September 03, 2015

Parents agree: Wynne's sex-ed curriculum is 'too much information, too soon'

Brian LilleyArchive

With the new school year about to start, the stage is being set for a fight between parents and Premier Kathleen Wynne over the controversial sex-ed curriculum.

The "new" curriculum is just a redo of McGuinty's that was rejected by parents in 2010. But Wynne is bringing it back regardless of what parents have to say and without the promised parental consultation before implementation.

For as long as this controversy has been brewing, the simple message from parents to politicians has consistently been that this sex-ed curriculum gives out too much information, too soon. Some of it, like the new and barely understood concept of "gender identity", is something many adults don't even understand, including some teachers who will be expected to explain it to children.

The "educrats" who think they are the co-parents of our children believe they know better but the state, the province and the educrats, need to be reminded that they do not own our kids and we do not consider them "co-parents" regardless of what they believe. Children belong to families.


JOIN for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.

Ontario’s sex-ed curriculum sexualizes young children, undermines parental authority and imposes the government's morality on every Ontario family.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-09-08 20:06:18 -0400
Guess which demographic took their kids out of school today.

I will give you a hint.

Holding hands is a sin to them.
commented 2015-09-08 07:17:37 -0400
Happy First Day Of School…for those that haven’t opted out.
commented 2015-09-07 20:07:56 -0400
The video is still up and it has gone from 100 views to nearly 10,000. Ex-Conservative candidate Tim Dutaud on the dangers of viagra (it’s pretty funny):
commented 2015-09-07 17:23:47 -0400
Glen Craig:
I didn’t know ‘turd-burgling’ was still on the books in Canada, so I looked it up. (Sorry, I went to public school in the 60’s in Ontario so I din’t benefit from the politically correct social engineering and indoctrination that was implemented by OISE right after that, and so I use politically incorrect terminology and words, and also have politically incorrect thoughts and don’t think in metric…) anyway I Googled – s 159 ccc – (Section 159 Canadian Criminal Code )
The first one up was titled, “Offenses tending to corrupt morals – Criminal Code – justice”…
So I clicked on that one and in the Canadian Criminal Code “anal intercourse” falls between “incest” and “bestiality”…
commented 2015-09-07 16:58:00 -0400
This link from Ron Voss:
and this one:
are very definitely worth the watch, because of the weight of their use as an effective weapon against this evil anti-Christian/anti- family, anti-sovereignty agenda. That’ll be the weapon of informed intelligence and moral correctness. Not the ideologically driven junk-science and Humanist dogma of the progressive left.
‘Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free…’
commented 2015-09-07 14:32:24 -0400
Certainly more than some people here.
commented 2015-09-07 14:30:07 -0400

One more thing – kids are not as naïve or unaware as we may think that they are – in many regards, they are more understanding and accepting compared to many adults. Certain some people here.
commented 2015-09-07 13:45:10 -0400

Yes and your position here is extremely exaggerated.

I am sure Steve Jobs did break the law in some instances. Not everything is front page news where they go to jail for many years. Is it OK to break the law if you are willing to pay the fine?

Have you ever jaywalked? Run a red light knowingly or fudged on your taxes in any capacity?

I won’t care about civilization when I am a rotting corpse. We are on my time now.
commented 2015-09-07 01:40:12 -0400
Jimmy, you seem to be confusing rules in terms of common practices with laws. Did Steve Jobs go around breaking the law? I’m fairly certain he was speaking to common practices. Also, I would like to point out, civilizations come and go. Our civilization has not always been and will not always be.

‘Nice extreme hyperbole there. You seem very absolute.’
A hyperbole is a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect. Your point is silly.
commented 2015-09-07 01:09:36 -0400

You do realize that some of the greatest people in business history strongly believed in the idea that rules were meant to be broken and that is how they actually become successful. Steve Jobs being one out of countless success stories.

While the point you are trying to make is clear – I completely disagree with it and apparently so do millions of people who break those “little white lie” laws every single day and society is just fine – we are not descending into anarchy. Nice extreme hyperbole there. You seem very absolute. There is no middle ground. If people are cheating on their taxes, jaywalking and running red lights – the world would be in absolute CHAOS!!!!! Except people have been doing all those things and more long before we were born.

When I say that the discussion should be over – I am not saying that I don’t want to continue talking. I am saying that you have no further reason to complain. My children can be all corrupted and their innocence destroyed by your way of thinking and your children can remain pure angels when you opt out. Done and done.
commented 2015-09-07 00:27:42 -0400

Fair enough, having rules that are silly and unenforceable leads to the toxic mind set that rules are meant to be broken. It is a fatal ideal which can allow a society to descend into anarchy given that the societal rules are meaningless (if not enforced). Hope my point is clear.

‘Don’t like the curriculum -opt out of it. The discussion should be over at this point.’
Okay if you don’t want to talk any more fine with me. I’d still like to tell you that you are wrong. Teaching a child that is not ready about sex and related topics is a foolish task.

Children who are not informed of the necessary information may make mistakes.However, just as plausible, a children confused by unnecessary information may just as well make mistakes.

The Gender roles information is not necessary for children still very young and about to or in the process of a very confusing time of their life. Adding another dimension, whether they might be the wrong sex, is a question that most children would never think to ask had they remained unaware until after they have developed and matured.

Why are we unable to teach respect for all and let the children mature at their own paces? Why must we have a one size fits all lesson that could also confuse children further?

I’m willing to bet by this point you still just think I’m some abhorrent bigoted social conservative (kinda ironic right?). If so just remember I merely disagree with you, and I want what’s best for children (specifically my own). So have fun being wrong.
commented 2015-09-06 22:46:39 -0400

Sorry, but you are talking to a rules are meant to be broken type of guy. Countless laws are broken every single day from the meaningless to the extreme. Many laws are not enforced and have no real penalty anyway beyond a small fine, because it’s a waste of the police department’s valuable time and resources to focus on those things.

Have you driven through a red light when you knew that no other cars or people were around? Have you jaywalked? Ever cheated on your taxes? I trust you see what I am saying here.

Don’t like the curriculum -opt out of it. The discussion should be over at this point.
commented 2015-09-06 21:54:08 -0400

So as long as the ones you think are archaic are not enforced it’s all cool. Interesting…

Never said I expected perfect I just think it’s interesting that you are very subjective in your stances. E.g which laws ought to be enforced, who should teach sex education.

So the real question is: How much should we teach and when? The major concern of people is that the curriculum teaches to much to early.

‘It’s clear though that one’s own personal sexual experiences dictates their position here. …’
I agree lets get a prostitute and her pimp to teach the kids. They have a ton of experience and can pass that wisdom onto the children. The pimp could even do some recruiting. That last bit was sarcasm in case it wasn’t clear.

That 13 girl can probably take it in the pussy fair better than I can. Maybe they should teach the kids! Problem solved!
commented 2015-09-06 20:16:40 -0400

I don’t have a stance on which laws I am OK with the police not enforcing. Some laws are stupid or archaic and have never been changed, some laws are just put on the books as a just in case type situation and some laws are just impossible to enforce despite their being a law, which makes it silly that the law even exists.

Nothing is perfect or absolute. And as you may know, kids/teens often do the opposite of what their parents or teachers may want for them. So what do we do – stop educating them, because they may have sex anyway? Or do our best further educate them and keep them informed with an updated curriculum that covers sex and sexuality TODAY.

I am happily married, so don’t flatter yourself. It’s clear though that one’s own personal sexual experiences dictates their position here. Again, IF you were just someone that only had to sex to have a baby and that is the full extent of your sexual experience – you are the last person that a child should be speaking to regarding sex and your position on the sex ed curriculum means less than nothing.

That 13 year old would be more advanced than you are when it comes to sex.
commented 2015-09-06 19:34:32 -0400

Oh my, not that you restated it a second time it’s all so much clearer! I understand it, my reading comprehension is no longer impeding my ability to understand the words you wrote (for the second time). Thank you, and while I’m at it. I’d like to thank Santa for always keeping a list and checking it twice. I’d also like to thank my Family, love you guys! And Bob, where is he? Oh there he is! Bob, the one and only! You rock!

You didn’t answer my question what level of lawlessness are you willing to condone? Which laws are you okay with the police not enforcing?

So by bring up this example of some random girl are you in fact stating that the sex education purpose as a whole is flawed? Since they’ve been doing it forever and with the introduction of previous curriculum failing to promote abstinence how would this curriculum succeed where the previous failed?

‘When did you partake in oral sex and lose your virginity?’ Are you coming on to me? Would you like all the salacious details? You haven’t even asked me ASL! You should really be less forward, I tend to think I’ve got some self respect you know!
commented 2015-09-06 19:08:20 -0400

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension:

We already discussed this – taxes presently are not a la carte, so we ALL pay for shit we don’t support one way or another.

So, tough shit.

At least your children don’t have to partake in the curriculum, which is what you are boo hooing about, so yes it is a win/win.

I didn’t say should not be enforced – I said that they are not enforced. If kids/teens want to have sex – they will do so. It’s been that way forever. Are you actually aware of what goes on with kids and teens and the sex stats when it comes to kids/teens? You seem incredibly naïve. Right now as we are talking – some 13 year old girl is giving a blowjob to her boyfriend. That is the reality. No law is going to stop this just like people in Louisiana are still going to be perform/receive oral sex, despite it being against the law.

Please explain how can it actually be enforced when the police don’t monitor such things?

When did you partake in oral sex and lose your virginity?
commented 2015-09-06 18:46:06 -0400

It is NOT a win/win (apparently use of capitalized letters makes the point more true). People who disagree still are forced to pay for it.

So consent laws should not be enforced? What other laws are you willing to not enforce? What amount of lawlessness are you happy to condone? If the police won’t enforce a law we should feel free to break it?

‘Did you give/receive oral sex or lose your virginity in your teens?’ Nope. I also expect flowers if you want a second date. And no sex until the third! Oh and long walks on the beach are a deal breaker too.
commented 2015-09-06 16:45:23 -0400

We already discussed this – taxes presently are not a la carte, so we ALL pay for shit we don’t support one way or another. So it IS Win/Win in that you can opt out of it.

Kids in grade 3 have had oral sex. Are you really going to bring up the law when it comes to consent – when it’s not something that is ever enforced – unless it’s a pedophile situation. If teenagers want to try anal sex – even if it’s a boy and a girl, I assure you that anal police will not be knocking on their door.

Did you give/receive oral sex or lose your virginity in your teens?
commented 2015-09-06 16:27:46 -0400

Sorry, it is not a win win. Tax payers (the stupid people) who disagree with the sex education are still funding it. I’m also glad to hear of you vary high opinions about your fellow individuals. You seem to have some deeper hatred towards ‘religious conservatives’ as you call them. Try to not let this cloud your reasoning as you seem to just associate those who disagree with you as being some radical religious conservative. Try to resist that liberal tendency to judge people before based on trivial factors.

‘I am quite sure that Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar haven’t taught their kids a fucking thing about sex and sexuality, especially when you consider that holding hands is a no-no in their world.’
Your ‘quite sure’ but not entirely sure that this Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar didn’t teach their kids anything about sex and sexuality? Are these people personal friends? Also, even if they didn’t teach their kids any thing at all, that is a single example, doesn’t really mean all that much (as shown by merely pointing to a counter example). Also, Josh who was part of Ashley Madision full well new what he was doing was wrong (if you need a sex education to tell you that you should consider refrain from having sex).

‘He really wants to bust a nust and his parents did him no favors in his upbringing.’
Again you don’t know that.

Finally, in terms of the law’s requirement to consent as brought up by Glenn. Try not to ignore his point, children cannot consent and therefore being taught to obtain consent from their teenage partner is laughable.
commented 2015-09-06 15:12:07 -0400

These are not “how to” courses as in how to have anal sex, but probably not – because the laws as you say are stupid. Just like oral sex is illegal in Louisiana. I am quite sure older children and teens have experience blow jobs.
commented 2015-09-06 14:44:34 -0400
Jimmy….back to section 159 of the Criminal Code…..Now I would have to agree that a law which offers as remedy a 10 year sentence in the Buggery Barn where the vast majority of the offences it aims to reduce or eliminate actually take place is a monumentally stupid law.

And it is a pretty safe bet that there is not one gay male in Canada who waited until they were 18….and in this day and age probably not that many heterosexual teenagers either.

But does this curriculum include the information that there is currently laws regarding age of consent and possible legal repercussions?
commented 2015-09-06 11:02:16 -0400
It was not the content of the public sex ed regime which I objected to it was the arbitrary imposition and undermining parental authority – a prime example of aggressive statism – but this seems corrected with an opt out – it certainly took a lot of vocal/embarrassing public backlash to get this concession because I believe conceding to the public will is not this governments first reflex.
commented 2015-09-06 02:15:04 -0400

Obviously we are not going to agree here – but hey, you are not stuck since you can opt out. So it’s win/win for those that support it and those that don’t. Canada – what a country.

Unfortunately parents are too stupid to teach their children about sex or at the very least are terrible at it or uncomfortable themselves – especially religious conservative parents who are sexually repressed and think you shouldn’t even be having sex until you are married, so why bother talking about it at all. Then wonder why their 14 year old daughter is pregnant.

Why do you think parents say that they dread having the sex talk. Quite often, children and teens have questions that parents don’t even know the answers too – without looking online. Essentially parents in many regards need to be educated about sex and sexuality themselves.

I am quite sure that Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar haven’t taught their kids a fucking thing about sex and sexuality, especially when you consider that holding hands is a no-no in their world. I can understand why Josh Duggar is on Ashley Madison and that’s the least of his problems. He really wants to bust a nust and his parents did him no favors in his upbringing.

I didn’t contradict myself – I clarified my point. There are conservatives that are socially liberal – you won’t really find them HERE, but they exist.
commented 2015-09-06 01:05:18 -0400
Yeah the world is controversial, why not start grade one by talking about death. More specifically child death. Lets show them video footage of children downing (cause that happens all to often). You really did miss my point so again let me spell it out. The material is introduced to early. The topics they are covering are not appropriate for the age they are being taught at. Thinking that there has been a pandemic of misinformed or ignorant children growing up just ignores reality. The curriculum does present some valid changes but it also aggressively introduces mature topics to younger students. Also, technical point, 20 years is over exaggerating, it was last updated 1998 not 1995.

Your summary of it is quite amusing within itself. I’m glad you finally admitted that you think parents are to stupid to properly teach their children. That parents don’t know what is best for their children. The stupid parents would just harm their kids through religious teaching. Best to educate them properly and educate everyone the exact same. It’s not like a similar incident occurred in a Canadian government’s history. Oh wait, there was the Canada’s Indian Residential School’s treatment of native children.

‘Not every conservative is socially conservative or religious in addition to being fiscally conservative – so certainly there are conservatives that fuck, simply because it feels good and as often as possible.’ You are contradicting yourself. I’m glad to see you at least concede this.

‘Sorry – forgot to add: But the crowd at The Rebel don’t come across at THOSE kinds of conservatives. You all seem very God fearing – thus sex is just for making babies and it’s awful sex.’ Yep you’ve caught us, you know more about our sexual practices than we do ourselves. Are you an omnipresent being!? Are you Santa!? Shouldn’t Santa look away if we aren’t quite sleeping!?
commented 2015-09-05 21:48:10 -0400

Sorry – forgot to add: But the crowd at The Rebel don’t come across at THOSE kinds of conservatives. You all seem very God fearing – thus sex is just for making babies and it’s awful sex.
commented 2015-09-05 21:46:19 -0400

Not every conservative is socially conservative or religious in addition to being fiscally conservative – so certainly there are conservatives that fuck, simply because it feels good and as often as possible.
commented 2015-09-05 21:43:52 -0400

I see nothing wrong with at least informing children and teens of the world we live in – controversial or not. You talk as if Ron Jeremy is going to be teaching the class with porn used as visual aids and then they move on to Losing Your Virginity 101, where the kids/teens actually have sex with other kids in the class and lose their virginity.

The Ontario government always had a role in sex ed programs in school since 1950. If you look at was taught over the years they seem to adjust to current trends. So why is this any different? Sex ed programs where changed almost every 10 years. It’s been 20 years since the last and with research and statistics these days you can paint a pretty clear picture of what’s really trending now. Do you think little girls were twerking on the Internet 10 years ago?

Comprehensive sex education reduces risky sexual behavior. The new Ontario curriculum will teach kids to expect consensus before sex, to avoid sexual activity that is unsafe and to have a respectful opinion about sexual diversity. Sounds good to me.

Conservatives who find this so distressful are allowed, under the education act, to have their children skip those classes. That is until the children are old enough to make their own decisions. By that time that child may have engaged in risky sexual behavior out of ignorance. Because you can damn sure Mom and Pop Conservative don’t know what the fuck they are talking about when it comes to sex education with their Bible in the night stand.
commented 2015-09-05 21:28:54 -0400

I guess Canada isn’t for you anymore. Have you thought where you might move?
commented 2015-09-05 19:49:30 -0400
Exactly Nil Moon, good posts.