Four-year-olds Will Get Gay Fairytales At School

[Urib2007]

[b][size=3]Four-year-olds will get gay fairytales at school[/size][/b]

[color="#FF0000"][b]UK Daily Mail | March 12, 2007
[/b][/color]

Schools are teaching children as young as four about same-sex relationships to comply with new gay rights laws, it emerged yesterday.

They are introducing youngsters to homosexuality using a series of story books in preparation for controversial regulations coming into force next month

Fourteen primary schools are already taking part in a £600,000 Government-funded study aimed at familiarising children with gay and lesbian relationships.
The research team behind the project intends to post the findings on national websites to help all schools use the books in their literacy lessons.

It also revealed it is leading workshops for local councils across the country which are asking how to implement new laws banning discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.

The academics working on the study say showing children that homosexuality is part of everyday life helps reduce homophobic bullying in the playground.

They claim schools need to ensure they are serving the needs of gay pupils and parents to comply with the Equality Act.

However the scheme sparked alarm among Christian groups who fear the legislation could leave schools open to lawsuits if they refuse to use books with gay characters.

One story being used in the research project, headed by academics at Sunderland University, is a fairytale about a prince who turns down three princesses before falling in love with one of their brothers. They marry in a book titled 'King & King'.

In another book, 'Spacegirl Pukes', the main character has two mothers, mummy Loula and mummy Neenee. She is about to set off on a space mission when she falls ill, requiring her mothers to nurse her back to health.

Another called 'And Tango Makes Three' features two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who fall in love at a New York zoo.

The latter has sparked fierce debate in the U.S. where some schools already use it.

The use of the books in England prompted claims that repealing Section 28 - the law banning the promotion of homosexuality in schools - has increased the use of inappropriate teaching materials.

There are also claims that new gay rights laws, coming into force on April 6, will allow schools to be sued if they do not use homosexual texts.

The Government insists that schools will still be able to decide what they teach.

A spokesman said existing guidance already made clear schools must "meet the needs of all young people whatever their family circumstances or developing sexuality", and in a way that is "age appropriate".

However Dr Elizabeth Atkinson, reader in social and educational inquiry at Sunderland University, said: "The purpose of the project is to support schools in meeting their requirements under the Equality Act, which will require all public institutions to meet the needs of gay and lesbian users.

"There's very little out there at the moment to enable them to meet the needs of all pupils."

The No Outsiders project, which has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, is run by Sunderland jointly with Exeter University and London's Institute of Education.

It has been launched in 14 schools across the North East, the South West, London and the Midlands.

Dr Atkinson added: "We are already finding that books like these are changing attitudes around homosexuality. Pupils are more willing to understand issues of discrimination."

However Simon Calvert, spokesman for the Christian Institute, said: "The predictions of those who said the repeal of Section 28 would result in the active promotion of homosexuality in schools are coming true."

His insitute is also warning that the new equality laws would lead to schools being "compelled" to provide books with gay themes and risk litigation if they do not.

Meanwhile the Christian Voice group has vowed to track down the books and organise a protest to ban them.

Director Stephen Green said: "The arrogance of people like Elizabeth Atkinson, using children as guinea pigs is outrageous and thoroughly wicked.

"I am astonished at this project and we are trying to find out where these schools are to empower parents to put pressure on them to remove the books."

[cmotherofpirl]

I suppose relgious schools will have to either sue or go out of business in the UK now.

[got2luvjc]

Christian schools are under government laws like that?

[Maggyie]

This is charming news!

/sarcasm

[dairygirl4u2c]

I say it's what Catholics get. They're so bent on teaching about Jesus and denying others the right to teach controversial things. If the country were right, we'd be more wary about allowin things that are controversial like that. If Catholics think might makes right, then it's what they get, as that was allowed by a law.
Now, if you're simply upset because it's being taught, that's understandable. Being upset because it can be taught.. while thinking you should have your say.. it's exactly what you get.

[Maggyie]

This is charming news!

/sarcasm

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212696' date='Mar 12 2007, 07:56 PM']I say it's what Catholics get. They're so bent on teaching about Jesus and denying others the right to teach controversial things. If the country were right, we'd be more wary about allowin things that are controversial like that. If Catholics think might makes right, then it's what they get, as that was allowed by a law.[/quote]That's quite a broad brush you're painting with. Do you believe that your characterization of what Catholics are "bent on" is at all accurate?

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212696' date='Mar 12 2007, 07:56 PM']Now, if you're simply upset because it's being taught, that's understandable. Being upset because it can be taught.. while thinking you should have your say.. it's exactly what you get.[/quote]I think the issue isn't if someone is upset that something "can" be taught. The real problem is that these interest groups are trying to use the government and threats of litigation to coerce schools that this stuff "must" be taught.

Edited March 12, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[dairygirl4u2c]

There's a law allowing for it. So the issue is what can be taught. I'm sure there's issues of what "must" be taught where the gay interest isn't in the majority.

I'm not sure how accurate my statement was. I usually chaacterize Catholics as the more conservative kind in my mind in my bias. I do give you the benefit whn considering your teachings academically. I know a many want to teach things like Jesus and God and Church here in school, a majority, I think, if my polls are accurate. ha... so I don't think I'm too far off.

[Socrates]

Absolutely disgusting. And people claim there is no such thing as a "homosexual agenda"!

Four-year-olds, Dude!

[quote]'Spacegirl Pukes'[/quote]This name seems quite appropriate!

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212733' date='Mar 12 2007, 09:30 PM']There's a law allowing for it. So the issue is what can be taught. I'm sure there's issues of what "must" be taught where the gay interest isn't in the majority.[/quote]I don't know if I agree with you that this law merely "allows" schools to use gay-themed books, as if this was forbidden before the law existed. I don't think a legal ban existed that needed to be overturned. In any event, I think the quotes in the article which suggest that the threat of litigation may be used to strong-arm schools into conforming to the wishes of the homosexual lobby.

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212733' date='Mar 12 2007, 09:30 PM']I'm not sure how accurate my statement was. I usually chaacterize Catholics as the more conservative kind in my mind in my bias. I do give you the benefit whn considering your teachings academically. I know a many want to teach things like Jesus and God and Church here in school, a majority, I think, if my polls are accurate. ha... so I don't think I'm too far off.[/quote]I know the education system in the US best. In public schools, I found religion to be a topic that wasn't really touched. In private Catholic schools, there certainly should be a freedom to teach "Jesus and God and Church."

I didn't think that England had the same kind of separation between public and private schools. I thought that British students have separate classes for religion, based on their background (please feel free to correct my ignorance on this topic). In any event, while I'm sure a pupil could opt-out of religious instruction in Britain, I don't see how he could opt-out of the reading of a fairytale which attempts to indoctrinate the homosexual agenda into four-year olds.

My laymen's opinion is that this pro-gay agenda is just a modern godless religion (well, maybe it has gods of lust, avarice, etc). If the status quo education system isolates religious instruction such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, why shouldn't citizens expect the same of this modern system of morality (or immorality )?

PS: Dairy, are you in the UK? I always thought you were an American.

[Socrates]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212696' date='Mar 12 2007, 05:56 PM']I say it's what Catholics get. They're so bent on teaching about Jesus and denying others the right to teach controversial things. If the country were right, we'd be more wary about allowin things that are controversial like that. If Catholics think might makes right, then it's what they get, as that was allowed by a law.
Now, if you're simply upset because it's being taught, that's understandable. Being upset because it can be taught.. while thinking you should have your say.. it's exactly what you get.[/quote]
This post reveals complete ignorance of history, among other things.

How does one define "controversial things" which should not be taught?

Keep in mind that originally in this country the public schools originally [i]did[/i] teach about the Bible and Jesus, as well as had Christian prayer, and this was hardly considered "controversial." (And these schools were strictly Protestant, so acting as though this is some purely "Catholic" issue is ignorant.) It was not until the 1950s that radical atheists began demanding the removal of anything Christian from the public schools, and it was this militant atheism that was "controversial" at the time, as most of the country was Christian.
(And the banning of prayer in 1962 was an unconstitutional move on the court's part. Such powers were to belong to the respective states, not the federal government.)

(though this particular news story is about England, the situation was not so different there, and since England does not have a strong "religious Right" like in America, blaming this incident on "conservative Catholics" becomes all the more absurd.)

The central issue here is not about "teaching controversial things", but about which of tow opposing wordviews prevails, a Christian worldview, or that of the radical godless Left.

This is nothing less than the state using public schools to promote the agenda of the radical homosexualist movement.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Socrates

[dairygirl4u2c]

Socrates is my case in point. He wants to teach all that church stuff, and prevent them. He essentially wants might makes right. well he wants his way, but it turns into might makes right. which is why i think it's wrong.
I think he misunderstood me though. I do understand that chruch stuff has and can be taught. What I think is that people ought to realize that somethings should not be taught and both sides have to give... just because we can doesn't mean we should. It's a moral issue of respect, to me.
And we can always cahnge the original way of doing things by changed by law.

Edited March 13, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212789' date='Mar 12 2007, 10:10 PM']Socrates is my case in point. He wants to teach all that church stuff, and prevent them. He essentially wants might makes right. well he wants his way, but it turns into might makes right. which is why i think it's wrong.[/quote]In his post, I don't see where he "wants to teach all that church stuff." He just recounted history.

I think his own post complements my point. Specifically, that we're talking about two competing religions/philosophies.

In my mind, the real problem is determining where the boundaries of a common culture ends and where a religion begins.

[Socrates]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1212789' date='Mar 12 2007, 08:10 PM']Socrates is my case in point. He wants to teach all that church stuff, and prevent them. He essentially wants might makes right. well he wants his way, but it turns into might makes right. which is why i think it's wrong.
I think he misunderstood me though. I do understand that chruch stuff has and can be taught. What I think is that people ought to realize that somethings should not be taught and both sides have to give... just because we can doesn't mean we should. It's a moral issue of respect, to me.
And we can always cahnge the original way of doing things by changed by law.[/quote]
Well thank you for informing us all "what Socrates wants."

Basically, I want the government to butt out of dictating what must be taught in the schools. This decision should be made at the local level, and the parents who send their kids to the public schools should certainly have their say in this, and parents should be allowed to exempt their children from offensive classes if they see fit.
We should not have activist judges dictating what political/social agendas must be taught by schools.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Socrates

[Fixxxer]

Texas would never allow it, yeeeehaaaah.