London - 1st December 2020
​
Are those whom we hold most dear not worth fighting for anymore?
‘I do not mind RSE, I am very liberal’. That is what a friend told me last week, looking at our children playing in the park after school. ‘I see, as a liberal what age would you consider appropriate to teach the practice of anal sex to your daughter?’ I ask. She stares at me …’WHAT?!’ and puts up a funny face from surprised to be disgusted.
Liberal means free, basically free form religion and its moral values, I suppose. There are infinite shades of ‘being liberal’. I am curious to understand up to what stage someone is effectively free, especially free to let someone else introduce their kids to perverse sexual material. Because this is what the new RSE allows, in line with the guidelines published by the Government in 2019 for the new Relationships and Sex Education (Link). But being liberal should not excuse unconditional acceptance of whatever is enforced in schools, I would rather call that oblivious.
At page 46 of the Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) and Health Education, we find material endorsed by the government as useful for implementing RSE in the school curriculum. These sites promote LGBT relationships, contraception and abortion in any available form. The suggested websites go much further than this. Sexwise states ‘We're here to give you honest advice about contraception, pregnancy, STIs and pleasure’ and promotes perversion. One topic suggests making a checklist of sexual desires, including perverse acts, sex toys, dominance, submission, strap-on porn with a hint of a pretentious list in case your mind is not enough perverted. You will also find cock worshipping among the various obscenities proposed (Link).
Brook is a website listed as a resource by the Department for Health and the NHS (National Health System) as the UK's leading promoter and provider of sexual health and well-being resources for young people under 25 (Link). My non liberal alarm bell goes off loudly every time I see the word health associated to sex, women and reproduction. This website, in addition to the usual things, promotes pornography and the practice of anal sex, going into great detail.
Brooks about porn: 'Watching porn alone, in a private place can be a very healthy part of your sex life and discovering yourself and there is nothing to be ashamed of'. The website also encourages to just remember that porn isn't real and don't watch too much of it, adding that 'too much' is personal and varies from person to person. I remind you that we are talking about children under the age of 18 but that some practices of providing personal pleasure have also been experimented in some primary schools classes, starting from the age of 6.( Link Here and Here)
In August (2020) the Daily Mail and other newspapers reported the news of the dice game to be offered in class to children aged 13 and over. The game is a dice that shows on each face a part of the body, the children throw the dice twice and then discuss how the parts can interact in a sexual act.(Link) These are just a few extracts from the material available. Voice for Justice has published a very detailed review of these contents.(Link)
The government is promoting pornography, known to create dependency, especially if exposed to from young age, acting on the brain at the same way as drugs addictions as exposed in different studies, including a Cambridge University study (Link) Would you feel comfortable if the government enforced lessons on cocaine, focusing on how good and cool you can feel, just make sure you don’t take too much? Are these practices really preparing pupils for the opportunities, responsibilities, and experiences of adult life? How are these encouraging healthy and respectful relationships? Isn't this simply promoting early sexual experimentation?
I know, we are just very ordinary people doing ordinary jobs, but above all, we are mothers and fathers… are those whom we hold most dear not worth fighting for anymore?
​
​
MAY 2020 - Relationships and Sex Education, an epochal change.
​
PREMISE
​
The family is the test of freedom, because the family is the only thing that the free man makes for himself and by himself. (J.K.Chesterton)
​
We, parents, bring up our children according to our own ideals and the State has the duty to protect this fundamental freedom, family is therefore the ultimate test of freedom for a free State.
​
Family has historically been acknowledged as existing before the State and being the base of society. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights define the family as the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, (where a child is intended everyone below 18 years of age)Article 2, says that the child must be protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child’s parents. Article 29 agree that the education of the child shall be directed to the development of respect for the child's parents, their own cultural identity, language, and values ...
​
Today, we are called to decide what is the ideal of society we have at heart and what method of education this society should promote. We should opt for either the State’s slowly imposed monopoly on education, or the primacy of family as the foundation of a free society in a free State.
​
RELATIONSHIPS AND SEXUAL EDUCATION
​
The new Relationships and Sexual Regulation (Link) will make Relationships Education mandatory in all primary schools. It was only in June 2019 that the content of the new RSE (Sexual and Relationships Education) became known when the guidance was published. The document has 3 paragraphs (31,37,68) unveiling the real intent of the regulation. 90 per cent of the text would in fact be pretty much acceptable if read with innocent eyes but, having seen those paragraphs, we understand it is the beginning of a new era with gender education landing in our schools.
All schools will have to comply with the Equality Act 2010, with gender reassignment and sexual orientation being amongst the protected characteristics.
​
Schools should ensure that LGBT content is fully integrated into their programmes of study rather than delivered as a standalone unit or lesson. Schools, the guidance says, should be alive to issues such as everyday sexism, misogyny, homophobia, and gender stereotypes, to be up to date with the teaching of Modern Britain. Sexual education remains not-mandatory although is clearly indicated as good practice for the head teacher to discuss the request with parents and, as appropriate, with the child to ensure that their wishes are understood, and to clarify the nature and purpose of the curriculum.
​
The apparently harmless Relationships Education is now compulsory, and the review will come at three years intervals. Parents are usually powerless, presented with non-informative consultation documents of dubious clarity.
​
Here and there in the RSE guidance are popping up references to the faith schools being able to teach about faith perspectives and parents being the first educators (See art 2 and 29 of The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child)..these are the eternal truths, disgracefully reduced to lark mirrors.
​
On closer inspection, the Guidance on Primary School Disruption over LGBT Teaching/Relationships Education (Link) advice on how to manage disruptions, keeping under control ‘significant increase in schools reporting parents asking about relationships education/sex education/teaching on equalities/teaching on LGBT’ and ‘significant numbers of parents using template letters for withdrawal of children from SRE/future sex education’ and again’, leafleting of local houses or outside schools about relationships education/teaching on equality/teaching on LGBT.
​
And the cherry on the cake, ‘becoming aware of WhatsApp groups (or other social media, such as Facebook) discussing concerns about relationships education/teaching on equality/teaching on LGBT... that is: we will spy you, report you, condemn you! We eventually, sadly, have clarity on the purpose of this document. Now, when I read these lines, it was exactly when I knew I had to do something to oppose this regulation as we are talking about restriction of freedom.
​
The Birmingham case (Link) may teach us something. Parents have found out from kids that the school was teaching LGBT issues, cross dressing, reading LGBT promoting stories, they approached the head teacher who was firmly set on her LGBT propaganda and they eventually decided to protest outside school. Parents have been taken to court, they have been banned from protesting in the vicinity of the school and the judge has declared that, not only the school has to integrate this teaching throughout the curriculum, but has the duty to introduce this new language and normalise this tolerance. And on gay issues, not only is legal but is necessary to teach them. Farewell to the parents as first educators of their children.
​
Teachers and headteachers that disagree with the content of this regulation are under the pressure of OFSTED. In the pre-approval discussions in parliament the minister said that no teacher would have been dismissed for teaching according to their faith. Now that it has become law, things are going to change. Those who will refuse to teach the LGTB agenda will be probably sacked and their careers smashed.
​
How? Let just look at what has happened already, even before September 2020, with the government encouraging to adopt the new curriculum early from September 2019.
​
Some schools like the Keser Girls’ or Boy’s School in Gateshead,(Link) but these are not isolated cases, have failed OFSTED inspections despite being deemed Good in three out of the four criteria and requiring improvements in the leadership for not addressing all the protected categories identified in The Equality Act 2010 (LGBT, Sex reassignment)
​
OFSTED constitutes the armed arm of the law. Those schools that will not adapt and compromise will be able to protect their teaching according to their faith for a little longer and then they will be probably demolished inspection after inspection.
​
No one really understand the consequences that these imposed new teaching will have on society, but we need to get ready for an epochal change. Will Home-schooling or parental schools be our last island of freedom before the guarantors of the education standards will come into our houses? ...Of course, this will not happen in a violent way but via a cleverly crafted bureaucracy.