Gay-haters to target primary schools
A scheme to promote sexuality equality in UK primary schools has caused a hot-and-sweaty reaction among homophobic religious groups. The pro-equality group No Outsiders is to introduce children’s stories featuring same-sex love relationships into several primary schools around the country.
Predictably, The Christian Institute is in a lather:
The predictions of those who said the repeal of Section 28 would result in the active promotion of homosexuality in schools are coming true.
The books to be used no more promote homosexuality than other children’s books promote heterosexuality. They merely present it in a way that reflects reality.
But, as ever, reality is exactly what these religious groups have trouble coping with. As Tahir Alam of the Muslim Council of Britain demonstrates:
This is not consistent with Islamic teachings and from our point of view many parents would be concerned.
And…?
The Christian pressure group Stephen Green’s Voice (aka Christian Voice) intends to play the most active role in opposing this scheme. Stephen “Dog Shit” Green said:
I am astonished at this project and we are trying to find out where these schools are to empower parents to put pressure on them to remove the books.
Well, he’s already threatened to picket a cancer charity, so primary schools certainly wouldn’t be beneath him.
The intention is to make homosexuality appear normal and these people have no business doing that to other people’s children. It is wicked and amounts to child abuse.
The more you normalise homosexuality, and the more kids see images of homosexual relationships from schoolbooks and authority figures the more kids think any crushes they have on children of the same sex – which is quite normal at 11 years old – are valid.
The three children’s books which will be introduced to selected primary schools are Spacegirl Pukes (Spacegirl is cared for by two women), King and King, and And Tango Makes Three which is based based on the true story of Roy and Silo, Central Park’s gay penguin couple.
Children of the age of 5-13 are too young to understand and fully comprehend issues of sex and sexuality be it straight, gay, lesbian or bisexual sex.
Let them learn the three rs before teaching them about something which requires a more mature mind to fully understand and get to grips with.
I don’t think kids under the age of 13 should be taught about sex and sexuality for that reason.
However of course I think once they reach they age of 13 they should be taught about all sexualities and that being homosexual isn’t bad or evil or sinful.
However the problem religious bigots like Stephen Green
is homosexuality! They are homophobic bigots and don’t want anyone to believe being gay isn’t bad evil or sinful be they a child of the age of 5 or a teenager of the age of 13, 14 or 15.
They’d be ok with kids reading books that showed gays dying of AIDS, going to hell and burning for all eternity!
I’ve got to admit, introducing this material to primary schools, or perhaps even junior is asking for trouble (although I could be proved wrong in time), but one wonders how Green plans to ’empower’ parents when most of his hand-wringing campaigns have exposed him as being as inept as they come.
As if we don’t know by now that while he acts horrified, this is the sort of thing he lives for.
I like Dan’s point about gay’s burning in hell. They already *do* teach kids stuff like that at Sunday school (and in church for those who go). Religion has a long and notable history of brainwashing children from the day they are born with stories of hell fire and eternal damnation. Doesn’t matter than they can’t prove any of them any more than they can prove the existence of Big Foot.
Gary Glitter would love traditional (Christian/Muslim/Jewish) morality. There is no age of consent in the bible for example! That’s why we have a secular law to protect children. The bible supports slavery – so we have a secular law to prevent it. I am sure there must be other examples.
Oh, don’t you just love the irony!
The irony being that he thinks that this is child abuse, but filling kids heads full of fairy tales and fear and guilt is not.
I don’t think I had any crushes at 11. I wonder why dog shit thinks gay crushes are normal at that age. Is there any independent research on this?
Dan, our local primary starts sex education in Y5 (9/10 year olds) which is probably about right.
I wonder why dog shit thinks gay crushes are normal at that age.
I think we may have stumbled on the reason why he spends so much of his time both thinking about gay sex and trying to persecute homosexuals; Dai from the Upper Sixth turned his offer of a quick hand-shandy down and it hurts him to this day.
I also think that that is a bit young for introducing sex, hetrosexual or homosexual.
But I’m more concened that the Bible read is at that age.
1) It suports incest (how did Cain and Able get their kids?)
2)Fratricide
3)Adultery. Abraham and his wifes maid.
4)Tugging on off (Onan)
2) Shitting the life out of your child by pretending to sacrifice him.
And thats only Genisis.
Sharing books that have positive images of same sex couples with children is not sex education – it is merely helping them to develop tolerance. This can and should start in nursery. We don’t call Cinderella sex education. For children of same-sex parenting it will help to give them confidence about who they are and of course there will be children beginning to question their own sexuality. Normalisation of these issues can only help build a btter society.
Additionally sex education starts as soon as children start to know where babies come from and that boys and girls are different – it isn’t all about sexual intercourse.
Dan writes,
I think the corollary of that is that all references to heterosexuality should be stripped out of kids’ stories, too, then. But they’re all there: handsome princes and beautiful maidens; a monster (the Beast) turning back into a gorgeous bloke for the girl (Beauty); Mummy Bear, Daddy Bear and Baby Bear. The 11-year-old who has a same-sex couple as parents might wonder at the opposite-sex couples in those stories just as much as a kid of opposite-sex parents might wonder at the characters who people Spacegirl Pukes and the like.
I think Paul hits the point with,