You Do Not Have The Ability To Refuse LGBT, You Will Be Dealt With Severely

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: infolurker

Really?
Just how much credibility do you think that guy has?

This is one of the biggest problems I see on ATS these days. Unverified click bait screed by some basement dwelling loud mouth served up as a "credible source".

And from Youtube........the home of such self-serving click bait generators. It's really, just awful. Yea, let's keep serving up junk from Bitchute and Youtube.

Please, make it stop.

The story can be easily verified online.

But somehow LGBTQ+ has found its way in schools trying to indoctrinate children about the life choices and sexual orientation of some adults. I am sure when you identify as trans and start the 'puberty blockers' and the hormones that's a personal choice. And there is no need to glorify dangerous personal choices or to discuss the delusions of a tiny minority of adults who think they are now the other gender.

Society doesn't have these values.

The teacher needs to be disciplined for his behaviour towards the children who has repeatedly threatened.

Speaking of junk. There is no more junk than the absurd and junk gender ideology.

a reply to: Astyanax

Allow me to "fix" things for you and perhaps you will be able to understand the visceral reactions"

"Did you have a choice over the curriculum you were taught in the cult? You may have had the option to choose among subjects in secondary school, but once you were in a cult you had no choice but to learn, and be tested on, the whole syllabus taught in that cult. This is precisely the same thing.

Of course every child needs to learn the values of their cult. They are free, thereafter, to reject those values if they disagree with them, but they do not and should not be given the liberty to pick and choose what they learn. That is emphatically not how cults works. It never has been and never will be."

Can you understand now? This isn't about societal values, it's about accepting the mental illness caused by the social contagion of sexual identity politics.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: Boadicea

Non of that extra curriculum is compulsory in the UK. Anyone saying otherwise probably shouldn't be educating imo....
My advice to UK parents would be to educate yourself and be proactive.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here, but yes, but LGBTQ instruction is mandatory in England at least:

LGBTQ+ inclusive lessons are now mandatory in all schools across England

All Schools in England Required to Teach LGBTQ-Inclusive Curriculum, Even to Young Children

There has been pushback from parents, and a review is scheduled to reconsider the curriculum --

UK Government review shouldn’t row back on LGBT-inclusive RSE

I recall similar happening in Ireland and Scotland, with Nicola Sturgeon receiving quite a bit of criticism for supporting the mandatory LGBTQ curriculum.

It seems that at least some parents are paying attention, educating themselves, and fighting back.

a reply to: Moon68

Watch the first minute and a half of this, let me know if it sounds familiar. This is how we used to deal with the people taking over schools and trying to take over society. It's eye opening.

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Moon68

Watch the first minute and a half of this, let me know if it sounds familiar. This is how we used to deal with the people taking over schools and trying to take over society. It's eye opening.

I will once I'm off work...eventually, lol.

It would be good to educate people about the rise of the LGBTQ+ cult over the last ~10 years, and the way that they've acted vile and militantly towards people who disagree, there's a website that has documented their comments over the years. I wonder if the teacher will mention that ordinary gay people are distancing themselves from the 'TQ+' as they're sick of their crap, hence the '#LGBwithoutT' tag. After all, what if one of the pupils mentions this?

His aggressiveness and tone suggests it's going to be just another indoctrination program. Catch 'em young and you've got them forever!

Thing is there's transvestites/transgenders/ladyboys that don't wave their junk in people's faces, just want to be left alone in their little world, don't support violent/cancelling protests, don't want men in women's sports, and advocate for leaving the kids alone and letting them be children. There is the bathrooms issue and I don't know where they stand on that, and obviously we don't want to chuck them in the same camp as that dude recently that said he'll shoot anyone who stops him using the women's bathrooms, he needs to be locked up.

It's getting very confusing with all the different factions, for example those women who completely support the LGBTQ+ cult, those who don't want them in sports but are otherwise ok with them being in women's spaces, or those who are vehemently against transgenders of any kind being allowed in women's spaces AT ALL.

I guess in the future there will be 3 bathrooms.

a reply to: Boadicea

From what I'm gathering many of these education programs are based upon PHSE - Personal, social, health and economic education. Which isn't statutory.

RSE - relationships, sex and health education is statutory, schools have to teach these things although there's exemptions. Religion works fine still apparently. I'm on a mobile so I'll edit a link or two...

PHSE guidance UKgov

Just the one link but it has all the relevant links to PDFs and the likes.

It seems that at least some parents are paying attention, educating themselves, and fighting back.

It's a mess and most people don't know their rights never mind how to use them effectively. I have no horse in this race so I'm not interested in how to go about fighting the power, I'd happily point someone in the right direction if they ever asked though.

Might as well add there's going to be a difference in how each is taught, again I have no reason to learn about the intricacies. RSE is about sex and the things that go with it, PHSE is going to be more about social aspects such as "Gary has 2 mums" or "Mary's mum is now her dad". Since acceptance of protected characteristics is the theme these days it somewhat makes sense that LBQT+-= whatever is included.

In the UK it's not so easy to privately educate. It's a costly endeavour, I'm no fan of schools. They've always been indoctrination camps in my eyes. Parents usually love them though...

a reply to: infolurker

I'm a Christian man in the UK, my wife is also Christian - our eldest son, I believe, based on the limited discussions we've had about the subject, has bought into the propaganda on this subject at least partially. Our youngest is far more conservative in his views, but even so he knows he can't voice those opinions in school, he just has to sit there & tolerate the BS as they propagandise. It's a terrible shame that our children have even slightly been affected by this nonsense - I hope in time that our eldest will come to see the error of their way of thinking. Each to their own, but don't force the children to like & follow along with the propaganda.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: Boadicea

From what I'm gathering many of these education programs are based upon PHSE - Personal, social, health and economic education. Which isn't statutory.

RSE - relationships, sex and health education is statutory, schools have to teach these things although there's exemptions. Religion works fine still apparently. I'm on a mobile so I'll edit a link or two...

PHSE guidance UKgov

Wow! That is quite the words salad -- at least to me. I know that British English varies from American English, but the distinctions between "mandatory" or "compulsive" with "statutory" are less than clear. Like this, for example:

Relationships and sex education (RSE) is an important part of PSHE education. Relationships education is compulsory for all primary school pupils, and relationships and sex education (RSE) is compulsory for all secondary school pupils. When any school provides RSE they must have regard to the Secretary of State’s guidance, this is a statutory duty.

And this:

PSHE is a non-statutory subject. To allow teachers the flexibility to deliver high-quality PSHE we consider it unnecessary to provide new standardised frameworks or programmes of study. PSHE can encompass many areas of study. Teachers are best placed to understand the needs of their pupils and do not need additional central prescription.

Perhaps "weasel words" would be a better way to describe this than "word salad." My overall impression is that they didn't dare put the true goal in words on paper, so they leave it vague and "flexible," while making it "compulsory," but not "statutory."

They've created a moving target.

Might as well add there's going to be a difference in how each is taught, again I have no reason to learn about the intricacies. RSE is about sex and the things that go with it, PHSE is going to be more about social aspects such as "Gary has 2 mums" or "Mary's mum is now her dad". Since acceptance of protected characteristics is the theme these days it somewhat makes sense that LBQT+-= whatever is included.

I'm not sure the lines between RSE and PHSE are as clear as you think. As soon as the curriculum moves away from the objective (anatomy, biology and physiology) to the subjective (feelings, preferences and desires), they've overstepped their bounds. I very easily explained homosexuality to my kids (after their school totally and completely confused the matter) without any subjectivity. This is not what all schools are doing, and the statutes and guidelines are such that virtually every teacher could be teaching something different.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

What you say is true.

The sad truth however is that the parents, much less the general public, has no say over what is taught in the Government Schools. The only solution is to get the kids OUT of the Government schools. And tens of thousands of Parents have come to the same conclusion and are removing their kids from the Government schools.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: Boadicea

From what I'm gathering many of these education programs are based upon PHSE - Personal, social, health and economic education. Which isn't statutory.

RSE - relationships, sex and health education is statutory, schools have to teach these things although there's exemptions. Religion works fine still apparently. I'm on a mobile so I'll edit a link or two...

PHSE guidance UKgov

Wow! That is quite the words salad -- at least to me. I know that British English varies from American English, but the distinctions between "mandatory" or "compulsive" with "statutory" are less than clear. Like this, for example:

Relationships and sex education (RSE) is an important part of PSHE education. Relationships education is compulsory for all primary school pupils, and relationships and sex education (RSE) is compulsory for all secondary school pupils. When any school provides RSE they must have regard to the Secretary of State’s guidance, this is a statutory duty.

And this:

PSHE is a non-statutory subject. To allow teachers the flexibility to deliver high-quality PSHE we consider it unnecessary to provide new standardised frameworks or programmes of study. PSHE can encompass many areas of study. Teachers are best placed to understand the needs of their pupils and do not need additional central prescription.

Perhaps "weasel words" would be a better way to describe this than "word salad." My overall impression is that they didn't dare put the true goal in words on paper, so they leave it vague and "flexible," while making it "compulsory," but not "statutory."

They've created a moving target.

Might as well add there's going to be a difference in how each is taught, again I have no reason to learn about the intricacies. RSE is about sex and the things that go with it, PHSE is going to be more about social aspects such as "Gary has 2 mums" or "Mary's mum is now her dad". Since acceptance of protected characteristics is the theme these days it somewhat makes sense that LBQT+-= whatever is included.

I'm not sure the lines between RSE and PHSE are as clear as you think. As soon as the curriculum moves away from the objective (anatomy, biology and physiology) to the subjective (feelings, preferences and desires), they've overstepped their bounds. I very easily explained homosexuality to my kids (after their school totally and completely confused the matter) without any subjectivity. This is not what all schools are doing, and the statutes and guidelines are such that virtually every teacher could be teaching something different.

Isn't that what any bloated bureaucracy is about though? Their modus operandi? Obfuscate and use completely loquacious and intangible language to keep the commoner unaware of their agenda?

originally posted by: EmeraldCoastFreedm
No 1st and 2nd glad we sent them packing in 1783

That's not very nice.😥
Humans imitate the emotions of other humans, so to help you be kinder, here's a picture of a beautiful smiling woman.😃
www.heart.org...

a reply to: LSU2018

I get the importance of independent reporting/journalism but one of the things I think we all know is that the schools strictly prohibit the recording, video or otherwise, of what happens in the classrooms because, rather obviously, they don't want the general public knowing what's going on in the schools. Hell, even the parents can't get access to much of the course materials. Therefore, I am naturally suspicious of any report that claims to be recorded within the school.

I do take seriously the testimonies of Parents reporting what outrages their kids have told them about. And those Parents have been featured lately, protesting in front of school boards and presenting testimonies of inappropriate topics covered in the classrooms.

a reply to: Moon68

Isn't that what any bloated bureaucracy is about though? Their modus operandi? Obfuscate and use completely loquacious and intangible language to keep the commoner unaware of their agenda?

Yup! It also allows for everyone to read what they want into it.... or out of it. So we have parents believing what they want to believe and teachers teaching what they want to believe, which may or may not be factual or truthful.

In England, this means teachers can read whatever they want into it or out of it in the classroom. And teach according to their beliefs -- not an established standardized curriculum.

a reply to: Boadicea

I actually raised the point of definitions in another thread recently! Lol

I s'pose the definitions are based upon how much leeway is to be given.

I fully understand the apprehension, even the paranoia and I also agree that government's have an agenda. The issue is globalism is a difficult thing to fight with national laws.

I have a sense of the direction we're all going and the best way to stop it is being proactive instead of reactionary. The way you taught your kids about homosexually is probably the best way although time and patience can be an issue for some. Plus there's the element of indoctrination from parents too.

In England, this means teachers can read whatever they want into it or out of it in the classroom. And teach according to their beliefs -- not an established standardized curriculum.

Not necessarily. They'd be compelled to teach whatever is set out by the school board when it comes to non-mandatory education. They in turn seek the guidance of 'professionals' which are often global based groups. A bit like inviting BLM to class about racism...

a reply to: RAY1990

It is pretty difficult to differentiate all the variations since many depend on how and with whom you wish to have sex. Without knowing what sex is, it gets murky.

a reply to: RAY1990

Quote"
" Plus there's the element of indoctrination from parents too."

Do you mean morals and the values handed down for generations in a family? Or, are you referring to parents that label a small child trans so they can monetize their own fetishizations on social media?

Quote:
"The issue is globalism is a difficult thing to fight with national laws."

Not really. Tell the globalists NO. If they show up to push the issue then hit them.

In the face.

With a bus.

Then send the mangled carcass back as a message to stay the F away.

a reply to: RAY1990

I actually raised the point of definitions in another thread recently! Lol

I s'pose the definitions are based upon how much leeway is to be given.

Those pesky definitions!

Confusing the language and our ability to express ourselves is a big part of the gaslighting. When definitions are subjective and whatever the speaker wants it to be, it's nigh impossible to communicate. I think that's part of the battle plan.

I have a sense of the direction we're all going and the best way to stop it is being proactive instead of reactionary. The way you taught your kids about homosexually is probably the best way although time and patience can be an issue for some. Plus there's the element of indoctrination from parents too.

I agree. But I also think that those pushing this agenda know this, and part of their strategy is to keep us guessing, unsure, confused, lacking confidence in our words and facts and principles -- in other words, gaslighting us and making us question ourselves. We necessarily become reactionary, trying to catch up, trying to understand all these new words and definitions and concepts. And while we're still trying to figure it out, they up the ante. Again.

originally posted by: EmeraldCoastFreedm
No 1st and 2nd glad we sent them packing in 1783

Lol that’s rich