Home
Who We Are
What We Do
Contact Us
References
Comment

The Truth About Bullying

Family North Carolina Magazine—September/October 2008

By Bill Brooks

A lot has been written about the so-called “Bullying Bill.” So much that it has become hard to sort out fact from fiction. Let’s take a look at the issues because some of the facts are being overlooked, some are simply ignored, and others are being distorted. One of our readers suggested that this be done in a bullet format, so here are the facts about the assertion that the General Assembly needed to pass a bill in order to deal with “bullying” in the public schools of North Carolina.

  • Fact: There is an ongoing national movement to pass anti-bullying legislation in the states.
  • Fact: In July 2004, the North Carolina State Board of Education (SBOE) passed a directive requiring every local school board in the state to adopt an anti-bullying and harassment policy.
  • Fact: When the SBOE adopted its anti-bullying and harassment directive, it rejected the enumeration of a list of characteristics, including “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression,” because the Board wanted the policy to cover all students in grades K-12 and wanted it to be clear “that there should not be any bullying, harassment, and discrimination of any kind to any child in any school environment.” The North Carolina Family Policy Council supports this viewpoint.
  • Fact: In the 2007 Legislative Session, HB 1366—School Violence Prevention Act was filed to address bullying in public schools. This bill included a section focusing on groups the proponents though required special attention, including “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression.”
  • Fact: The chairman of the State Board of Education, former Sen. Howard Lee, has said that an enumerations section places the focus on the victims of bullying instead of where it needs to be—on the bully—and that the enumerations section is not needed.
  • Fact: Pro-homosexual activists across the country have attempted to use these “bullying bills” to include enumeration clauses with the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression.”
  • Fact: The national anti-bullying model legislation does NOT include an “enumeration clause” listing classifications of potential bullying victims.
  • Fact: One of the pioneers of the anti-bullying movement, Brenda High, has stated that these enumeration clauses are not needed, are counterproductive, and should not be included in the bills.
  • Fact: If the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” were included in such a bill in North Carolina, it would be the first time such terms were used in the General Statutes of the State.
  • Fact: If the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” were used in a “Bullying Bill” there would be several results. Among these:
    • Teachers and other school employees would have to be trained on how to talk with students about “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” as well as about other categories of students who might be bullied.
    • Since “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” are not defined in the bill, or anywhere else in state law, there would be disagreements about what these terms really mean.
    • The courts would decide after years of legal wrangling and litigation with school districts what these terms actually meant.
    • Students as young as kindergarten would be involved in discussions about homosexuality, lesbianism, cross-dressing and other such sexual behaviors in sessions designed to teach them about the categories of people who should not be bullied.
    • There is even disagreement in the homosexual community about what the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” mean.
    • Having the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” in the statutes could give North Carolina courts the basis for overturning other state laws.
  • Fact: The 2007 Session of the General Assembly adjourned with the “Bullying Bill” still on the table, and the 2008 Session ended without a very unnecessary bill becoming law.

For all of these reasons, and more, the North Carolina Family Policy Council took a position in the 2007–08 Session that the enumerations section should not be included in House Bill 1366—School Violence Protection Act. Our research was strong, and our reasoning was sound. Twice, the Senate offered the House the opportunity to have the bill become law without the enumerations. Twice the House sponsor and other proponents of the House version of the bill rejected the offer. v

Bill Brooks is president and executive director of the North Carolina Family Policy Council.

Copyright © 2008. North Carolina Family Policy Council. All rights reserved.