Crosswords1 min ago
Gay promotion in schools.
127 Answers
MEP fights 'gay' books for schools
Books illustrating gay relationships are becoming part of the school curriculum under the new Sexual Orientation Regulations Act.
Titles such as 'The Sissy Duckling', 'Hello Sailor' and 'Daddy's Room mate' are recommended by Government departments for children aged 5 upwards.
One shows pictures of two males in bed together and cuddling on a sofa whilst 'Elmer' in 'The Sissy Duckling' is promoted as "a terrific role model for any child" on a Government website.
'Strange Boy' aimed at secondary stage pupils contains an explicit description of a homosexual act between two boys aged 10 and14 years old.
UKIP MEP Derek Clark described the books as "completely unsuitable" and said he was "appalled" at the decision by some local authorities to use the books.
"How is it in any way suitable for schools to promote under age homosexual acts?" asked Mr Clark, himself a teacher of 39 years.
"Schools should be concentrating on teaching children how to read and write. Is it any surprise that the UK has some of the worst rates of literacy in Europe when our teachers are having to spend their time promoting gay rights to youngsters?"
The new regulations could see schools compelled to promote gay rights in the curriculum rather than counter threats of legal action from gay activists.
I find this extremely alarming and I'm sure the majority of others will too. This sort of politically correct brainwashing ill-serves our children.
Books illustrating gay relationships are becoming part of the school curriculum under the new Sexual Orientation Regulations Act.
Titles such as 'The Sissy Duckling', 'Hello Sailor' and 'Daddy's Room mate' are recommended by Government departments for children aged 5 upwards.
One shows pictures of two males in bed together and cuddling on a sofa whilst 'Elmer' in 'The Sissy Duckling' is promoted as "a terrific role model for any child" on a Government website.
'Strange Boy' aimed at secondary stage pupils contains an explicit description of a homosexual act between two boys aged 10 and14 years old.
UKIP MEP Derek Clark described the books as "completely unsuitable" and said he was "appalled" at the decision by some local authorities to use the books.
"How is it in any way suitable for schools to promote under age homosexual acts?" asked Mr Clark, himself a teacher of 39 years.
"Schools should be concentrating on teaching children how to read and write. Is it any surprise that the UK has some of the worst rates of literacy in Europe when our teachers are having to spend their time promoting gay rights to youngsters?"
The new regulations could see schools compelled to promote gay rights in the curriculum rather than counter threats of legal action from gay activists.
I find this extremely alarming and I'm sure the majority of others will too. This sort of politically correct brainwashing ill-serves our children.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hammer Head. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'll tell you what makes me sick Theland? - the fact that schools are forced by law to have regular acts of worship!
You want to talk about brainwashing children let's start with that.
As a parent of two school age children I am for ever flooded with letters for consent for them to see drugs films or sex education - I've yet to be asked for consent for them to be told a load of fairy stories about carpenters walking on water!
If people don't want their children to have sex education at school it's the easiest thing in the world for them to opt out.
None of this is "promoting" homosexuality, it is about portraying homosexuality as something that is not out of the norm.
Or do we want to go back to the days when "Gaybashing" was rife and openly gay people were getting beaten up on the streets?
You want to talk about brainwashing children let's start with that.
As a parent of two school age children I am for ever flooded with letters for consent for them to see drugs films or sex education - I've yet to be asked for consent for them to be told a load of fairy stories about carpenters walking on water!
If people don't want their children to have sex education at school it's the easiest thing in the world for them to opt out.
None of this is "promoting" homosexuality, it is about portraying homosexuality as something that is not out of the norm.
Or do we want to go back to the days when "Gaybashing" was rife and openly gay people were getting beaten up on the streets?
Naomi
You wrote:
"Political correctness does ill-serve our children - and the majority of the rest of society too."
What would you prefer? Would you prefer teachers to be gagged from discussing or councelling children who have questions about their sexuality.
How would you handle it if you were a teacher.
Forget the question of Political Correctness...as a human being, how would you deal with a child who has tried to commit suicide because they feel that they're totally alone and the subject of homophobic bullying.
I ask this because in the past I've councelled kids in this state and I'd absolutely LOVE to know how open-minded people like would deal with you.
Perhaps let them kill themselves?
I mean, as Theland has already stated...we wouldn't want anyone thinking that it was an acceptable alternative lifestyle.
You wrote:
"Political correctness does ill-serve our children - and the majority of the rest of society too."
What would you prefer? Would you prefer teachers to be gagged from discussing or councelling children who have questions about their sexuality.
How would you handle it if you were a teacher.
Forget the question of Political Correctness...as a human being, how would you deal with a child who has tried to commit suicide because they feel that they're totally alone and the subject of homophobic bullying.
I ask this because in the past I've councelled kids in this state and I'd absolutely LOVE to know how open-minded people like would deal with you.
Perhaps let them kill themselves?
I mean, as Theland has already stated...we wouldn't want anyone thinking that it was an acceptable alternative lifestyle.
As far as I can tell, with the 60,000 gay people who 'married' last year, then it must be normal. That means that there are thousands or even millions of gay people aside from these married ones who gay!! If this were any other subject, by token of the extremely large numbers, then it would be classed as 'common' if not normal.
Gayness just is what it is and if you are gay, then you are gay!
jno - sorry to inform you that Baa Baa Black sheep has just been 'modified' in the YMCA is Southport to Baa Baa Raindow sheep - much to the furore of the neighbourhood! So it is still happening. I tell ya!
Gayness just is what it is and if you are gay, then you are gay!
jno - sorry to inform you that Baa Baa Black sheep has just been 'modified' in the YMCA is Southport to Baa Baa Raindow sheep - much to the furore of the neighbourhood! So it is still happening. I tell ya!
Aids started out as a homosexual disease, because of the tendency for homosexual men to be so pomiscuous, and passed into the hetero population through bisexuals. Numbers don't mean it's right, and I consider their promiscuous disease ridden existence a perversion. I feel sorry for them, and I applaud the efforts to find a reliable permanent cure for Aids. I don't hate them, but I hate what they do.
sp1814 - What lesbians do is their affair, not mine. However, that also is in my opinion, not a normal lifestyle. But, as I said, it's their business.
If they are good citizens, then bravo, I'd love them as neighbours. I simply do not think that their lifestyle should be promoted as being normal. It is not.
If they are good citizens, then bravo, I'd love them as neighbours. I simply do not think that their lifestyle should be promoted as being normal. It is not.
Theland
AIDS is prevalent amongst promiscious gay men, straight people and intravenous drug users.
It first attacked the gay community, but with more and more gay couples opting for a monogomous committed lifestyle (as evidenced by the numbers opting for civil unions), don't you think that prejudice based on religious beliefs is becoming more and more outdated?
Again - how would you handle it if one of your kids turned out to be gay?
And if they aren't gay - what difference does it make to their life? Surely the worst that could happen is that they would be more tolerant of others.
I literally cannot see how greater understanding of others is a bad thing.
Seriously - I've been wracking my brain, but I can't see it.
AIDS is prevalent amongst promiscious gay men, straight people and intravenous drug users.
It first attacked the gay community, but with more and more gay couples opting for a monogomous committed lifestyle (as evidenced by the numbers opting for civil unions), don't you think that prejudice based on religious beliefs is becoming more and more outdated?
Again - how would you handle it if one of your kids turned out to be gay?
And if they aren't gay - what difference does it make to their life? Surely the worst that could happen is that they would be more tolerant of others.
I literally cannot see how greater understanding of others is a bad thing.
Seriously - I've been wracking my brain, but I can't see it.
Leaving aside for a moment that actual story and whether or not it's true. The issue here is education of gay issues versus promotion of gay issues. We once had a very effective method of understanding the former and not doing the latter. Remember Clause 28 anyone? That was designed to prevent educators promoting homosexuality. However it was jumped on by the liberal elite as being the reason that teachers etc could not even discuss gay issues. Total rubbish of course, I can rememeber when I was at school, homosexuality was discussed but just not promoted. Still His Tonyness saw it as another way to appease the militant gay community and removed this most useful piece of legislation. So I'm not surprised we are have this issue now.
sp - Tolerance! That's it. You may think that my intolerance of homosexual practices means I am intolerant of homosexual people. No. I am not.
They would be offended to be sure, to know that I feel sorry for them. I firmly believe that a monogamous heterosexual relationship is normal, other relationships are not.
Aids was indeed recognised as a homosexual disease, and that reflected their promiscuity. To say that they now, in huge numbers go in for civil partnerships, may go some way to a welcome situation where thay are not so promiscuous but as with divorce and breakdowns in the hetero population, they will also be affected by this, I would presume.
They would be offended to be sure, to know that I feel sorry for them. I firmly believe that a monogamous heterosexual relationship is normal, other relationships are not.
Aids was indeed recognised as a homosexual disease, and that reflected their promiscuity. To say that they now, in huge numbers go in for civil partnerships, may go some way to a welcome situation where thay are not so promiscuous but as with divorce and breakdowns in the hetero population, they will also be affected by this, I would presume.
Clause 28 said
"a local authority shall not ...promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship"
This meant teachers could not discuss homosexuality in any terms that reflected the way that thousands of gay couples actually live - as partners living together, going abut their daily lives.
They were being forced to give a politically distorted view - Total Rubbish? I think not!
"a local authority shall not ...promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship"
This meant teachers could not discuss homosexuality in any terms that reflected the way that thousands of gay couples actually live - as partners living together, going abut their daily lives.
They were being forced to give a politically distorted view - Total Rubbish? I think not!
No Jake it just meant they could not promote it as normal as your quoted text says. The intent was deliberately mis interpreted by extremists and propagated as true and belived by teachers generally in it's latter years. Homosexuality was discussed in my school sex education in the 70's. Can anyone else of that era remember?
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
ChatterBank2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Vacuum Cleaner For Dog Hair...
Home & Garden3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.