January 31, 2018

Ontario’s sex-ed curriculum spreads across Canada. What’s next in parental rights battle?

Sheila Gunn ReidRebel Host | The Gunn Show

 

Have you ever noticed that every bad social experiment we see around us -especially those targeted at kids- has been festered in Ontario like a disease in a petri dish?

Ontario updated their sex-ed curriculum in 2015 to include the introduction of gender theory to kids as young as eight, outraging parents.

Parents in the province stood alone in their opposition. They had no help from the Progressive Conservative party. They had to defend their parental rights alone, and lost.

A form of that same ideologically based sex-ed called SOGI 123, is being rolled out in BC. The SOGI curriculum, among other things, teaches that gender is fluid and not determined through biological sex - just like in Ontario.

SOGI 123 has a particular focus on “anti-bullying” and is now mandatory in all BC schools, even private and faith-based schools.

It sounds a lot like Alberta's gay straight alliances.

That legislation prevents teachers from informing parents if their children join a GSA support group, meaning the legislation mandates secrets between teachers and students, effectively excluding loving parents from the mix by force of law.

What's the next battleground for parental rights? I look to Ontario for answers.

Joining me this week is Ontario based parental rights activist Tanya Granic Allen, from Parents As First Educators (PAFE).

We talk about sex-ed, what happened to one BC school board trustee who spoke out about gender theory and what the shake up in the Ontario PCs means for parental autonomy.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2018-02-03 22:19:50 -0500
Paul Dixon, excellent post!
commented 2018-02-03 15:27:08 -0500
Believe me – teachers DO NOT LIKE teaching this stuff! I know some who just ignore some of the material. And much of the material is “suggested” questions and issues that teachers have the option to introduce. I think many just pass it by. Makes sense to me. Principals generally are not going to monitor it because, not only are most of them uncomfortable with it, most realize that teachers do not like it and they do not want to impose or butt in to the teacher’s professionalism in making personal curriculum choices. In my last ten years teaching I never personally had a principal investigate my curriculum choices (not saying that it does not happen though).

But there are those teachers who will teach it, ones who themselves are somewhat perverted in their thinking about sexuality.

My suggestion, as I have contributed before, is for parents to constantly be badgering and pestering their children’s teacher and the principal. If enough did this, notice would be taken. If parents removed their kids from class while this teaching was going on that would be disruptive, which is what you want. Imagine if, at Health class time, the teacher received a call from the office that 10 kids were to be sent to the office because their mom/dad was taking them out during the period. Or 20 kids. Not only would it disrupt the class, but all the other kids in the school would be wondering about it and talking about. It would get around, and other parents would be inquiring what was happening, and the cat would be out of the bag. Jehovah’s Witnesses can have their kids withdrawn during the national anthem for religious reasons, so why not our kids from sex indoctrination in Health class? And the school must accommodate the JW kids somewhere else with supervision. Imagine the hastle that would be for a principal, who does not have a budget for another teacher to watch them. He would have to do it himself!!

The idea of withdrawing kids from the first 22 days of school is also a good one. During the first month of school each Board has what it calls “reorganization”. Before the school year starts, actually by the end of the previous school year, the Board determines, based on numbers of expected students submitted by each principal, how many teachers (there is a teacher/student ratio) they will budget for each school. Then September arrives and numbers may go up or down. The Board may then decide to take a teacher out, or put another one in, on the basis of numbers (there are contractual guidelines for this). It will normally not happen until the end of September, at least. Grade assignments for teachers may change. Class sizes may change. Special Ed. teachers or Educational Assistants may be withdrawn or added. Teachers may lose that great student and get stuck with that kid form you-know-where! It can be a bonus or a nightmare – I have seen both! In September teachers and administration are often on pins and needles.

So what would happen is 10-15 kids were removed at the beginning of the year? Chaos, for teachers and administrators. And then if they were readmitted a few weeks later when everything had been shuffled around! This would not please anyone! And the school must still admit the students according to the Education Act.

Parents are the key to changing this nonsense. My two cents worth.
commented 2018-02-02 13:59:56 -0500
The left is constantly telling us we need to meet our obligations to the UN. We have NO obligations to the UN. We didn’t vote for them therefore we have no obligation to them. Anymore than we have an obligation to the dictates of Kin Jog Un if he has a brilliant plan for us. Hmm, Un- UN. Maybe there is a connection that needs to be investigated ; )

The left loves to push this “obligation” on us for the same reason it does most things. They can use the coercive power of the state to control us. And they are, above all else, control freaks. Their thinking is, big government is good and bigger world government is better.
commented 2018-02-02 02:08:10 -0500
Andrew, it means that the parent has a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children, ‘Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups’.

While I don’t have a problem with any of the above in a broad sense, it nowhere suggests that Levin style sex ed be taught in schools, or that young children be sexualized by adults with agenda, much of which goes against all professional medical and mental health advice and knowledge, so not something that any curricula should be based on. Clearly not all ‘experts’ agree. It does not appear to be an endorsement of what you are promoting. There is a lot of room for interpretation there and it suggests that parents get to do the interpreting.

Besides, the universal human rights declared by the UN are no inherent rights, but rather are issued. They can’t over ride inalienable rights.

Except in rare cases, parental rights are inalienable and not given or taken by the government. Government exists for our benefit, not the other way around.

The UN was set up by the Rockefellers at the end of WW2 to ultimately become the One World Government. That isn’t something I would willingly recognise anyway.
commented 2018-02-02 01:56:33 -0500
Andrew it is the left who wants us to be ruled by one culture. You say the dumbest things.
commented 2018-02-02 01:55:44 -0500
Andrew Stephenson that is not what is happening. Grooming and indoctrinating is not development.
commented 2018-02-01 23:27:28 -0500
Ron Voss commented 2018-02-01 18:23:41 -0500
Does the “useful idiot” oppose the following under Article 26 (Right to Education) of the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”. Yes or No? "

Not really clear what the intent of the term “kind of education” means, but that’s subsection 3, with (2) being " Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace."

Which is actually an endorsement of the “indoctrination” the anti-sex-eders seem to oppose. An interesting selective omission, indeed.

All together, it seems that “kind of education” would actually mean teaching mechanism (such as Montessori vs conventional), not cherry picking curricula.
commented 2018-02-01 23:04:52 -0500
I watched an original Star Trek episode tonight, called “And the children shall lead”
Gene Roddenberry was truly ahead of his time, and predicted a lot of what has come to pass (good and BAD!) … here’s a line right out of this episode and I encourage you to think on this. Remember, it’s from the 1960s !
Quote, “Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth or by misleading the innocent”.
That in a NUTSHELL is where we have arrived.
commented 2018-02-01 22:34:15 -0500
Many have said it before, it is sexual interference of minors. Sanctioned child abuse nothing less.

‘Teachers! leave those kids alone.’
commented 2018-02-01 19:44:16 -0500
Here is how much socialist care about children. It will be no different here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCeWr8OFuEs

We have neighbours who adopted a girl out of one of these orphanages. Needless to say say she is much better of under a loving family than under the tender mercies of a socialist.
commented 2018-02-01 19:41:02 -0500
RON VOSS commented 2018-02-01 16:49:34 -0500
AL PETERSON, appreciate your explanation to the “useful idiot” troll. Adolf Hitler considered education to be a very important factor in Nazi Germany. When he wrote ‘Mein Kampf’ while serving out a prison sentence, Hitler wrote “whoever has the youth has the future”. Indeed. Totalitarians of all stripes have understood this! The U.N.’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 was a response to such totalitarian thinking. Paragraph 3 under Article 26 (Right to Education) states, “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”.
________________________________________________________________________________

Ron, as you know, I spent 2years teaching in the former Soviet Union. I met a lot of people who lived through government ownership of children. It wasn’t pretty. It was a disaster. What makes the leftists think that some distant government busy body would care more about your children than you do? They don’t . They just want control of your children for the reasons you outlined. SO they can brainwash them to achieve their ends.

More evidence of what Ontario teaches. Considerably more than basic biology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8KhL0-TIFQ
commented 2018-02-01 19:31:45 -0500
Andrew, you are slipping either by intent or by incompetence. Probably the former since socialists are all about deceit to attain their ends. The comment I made was about YOUR inconsistency about diversity and multiculti. You say you are in favour of these things but in reality your are pushing your monoculture agenda. I have no inconsistency in my argument since I think multiculti diversity is a cult.

You can fool someone the people some of the time But I’ve got a read on liberal tactics going back for decades. One only needs to read Saul Alinsky to uncover their true agenda and their tactics to attain it. It is all about deceit.

“Lest we forget at least an over the shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
― Saul D. Alinsky, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals

“For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.”
2 John !:7
commented 2018-02-01 19:12:11 -0500
Andrew says. “By the way, Isn’t dispersion of the “monoculture” by mass-immigration actually a common complaint? Or is it just one of convenience?”

I swear, you people have no comprehension skills. Nobody is talking about a ‘monoculture’, but instead, cultures which are not an obvious clash with one another. You know like Islamic and Western culture’s are.

Andrew, lets stay on topic. Would you be able to respond to Ron Voss’s question regarding Article 26 (Right to Education) of the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights or not?
commented 2018-02-01 18:23:41 -0500
Does the “useful idiot” oppose the following under Article 26 (Right to Education) of the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”. Yes or No?
commented 2018-02-01 18:11:48 -0500
No one is talking about ‘with holding’ anything necessary to healthy child development. Only you are Andrew.

“public education with mandatory curricula”
Locally determined, with no outside interference if you are talking early-mid 19th century.

There are ways to make sure adolescent’s obtain necessary health education without it involving all aspects of the educational system. It is intrusive, and is used as an excuse and a conduit for government interference. They have proven their agenda by inflicting it on children too young to even be able to digest the information. It is indoctrination of the most evil and insipid kind. It is social control.
commented 2018-02-01 17:54:39 -0500
“The concept of parental rights has existed from time immemorial. It is only the concept of Government rights to your children that began with the usual cadre of socialists in the early 20th century- the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
This is why socialists love being government- because they can use the coercive power of the state to push their agendas down everyone else’s throat. There is no bigger chattel than a child subjected to the tender mercies of the state. The socialist don’t give a damn about children. As in all their deceitful claims it is a tug at the heart strings of the weak minded in order to gain control. At their heart of hearts socialists are heartless control freaks.

That is why they are always pushing some agenda under government threat and forcing everyone to do their bidding while claiming to love, just love diversity. The reality is they are pushing for a monoculture with them at at the head of it tightening down the screws. "

“Parental rights”, as in children as chattel who are absolute property of their parents and who can be subjected to harm (such as by withholding education) at parental discretion, is an obsolete concept. Tradition is a silly reason to continue otherwise unjustifiable strategies. Those children are in fact independent entities that have full rights to access all information and education available, whether or not parents approve … withholding education impacts the children more than the parents, so the latter have a lesser stake in outcomes.

I think public education with mandatory curricula long predates “communism” and is in fact an early-mid 19th century American invention… recognizing that, yes, an educational “monoculture” is beneficial to everyone – students, who have a guaranteed level of education, employers, get employees with minimum skillsets, and society, who finds themselves with a common background. Interestingly enough, this seems tacitly evident from the fact that say arithmetic is uncontroversial, beyond some parents uncomfortable with modern teaching methods. From the perspective of sex ed unsafe sexual practices have very real direct and indirect societal costs, and reducing STI and teen pregnancy rates is a huge benefit to pretty much everyone. By the way, Isn’t dispersion of the “monoculture” by mass-immigration actually a common complaint? Or is it just one of convenience?
commented 2018-02-01 17:44:39 -0500
Al and Ron, to your posts, you are right. This really is much bigger than sex ed. This is manipulation of the population at the base level for maximum control of all of society.
Not gonna end well.
commented 2018-02-01 17:40:41 -0500
Tammie I think part of the problem is that the agenda of the sex ed perps is to so inject it into every aspect of daily lessons that it is literally systemic and impossible to opt out of. The designated sex ed classes yes, I hope there is an opt out option, but I think it really is more in the ‘drip line’ of the delivery system and every part of the cirriculum is hooked up to it.
commented 2018-02-01 17:35:49 -0500
“Strayed & mutated” very good description Liza!
commented 2018-02-01 17:34:24 -0500
Andrew says. “The reality is, also, that hiding them from reality and scenarios they’ll encounter in the real world, does nobody any favours.”

That is quite a supposition, a very big shovelful of it. A common tactic used by the moral nihilist postmodernist’s in their approach to child rearing is that parents keep reality from their children and other unwarranted broad brush accusations related to family values. It is used against parents and for their argument of government interference. When school boards began, they were autonomous, locally run, union free, and provincial and federal interference free were they not? Correct me if I am wrong. We have certainly strayed and mutated.
commented 2018-02-01 16:49:34 -0500
AL PETERSON, appreciate your explanation to the “useful idiot” troll. Adolf Hitler considered education to be a very important factor in Nazi Germany. When he wrote ‘Mein Kampf’ while serving out a prison sentence, Hitler wrote “whoever has the youth has the future”. Indeed. Totalitarians of all stripes have understood this! The U.N.’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 was a response to such totalitarian thinking. Paragraph 3 under Article 26 (Right to Education) states, “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”.
commented 2018-02-01 16:20:47 -0500
Liza, you’re right. Parents can have an impact if they move forward as a unified group.

In the meantime, they can speak to teachers directly and insist their child be “opted out” and make arrangements with the school library for their child to work on other subjects or read independently. If the teacher is reluctant to handle it in this manner, go directly to the school principal. If the principal also proves useless…advise the Parent Council you will be elevating this matter to the Superintendent of Schools and Board Trustees. Don’t hesitate to clearly state your intentions at every stage. Also, it wouldn’t hurt to go public if all you encounter from the School Board is resistance.
commented 2018-02-01 16:13:29 -0500
ANDREW STEPHENSON commented 2018-02-01 01:54:25 -0500
The concept of "parental rights’ reduces minors to chattel, rather than self-determining individuals. The reality is, also, that hiding them from reality and scenarios they’ll encounter in the real world, does nobody any favours.
________________________________________________________________________________

The concept of parental rights has existed from time immemorial. It is only the concept of Government rights to your children that began with the usual cadre of socialists in the early 20th century- the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
This is why socialists love being government- because they can use the coercive power of the state to push their agendas down everyone else’s throat. There is no bigger chattel than a child subjected to the tender mercies of the state. The socialist don’t give a damn about children. As in all their deceitful claims it is a tug at the heart strings of the weak minded in order to gain control. At their heart of hearts socialists are heartless control freaks.

That is why they are always pushing some agenda under government threat and forcing everyone to do their bidding while claiming to love, just love diversity. The reality is they are pushing for a monoculture with them at at the head of it tightening down the screws.

This is why they won’t pack their keesters to some other socialist Nirvana such as Venezuela where all their desires have been fulfilled. It would leave one desire unfulfilled- the control of others. A socialist is someone who has to force their misery on someone else.
commented 2018-02-01 16:06:06 -0500
22 days at the start of the next school year.. Kids wouldn’t be missing much and it would make an impact. Parents have to commit to do it. And do it as big as possible. A unified group.
commented 2018-02-01 15:47:56 -0500
I stand corrected , Thanks Tammie. 22 days.
commented 2018-02-01 15:46:14 -0500
liza rosie,

If the majority of parents were against this, it would have already happened.

You really need to understand that as passionate as you may be about something, you still may be in the vast minority of people that think as you do.
commented 2018-02-01 15:30:54 -0500
Liza, my understanding is, 22 consecutive days of absences will cripple their budgets!
commented 2018-02-01 15:28:38 -0500
Andrew, it’s not basic anatomy they are teaching. Perhaps you should first listen to Sheila’s report; then research the Curriculum in Ontario, read up on Benjamin Levin, disgraced & convicted child pornographer who most certainly played a role in developing the radical document which is being used in our schools; and recognize parents do not consider their children to be chattel.