news-record.com

NEWS

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Lawmakers: Anti-bully bill not about gay rights

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

(Updated 10:58 am)

RALEIGH -- Lawmakers pushing for a new anti-bullying law in public schools on Tuesday addressed claims by opponents that the proposal is really about gay rights.

Opponents say the state would be better served by a generic anti-bullying law, in contrast to the bill the legislature is moving.

The version that is advancing names 16 potential victims of bullies, including gay students. Other potential reasons for bullying include race, religion, ethnicity and disability, but the bill leaves open the possibility that people might be bullied for other, unspecified reasons.

Conservatives' stance

Social conservatives who oppose gay rights have argued that the bill is a way to slip the concept of "sexual orientation" into state law. They say this would designate gay people as a specially protected group -- and is a step toward the legalization of gay marriage in North Carolina.

That's not true, said Rep. Rick Glazier, a Democratic lawmaker from Fayetteville and a proponent of the bill.

''That is a specious, disingenuous argument when the language in the bill absolutely prohibits that," Glazier said. "This not about anything other than dealing with the best way to protect children."

The committee debated the legislation but took no vote. Debate is scheduled to resume when the committee meets again on Thursday.

It already has been approved by the state Senate.

North Carolina's state Board of Education already requires schools to have an anti-bullying policy. It does not list types of potential victims.

The Cumberland County Board of Education requires its schools to punish children who bully their classmates. The policy defines bullying behavior but does not list potential victims.

Rep. Marilyn Avila, a Republican from Raleigh, said the problem would be addressed if educators enforced the existing rules.

''I'm 60 years old, and I got bullied and picked on the day I started school," she said. "My teachers stopped it, and my parents told me to stick up for myself. Now you tell the people to do the job that they were taught to do as professional teachers and administrators in school, and we will not have to pass this law," she said.

More protection

A generic anti-bully law would be ineffective, Glazier said. In 2004, Glazier said, 64

percent of students surveyed at high schools in the Triangle reported they heard anti-gay slurs at school every day.

He and other legislators cited examples of children who killed themselves or attempted suicide after classmates tormented them because they thought they were gay.

''The truth is there are certain vulnerable populations that are targeted for abuse far more frequently, that generic policies will not prevent that, they have not prevented that," Glazier said.

Alternative bill

Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam, a Wake County Republican and head of the Republicans in the state House, tried get the committee to consider a version of the bill which says all bullying is wrong, but doesn't list the potential motives for a bully. Committee Chairman Larry Bell of Clinton refused to accept his version.

The Glazier bill notes that teachers and other school staff can be the victims of bullies. With this in mind, Rep. Pat McElraft, a Republican from Emerald Isle, had a question: "Can you tell me if a male teacher, who decides to come to school dressed as a woman, in high heels, wig, etc., if he is laughed at by children in the class, would they be considered 'bullying' him?" she asked.

''The answer to your question is 'no,' '' Glazier said.

Under the proposed law, bullying is something that is severe and pervasive, he said, so this one-time laughing incident wouldn't apply.

Also, he said, the bill says bullying applies to "gender identity." The man's choice to wear women's clothing is "gender expression," which, Glazier said, is not a concept listed in the bill.

What do you think?

6 comment(s)

Read other visitors' comments.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please notify us.

Happy

May 27, 2009 - 6:45 am EDT

All people have the right to be protected. Please pass this bill.

Panacea

May 27, 2009 - 8:05 am EDT

I agree. This is a good bill and needs to pass.

A lot of bullies use gay slurs against their victims because they know it will hurt. It doesn't matter to the bullies whether it was true or not. That's why that specific language should be used.

Rep Avilia: I got bullied in school as well. I was beaten to a bloody pulp IN FRONT OF A TEACHER, who did NOTHING to stop it. The principal refused the secretary's pleas to call my mother. I lay on a couch in the principals office all day. Staff had to help me onto the bus. The bus driver had to help me into the house. My mother was horrified.

This was in 1978. Parents did just sue the schools at the drop of a hat back then. Instead, my father had to impress upon the principal that this was not acceptable. The student who beat me up was never punished, nor was the teacher.

Bullying has only gotten worse. It distracts children from learning. It's not a joke. It's not a normal part of growing up. Teachers need to be given the authority and the RESPONSIBILITY to stop it.

And spelling out what bullying behavior is puts everyone on notice.

This is a good bill. It must pass.

CopOnTheBeat

May 27, 2009 - 9:22 am EDT

"Can you tell me if a male teacher, who decides to come to school dressed as a woman, in high heels, wig, etc., if he is laughed at by children in the class, would they be considered 'bullying' him?"

HILARIOUS! The Republicans are so obsessed with gay people, now they are thinking that male teachers will start coming to school with dresses on -- BUT WAIT -- I noticed she (the Representative) didn't mention anything about a male judge who may come to court wearing his robe -- and that he could be wearing a snappy pair of Prada pumps and a Playtex cross-your-heart as well. Bet she didn't think about that.

How sad it is that the GOP, the entire party, is obsessed with "good Christian values" and all that lot. Yeah, I want somebody like pill-popping Rush Limbaugh and ditzy Sarah Palin to speak for me too.

ChuckStires

May 27, 2009 - 1:58 pm EDT

A major push for this bill comes from Equality NC which wants 'gender identity' and 'sexual orientation' written into at least one NC law. The Senate's version, S526, sponsored by Julia Boseman and the House version H548, sponsored by Glazier, Fisher, Tarleton, and Martin have included these specific words at the behest of the gay community (significant campaign contributions were made by Equality NC to some of the sponsors/cosponsors of the Senate and House bills). Senator Doug Berger, liberal Democrat, a solid backer of this bill, has also received campaign contributions from Equality NC.

A good bullying bill is inclusive whereas this bill is so specific that it excludes many potential bullying targets. Therefore this is a bad bill and does a significant disservice to the excluded classes.

Also, by including 'gender identity' and 'sexual orientation', NC's marriage amendment will be challenged and overturned on the same basis that marriage amendments in other states have been overturned. At this time the NC General Assembly has been prudent to conscientiously keep such language out of a law. Any NC law which says its not nice to discriminate on the basis of 'gender identity' and 'sexual orientation' will be used to overturn the marriage amendment.

Elimination of 'gender identity' and 'sexual orientation' from a bullying bill is right, proper and keeps the best efforts of the NC General Assembly intact to protect all classes, not selective, politically funded special interests.

CopOnTheBeat

May 27, 2009 - 2:26 pm EDT

C'mon Chuck...did you write all that yourself? Or did you get that from the NC-GOP website? Or from your upcoming campaign on the Republican ticket?

Better yet, the question that begs to be asked, did you get all thoe ideas while having lunch with Rep. Virginia Foxxy - R(NC) who is known for being informed on the issues of the day?

I think if the Republicans had spent more time trying to get us out of this hole we're in, the economy and the war, and spent less time wondering about people and what they do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, then we wouldn't be in such rocky shape now.

I thought all of that up on my own too, Chuck, I didn't consult Rush, MIchael Savage, Sarah Palin, Virginia Foxxy, or anyone else.

Oh, and adding hate crime against gays or any other persecuted group isn't going to take anything out of your pocket, Chuck, and if you're not gay, then why would you even care that there are law to protect others, or including groups that have been plagued by hate crimes forever? That's right, all while others (like some cops) turned a blind eye and even condoned it. And yeah, I thought that up on my own too, I don't have to cut and paste from some website, Chuck.

I guess you're gearing up for another unsuccessful run for the NC Senate? Is that why you're so vocal about it now? I wouldn't think a man with over 40 years of marriage, and who isn't an elected official, would be all that concerned about it, unless you're trying to get your name out there for upcoming elections.

Just my observation.

ChuckStires

May 28, 2009 - 6:00 am EDT

Looks like Cap is in bed with Doug Berger...because this is the only way Doug Berger responds to independent thinking. The facts are the facts...if you will follow what happened in Iowa, etc. The plans were laid for destroying the traditional definition of marriage by getting 'sexual orientation' into just one law. Then the GLBT's got an activist judge to swing a gavel and.... Any person of minimal intelligence can see the pattern.

Have a great day!