Should LGBT Relationships Be Taught in Primary School? | This Morning

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:36 pm

First topic message reminder :

It’s been announced that primary school children as young as five will now be taught about LGBT families and transgender relationships, with the new curriculum ending parents’ rights to opt their children out of the classes in 2020. We’re joined by Peter Tatchell, a gay rights activist who believes that it’s about time that this happened and that inclusivity should be promoted from as early an age as possible, and Caroline Farrow who feels that it takes away a parent’s right to teach their own child about relationships.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rupJjIcxjc

Sorry, but that is the biggest load of claptrap ever proposed by Caroline Farrow.
Nobody is saying parents are not good enough at all and a parent has a continued right to coninue to teach children what ever belief they believe in. What is being taught is that children should come to understand that people are different in society within relationships. In that there is gay and transgender parents for example, as well as hetrosexal parents and people. To say this is about what is age appropiate, is based on what they think and not on thinking about how its going to make life less complicated for children. Growing up around other children, that have gay parents for example.

I mean we rightly teach evolution in school and there is many religious parents that disagree with this. Even though their view has no bases in science. Its allowing children to actually come to see scientifc theories on the origins of humanity. What parents may think they know what is best, for their children is based on their perceived perception based on their own beliefs and not as a society as a whole or any real science

So no power is being taken away from parents. As they have every right to disagree with what is being taught and daily fill their childrens heads, with example outdated and quite discrminating religious beliefs they may hold against homosexuals. Taking power away, would be denying the parent the right to teach their children their own views. That is not actually happenning. What is happenning is teaching children, that there is different parental groups and people, including children. What these parents are really saying, is they disagree with homosexuality etc. As why object for young children to come to understand adults have different relationships and that some children are different?

So its never imposing anything, if anything they are trying to censur the rights of children to actually learn, based on their beliefs. As that is what it boils down to. They want to censur a reality of the world today, based off what they disagree with. It shows the very exclusive view point they hold on what they want society to be like. When they should be welcoming children to learn about being inclusive to everyone.

So I am sorry, I know when I see bulllshit arguments and those opposing teaching these differences, are not based on age appopriation, but a prejudiced view they hold themselves.

by Eilzel Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:29 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

Waffle...

Section 28 didn't stop the mention of homosexuality from ever happening...

It was there to stop the promotion of homosexuality from happening... and to stop taxpayer money being spent on any educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!

There is only one normal and natural way of things... and that is the only thing that we should be promoting as being the normal and natural way of things, to the younger generation...

If a tiny minority of them then go on to do other things of their own choosing... then that is completely up to them...

But it Is wrong to promote anything other than the normal and natural way of things...!

You don't know what you're talking about.

You are inhumanly stupid. To respond to what I just said with 'waffle' shows the inhumanity of your views and lack of knowledge of history. Nasty, robotic and like a stuck record. Perfect little tommybot.

by Eilzel Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:30 am

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Its not me who is being "evasive" or "disingenuous"...

Try reading again...

Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 prohibited local authorities from "promoting" homosexuality or gay "pretended family relationships", and prevented councils spending money on educational materials and projects perceived to promote a gay lifestyle.

Do you think that local authorities should be promoting such things, and spending taxpayer funds on educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!???

Still no answer.

Thick.

I don't know how gay lifestyles can be 'promoted'. If you can do that, I might be able to answer your question.

Do you think that local authorities should be promoting such things, and spending taxpayer funds on educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!???

Or not...!!!???

Come on Les...

Tell us what you really think/mean...!?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Fuck, tommy. Do you even know what history is?

I went to school in the 90s, the time when Sec 28 was in force. It meant NO mention of homosexuality whatsoever. It being brought up by teachers could have been 'perceived' as 'promotion' and there'd have been trouble.

The result was people like me growing up with no positive role models, no support from teachers on the matter, no feeling that your feelings were 'OK' or 'natural' (and subsequently, as a closeted teen, feeling there is something wrong with you). And no attempt to tackle the topic of homophobia. All in a school environment that is decidely homophobic (in the 90s certainly, but also today in places)

That is so wrong.

I wouldn't change my personal path, because I believe everything that happens to us shapes us some how, and I might not have ended up where I am today.

But no one should have to go through the silent struggle I did, or the worse struggles many kids go through - especially those who find it more difficult to 'hide' their sexuality.

I lived it tommy, so fuck your hypothetical.

For the record, does this actually sound like a fair system to you, tommy?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:38 am

I am sorry but the view on parents knowing best. Espically how many are being brainwashed on soical media is even becoming more apparant in this day and age that a number do not know what is best.

This from those who are filled with warped conspiracies like those who are anti-vaxxers to where they hold backward illiberal beliefs.

To give an example why in this instance its not best to leave up to parents to teach people to be inclusive to others. The last poll on Muslims, had half of Muslims believe that homosexuality should be illegal. Where 47% also believed that homosexuals should not be allowed to be teachers.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/poll-finds-more-than-half-of-britsih-Muslims-believe-homosexuality-should-be-illegal-a6978091.html

How is then leaving this up to the parents going to ensure a next generation of Muslims. Is going to grow up being inclusive of homosexuals, bisexuals etc that live in this country?

These same parents want the school to teach people to be inclusive to Muslims. Which the school should rightly do so, but they dont want anything that conflicts with their beliefs.

So again should the beliefs of individual people, parents etc superscede the laws of this land?

The simple answer is no. Those parents are entittled to their beliefs, but the state has a right to teach all children through the school system. To be tolerant of others and be inclusive.

The beliefs of people, should never trump the rights of people. Where homosexuals are rightly are protected from hate and discrimination. Just as any religious person, including Muslims are protected from hate and discrimination.

Hence the beliefs of people should never trump the human rights of people in this country and the state has every right. To ensure future generations grow up tolerant of others and inclusive to all. By teaching people to be tolerant other each other and to be inclusive.

If you dont like that system. Then you have options. We live in a Democratic society, where you can look to campaign to change the laws on human rights, thus leaving yourself open to no protection yourself in law from discrimination and hate. Or understand public opinion is supportive of homosexual rights and find a country that suits your backward illiberal views and go and live there instead.

by Syl Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:47 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Do you think that local authorities should be promoting such things, and spending taxpayer funds on educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!???

Or not...!!!???

Come on Les...

Tell us what you really think/mean...!?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Fuck, tommy. Do you even know what history is?

I went to school in the 90s, the time when Sec 28 was in force. It meant NO mention of homosexuality whatsoever. It being brought up by teachers could have been 'perceived' as 'promotion' and there'd have been trouble.

The result was people like me growing up with no positive role models, no support from teachers on the matter, no feeling that your feelings were 'OK' or 'natural' (and subsequently, as a closeted teen, feeling there is something wrong with you). And no attempt to tackle the topic of homophobia. All in a school environment that is decidely homophobic (in the 90s certainly, but also today in places)

That is so wrong.

I wouldn't change my personal path, because I believe everything that happens to us shapes us some how, and I might not have ended up where I am today.

But no one should have to go through the silent struggle I did, or the worse struggles many kids go through - especially those who find it more difficult to 'hide' their sexuality.

I lived it tommy, so fuck your hypothetical.

Thats pretty moving.
It's so sad that people in the 90's still suffered growing up afraid to be what they are.

In the 60's it was forbidden by law, practicing homosexuals could be jailed (gay women couldn't be punished by law, just by society) but it was usually hidden and often covered up by marriage.

Thank God those days are behind us, but obviously there is still a way to go changing the attitudes of some people..

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:11 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

Fuck, tommy. Do you even know what history is?

I went to school in the 90s, the time when Sec 28 was in force. It meant NO mention of homosexuality whatsoever. It being brought up by teachers could have been 'perceived' as 'promotion' and there'd have been trouble.

The result was people like me growing up with no positive role models, no support from teachers on the matter, no feeling that your feelings were 'OK' or 'natural' (and subsequently, as a closeted teen, feeling there is something wrong with you). And no attempt to tackle the topic of homophobia. All in a school environment that is decidely homophobic (in the 90s certainly, but also today in places)

That is so wrong.

I wouldn't change my personal path, because I believe everything that happens to us shapes us some how, and I might not have ended up where I am today.

But no one should have to go through the silent struggle I did, or the worse struggles many kids go through - especially those who find it more difficult to 'hide' their sexuality.

I lived it tommy, so fuck your hypothetical.

For the record, does this actually sound like a fair system to you, tommy?

Well... this may be news to you... but I think you'll find that the vast majority of teenagers think there's something wrong with them, be it too skinny, too fat, nose too big or small, too tall too short, and a whole range of other neurotic thoughts about self image... as well as suffering from awkwardness and lack of confidence etc, no matter how much front some may put on...

But back to my points...

Section 28 didn't stop the mention of homosexuality from ever happening...

It was there to stop the promotion of homosexuality from happening... and to stop taxpayer money being spent on any educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!

There is only one normal and natural way of things... and that is the only thing that we should be promoting as being the normal and natural way of things, to the younger generation...

If a tiny minority of them then go on to do other things of their own choosing... then that is completely up to them...

But it Is wrong to promote anything other than the normal and natural way of things...!

by Eilzel Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:24 pm

Syl wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Do you think that local authorities should be promoting such things, and spending taxpayer funds on educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!???

Or not...!!!???

Come on Les...

Tell us what you really think/mean...!?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Fuck, tommy. Do you even know what history is?

I went to school in the 90s, the time when Sec 28 was in force. It meant NO mention of homosexuality whatsoever. It being brought up by teachers could have been 'perceived' as 'promotion' and there'd have been trouble.

The result was people like me growing up with no positive role models, no support from teachers on the matter, no feeling that your feelings were 'OK' or 'natural' (and subsequently, as a closeted teen, feeling there is something wrong with you). And no attempt to tackle the topic of homophobia. All in a school environment that is decidely homophobic (in the 90s certainly, but also today in places)

That is so wrong.

I wouldn't change my personal path, because I believe everything that happens to us shapes us some how, and I might not have ended up where I am today.

But no one should have to go through the silent struggle I did, or the worse struggles many kids go through - especially those who find it more difficult to 'hide' their sexuality.

I lived it tommy, so fuck your hypothetical.

Thats pretty moving.
It's so sad that people in the 90's still suffered growing up afraid to be what they are.

In the 60's it was forbidden by law, practicing homosexuals could be jailed (gay women couldn't be punished by law, just by society) but it was usually hidden and often covered up by marriage.

Thank God those days are behind us, but obviously there is still a way to go changing the attitudes of some people..

There is, and this is part of trying to do just that.

Tommy however isn't livng in the real world.

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 2:35 pm

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:33 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Syl wrote:

Thats pretty moving.
It's so sad that people in the 90's still suffered growing up afraid to be what they are.

In the 60's it was forbidden by law, practicing homosexuals could be jailed (gay women couldn't be punished by law, just by society) but it was usually hidden and often covered up by marriage.

Thank God those days are behind us, but obviously there is still a way to go changing the attitudes of some people..

There is, and this is part of trying to do just that.

Tommy however isn't livng in the real world.

Emphatically true

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained...

So you dont want people to learn medical science then?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:35 pm

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:36 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Explained to me what exactly is the promotion of homosexuality?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:36 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:38 pm

I see Tommy is running away from questions and he activated his default Tommy bot version 8.0

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:39 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained...

How do you explain medicines then?[/quote]

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:44 pm

What teaching about medicines is that?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:45 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

What teaching about medicines is that?

Are many medicines natural?

Are disabilities, using your warped reasoning, natural and normal?

The reality is homosexuality is natural and normal and found through many species

So you really dont have any objection then to homosexual relationships being taught then, right?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:51 pm

What are you waffling about!?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:53 pm

So that is another new version of default tommy bot version 1.6

You said

Tommy Monk wrote:What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained...

Homosexual relationships are certainly natural and normal biologically and through neruology

So you clearly must back such relationships being taught

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:56 pm

No... the heterosexual way of things is the only real normal and natural...

by Eilzel Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:58 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

Fuck, tommy. Do you even know what history is?

I went to school in the 90s, the time when Sec 28 was in force. It meant NO mention of homosexuality whatsoever. It being brought up by teachers could have been 'perceived' as 'promotion' and there'd have been trouble.

The result was people like me growing up with no positive role models, no support from teachers on the matter, no feeling that your feelings were 'OK' or 'natural' (and subsequently, as a closeted teen, feeling there is something wrong with you). And no attempt to tackle the topic of homophobia. All in a school environment that is decidely homophobic (in the 90s certainly, but also today in places)

That is so wrong.

I wouldn't change my personal path, because I believe everything that happens to us shapes us some how, and I might not have ended up where I am today.

But no one should have to go through the silent struggle I did, or the worse struggles many kids go through - especially those who find it more difficult to 'hide' their sexuality.

I lived it tommy, so fuck your hypothetical.

For the record, does this actually sound like a fair system to you, tommy?

Well... this may be news to you... but I think you'll find that the vast majority of teenagers think there's something wrong with them, be it too skinny, too fat, nose too big or small, too tall too short, and a whole range of other neurotic thoughts about self image... as well as suffering from awkwardness and lack of confidence etc, no matter how much front some may put on...

But back to my points...

Section 28 didn't stop the mention of homosexuality from ever happening...

It was there to stop the promotion of homosexuality from happening... and to stop taxpayer money being spent on any educational materials and projects that promote gay lifestyles...!!!

There is only one normal and natural way of things... and that is the only thing that we should be promoting as being the normal and natural way of things, to the younger generation...

If a tiny minority of them then go on to do other things of their own choosing... then that is completely up to them...

But it Is wrong to promote anything other than the normal and natural way of things...!

It's not a choice, tommybot.

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:58 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

No... the heterosexual way of things is the only real normal and natural...

Based on what rationality?

Within thousands of species, we see homosexuality

Which means it happens naturally and is thus normal that it happens

In other words its replicated throughout many species and not unique to humans

So you tying yourself up in knots

as you really cannot have any objection

by Syl Tue Mar 05, 2019 4:42 pm

I always think, people who are so convinced homosexuality is so perverted, if your child grew up and told you they were gay....you know, the boy or girl you had cherished from birth, the average kid who had grown up to be loving, kind, funny, and all the things you hoped he/she would be, just say they fell in love with someone of the same sex, would you then suddenly see them as abnormal or unnatural in some way?

by SEXY MAMA Tue Mar 05, 2019 4:50 pm

Syl wrote:I always think, people who are so convinced homosexuality is so perverted, if your child grew up and told you they were gay....you know, the boy or girl you had cherished from birth, the average kid who had grown up to be loving, kind, funny, and all the things you hoped he/she would be, just say they fell in love with someone of the same sex, would you then suddenly see them as abnormal or unnatural in some way?

No they should be loved no matter what.

As a parent it’s your duty to live your child regardless of their sexual preferences.

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:11 pm

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:49 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Still no answer...!?

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:56 pm

Thor wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

No... the heterosexual way of things is the only real normal and natural...

Based on what rationality?

Within thousands of species, we see homosexuality

Which means it happens naturally and is thus normal that it happens

In other words its replicated throughout many species and not unique to humans

So you tying yourself up in knots

as you really cannot have any objection

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:00 pm

So tommy runs away again

As to his question, of introducing the law again

He needs to explain what the promotion of homosexuality is

The rest of his views have been completed shown to be irrational, contradictive and completely rubbished away

So he is left with one simngle claim. To bring back a law, that is not being called to come back and he needs to propose why and state what exactly is homosexual propaganda, which he has failed throughout to answer

He has one last chance or he will be sent to Coventry for the rest of the debate

His choice and he can continue to spam his posts that have been answered all he likes

They will still have been answered and shown to be wrong

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:01 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:02 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:
If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Still no answer...!?

by Syl Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:32 pm

SEXY MAMA wrote:
Syl wrote:I always think, people who are so convinced homosexuality is so perverted, if your child grew up and told you they were gay....you know, the boy or girl you had cherished from birth, the average kid who had grown up to be loving, kind, funny, and all the things you hoped he/she would be, just say they fell in love with someone of the same sex, would you then suddenly see them as abnormal or unnatural in some way?

No they should be loved no matter what.

As a parent it’s your duty to live your child regardless of their sexual preferences.

Exactly, they are still the person they have always been.
I dont see the mindset of people who think differently tbh. A persons sexuality is just a small part of who they are. I dont know why people get so stressed about it all.
Live and let live.

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:27 pm

So Tommy went back to default Tommybot mode and yet again failed to answer my questions and points

Enjoy Coverntry, for the rest of the debate Tommy

You had plenty of chances and did your usual spamming

Laughing

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:04 pm

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Still waiting for didge and Les to answer my questions...!?

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:14 pm

Still waiting...

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:34 pm

So the latest is Tommy actually now has an ally for doing exactly what he wants

She is a Muslim and a Labour MP

The irony

Maybe he would like to sign her petition?

Indeed, only this week we have had to witness the unedifying spectacle of a Labour MP advocating for the de facto return of Section 28. This tweeted by Labour MP, Shabana Mahmood:

It’s vital that schools follow the guidance for teaching #RSE, with parental engagement and proper consideration for pupils’ religion and background. Yesterday, I made this clear to Education ministers in response to a petition signed by 1,763 #Birmingham #Ladywood constituents.

This was in response to news that LGBT-inclusive lessons had been suspended at a Muslim school following protests.

The backlash is very good

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2019/03/opposing-equality-sex-education-shabana-mahmood-underestimating-children

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/parkfield-birmingham-lgbt-classes-teaching-no-outsiders-acceptence

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/05/pupils-lgbt-lessons-parents-gay-Muslim-parkfield-school

So apart from the Odd Christian and mainly and only less than 2000 mulsims

This looks like it will snow dive as it should

Maybe Tommy should convert to Islam.... Laughing

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:47 pm

“We are not a bunch of homophobic mothers,” she said. “We just feel that some of these lessons are inappropriate. Some of the themes being discussed are very adult and complex and the children are getting confused.

“They need to be allowed to be children rather than having to constantly think about equalities and rights.”

And...

Moffat, the author of Challenging Homophobia in Primary Schools who is currently shortlisted for a world’s best teacheraward, resigned from another primary school – Chilwell Croft academy, also in Birmingham – after a similar dispute with Muslim and Christian parents.

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:48 pm

Hey, teacher... leave them kids alone...!!!

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:52 pm

Critics of LGBT lessons for kids must ask themselves: what makes a gay relationship less “age appropriate” than a straight one?

Those who object to these lessons often do so due to a misconception that if children are being taught about gay relationships, surely gay sex must come into it at some point. That's not only untrue—it's actively harmful

For many LGBT people, this citation will bring back memories of Section 28: the clause in the Local Government Act 1988 which forbade “the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” The year before it was introduced, then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had told her party conference that, “Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay.”

The message is always that gay relationships are inappropriate for children. A large part of this belief has its origins in the idea that same-gender relationships are inherently sexual, whilst heterosexual relationships are instead about love and romance. Many parents (and politicians) who object to these lessons do so due to a misconception that if children are being taught about gay relationships, surely gay sex must come into it at some point.

In reality, they are simply being taught that a relationship between two women or two men can be just as loving and fulfilling—and, perhaps more importantly, just as normal—as one between a woman and a man. There is nothing “adult” about being gay or bisexual, any more than there is about being straight. These supposed concerns about ‘protecting children’ merely reflect decades of homophobia which contrasted promiscuous, sexual gays with wholesome, loving straight people.

The second point which Mahmood brings up is “the context of religious backgrounds.” Many of the parents who protested at Parkfield are said to be Muslim. Reporting on this story, whether it takes the side of the parents or the headteacher, has been keen to frame it as a conflict between religion and LGBT acceptance—as though these two elements are inherently contradictory.

In fact, there are many religious parents who love and accept their LGBT children, and many more LGBT people who are religious themselves. Religious LGBT people often struggle with what they perceive as a contradiction between their sexuality or gender identity and their deeply-held religious convictions—and declaring or implying that these two identities are incompatible will only hurt them more. Above all, it is fundamentally incorrect: many religions openly condemn homophobia, such as the Quakers, who adopted support for equal marriage in the UK in 2009.

Promoting the false idea that religion is antithetical to LGBT rights and acceptance is also dangerous to LGBT children in religious families, whose parents are being told that they have to choose between accepting their child and following their faith.

Islam, in particular, is commonly claimed to be anti-LGBT, especially by those attempting to promote Islamophobia among LGBT people and allies. But many Muslims are supportive of LGBT people—and many are LGBT themselves. Hidayah is an organisation in the UK whose mission is “To provide support and welfare for LGBTQI+ Muslims and promote social justice and education about the Muslim LGBTQI+ community to counter discrimination, prejudice and injustice.”

In a quote on their website, Shelina says, “I think that you can certainly reconcile being a lesbian and being a Muslim. You can exist and I am living proof of it. I also believe that being gay isn’t condemned in Islam.” Similarly, Choi is of the opinion that “Allah SWT made me the way I am. I could’ve been fashioned as a so-called normal Muslimah, but I’m not. I could’ve easily given up on Islam, but I haven’t.”

Religious and secular parents often have concerns about what their children are being taught, in all subjects, and this is only natural. But whilst we should take religious rights and opinions into account, it is also important to consider the rights of children who are or might turn out to be LGBT.

Knowing that the environment in which they are growing up will tolerate and accept them can make a big difference to a child’s mental health and self-esteem. In addition, schools have a duty to society as a whole to educate and bring up young people to have positive attitudes towards minorities within that society.

Fundamentally, support of and tolerance for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people is entirely age-appropriate for children, and in no way implies the existence of sexual or adult content. Neither is it fundamentally anti-religious for children to have such lessons—in fact, teaching religious tolerance for minorities might encourage LGBT people to retain their faith. The Parkland protestors may say they are not “a bunch of homophobes,” but without those two angles to defend their words from, what’s left?

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/parkfield-birmingham-lgbt-classes-teaching-no-outsiders-acceptence

That is it in a nutshell

Night everyone

by Tommy Monk Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:55 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Still waiting for didge and Les to answer my questions...!?

by Guest Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:38 pm

If ever people wanted to understand why we need to teach inclusion within schools and not leave this to religious homophobic parents

Then please watch, as the reality is, they are teaching children to view homosexual couple as something wrong

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_uDx2OJe2U

by Tommy Monk Fri Mar 08, 2019 12:08 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

What's wrong with just having a couple of lessons where the biological mechanics of the normal and natural way of things is explained... and then adding the caveat afterwards that of course there are some men who like men and some women who like women...!?

Surely this is all that is needed...!?

And section 28 wouldn't stop any of that!

So what's the problem with that?

If section 28 was reinstated... what exactly is it that is happening now that you think would be stopped by this...!?

Still waiting for didge and Les to answer my questions...!?

Still waiting for answers...

by Sponsored content