California’s public schools will be required to teach students about the contributions of homosexual Americans beginning on January 1, after Gov. Jerry Brown signed a landmark bill last Thursday requiring the material to be added to social studies textbooks and curricula.

The new law requires social studies courses to include lessons about the “role and contributions” of “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans.” The legislation also mandates that “instructional materials,” like textbooks, include sections about the history of homosexual people.

The law, called SB48, also prohibits instructional materials such as textbooks from “reflecting adversely” upon homosexuals, a stipulation sure to influence the way these books define marriage.

One especially shocking aspect of the legislation is its failure to set any grade limits on the new material. This means that homosexual history could and will be taught at the elementary level. The California Family Council sent an e-mail alert to its readers warning that “children as young as kindergarten age” could be taught the new material.

Students enrolled in these schools will not be permitted to opt out of classes teaching the homosexual-oriented material. The California Family Council said that since the material is not part of a “sexual education” class, parents will not have an opting-out option, and will not be told beforehand about classes teaching the new material.

Beyond the Golden State

Another significant aspect of SB48 is the anticipated impact on the other 49 states in the union.

In addition to being the first state to pass such legislation, California is one the Untied States’ top purchasers of textbooks. The state’s massive buying power prompts many publishers to tailor their books specifically to California’s standards. So the impact of the legislation will extend far beyond the Golden State.

Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute legal group, said, “[T]he major textbook manufacturers do not create different textbooks for each state. Instead, they seek to comply with mandates in the largest states, especially California and Texas. As a result, many smaller states are pressured into approving California-focused instructional materials, which must now cater to the gay history mandate.”

Gay rights supporters celebrated California’s decision to pass SB48 as a great victory, saying the law will make public schools safer for homosexual students. Carolyn Laub, executive director of California’s Gay-Straight Alliance Network, said, “[The bill] is a victory not only for the lgbt youth in California who have been fighting to be heard in Sacramento and represented in their history classes, but also for all California youth who deserve to learn a fair and accurate account of California and U.S. history.”

Opponents were upset with Brown’s decision to sign the bill, and questioned whether instruction about homosexuals in public schools is necessary.

“If children in other countries are learning math and science, and American children are learning about the private lives of historical figures, how will our students compete for jobs in the global economy?” said Sen. Sharon Runner.

But students’ ability to compete for jobs is not the gravest of the dangers presented by this landmark bill.

The most basic building block of a strong and stable civilization is the traditional family structure, and this law represents the latest in a long list of assaults against it. To require impressionable children as young as 5 to study such material will have a profound impact on their family values.

Decades ago, educator Herbert Armstrong recognized and identified the war on the institution of family—and accurately forecast where it would lead.

Back in 1976 he wrote of a “widespread and aggressive conspiracy to destroy the institution of marriage. … This is a war which is being vigorously and fanatically waged. … Every subtle method is being employed to capture the minds of those of pre-marriage age” (Plain Truth, July 1976).

As alarmist as those words may have seemed to some in 1976, who could deny that “every subtle method is being employed to capture the minds of those of pre-marriage age” in light of such laws as SB48?

Clearly, minds back then were captured and attacked. Now they are 35 years older and have raised another generation even more deceived about traditional marriage and family.

To understand more about the insidious attack on family, and how you can defend against it, read “The War Against Family”.