Is this homophobia dressed up as parents' rights?

[gregs656]

joshcowin said:

As you say great to just chat something over! I am trying to look at this from all angles.

'I'm glad we can accommodate Afghani muslims, and I'm glad we have a Muslim community in this country. But when that community starts flexing it's collective muscles and demanding that the nationally mandated educated curriculum is not taught to their children, we have a problem. '

So happy for LGBTQ community to flex their muscles and demand certain education, however muslims not so much? Funnily enough there is a similar amount of gay people in the UK as Muslims! According to wikipedia anyway!

e.g. if this was written would the writer be in the wrong?

'I'm glad we can accommodate LGBTQ people, and I'm glad we have a LGBTQ community in this country. But when that community starts flexing it's collective muscles and demanding that the nationally mandated educated curriculum is not taught to their children, we have a problem.

Look at the Equality Act 2010.

FWIW if a group of LGBT parents were protesting RE in their childs school and removing them from those classes I think that would be wrong too.

But I don't think that is going to happen any time soon, do you?

[joshcowin]

gregs656 said:

joshcowin said:

To be part of the LGBT community was illegal decades ago, enforced by teaching that in schools.
The government is an awful tool to use in order to educate children in such important matters!!

Well this whole discussion has shown how complicated it is, firstly not everyone agrees (the muslim parents), legally people are allowed to practise their religion freely in this country, the muslim parents are not doing anything wrong legally. However many on here feel they are wrong in not educating their children in this matter, that may be the case however they are operating within the laws of this land!

It was, but we have moved on, and so has our education. I have no idea who else you think should regulate education?

No this discussion has shown that religion makes it complicated, it has not shown it is complicated as such. It is actually fairly straight forward, no child is born homophobic so it is not like you are challenging an established dogma.

I think it is wrong they have successfully stopped the school delivering these lessons, generally I think the 'right to remove' for religious reasons is problematic although I don't know what the answer is.

I have said many times, no problem with the academic education being dictated by experts who consult the government! Regulating academic issues and moral issues are two different things!

So we agree it is a complicated issue then? As religion is heavily involved, and their religion does not agree with homosexuality. Their religion is also not illegal, pretty tricky situation.

[Rivenink]

joshcowin said:

In the context of this thread Yes. The muslim parents believe it is immoral, the state believe it is moral.

Not entirely correct.

The State believes it is morally wrong to discriminate based on certain 'protected characteristics'.

The State, of course, is the elected Parliament.

[joshcowin]

gregs656 said:

Look at the Equality Act 2010.

FWIW if a group of LGBT parents were protesting RE in their childs school and removing them from those classes I think that would be wrong too.

But I don't think that is going to happen any time soon, do you?

I am not offering my personal opinion I am trying to look at it from all angles!!

TBH yes I can see that happening, news articles like the one we are discussing don't help in preventing that happening!

[Thorodin]

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

[joshcowin]

Rivenink said:

joshcowin said:

In the context of this thread Yes. The muslim parents believe it is immoral, the state believe it is moral.

Not entirely correct.

The State believes it is morally wrong to discriminate based on certain 'protected characteristics'.

The State, of course, is the elected Parliament.

Complex isn't it as their religion is also a protected characteristic, why should their children be taught something that conflicts with their religious teachings. Would teaching it to them be morally justified?

[nadger]

desolate said:

nadger said:

I teach students about the causes and consequences of 9/11!
I’m afraid that for school children 20 years ago is more than a lifetime! Sorry!

I am well aware of that.

I am simply stating that the teaching of mutual tolerance and respect is a relatively new thing. If you are over 30 it's highly likely you won't have been taught that way in this country.

Edited by desolate on Monday 4th March 14:29

Ah I see! Apologies for the misunderstanding.

[GroundEffect]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

Or you could realise that children from the age of 5 and beyond start to realise their own sexuality, therefore this helps mitigate hatred from others (because different is scary) but also helps those who are struggling with their own sexuality come to terms with it?

I'm sure it's very easy for you to dismiss as someone unaffected by it, but there are millions who are affected.

[gregs656]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

What is the indoctrination?

Given that LGBT teens are at a much higher risk of experiencing mental health issues and attempting suicide, due mostly to how they are treated for who they are, don't you think it is sensible to educate young children on the existence of gay people, and tell them that being gay is ok? There is no cost here, there are no down sides.

[joshcowin]

Buggles said:

joshcowin said:

So happy for LGBTQ community to flex their muscles and demand certain education, however muslims not so much? Funnily enough there is a similar amount of gay people in the UK as Muslims! According to wikipedia anyway!

Can you show me where LGBTQ people are demanding this education?

joshcowin said:

e.g. if this was written would the writer be in the wrong?

'I'm glad we can accommodate LGBTQ people, and I'm glad we have a LGBTQ community in this country. But when that community starts flexing it's collective muscles and demanding that the nationally mandated educated curriculum is not taught to their children, we have a problem.

Yes, that would be wrong. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make chap?

In my first post on the subject I think I said why are we giving one minority priority over others! I guess that is all I am trying to say. We could be discussing any minority here but why the emphasis on LGBTQ. My question has been answered partly by your and other replies!

[gregs656]

joshcowin said:

I have said many times, no problem with the academic education being dictated by experts who consult the government! Regulating academic issues and moral issues are two different things!

So we agree it is a complicated issue then? As religion is heavily involved, and their religion does not agree with homosexuality. Their religion is also not illegal, pretty tricky situation.

Not really. There is a huge cross over and in any case the State defines the laws of the land which are frequently moral issues. I have no idea what you are trying to show here as morality comes into every aspect of life, there is no way an effective state or institution of any kind could not have rules which are moral in nature.

No, I don't think it is complicated. I think it is very straight forward which is why I am so clear that what these parents are doing is wrong.

[joshcowin]

Buggles said:

Yes. They need to be taught it, because they exist in a country where there are people with different sexualities.

Teaching anyone - regardless of religion - that bullying is wrong and that all people should be treated equally overrides any stuck-in-the-dark-ages Imam.

What's the alternative? Go like Saudi, let them go nuts when they see a gay bar, because their mum and dad and the Imam says it's wrong? Do you see why these children need the balance? Why the children of white non-muslim homophobes need the balance?

I agree with you!

[joshcowin]

gregs656 said:

No, I don't think it is complicated. I think it is very straight forward which is why I am so clear that what these parents are doing is wrong.

I think it is wrong also, however they are legally entitled to refuse to send their children to the lessons!

[joshcowin]

Buggles said:

joshcowin said:

I think it is wrong also, however they are legally entitled to refuse to send their children to the lessons!

They're not you know. From gov.co.uk

When your child can miss school

You can only allow your child to miss school if either:
•they’re too ill to go in
•you’ve got advance permission from the school

would the school be allowed to deny them if they tried to obtain permission?

[Bill]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

I'm guessing you think the bit in bold is some cunning insult.

[anonymous-user]

I suppose Thorodin's post goes some way to demonstrate that this isn't something that's embedded in British culture.

Still a long way to go.

[Countdown]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

How would you feel if your beautiful children were bullied and beaten up for being gay? Or even loathed themselves because they assumed their father was a homophobe?

It may well be that your children would be taught at home that there is nothing wrong with being gay, how they should respond if they get bullied etc etc, but not all parents may be as forward-thinking as you. There is literally no harm in kids being taught about homosexuality and suggesting that parents should be able to pick and choose what subjects are acceptable for their children to study is as stupid as those parents in the US who insist on their kids being taught that Dinosaurs are 6000 years old.

[bitchstewie]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

Amazing amount of word salad for something pretty nasty.

Not good.

[J4CKO]

Thorodin said:

Lots of flag waving here, maybe by a predominance of victims of homophobia. Given the 'official' stats, allowing for a natural reticence, and allowing for a 10% bias from a frankly unrepresentative but frantic group of echo chamber fanatics, just how many infant school children have the foggiest idea what it's all about? It is indoctrination of immature minds and totally unnecessary. Aren't there better and more relevant starts for the inculcation of precious lives of children? One of those scary cases of 'if you aren't vigorously for us you must by definition be violently against and therefore beyond redemption and evil in the extreme'. I am eternally grateful my two beautiful children were not infected by this and other viruses. We should be ashamed of these false prophets.

"Infected" ?

"False Prophets" ?

Hmmm

[RemyMartin81D]

bhstewie said:

Amazing amount of word salad for something pretty nasty.

Not good.

Aye.

Might as well have wrote I don't like pooftas.