Gay teacher – leave our kids alone!

So, here we go, there is an agenda after all. Let’s go for the kids in school. Educate them into gayness and demolish the family in the process.

I hear voices saying, “No! Gays are not trying to destroy the family. They’re just out for equality!”

Yet here it is, one of series of serious and below-the-belt attacks on the accepted family structure – the role of mums and dads. Gay promoters want to take away one of the most important institutions and replace it in schools – where children are heavily influenced – with some politically-correct, wiltingly weedy, all-encompassingly non-descriptive identity – ‘partners’, stealing from every child the right – and I use the word ‘right’ politically – the right and privilege to grow up knowing it’s perfectly correct and proper, and desirable to call their parents mum and dad, and that it is not politically or socially incorrect to do so.

From the Telegraph:

TEACHERS are being urged to stop using terms such as husband and wife when addressing students or families under a major anti-homophobia push in schools.

The terms boyfriend, girlfriend and spouse are also on the banned list – to be replaced by the generic “partner” – in changes sought by the gay lobby aimed at reducing discrimination in classrooms.

Schools are coming under pressure to provide lessons for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students and stack their libraries with books and videos covering their issues.

Among the demands are the outlawing of homophobic comments by teachers or students in the playground and a requirement for teachers to receive “diversity training”.

Education Director-General Michael Coutts-Trotter emerged as a leader of the school anti-homophobia campaign, opening a Government-backed conference on sexual diversity – That’s So Gay.

The Federation of Parents and Citizens’ Associations also weighed into the debate calling for “appropriate literacy materials promoting diversity in families”.

The radical shake-up means that families with two mums or two dads are set to be accepted as a normal part of school communities.

Mr Coutts-Trotter said public schools had a responsibility to include children from same sex couples and allow no discrimination.

“Happy families come in all shapes and sizes,” he said.

“We value diversity and include everyone in the life of the school…meeting the bare legal requirement is not enough.

“Public education has a responsibility to include…to strive to make all feel welcome.”

Mr Coutts-Trotter said he was aware some teenagers felt “lonely and abandoned as they come to terms with their sexuality”.

He said leadership from students in public and independent schools was an important weapon to support those facing discrimination and “combat homophobia”.

“Our schools should be sanctuaries (for students).”

The Department of Education and Training said any attempt to stop same sex partners from attending a school formal in NSW – as controversially occurred in Queensland – was likely to breach anti-discrimination laws.

And there is an agenda here. No on can deny it. Pressure has been put on schools and teachers to become so insipidly multi-everything that we remove the possibility of offending so-called minorities, but in the processs totally ignore the right of the majority. If these guys really support ‘diversity’ then why take away the significance of that rather large part of the diversity called mums and dads?

Thank God the media has got hold of this and is showing some indignation.

The Daily Telegraph can reveal that the department is already spearheading a major push to win acceptance for gay and lesbian students in public schools.

“Teaching about sexual diversity, tolerance and anti-bullying occurs through the Personal Development, Health and Physical Education (PDHPE) curriculum in all NSW schools – public and independent,” the spokesman said.

“In Years 7 and 8 students learn about bullying, including anti-homophobia. This is reinforced in Years 9 and 10 in the anti-discrimination topics in the curriculum.”

“Same-sex attraction issues” are included in students’ lessons on relationships, diversity and discrimination.

A 25-hour course, mandatory for all Year 11 and 12 students in government schools, examines “issues relating to sexuality and sexual diversity”.

Why do schools have to remain the targets of politically driven agenda groups? There are people with vested interests attempting to steal a generation. It’s time to push teachers back to the essential 3 R’s of education and force groups like these to get their hands off our children.

Parenting is a privilege given to people by God. Christians need to be aware of what is happening and be prepared to stand for the truth about God’s family structure. Mums and dads unite!

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23551033-5001021,00.html

UPDATE: In what is either a backflip or a serious attempt at putting out a fire, Coutts-Trotter is now denying the move:

SCHOOLS will not move to stop using words like mum and dad, or girlfriend and boyfriend, the New South Wales Education Department says, despite reports that public schools are under pressure to provide gay-friendly environments.

This is good news, and in a way this whole saga so far has highlighted the age-old understanding that you do not touch the treasured institution of mums and dads.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23551136-2,00.html

UPDATE 2: Schools are saying they won’t bow to the pressure from gay lobby groups. So there is still pressure. Could this be a bridge too far for the lobbyists?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=104952

UPDATE 3: A third source, from an ABC News interview this morning, which is a denial that the terms ‘mums and dads’ were used, and so it is quite probably an exaggeration by the Telegraph, but also an admission that there is a suggestion of political correction or watering down of terms, so neither a denial or a confirmation, but certainly a move away from acknowledging recognised family structures by emphasising ‘diversity’ of structures. Still not good!

This is an audio clip, but quite short.

http://www.abc.net.au/newsradio/audio/mp3/20080417-mumdadban.mp3


16 thoughts on “Gay teacher – leave our kids alone!

  1. Hmm… Best thing a family can do is travel the world and home school their kids on their travels. No problems with homophobes. No problems with evolution classes, and no problem with political agendas. It’s simple, but time consuming- but well worth it!

    I think this is a joke. How will sex-education classes work? Will anti-homophobia teach kids that we’re created by chance? Will teachers encourage kids to find out for themselves what to do with their equipment? Is this how far this movement is willing to go? Ay-ay-ay!
    (Been watching the movie, “The God’s Must Be Crazy”!)

  2. Some of this debate is just silly. A mother is a male parent, a dad is a female one, whether there are one or two of them. Just as a girlfriend is a female friend, and a boyfriend is a male friend. By the way, those two terms don’t necessarily always imply an intimate relationship – eg: I am a girl, I have lots of girlfriends, and several boyfriends, but only one partner. Really, anyone who tries to stop using those words is unlikely to be successful. As part of an agenda, I don’t think it will succeed.

    The term ‘partner’ is vague – already I use this personally when referring to another person’s partner, as I often don’t know if the person is married, de facto, gay or straight. It just implies that we don’t know what the relationship is. There are so many de facto couples now, that you can’t just assume husband or wife, and its a bit embarrassing to make a mistake, so ‘partner’ is a good alternative. Where we actually know the situation, then the appropriate word can be used. So in terms of language, the term ‘partner’ goes outside the gay debate.

    There absolutely should be teaching on bullying within schools, including homophobia. For sure. Bullying for any reason is unacceptable.

    Teaching that one type of sexuality is moral or immoral though, has really always been the domain of religious faith. To teach that homosexuality is OK, when many religions say it is not, is actually a school trying to teach a value, rather than ethical behaviour. We can’t expect our public institutions to teach values that are a response to faith, rather than intrinsically obvious. Without believing the Bible, it is not obvious to many people that same sex relationships are immoral. So it won’t be taught in the public system. If we are scared of our kids being taught that, we should send them to Christian schools.

    However, I will be sending my kids to a public school, probably, for the diversity of education – or a school which encourages this. I want them to develop their own internal conscience, without being dependent upon some external structure to tell them what is right, wrong or whatever. I also want them to be comfortable and accepting and play or socialise with people from a diversity of backgrounds.

    I do believe that homosexuality is sin, but I don’t see a need to ostracise those people from my community. I don’t want to see gay kids ostracised or pressured at school over their sexuality. That is not going to help anyone.

    At home, we will discuss those issues, we will talk about what the Bible says, and the kids will grow stronger for dealing with the issue in a more personal way, while still being able to cope with the world around them. If I see an agenda being pushed at school, I’ll talk about it with the kids – there’s a lot to be gained from being able to recognise an agenda – a worthwhile skill in itself. The fact is, that the gay lifestyle is part of the world around us and we need to accept those people and love them as God does, although that doesn’t mean we need to compromise what the Bible says about homosexual acts.

  3. Looks like I need some sex education:

    “A mother is a male parent, a dad is a female one”… oops!

  4. I guess we’ve all used ‘partner’ to describe various arrangements, but to insist on it as the normal designation for all couples is ridiculous, and dangerous if it sends a signal to students of any age that normal terms of endearment for parents are in any way politically or socially incorrect.

  5. I can’t imagine how it would ever replace more accurate words, or replace the normal terms of endearment for parents.

    Surely calling someone Mum or Dad is not an issue in any way?

    Maybe the Daily Tele’s just beating the story up – I can’t imagine anyone seriously wanting to take those terms out of the language, including gay people who also love their Mum’s and Dad’s.

    Plus those words are easy for babies when they are learning to talk.

  6. All signs point to a beat-up by the Tele. The “gay lobby” who are supposed to be calling for this are never named. The only person who is named is Couts-Trotter who denies it. This was a non-story in the Fairfax press, they only reported the denial.

  7. Yes, Wazza, I think you are probably right about this. If it was a non-story in the Fairfax press, then I’d say its a beat up. Just a piece of sensationalist journalism to scare people about the gay lobby – a bit of Today Tonight. The things the Tele says the gay lobby want seem a bit too far fetched to be believed in the extreme form stated.

  8. Hey fellow-beings,

    I very often think of the men of Sodom; what they were like, and how they probably weren’t all that different from the men of today.

    Ive met and worked with alot of homosexual people, and often have to work with many, apparently ‘effeminate’ men, often who are actually turned out to be ‘straight’, with kids or female partner!-ive also been surprised at the homosexual underworld, where ‘straight’ people live a second-life, and do sordid things in parks or whatever.This is not new.

    What do we expect in trying to create a secularised Australian society which tries to legislate equal validity to all, when only ‘the strong’ dominated in the past?

    Ive known gay people to be people with ‘issues’-whether raped or interfered with when young, were taught to be ‘bi’ in the 80s, or who simply decided to choose same-sex relationships; there are so many reasons, but Ive known so many gay men to be ‘more bitchy than girls’, to be hopelessly vain , ‘disconnected’ from reality ,or gay people to trivialise or ridicule sex; and of course, they arent the only ones to do this.

    I feel John Eldredge in “Wild at Heart” really touches something when he says most gay men are merely ‘sexualising’ a missing and very normal male touch, love or affection they never received when young.-It might be safe to wonder if this is the same for the girls.

    The greatest threat that sexual perversion brings is ‘spiritual death’ in the spirit realm, and ‘inter-speciel, or STD diseases into the human race.

    Please note the special mention that Christ makes of 2 groups in the Revelation; “liars and the sexually immoral” who will be excluded from Gods presence-Upon reflection, these are 2 very interesting groups of related people:

    Liars- people who are disconnected from reality in one way or another, ‘in denial’ perhaps,
    Sexually Immoral-again, people who are disconnected from reality. [ in this case, from a commitment to one person of opposite sex, and the lifestyle of such]

    Modern intellectuals and artists have worked very hard to try and make unreality/dishonesty a ‘normal’ state for people, and sexual fracturing also a ‘normal state.’-the agenda is always to disposess the marketplace, by making temporary gratification the dictating rule, and then again, this is philosophy- driven.

    if ‘A mans work is a picture of his mind’, then that helps us make some sense of what gay intellectuals try to do; merely reflect what their sexuality dictates in their work.

    ‘People without God usually want to be their own Gods’; this tendency is as old as time, and the root problem of the above.

    Consider how the strongly homosexual/ bisexual societies of Ancient Greece and Fascist Sparta, and [today, one wonders, like Turkey and Brazil?], fell into decadence-I do wonder that Governments never seem to take much notice of the long lessons of history, to the ruin of their people.

    As for ‘a beat-up’, let me remind you of something Julius caesar said; “It is those things which happen very slowly, by degrees that are the most unstoppable.”- the gay lobby is very real and has been at it for a very long time- havent any of you heard about the Lesbian network through the command of the NSW & VIC police-forces?-if such a Male-dominated, conservative force can be infiltrated, then just about anything can.

    This stuff is never going to go away- strangely , if we choose to live passively in these sorts of chaotic, lonely city environments, then dont be surprised if we end up “as righteous Lot, who suffered amongst sinners”!

    -Im a great believer in leading by individual example [even if you want to virtually live existentially and view this life as an individual Christian experience]–or even if our societies reject our public lobbying or influence- Great Christians are truly a fearsome presence, and we were created to shine very bright, to cast this dark world in sharp relief- A strongly loving and bright christian really casts awe, inspires affection and peace, or provokes dark dislike and consternation- [what a generalisation!-haha]

    [..Remember when Jesus brought that huge catch of fish to Peter, who cowered back and said;”get away from me lord, for I am a man of unclean lips!”-I myself even as a Christian have felt this feeling, so I know that this strange ‘holy fear’ is quite real, and purity has this power.

    ‘Monkey-see, Monkey-do’, so people will choose with their own horse-sense the lifestyle they admire, even if they cant really articulate why, and Ill generally bet that bright-christians will win hands-down against the gay option, whatever our government decides.

  9. This is clearly not a ‘beat up’. From the article on NineMSN (second UPDATE in post) there is a significant, clarifying quote from Morris Iemma:

    ‘NSW Premier Morris Iemma said Thursday the Department of Education had been lobbied to ban teachers using words such as husband, wife, boyfriend and girlfriend.’

    Now how disgraceful is that? Why would any group lobby The Department of Education to have natural, normal terms such as husband and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend removed from school language?

    And to ban teachers for using the English language? These lobbyists should be banned, not teachers.

  10. Well, if it’s not a beat-up, it’s even more ridiculous. So these lobbyists are trying to influence society by controlling the language. Not new. But I really don’t think this will happen, because we need words that describe what actually exists!

  11. Well it would be good to know who the lobby group was, and what exactly they lobbied the government to do. Of course we can always trust politicians like Iemma to report accurately on what they are being lobbied for, but it still would be nice to know.

  12. Hey Zeppelin!
    I think you made a lot of good comments. I agree with you how subtlety is the hardest thing to stop.

    “I very often think of the men of Sodom; what they were like, and how they probably weren’t all that different from the men of today.”

    However, let me put forth another reason as to why God was against Sodom and Gomorrah and the “sexually immoral” people.

    “Sexually immoral” could mean juts that, or it could refer to those that pursued sexual relationships/ acts with angels, spirits, gods or demons in both the Old and New Testament. We can’t forget that angels did abduct women before the flood and created hybrid humans- nephilim, aka ‘mighty men’ or giants. This occurred after the flood and it seemed the men in Sodom recognised the angels and wanted to… sleep with them.

    Just like Noah and his family were the only one’s having the righteous blood line just before God’s judgment on the earth by the global flood, so was Lot with his blood among the corrupted bloodlines of the people in those cities. Unfortunately, I think his daughters were corrupted and stumped that branch of the righteous bloodline from following through, (which I think explains why we had to read the twisted tale of Lot’s daughters). This (I think only) left Abraham as the only one with the righteous bloodline which Satan tried to corrupt- the kings that tried to sleep with her wife. God sorted those kings out.

    When Israel came up out of Egypt, God told them to kill all those inhabiting the promised land. Why? Because they were giants- nephilim- here known as anakim! They were hybrids, Satan attempting to use anyone as his pawns to corrupt God’s righteous bloodline.

    This happens again at the time of Jesus. It’s possible that His bloodline was the only righteous bloodline that hadn’t been polluted through the means of fallen angels. This is why Jesus accused the Pharisees of calling the devil their father and how they were white washed tombstones. In the Major/Minor prophets visions, one prophet saw the occult practices some of the Levite’s were committing. This may have been the time of their bloodline polluted. You said the following:

    “Please note the special mention that Christ makes of 2 groups in the Revelation; “liars and the sexually immoral” who will be excluded from Gods presence-Upon reflection, these are 2 very interesting groups of related people:

    Liars- people who are disconnected from reality in one way or another, ‘in denial’ perhaps,
    Sexually Immoral-again, people who are disconnected from reality. [ in this case, from a commitment to one person of opposite sex, and the lifestyle of such]”

    Liars, I believe are not just any type of liar, they are the ones who follow the false prophet’s teachings. Just like their is an anti-christ, their will be the false prophet which represents the anti-Spirit. Those who live in this Spirit will be judged and that does include some people of today. Paul talks of those who speak with the authority of Anti-Christ. Those would be the liars being judged.

    But now you know my understanding of what I think the bible says about the sexual immoral. I don’t support this homosexual movement, but I think the “sexual immoral” are much worse then I think we realise. Jesus spoke a parable about how ‘seed’ was planted over night in a mans field of tares and how it caused a ruckus for those who were going to have to pull them out. This would be about the “sexually immoral” being judged.

  13. I don’t get see why the “seed” in the tares and wheat parable has to be about sexual immorality SAP. You don’t think the seed in the parable of the sower was sexual do you? Surely the seed in these two parables is similar; wheat in the parable of the sower and tares in the parable of the tares.

    I think the point is that some people are sowing the seed of the word of God that is not actually the word of God. 2 Corinthians seems to me to be a book about a real-life example of tares and wheat and Paul calls the sowers of the seed false apostles and says they claim to be apostles but judge according to appearances. The implication seems to be they attempted to turn the people of Corinth against Paul because he did not seem blessed. Paul is worried that the Corinthians will lose the simplicity of obedience to Christ.

    It seems clear that there are two groups of people that look like christians and this must be as true now as then. One group lives in the righteousness given by God to those in a love relationship with Him. The other are attempting to gain a relationship with God by doing particular things – effectively they are turning away from Jesus and back to religion.

    These two groups look very similar on the outside but are not. On the other hand we are not to try and separate the two because God will do that. Unfortunately I think many of the big institutional churches are preaching the wrong Gospel where doing things wins you a relationship with God. Mine too unfortunately and I hear it all the time 😦

Comments are closed.