Militant homosexual agenda in schools

'Militant' gay agenda seen in new sex course
Plans On Hold; Conservative Christians call for student boycott

Charles Lewis, National Post; With Files From Canwest News Service

Getty Images Files
The social conservative leaders who led the charge against Ontario's now-postponed overhaul of the province's sex-education curriculum were among many who had complaints about the explicit nature of some of the subject matter, and the young age of some of the children who would be taught it.

But the leaders went a lot further with their concerns, charging the reforms were part of a larger political agenda to make homosexuality more acceptable to society and to influence young children to "practise" homosexuality.

Charles McVety and Brian Rushfeldt, both representing conservative Christian groups, raised warnings this week about Ontario's new Health and Physical Education Curriculum for Grades 1-8, saying it would corrupt children and society. They were calling for a one-day boycott of students and a massive demonstration at Queen's Park.

But yesterday, Dalton Mc-Gunity, the Ontario Premier, said he was putting the plan on hold for further study.

The new plan, which would have come into effect in September, would have introduced discussions about gender identity and same-sex relationships in Grade 3, masturbation in Grade 6 and the dangers of oral, vaginal and anal sex in Grade 7, as well as descriptions of safe-sex practices.

Mr. McVety, president of Canada Christian College in Toronto, said the curriculum must be seen in the larger context of liberal social engineering. "It's not about this curriculum, it's about changing the culture in our schools, Mr. McVety said. "We warned the country about this when same-sex marriage came in. We changed the laws in this country, redefined marriage, the end result now this is coming into our classrooms.

"This is part of a militant homosexual agenda to normalize homosexuality in everyone's mind and thereby promote homosexuality. If we teach our children these things ... guess what? That's what they'll practice."

A number of religious groups -- from Catholics to evangelical Christians -- have also raised concerns about the new curriculum, though few have been as vocal as Mr. Mc-Vety and Mr. Rushfeldt in suggesting it would bring social corruption.

"This was an attempt to shape society and young minds," said Mr. Rushfeldt, of the Calgary-based Canada Family Action Coalition. "And to shift society away from the concept of male-female and husband-wife. They want to make society believe that two men and two women having sex is normal."

Mr. Rushfeldt and others also pointed out that introducing "gender identity" -- the idea that someone look like one sex on the outside but feel like the opposite sex -- would create confusion and anxiety in young children. But Mr. Rushfeldt believed there was an additional agenda of indoctrination.

"They're trying to ingrain in children a concept that society has never accepted before and that's why they're looking to children. Clearly they are trying to teach children so they can shape them at a young age."

However, a spokesman for the Ministry of Education said this week that the subject of gender identity was simply a way to help students understand the world around them.

"This is not a how-to," Michelle Despault said. "This is not teaching kids a way of being. This is teaching kids information they need to know for their health and well-being. So the expectation is to understand differences and what makes different people unique.

"Some of those differences in our society are around sexual orientation."

Questions about the teaching of homosexuality in classroomsareparticularly sensitive in Catholic schools, and there was controversy this week over whether they would have had to follow the new plan.

Mr. McGuinty said that Catholic schools in Ontario would have had to follow the new curriculum as written. However, the Ontario Association of Catholic Bishops stated that Catholic schools have the constitutional right to rewrite any policy that goes against Catholic teaching. That idea was also confirmed by a spokesman for the Ministry of Education earlier in the week.

Sister Joan Cronin, of the Institute for Catholic Education, which helps shape Catholic teaching across the province, said Catholic schools already have a teaching on homosexuality, which is taught in Grade 8.

The Catholic Catechism does teach that homosexual behaviour is "objectively disordered" but she said that concept is too complex to be introduced to students.

"What we say is that every person, gay or straight, is created in the image of God and deserves respect. But while the Church supports gay people it does not support homosexual acts or lifestyles."

She did not believe that the province had an agenda or ulterior motives for presenting the new curriculum.

"I have great regard for the educators at the Ministry of Education. I would say from their point of view they would have widely researched the topics and received vast research before they would design that program. The would have done it with the best research available."

© 2010 The National Post Company. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.

Give us a break Sr.Cronin. They knew exactly what they were doing with the best homosexual propaganda available.
We need to take a good hard look at the Inst. for Catholic Education and the liberal board that serves it.

Tax Glutton Liberals

Tax Glutton Liberals



The elderly lady was walking in the park when she sat down on the bench beside a man wearing an army uniform. His legs were twitching up and down continually so she asked him what had happened to him. He said his nerves were injured while serving in the army. She gave him her sympathy and walked on when she saw another man in an air force uniform and he was shaking his head back and forth while frothing at the mouth. She sat beside him and asked what had happened to him. He said that he got injured while serving in the air force. Finally she walked on and came upon a man in a navy uniform who was shaking his arm and hand vigorously. Right away she asked him, “Did you get that in the navy young man?” ‘No” he answered, “I got it in my nose and I can’t get the darn thing off my finger!”
That’s the way most rural people feel about the McGuinty liberals who keep getting elected by big cities, union employees, city journalists and special interest elitists. We just can’t seem to shake their dictating policies and taxes off of us.
Hydro just announced another rate increase. While we’ve all been paying for the huge hydro debt, McGuinty went shopping and borrowed another billion dollars to pay for his unneeded ‘Smart Meters’. He’s pouring our money into Green Energy which costs more to produce that it’s worth while he creates more useless, high paying, green jobs for his friends. With the beginning of his ‘Time-of-Use’ power prices and HST this summer, we will all be paying much more for our hydro and heating fuel. And it doesn’t stop there.
McGuinty’s liberals have added ‘environmental levees’ to many of our consumer items. Whenever you purchase any oil products, you pay a levy (plus tax) and you pay a $5.00 disposal levy (plus tax) when you get an oil change on your vehicle. If you can afford it, that big screen TV is going to have a $50.00 levy (plus tax) and eventually all our consumer items will have this green levy (plus tax). Lets not mention the continual user fees he adds for services.
This tax glut, at our expense, will set up the liberals for the next election when they can promise all the unions easy settlements and greeners all the money they want to invade rural people with more environmental and species at risk laws and fines.
Provincially and federally the liberals are finished in most rural areas mostly because they only speak to the cities and punish the rural. The wide gap between the well off and the poor here is displayed by who’s licking McGuinty’s pink slippers and who isn’t.
The challenge now is for the provincial conservatives to create fiscal and social policies that reflect real conservative values because right now there’s almost no difference between the red and blue. Better yet, create a new party like the Family Coalition Party with real family values.
The only environmental problem rural Ontario has is the green fog that hovers over Toronto politics and I can’t see anything changing until people get off their butts and demand a change from the people they hire in government.

Ontario schools promote homosexuality

Mandatory Curriculum for Ontario Schools Promotes Homosexuality, Masturbation

TORONTO, Ontario, March 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As of next year, Grade 6 students in Ontario’s publicly-funded schools can expect to be taught that masturbation “is common and is not harmful and is one way of learning about your body,” according to a newly-revised curriculum document released by the Ministry of Education.
The Ministry put out its new Health and Physical Education curriculum for grades 1 to 8 in January, and a spokesperson has confirmed to LifeSiteNews (LSN) that the new curriculum will be mandatory for all schools, Catholic and public, in September 2010. The high school curriculum will be released this spring, and will be mandatory as of September 2011. At this point, it is unclear, however, whether Catholic schools are to be forced into teaching elements that violate Catholic teaching.
The new curriculum, replacing a previous version from 1998, aligns with the Ministry’s campaign to promote “equity and inclusive education” in Ontario’s schools, which includes the advancement of homosexualism and transgenderism. A notable aspect of the curriculum’s revision is the attempt to instil a sense that homosexuality and transgenderism are perfectly normal.
The document includes curriculum expectations, which teachers are required to address, accompanied by sample teacher prompts and student responses that are meant “to indicate the content and scope of intended learning.”
Students begin to explore “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” in grade 3, as part of an expectation to appreciate “invisible differences” in others. A desired response has the eight-year-old student recognizing that “some [families] have two mothers or two fathers.”
In grade 5, a student is expected to recognize that “things I cannot control include … personal characteristics such as … my gender identity [and] sexual orientation.”
In addition to learning about masturbation, a grade 6 student response suggests that students can better understand “sexual orientation” by “reading books that describe various types of families and relationships,” including those involving two “mothers” or “fathers.” The response adds the suggestion that students use the word “partner” rather than “husband” or “wife” to avoid the assumption that all couples are of opposite sexes.
In grades 7 and 8, “preventing pregnancy and disease,” “gender identity,” and “sexual orientation” become “key topics.”
Grade 7s are expected to be taught about “using condoms consistently if and when a person becomes sexually active.” A response from the twelve-year-old states that “People who think they will be having sex sometime soon should keep a condom with them so they will have it when they need it.” Another response has the student stating that one should avoid “anal intercourse without a condom” to prevent HIV/AIDS.
In grade 8, the use of contraception is a key component of the curriculum, and students are expected to “demonstrate an understanding of gender identity (e.g., male, female, two-spirited, transgendered, transsexual, intersex) and sexual orientation (e.g., heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual).” A grade 8 student response states it is important to have “all gender identities and sexual orientations portrayed positively in the media, in literature, and in materials we use at school.”
Patricia MacNeil, a spokesperson for the Ministry, told LSN that the new curriculum is indeed mandatory for all Ontario schools, including the Catholic ones. She said that there was “extensive consultation” on the revision beginning in September 2007, which included teachers, staff, and administrators from the Catholic school system. She also confirmed that the Ontario bishops’ education arm, the Institute for Catholic Education (ICE), was involved in the process.
“The curriculum was certainly revised with Catholic educators and students needs in mind,” she wrote in an e-mail.
She explained that the Ministry establishes curriculum policy, and then the school boards are responsible for implementation. Teachers determine their approach to addressing the curriculum expectations laid out by the Ministry.
“Teachers design their lesson plans and present material in a manner that is open and respectful of various view points,” she wrote, “and it is expected that teachers in the Catholic education system will present the material in a manner that affirms the values of Catholic education.”
She explained further that “the ministry is working with [the Ontario Physical and Health Education Association] and ICE to provide teachers with resources to support the teaching of sensitive and challenging topics, including sexual health, gender identity, sexual orientation, and mental health.”
Given MacNeil’s statement that the material may be presented “in a manner that affirms the values of Catholic education,” LSN followed up by asking yesterday whether that means that Catholic schools do not have to teach about contraception and other activities that violate Catholic values. LSN has not received a response as of press time.
The potential that this curriculum would be forced on Catholic schools is exacerbated in light of LSN’s previous investigations into the Ministry’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy. Under this strategy, the Ministry is requiring all boards, including the Catholic ones, to develop an equity policy that recognizes “sexual orientation” as a protected ground for non-discrimination, as well as committing to fighting “homophobia.”
When LSN spoke with MacNeil in January, she refused to answer, after repeated questioning, whether the Catholic Catechism’s teaching that homosexual inclinations are “objectively disordered” and homosexual acts are “acts of grave depravity” (2357-2359) would be able to be taught in Catholic schools under the equity strategy.
The Institute for Catholic Education, the Catholic school boards, and other Catholic stakeholders have signed off on the equity strategy, believing that it would not disturb the teaching of authentic Catholic doctrine in Catholic schools.
But the Vatican has warned that protecting people from discrimination based on “sexual orientation” opens the door to outright promotion of homosexuality, and this new Health and Physical Education curriculum may, in fact, bear that out.
In 1992, while under the leadership of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith condemned the recognition of “sexual orientation” as comparable to immutable characteristics such as race and ethnicity. The statement affirmed that homosexuals should be granted the same rights as everyone else, but also emphasized that there can be just “discrimination” based on “sexual orientation,” regarding adoption or military recruitment, for example.
“The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality,” the document stated.
The Institute for Catholic Education was unavailable for comment.
See The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education, 2010 (revised) (http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health18curr2010.pdf).
The price of freedom…and good morals…is vigilence. The lack of it explains what you have just read.