Harvey Milk Day Should Go Sour

The May 14th 2009 edition of San Jose's Mercury News remarked that the California Senate has approved legislation that would designate May 22 each year as a day to to honor slain gay rights leader Harvey Milk.

The bill was authored by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and claims this will be a day of special significance to recognize the late Bay area supervisor's contributions to California.

Though the bill would not make May 22nd an official holiday, it would encourage (not require) schools to educate California's students about the legacy of Milk - the first openly homosexual man to be elected to public office in the Western state. Milk was assassinated in 1978.

The bill known as SB 572 can be read at http://www.senate.ca.gov, passed 24-14 and presently is awaiting the governor's approval or disapproval. For the record Schwarzenegger vetoed a nearly identical bill last year.

While I foresee many problems with this bill, I have an equally struggle with the legacy of Harvey Milk. Is Harvey Milk day based on the fact he was a great political figure with wonderful accomplishments for the state he served, the fact he was assassinated or simply that he was the first gay man to be voted on a California Board of Supervisors.

First, as a political figure, he did not accomplish much. He did have a hand in passing a gay rights ordinance in San Francisco (lacking practically no opposition, I'm sure) and pushing through a measure that would require dog owners to pick up their dog's feces and dispose of it in a sanitary way. Does Milk's political legacy call for a special day in the state of California?

According to Dan Flynn author of Intellectual Morons, in a radio interview he stated that Milk served in his political office less than a year. Flynn also notes that Milk made up a story about being dishonorably discharged from the Navy for being gay. However, the truth be told, Milk served four years in the Navy and received an honorable discharge and was never the victim of anti-homosexual discrimination in the military.

Milk's assassinator Dan White, also Mllk's campaign manager was portrayed in the recent Sean Penn film, Milk, as a right wing nut case. According to Dan Flyn's research Dan White was pro-gay rights and was anything but a right-winger. In fact. the Dan White's motives for killing Harvey Milk and SF's Mayor Moscone had little to do with any homophobic issues. The SFWeekly argues that Dan White's motives were more about betrayal than homophobia. The article states,

"According to voting records, newspaper stories, and anecdotal information, White supported Milk's agenda with his influence, vote, and pocketbook. More than that, Sloan says, White respected Milk and actively sought his friendship. That is, until the two had a bitter falling-out over a land-use issue in White's district."

If anything, says Dan Flynn, Dan White went postal on Milk and the Mayor after feeling betrayed.

My real concern about having a Harvey Milk day is that it will become a day to push the gay-agenda on Californian school children from grades K-12. Do you want your kindergarten child to be exposed to the fact of other sexual preferences at such a young age?

I fear that homosexual, bi-sexual, gay marriage issues and transsexual indoctrination will take place in the public schools in the name of Harvey Milk day. As a tax paying citizen of California I will prohibit my teenager from attending school on May 22 should the bill be passed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

If parents want to indoctrinate their children about homosexuality, then they can speak to their children in the privacy of their homes. As a taxpayer I do not want my tax dollars to be used to push the gay agenda in the California public school system in the name of Harvey Milk.

Should agree that you do not want Harvey Milk Day in California and that you do not want SB 572 to be approved by him, please call the governor's office at 916 445 2841 and let him know of your disapproval.