Some view call to oust Jennings as anti-Gay/civil rights campaign

Although drugs and alcohol abuse are also used in the letter, along with bad judgment as a 24 year old teacher, I suspect that the anti-gay agenda is the driving force behind this letter.

I wouldn.t expect a 24 year old to use the sound judgment expected of  a 40 year old.

Drug and Alcohol Abuse are serious issues though.  The question is, where does he stand on those today?

Let him who never had bad judgment as a 24 year old cast the first stone.

At least he is not hiding it and recorded it all in a book.

I thank you both for your comments.  I would agree that at 24 one does not always use the best judgment,  and yes,  he was honest enough to speak openly about it in his book.  Yes,  it does seem that what is "suspect"  about Jennings,  enough to have 53 House representatives call for his removal, is that he is intent on seeing that gays get protection and representation in schools.  This is "suspect"  indeed only if one does not want such protection to be there for this community.   I am annoyed that so much has been made of his being a promoter of NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association)  and it turns out this is not the truth at all!  He merely admired a man who LATER had some affiliation with that group,  and Jennings never himself promoted such a group.  Yes,  Rhonda,  it is a smear campaign,  and I hope it does not work!  smk

I maybe look at life in a different way than others, i have read the letter and also remember my youth and the use of cannabis and alcohol. I myself in later years have warned young people not to follow my example and of course have had young people confide in me many things of which I have kept confidential and have offered some time extraordinary advise that religious or even parents would sort of frown on. These confiders were soldiers and once or more what was said could of broke relationships with wives or caused a problem within military circles because they were gay. Keeping confidence was to my mind the right thing as people really required to trust me for such that's what they expected and what I did as part of my job.

The point is is this guy actually doing a good job and if that is so why are people trying to get him relieved of a job that he is doing well of which i expect is the actual reality. They seemingly are bias most probably religious or politically or simply both. 

The president actual has an easy task here as he would know the reality by the actual; reports from the department concerned. I have a gut feeling that the guys doing a good job and the flack shows just that.

I think it is devoid of sound judgment to give such a position to someone who seems to be so cozy with NAMBLA, which espouses gay relationships between men and boys.  It's like storing a can of gasoline next to a space heater or using a fox as a watchdog to guard the hen-house.  Look, even if you advocate a belief in equal rights for homosexuals, you still need to exercise wisdom.  Just like with other things, there are times when there is a "conflict of interests" that is inappropriate.  This seems to be one of those times.  Not all parents agree with teaching homosexuality, etc. to their kids, even for religious as well as other scientific and idealogical reasons.  It looks like an attempt to "stick a finger in the eye" of others for mere political reasons, and that is not the way Democrats pledged to operate.  Didn't the party promise to try to reach out to form bi-partisan solutions to things?  It is looking more & more like the radical elements simply USED such talk to get voted into office while having no real intent to live up to it.  Instead, so many have been deceived into voting people into office who seem to have no other plan than to gain power for themselves, not look after our interests; and, what, now they seem to be trying to force their ideals on everyone else?  It all seems only politically motivated, and too much doesn't look right.  If Democrats try to force the views and lifestyles of the far-left side of the party upon the whole nation, it could cause much more harm than good for everyone.

Do these 'upstanding citizens' want children's protection removed because of their sexual orientation? Don't they get it?  You don't choose your sexuality.  You just are what you are.

I understand all of the comments above,  and I understand the reservations of conservatives.

Barbara:  I agree,  this is where the trouble is coming from, the crux of it,  as it were.  Some of the opposition believe gays to be a "movement"  bent on pushing its "agenda"  onto others.  I know for a fact that you cannot recruit anyone into being gay:  When our son was about eleven,  my husband and I thought he might be gay,  as he was very unusual and not interested in a lot of "boy"  things.  To prepare for this,  we spoke to him about our  being ok with it if he was,  and even took him to Provincetown -  the gay mecca of America  -  and showed him how artistic and political and productive the men were there.  Well,  he hit age 12,  and began being ultra interested in pretty girls,  and that was it.  No more talk of the gay community.  So you might say we did things which supposedly were going to "turn him gay",  and it didn't work.  He likes gays, but simply is not gay himself.  So I don't see how anyone can be worried,  because from my experience,  it does not work to "recruit".    

Hey,  I can post under my own name again, yay!  Thanks, Jordan :)

NAMBLA- very, very bad. The advice about the relationship with the older guy? Bad, but not so bad.

Many, many friends of mine who are gay have spoken to me about their relationships with older men when they were teenagers.

It sounds like a case of guilt by association. Kind of reminds me of the McCarthy era.If anyone has an agenda here, it is people that profess a strong belief in Jesus, and may be uncomfortable with their own sexuality. I've always wondered why all of Christ's disciples were males. To be fair, some people claim Mary Magdalene is in there somewhere.

It is not "guilt by association" and name me one person accused by McCarthy who was not subsequently proven to be a Soviet agent? 

Your values and policies as a teacher and administrator are not "associations" but what you really are.

This has nothing to do with Jesus and Mary. Jesus was a rabbi. The whole carpenter thing is a mis-translation of "apprentice" or something like that.

Gee, let's wonder why the rabbis are all male? Buddhist priests?

Elia Kazan was not interviewed or accused by McCarthy, Nantute.

Elia Kazan was accused by HUAC and he was an ex-communist party member. You need to learn some history.

HUAC made mistakes. McCarthy's campaign was in the senate, not the house. No mistakes.

You can read about all the intellectuals and artists who abandoned the communist party in a book called "The God That Failed".

And, they were pro-soviet.