LETTER TO THE EDITOR

IN RESPONSE

Perkins' opponents offer standards of their own

Will Perkins' column on the sexual conduct policy that Colorado for Family Values has proposed to Colorado Springs School District 11 has several misrepresentations ("Sexual conduct policy sends right message," Commentary Feb. 16).

Perkins denies a thinly veiled plot to persecute homosexuals: The plot hasn't been thinly veiled for a long time. The plot is explicit and transparent. It is the history of Colorado for Family Values. Using Perkins' words "plot" and "persecute," I sound paranoid and overreaching. Hold the thought, but change the words to "strategy" and "suppress." Does anyone doubt that it is CFV's strategy to suppress homosexuals and keep them from full participation in our community? It is its very mission. This policy carries the strategy to suppress, if not the plot to persecute.

Perkins denies that CFV seeks to impose religious views on others: The fact that this proposed policy fails to mention religion does not mean the proponents have no wish to impose their views. This is a red herring. Nobody expects to see explicit reference to the imposition of religious views. That's not CFV's modus operandi.

Perkins said he doesn't intend to limit student discussion and seeks only to clarify what the faculty endorses. The proposed policy doesn't seek clarification of what the faculty endorses, it seeks to dictate what they must endorse. This is the whole point of the policy. If implemented, how would the faculty be expected to respond to student discussion that did not conform to the policy? They would be expected to defend the policy and could expect sanctions if they did not.

Perkins claims critics offer only standard-less nihilism: This is Perkins' most egregious mischaracterization. Perkins has heard his critics in many public forums over several years present their opposition in intelligent, thoughtful perspectives that include deeply held values bearing no connection to nihilism. For instance, at the District 11 board meeting where Perkins presented the proposed policy, speaker after speaker in opposition to him supported the district's policy on abstinence as the value of choice in sex education. There were also references to the values of fairness, honesty, decency, kindness, cooperation, etc. This is not "standard-less nihilism."

Perkins claims that CFV's issue has never been with the Lever staff or District 11 students: The issue was precisely the Lever staff and D-11 students until it was clear that the Lever student editors and staff were formidable in their intelligence and integrity.

Perkins said we need positive measures from our leaders: Of course we need positive measures from our leaders. Who is proposing negative measures or "reticent" measures, whatever they are? But this proposed policy is not positive. It is covert. It misrepresents. It is oppressive. It does not protect children. Perkins is correct: "Our community doesn't need more problems stemming from illegitimate pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and fragmented families." The proposed policy will not protect students from these problems, and Perkins knows it.

-- Dick Schnickel, Colorado Springs