3yr-olds to be taught about gay relationships

Started by selkie, Jul 22, 2006, 11:06 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

selkie

http://tinyurl.com/qap2m

Children as young as three should be taught about same-sex relationships in a bid to stamp out homophobia in schools, it was claimed yesterday.

The National Union of Teachers, the country's largest teaching union, sparked outrage by demanding that nursery staff help to educate children about gay families.

It claims it is too late to wait until youngsters arrive at primary school to learn about the subject because some three-year-olds are already using homophobic language.

But critics branded the NUT as "achingly politically correct" and said the proposals were akin to "brain-washing" vulnerable youngsters.

The proposal was made yesterday when the NUT published its response to the Department for Education and Skills' Early Years Foundation Stage consultation document.

This government report sets out the "early learning goals" which youngsters should be achieving in the first few years of their lives.

But the NUT claims that it needs to go further and early years teachers should be given "the skills and tools to challenge racism, sexism and homophobia" and abusive language.

The NUT document says: "In the case of homophobia, the use of the word 'gay' is prevalent in primary schools and young boys who are perceived to not conform to masculine stereotypes are at risk of bullying, isolation and social exclusion.

"It is too late to wait until primary school to challenge prejudice and intolerant abusive language.

"The EYFS curriculum needs to alert early years teachers to their responsibilities to challenge gender stereotypes and to challenge language that is negative or prejudiced."

It adds: "It is particularly important to begin to make three to five-year-olds aware of the range of families that exist in the UK today; families with one mum, one mum and dad, two mums, two dads, grandparents, adoptive parents, guardians etc.

"There will be parents who are gay or lesbian who will want to be reassured that their children will be safe in the setting.

"Many gay parents do not 'come out' to their nursery schools because they fear their children will be bullied as a result of the sexual orientation of their parents.

"Now that civil partnerships are legal, nursery settings need to use the curriculum to educate children about all types of families and to promote respect and understanding."

But Nick Seaton, of the Campaign for Real Education, branded the demands as "ridiculous".

He said: "I very much doubt that three-year-olds will be able to grasp the implications of these things anyway.

"Apart from that, even if they do, it seems completely wrong for the state education system to try and brainwash youngsters in this way.

"It is achingly politically correct and it's a sad reflection on the direction state education is taking, with the emphasis on teaching politically correct values, rather than worthwhile subjects."

Hugh McKinney, of the National Family Campaign, added: "To attach any kind of value judgement to the views and statements of three-year-olds is simply nonsense.

"Nobody condones homophobic language but to try and teach impressionable, immature youngsters about issues such as this is simply wrong for their stage of development.

"The state system should not be the basis for such teaching until children are older and more able to form their own judgements."

A spokeswoman for the NUT last night defended educating very young children about gay relationships.

She said: "It's never too early to encourage respect. It's about valuing every child and the relationship they live in and ensuring all children show respect to that relationship as well."

Peter

Quote from: "selkie"
She said: "It's never too early to encourage respect. It's about valuing every child and the relationship they live in and ensuring all children show respect to that relationship as well."


The few things I respect is facts. Respecting and even encouriging any perversion, abomination, barabaric practice leads to cultural suicide.

Diversity and uncontrolled immigration is going to kill us.

This is part of our cultural suicide.
BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

Men's Rights Activist

Quote
But the NUT claims that it needs to go further and early years teachers should be given "the skills and tools to challenge racism, sexism and homophobia" and abusive language.


What really needs to be challenged are the heterophobic perverts at NUT who can't wait to get their hands on America's children.  Can you say "private education," where this trash is not permitted?
Life, Liberty, & Pursuit of Happiness are fundamental rights for all (including males), & not contingent on gender feminist approval or denial. Consider my "Independence" from all tyrannical gender feminist ideology "Declared" - Here & Now!

selkie

#3
Jul 23, 2006, 12:04 AM Last Edit: Jul 24, 2012, 02:00 PM by selkie
***

Rob

Quote from: "Men's Rights Activist"
Quote
But the NUT claims that it needs to go further and early years teachers should be given "the skills and tools to challenge racism, sexism and homophobia" and abusive language.


What really needs to be challenged are the heterophobic perverts at NUT who can't wait to get their hands on America's children.  Can you say "private education," where this trash is not permitted?


Yeah, but now this stuff is going on here in my home province of BC, where the gov't has hired a gay married couple to review the BC Educational Curriculum from K to 12. When asked if this will apply to the curriculum of private schools (mandated to be to a certain gov't standard), the government is curiously evasive and silent on the issue... which makes one wonder...

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=80dd8007-ef56-40a7-809d-37936b9d4179&k=51593

Quote:

"But the Correns said the anticipated changes to the K-12 curriculum along with TOUGHER LIMITS ON PARENTAL RIGHTS to remove their children from classes teaching "sensitive content" are far more important and represent a major victory after a 10-year human rights battle to have gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people reflected in everyday curriculum."

Rob says:

OK, tougher limits on parental rights = GOV'T TAKING THOUGHT CONTROL OVER OUR CHILDREN!!! Yes? No?

Rob

Since gays make up such a minority of the population (2%? or less), you wonder why they get so much say, while people who affiliate themselves with Christianity - 70%!!! http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/rel/canada.cfm

70% of the citizens who identify themselves as Christian are prohibited from having the Lord's Prayer recited to their children in the schools - BUT, the 2% (0.5% of commonlaw couples are gay http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/jan/03013006.html - here it states that 1.3% of men and 0.7% of women are homosexual http://www.narth.com/docs/NARTHAMALettersThree0904.pdf) are allowed to foist their agenda upon those who disagree with it AND THE GOV'T IS REMOVING THE RIGHT FOR PARENTS TO RESTRICT THEIR CHILDREN'S EXPOSURE TO IT!

Well, I guess its alright the children can't recite the Lord's Prayer as long as they learn that Alexender the Great was a flamer, eh? That's obviously the will of the majority of the people!

Long live Democracy!

It is ironic to notice that the two men who are mandated to "enlighten our children" with their agenda are two people who cannot possibly have children of their own due to the laws of nature. Doesn't that remind all of you parents out there of that snotty neighbour with no kids who was always lecturing you on how to better raise your children?

LSBeene

Gov't tells US what we can teach our children.

The incrementalism of the left's true agenda is showing.

Steven
'Watch our backs at home, we'll guard the wall over here. You can sleep safe tonight, we'll guard the door."

Isaiah 6:8
"Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"

Peter

Anyone else think this is counterproductive to homosexual people's wellbeing?

Personally I did not hate homosexuals until they went into politiccs and became a protected group.

Meddling with the politics of how to treat the diseases you spread, attempting to take over educational institutions is not going to win them many friends.
BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

ghost

Quote
It adds: "It is particularly important to begin to make three to five-year-olds aware of the range of families that exist in the UK today; families with one mum, one mum and dad, two mums, two dads, grandparents, adoptive parents, guardians etc.

Notice how they mentioned "two dads" but they failed to mention the far more common "single dad". Hmmm......
And no, I think the only type of family three-to-five years olds should be aware of is mom + dad.
This is not to say something bad about single parents, but the very notion of what a family is supposed to be is falling down.

FP

Quote from: "Peter"
Quote from: "selkie"
She said: "It's never too early to encourage respect. It's about valuing every child and the relationship they live in and ensuring all children show respect to that relationship as well."


The few things I respect is facts. Respecting and even encouriging any perversion, abomination, barabaric practice leads to cultural suicide.

Diversity and uncontrolled immigration is going to kill us.

This is part of our cultural suicide.


Its something that so many on the "left" refuse to see and frustrates me to no end. Diversity is fine, like all things in moderation. However, mix it in with uncontrolled immigration, PC mentalities (aka shaming) and no culture/country/society can handle them both at the same time on a massive scale without the inevitable culture wars/suicides, or just total obliteration of one or both cultures. All one has to do is to look at the Balkans for a modern day lesson.

strangedisk

Hey look!  Another left-bashing, hate-by-any-possible-justification-at-all thread with no bearing whatsoever on men's rights (except in the sense of being anti-male, if the male happens to be gay)!  Wow, who would have thunk it!

ghost

Does that mean you agree that 3 year olds should be taught about gays and lesbians and two mom families?

TheManOnTheStreet

Kinda ironic that their acronym is NUT....

I also wonder, why is it gay and lesbian?  Aren't lesbians gay?  Why isn't is just homosexuals, or gays?

Also, Strangedisk, what is your problem?  As men, and fathers we SHOULD be concerned about our children being brainwashed as early as 3 fucking years old.  Left, right, who cares?  It's a parent issue!  Amazingly, MEN are parents too!

I wouldn't want my 3 year old child being brainwashed, and that IS what it is, into believing that gay folks are 'normal'.  They are not.  

This is just another charge at breaking down the biological family.  Making heterosexuality abnormal and everything else 'normal'.  All under the guise of "diversity" and "tolerance".

BTW, for me, 'normal' is defined as nature(-al) and biology.  So don't get any ideas that this has anything what-so-ever to do with left, right, or religion.

lastly Strangedisk, what did YOUR post contribute to men's rights?  To this site?  To the thread and topic at hand?  Nothing.  kettle, black, think.

TMOTS
The Man On The Street is on the street for a reason.......
_________________________________
It's not illegal to be male.....yet.

Rob

Quote from: "strangedisk"
Hey look!  Another left-bashing, hate-by-any-possible-justification-at-all thread with no bearing whatsoever on men's rights (except in the sense of being anti-male, if the male happens to be gay)!  Wow, who would have thunk it!


Wow, I don't see how you can't see the correlations.

The above articles show the "left's" (in reality all PC Concerned Gov't) willingness to promote an agenda which is anti traditional family, something which is definitely anti-male and of concern to Men's Right's.

Anything anti-male/anti-family continues to promote the troubles we know are associated with fatherlessness - In fact, we have here some more "social engineering" that the gov't is foisting upon us, much like the Oh So Successful Single Mom Family Unit that the PC gov't was complicit in creating, at the expense of men.

The one article blatantly shows, in fact even seems to glorify, that the taking away of rights to promote a radical agenda of a tiny portion of the population is a good thing. Sound familiar?

Why not connect this radical agenda with the Universal Daycare system that the "left wingers" are bent on hammering through into Canadian law, something that further decreases the family and plays right into the Rad-Fem agenda, and also into the Socialist Totalitarian agenda http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/roberts/040116

Why not recognize that it was only around 3 years ago that Gay Marriage was made legal in Canada. It was said at the time that there was no way that Gay Marriage would in any way undermine traditional marriage or traditional marriage values. I remember asking some friends of mine back then who were "gay rights advocates" if they were given all that they demanded today, would they disband and go live happy among society - or would they find something new to fight for tomorrow. Guess what, that they are now completely revamping the educational system of the 100% population while only representing the tiniest portion of the population makes a pretty strong statement about their intentions to never quit, doesn't it? Traditional Mother-Father based parents be damned! In fact, it is viewed as a victory to remove these parent's right to with-hold their children from being indoctrinated by this radical agenda. Yippee for the left!

The next thing is gay adoption, the "new" styled family, which will promote the agenda of the gay community. They will have academia do all kinds of studies to promote their agenda building up "gay parents" and tearing down "traditional parents", whether they are right or not is not of concern. While they gay rights community rejoices in being able to rewrite our educational system, where do we see their concern that this is in the best interest of the children?  

Ever wonder why the feminists show such heavy support for gay rights advocates? Deep down, they know gay rights is not about two people of the same sex being allowed to get together to bump uglies in the middle of the night... feminists know that gay rights has the same agenda as they do, the tearing down of the traditional and the complete revamping of society to suit THEIR OWN needs. This is why gay "rights" advocates could care so little about "rights", while they win their victories based on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they couldn't care less that their agenda is directly (and admittedly) trying to take away a "right" in the same charter - that is freedom of religion! Admittedly several gay rights advocates have openly admitted to me that they feel that Christianity is bigoted and should be changed to accomodate homosexuality... hmmm, so much for freedom of religion, eh? They apparently are not concerned with "rights" at all!

Ever wonder why the left has been pushing for State Run Daycare so heavily? It will mean the further erosion of the family while allowing the State to indoctrinate our children at the earliest of ages right through to the end of University, when they will be set free to be "good worker drones" who are loyal to the state - and won't question the government with all those "pesky ideas" that parents, most often fathers, might instill in them. God help the left if men are around to teach their children such insane concepts like Truth, Justice and Honour! Nope, this won't do at all for the left.

I don't care if it seems we are always attacking the left. The left can go to hell because I don't see how the left is concerned about representing ANY of my rights and concerns.

When will be the day that Fathers and Men, making up 48% of the population, are asked if they can review our educational systems to ensure that Fathers and Men are represented properly in OUR children's education?

That 1% to 2% gets to do something that the 48% of us are not... well, that most certainly requires some trash talking about the left, in my opinion.

CaptDMO

Quote from: "strangedisk"
Hey look!  Another left-bashing, hate-by-any-possible-justification-at-all thread with no bearing whatsoever on men's rights (except in the sense of being anti-male, if the male happens to be gay)!  Wow, who would have thunk it!

Hey look, another impotent attempt at shaming  without measured address to the subject matter at hand.

Is there something you have to offer, pro or con, to the subject of homosexual overview of K-12  indoctrination to the GLBT(and their allies)
agenda, by folks that seem to have no credentials or qualification other than
they are queer?

Or will a traditional ad hominem of "big poopy head" response prevail yet again? If so, you may consider "alas".

EDIT to add: Damn, should have read the rest of the thread before I obligated myself to immediately stamp on silliness when I see it. Sorry I flailed the dead horse.

Go Up