School protests - sex education

[otolith]

Biker 1 said:

dundarach said:

I'm replying as a practicing Christian....

.... my local C of E church, for which I moved 10 miles to live next to, because their new minister openly supports a regime which not only supports the view that women should not have leadership positions over men, but also that homosexuality is wrong...

Just wow - you actually moved house for this?!?!?!? And now you find out you were diddled......

No, it's mostly the Catholics who did the diddling.

[jimPH]

chrispmartha said:

motco said:

I would expect liberals to support ethnic minorities in their strict religious beliefs.

I would expect liberals to support freedom of sexual expression and the accompanying full range sex education.

Rather than assuming, why not ak or better still state your position on the matter?

FWIW I don't think religious teachings should have any bearing on what is taught in schools, and I also think children should be taught about issues surrounding LGBT issues from a young age, there will be kids who have two mums, two dads etc etc and it should be recognised in school that there is nothing wrong with that.

So I am what you would call a Liberal and I'm not tearing my hair out, so you expect incorrectly.

How do some kids have two mums or two dads? Surely there's a test available to whittle them down to one of each.

[otolith]

jimPH said:

How do some kids have two mums or two dads? Surely there's a test available to whittle them down to one of each.

A mum or a dad is not necessarily the biological parent. There are families with children from different relationships, families with adopted children, families with children from surrogates or donated sperm or eggs. And in some of those families the mum(s) or dad(s) are gay. The important thing is their relationship to the child, not the genetics.

[clio007]

chrispmartha said:

motco said:

I would expect liberals to support ethnic minorities in their strict religious beliefs.

I would expect liberals to support freedom of sexual expression and the accompanying full range sex education.

Rather than assuming, why not ak or better still state your position on the matter?

FWIW I don't think religious teachings should have any bearing on what is taught in schools, and I also think children should be taught about issues surrounding LGBT issues from a young age, there will be kids who have two mums, two dads etc etc and it should be recognised in school that there is nothing wrong with that.

So I am what you would call a Liberal and I'm not tearing my hair out, so you expect incorrectly.

So its ok to teach about LGBT but not to teach about religious teachings.. There will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc. Is there something wrong with following a religion then?

[anonymous-user]

Pesty said:

Funny how it’s only one side that has to be tolerant. When they say our children they mean their children fk the kafir.

Outsiders in our own country.

Wait until they become 20% and start getting bold.

You have the wrong end of the stick regarding "No Outsiders" - that's the name of the lesson scheme, not a reference to those "outside" their religion.

They have the support of the government anyway so it's hardly an extreme point of view, as much as I disagree with it. More or less solid Tory "family values" bks.

[RTB]

clio007 said:

So its ok to teach about LGBT but not to teach about religious teachings.. There will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc. Is there something wrong with following a religion then?

I didn't read the post as not wanting children educated about religion. I read it that the content of religious beliefs should not have any bearing on what is taught outside of RE. Just because a large number of people believe the earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean we should be re-writing the science curriculum to keep them happy.

I take issue with your statement that there will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, more accurately there will be kids in schools who have parents who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, I'm not sure a 6 year old is likely to have taken a conscious decision to be any of those things. Replace the word Muslim or Christian with the word Marxist or Free-Market Capitalist when describing a child and you realise how silly it is

[chrispmartha]

jimPH said:

chrispmartha said:

motco said:

I would expect liberals to support ethnic minorities in their strict religious beliefs.

I would expect liberals to support freedom of sexual expression and the accompanying full range sex education.

Rather than assuming, why not ak or better still state your position on the matter?

FWIW I don't think religious teachings should have any bearing on what is taught in schools, and I also think children should be taught about issues surrounding LGBT issues from a young age, there will be kids who have two mums, two dads etc etc and it should be recognised in school that there is nothing wrong with that.

So I am what you would call a Liberal and I'm not tearing my hair out, so you expect incorrectly.

How do some kids have two mums or two dads? Surely there's a test available to whittle them down to one of each.

Is that a serious answer? If so it shows there does need to be more education surrounding these matters.

[s1962a]

RTB said:

clio007 said:

So its ok to teach about LGBT but not to teach about religious teachings.. There will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc. Is there something wrong with following a religion then?

I didn't read the post as not wanting children educated about religion. I read it that the content of religious beliefs should not have any bearing on what is taught outside of RE. Just because a large number of people believe the earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean we should be re-writing the science curriculum to keep them happy.

I take issue with your statement that there will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, more accurately there will be kids in schools who have parents who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, I'm not sure a 6 year old is likely to have taken a conscious decision to be any of those things. Replace the word Muslim or Christian with the word Marxist or Free-Market Capitalist when describing a child and you realise how silly it is

i remember this thread

[eldar]

Diversion said:

What is an Extreme Religious View ?

If it is in the religious texts, it is hardly extreme. Society has moved on and certain things we now deem unacceptable but that doesn't make a religious text extreme.

You regularly see Islamic schools in the press teaching what are either Extreme Religious Views or are they good traditional Islamic values ??

That would be an ecumenical matter....

[clio007]

RTB said:

I didn't read the post as not wanting children educated about religion. I read it that the content of religious beliefs should not have any bearing on what is taught outside of RE. Just because a large number of people believe the earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean we should be re-writing the science curriculum to keep them happy.

I take issue with your statement that there will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, more accurately there will be kids in schools who have parents who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc, I'm not sure a 6 year old is likely to have taken a conscious decision to be any of those things. Replace the word Muslim or Christian with the word Marxist or Free-Market Capitalist when describing a child and you realise how silly it is

But a 6 year old is able to take a conscious decision on his/her/its gender.

[chrispmartha]

clio007 said:

chrispmartha said:

motco said:

I would expect liberals to support ethnic minorities in their strict religious beliefs.

I would expect liberals to support freedom of sexual expression and the accompanying full range sex education.

Rather than assuming, why not ak or better still state your position on the matter?

FWIW I don't think religious teachings should have any bearing on what is taught in schools, and I also think children should be taught about issues surrounding LGBT issues from a young age, there will be kids who have two mums, two dads etc etc and it should be recognised in school that there is nothing wrong with that.

So I am what you would call a Liberal and I'm not tearing my hair out, so you expect incorrectly.

So its ok to teach about LGBT but not to teach about religious teachings.. There will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc. Is there something wrong with following a religion then?

I probably worded it clumsily, of course religion and religious teachings should be taught about (not one over the other or, religious texts as facts though), What's in those religious teachings should not dictate what is in the curriculum though.

There's nothing wrong with people following their religion (I find it bonkers though but that's just me) but their religion should not dictate the curriculum in schools.

Schools should be secular.

Edited by chrispmartha on Monday 20th May 15:22

[chrispmartha]

RTB said:

clio007 said:

So its ok to teach about LGBT but not to teach about religious teachings.. There will be kids in school who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindus etc etc. Is there something wrong with following a religion then?

I didn't read the post as not wanting children educated about religion. I read it that the content of religious beliefs should not have any bearing on what is taught outside of RE. Just because a large number of people believe the earth is 6000 years old doesn't mean we should be re-writing the science curriculum to keep them happy.

Yes exactly that.

[clio007]

chrispmartha said:

I probably worded it clumsily, of course religion and religious teachings should be taught about (not one over the other or, religious texts as facts though), What's in those religious teachings should not dictate what is in the curriculum though.

Schools should be secular.

The UK is not secular country though is it? So why should the schools be?

[chrispmartha]

clio007 said:

chrispmartha said:

I probably worded it clumsily, of course religion and religious teachings should be taught about (not one over the other or, religious texts as facts though), What's in those religious teachings should not dictate what is in the curriculum though.

Schools should be secular.

The UK is not secular country though is it? So why should the schools be?

The UK should be secular as well while we're at it.

[anonymous-user]

chrispmartha said:

The UK should be secular as well while we're at it.

Pissing in the wind there unfortunately.

[rscott]

clio007 said:

chrispmartha said:

I probably worded it clumsily, of course religion and religious teachings should be taught about (not one over the other or, religious texts as facts though), What's in those religious teachings should not dictate what is in the curriculum though.

Schools should be secular.

The UK is not secular country though is it? So why should the schools be?

Under half the population consider themselves religious - https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...

[anonymous-user]

rscott said:

Under half the population consider themselves religious - https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...

When the head of state has to also be the head of a particular brand of Christian church then you have yourself a religious country. That church also gets seats within government.

[The_Burg]

rscott said:

clio007 said:

chrispmartha said:

I probably worded it clumsily, of course religion and religious teachings should be taught about (not one over the other or, religious texts as facts though), What's in those religious teachings should not dictate what is in the curriculum though.

Schools should be secular.

The UK is not secular country though is it? So why should the schools be?

Under half the population consider themselves religious - https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...

Nearly 50% are non religious actually. Which i find rather shocking. I would have expected those magic pixie fetishists to have been 25% at the very most these days.

Back to the original subject, sex education is teaching facts, actual real things. Stuff kids need to know. I would suggest those most averse to it are by far the most in need of it.

[Dog Star]

otolith said:

Dog Star said:

I have serious objections to this sort of thing, not because I give a flying fk about LGBT blah blah rights etc, but quite simply because of the time wasted on it.

I think there may be some misconceptions about what this particular storm in a teacup is about.

For one thing, it isn't about sex education. It's about primary schools teaching small children some very basic ideas about some people being different, in order to meet their statutory duty to teach them "British values".

This kind of thing;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-47738863/school-l...

As required by this;

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/guidance-on-pro...

The thing is that I never had any of this kind of thing - I'm 51 - during my education. Because I am (hopefully) a decent human being I don't go around picking on people that are different, if someone is doing something harmless to others then I really don't care.

I would venture that with media and general social ideas these days that all this kind of stuff it totally unnecessary. If I had a child I'd rather it was being taught to speak French or whatever in the time.

[s1962a]

So in typical PH fashion, if your kids school was doing a religious seminar and an LGBT educational seminar on the same day for your kids, you'd be up in arms about the religions education, and a religious type would be up in arms against the LGBT session.. but you'd claim the other person was wrong and not being tolerant?

That makes sense.