Wednesday, 25 February 2009

The Rights Of Parents In The Education System

To be honest I feel everything comes down to money, and who is paying it. Even the ever present controversy over teaching about homosexuality in state schools. Personally I find the views of parents opposed to such teaching baffling.

Homosexuality is real. Almost everyone will have dealt with the issue on a personal basis (be it explore it, have a gay friend, meet a gay person or simply see depictions of it on the television) by early adulthood. It is a real thing and something children should thus be taught about. Just as one introduces children to the basics of mathematics, science, language and history from an early age, we should also introduce children to the diversity of relationships and lifestyles they will encounter in the course of their lives.

The idea of with holding information from children is, to be frank, idiotic. There's no point having publicly funded schools if we aren't going to teach them everything possible. Of course I'm not suggesting they learn about the mechanics of sex at the age of 5, but then again I'm not suggesting one teaches them the full horror of the Second World War at that age either. But it's good to lay a groundwork so that when they are taught about sex it is within the framework of a complex world of relationships just as when the Holocaust is taught it is helpful to have an understanding of the basics of the Second World War.

People don't complain about Horrible Histories like The Rotten Romans or the Vicious Vikings (in all their gory, dirty detail) so why complain about "And Tango Makes Three"? Schools are paid for collectively and thus must serve us all collectively. If parents wish to have the right to stop certain subjects, which our elected Government sees fit to allow, then I suggest they stop their anti gay campaigning and start campaigning for an end to publicly funded schools and the National Curriculum. I don't agree the country would benefit from such a move, but it would be the only logical way of then allowing parents to send children to schools which brainwash them in a way more to their liking.

Now in reply to this article...

by Andrew Hibbard - The Parent Organisation Ltd
The value of marriage has been eroded in the past decade and the emphasis switched to same-sex relationships and single parenthood.

Erm... you're point being?

Schools now teach children as young as five that both are acceptable, although neither is condoned by any religion.

Oh you're a God botherer, makes sense. You do understand that being condoned by a religion isn't all it's cracked up to be? Public execution, slavery and genocide are all condoned in the Bible. Hardly a ringing endorsement of religious endorsement!

Schools call it 'relationship' education. It is the start of sex education.

Whereas teaching them marriage isn't? I thought marriage was all about sex (joke)! Used to be you could get your marriage annulled if you hadn't done the nasty. And homosexual relationships are not just all about sex. A bit like marriage, it's complicated!

Why teach them?
Infant school children are not naturally racist or homophobic.

No it takes religious/bigoted parents and teachers to make them so.

If they make comments, they rarely understand them. Why teach them?

And there I was thinking schools were all about educating people who don't understand things... that's why we teach them!!

Homosexual subject matter may be suitable for older primary school children but by age 10 most would see a story of two male penguins hatching an egg as nothing but childish fiction.

Yes totally fictional, except in the real world... and are you saying that because a story is completely fictional it has no moral value, nor ability to educate? If so then I think an entire educational tradition of fables and parables just went out the window. Jesus taught in fucking parables!

Last year my 10-year-old announced he had been shown in class how to put on a condom.

Why did he need to know? It is irrelevant and inappropriate.

Well last I checked one day he will be a man and may just need a condom. It's a life skill.

It is not appropriate to teach infants about homosexuality any more than it is appropriate to show 15-year-olds graphic images of genitalia and oral sex – images stronger than they can see legally outside the classroom.
There is huge inconsistency in sex education - some schools go much too far while others barely touch it.

Imagine! Showing 15 year olds pictures of genitalia when they are meant to be learning what to do with... genitalia... next they will be showing cross sections of rivers when talking about sediment in geography or, heaven forbid, reading books in English Literature.

Consistency is important, but why has government not sought the views of parents?
Why do some organisations want five-year-olds taught about sex?
It can come as little surprise that having been shown, in detail, how to do sex, and given access to free contraception, morning after pills and abortions without their parents' knowledge or consent, that teenagers get pregnant.

I hardly think the books mentioned teach 5 year olds about sex. Again Mr Hibbard is allowing his sick ideas of what homosexuality is to rule his brain. Because that is what they are, Mr Hibbard is sexually obsessed with homosexuality as are most homophobes. It's disgusting that he then infers the same obsession onto innocent children.

Plus free contraception and morning after pills are causing teenagers to get pregnant????? This is as bad as the stuff stupid "MMR" jabs cause autism crazies say. It makes no logical sense!

No comments: