As the government of British Columbia in the fall of 2011 negotiates with teachers, will they give consideration to the rights of parents or only to monetary issues? Without pressure, there is a good chance that the rights of parents will be ignored, if the government's actions in signing the Corren Agreement are its precedent.

View a powerful video in which Sean Murphy defends the rights of parents and explains how the signing of the Corren Agreement violated those rights, and why all those who respect those rights should be concerned. Sean Murphy is associated with the Catholic Civil Rights League, but what he has to say in this video should be heard far beyond the Roman Catholic community.

(British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life is not affiliated with any denomination or faith group, but is committed to the defence of parental. rights to bring up their children, and has stood up for the rights of those parents whose concern it is to pass on those traditional and universal values which have been foundational to our society.)

Please take the time to view this important video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpFsXZkjNS8 .

Does This CDC Report Say Something about the Danger of Legitimizing Homosexual Behaviour to Our Youth?

What responsibility will be borne by those who normalize a culture in which a dangerous practices are widespread? The following news release from the director of the U.S. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention ought to be considered carefully.

Media Statement
For Immediate Release: June 2, 2011
Contact: NCHHSTP News Media Team
(404) 639-8895

Commemorating 30 Years of HIV/AIDS
By Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H.
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

This week marks 30 years since the first report of a mysterious and deadly new syndrome that would come to be known as AIDS was published in CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). At the time, no one could have predicted the enormous toll the disease would take—claiming the lives of more than 500,000 Americans and many millions worldwide. Today we remember those we have lost, and honor them by recommitting ourselves to the fight against this deadly yet preventable disease.

Over the last three decades, prevention efforts have helped reduce new infections and treatment advances have allowed people with HIV to live longer, healthier lives. But as these improvements have taken place, our nation's collective sense of crisis has waned. Far too many Americans underestimate their risk of infection or believe HIV is no longer a serious health threat, but they must understand that HIV remains an incurable infection. We must increase our resolve to end this epidemic.

CDC released data today showing that the number of Americans living with HIV continued to increase by more than 71,000 people between 2006 and 2008, mainly due to treatments which allow those infected with HIV to live longer, healthier lives. Currently, more than 1.1 million people in the United States live with HIV, and as this number increases, so does the risk of HIV transmission.

Today, the most infections are among people under 30—a new generation that has never known a time without effective HIV treatments and who may not fully understand the significant health threat HIV poses. Groups that have historically borne a disproportionate burden of HIV continue to see more than their share of devastation from this disease:

•Gay men: Gay and bisexual men of all races remain the group most affected by this epidemic. Men who have sex with men (MSM) account for just 2 percent of the U.S. population but represent more than half of all new infections in the United States. White MSM continue to account for the largest number of new infections, but MSM of color are disproportionately impacted. And a CDC analysis released today found high levels of HIV infection even among those MSM who get tested regularly. Approximately 7 percent of MSM in the 21 cities surveyed tested positive for HIV in the study, even though they reported having a negative HIV test result during the past 12 months. . . . .

[Read the whole CDC article from which the above excerpt is taken.]

Powerful Video on the Corren Agreement and Parental Rights

Please take the time to view this important video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpFsXZkjNS8 .

Are Anti-Discrimination Policies Bullying Christian Schools and Families?

Monday, June 20, 2011

Across the country, school boards are jumping on the bandwagon to implement equity and sexual orientation policies. Many of the objectives of these policies are laudable. Children should not be bullied, ridiculed, attacked or intimidated under any circumstance, or for any reason, and school boards are right to address it when it occurs. But what happens when the policies themselves become the bullies?

In many cases, the wording in the policies being rolled out proves problematic for Christian schools, programs and families. To provide “healthy” classrooms school boards need to recognize that they cannot ignore certain classes of human rights, such as the rights to freedom of religion, conscience and parental authority, in order to protect another, the right to be free from discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly expressed that we live in a plural society, and that requires respect for the worldview of a variety of communities, religious or otherwise. . . . .

[Read the whole article at the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada's Activate CFPL website.]

Who Are the Supporters of "Out in Schools?"

Perhaps, as we do, you question the judgement of "Out in Schools" (the organization that has been in the news for publishing a teaching resource with links to sites with sexually explicit pictures and messages). Perhaps, like us, you have problems with their basic approach and question their being allowed to propagandize youth in the schools. Then you may be interested to know that some of the organizations that you have trusted are listed as partners or supporters "Out in Schools."

The TD Bank Group and Vancity are listed on the “Out in Schools” website as “principal partners,” as are Caya, the Fillmore Family Foundation, and –not surprisingly—Xtra, the periodical for homosexuals. Xtra is also listed as the “media partner.”

The Vancouver School Board is listed on the Out in Schools’ “honor roll,” along with Coast Capital, The Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation, and the British Columbia Nurses’ Union.

On the Out in Schools “credit roll” are: Face the World Foundation, Modo The Car Co-op, the City of Vanouver, Work Safe B.C., British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, and the Pride Education Network.

“Honourable Mention” is given by Out in Schools to the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

Action plan: Write to the organizations which you are associated with, and tell them you do not want your money to go (directly or indirectly) to “Out in Schools.”

Out in Schools: Debate . . .

Vancouver Sun blog

by Janet Steffenhagen

September 14, 2011

Parents who protested a new gay-friendly policy for Burnaby schools last spring said they feared the policy was intended to do more than simply stop bullying. They were worried it might lead to classroom lessons that would offend their traditional values.

Now, some are pointing to a resource called Out in Schools as evidence that their concerns were legitimate. This resource, which has been purchased for use in many Canadian schools (including in Burnaby), includes links to sites with sexually explicit pictures and messages. Some parents find this shocking and have teamed up with conservative activist Kari Simpson to make their concerns known. She claims Out in Schools is not so much an anti-bullying program as an attempt to lure students into sexual activism.

Simpson held a news conference Tuesday outside the BCTF building but few reporters attended. Nevertheless, there’s been much discussion about it online. Find the Out in Schools website here.

Simpson has also filed a police complaint, which XtraWest writes about here. The Parents’ Voice, the group that led the opposition to the Burnaby school policy last spring, has also posted about it in here. The discussion has now spread beyond B.C. In an email to members, the Ontario Catholic Parents’ Association urges everyone to watch Simpson’s video.

“Look at it and ask yourself, do we want our children to be exposed to this kind of sexual education curriculum. If not, forward this email to as many people as you can,” it states.

I have not read the Out in Schools teaching manual nor have I observed a presentation in a school, but I was surprised to find a link from the online version of Out in Schools to the Health Initiative for Men and its graphic sexual images under the heading “It’s hottest at the start”. (Out in Schools has removed that link in recent days.) Some parents are also questioning links to the website Won’t Get Weird.

Since the news conference was outside the BCTF office, I asked the union for comment and received an email with the following information from BCTF vice-president Glen Hansman:

”The Out In Schools program receives provincial funding. We’ve endorsed them. They are invited to schools by principals, teachers, parent groups. They show 3-4 short films over a noon-hour, typically, or in a school assembly. The films usually show a LGBT student coming out to their family or friends, or play on stereotypes that are common in our schools and society. There then is an opportunity to discuss the films in a group.

“The Resource Guide that is available for teachers to use contains links to external websites. One is to an AIDS/HIV-awareness program aimed at gay men. You can see the ads in bus stops in the WestEnd. Again, teachers do not show pornographic material in schools, but the websites are there for references for teachers to make use of. The rate of AIDS/HIV in the under-25 gay male population remains high. The BCTF has called upon the provincial government to provide up-to-date, age-appropriate resources that address AIDS/HIV in multiple languages (see AGM decision from a couple years ago).

UPDATE: Shortly after I posted this, the Burnaby school district sent me the following statement:

“The Out in Schools Teachers Learning Resource Guide is a respected resource funded by the Vancouver Foundation, Canada Council for the Arts and the Province of British Columbia.

“It is an optional resource for secondary school Planning 10 teachers and is not used in elementary schools. It is not a student resource.

“The Out in Schools Teachers Learning Resource Guide does not contain any explicit content. It includes student work units and meets Ministry of Education prescribed learning outcomes.

“The Out in Schools Teachers Learning Resource Guide contains a section that lists additional resources for teachers’ consideration. These resources are extra to the main teacher resource guide. As with all resources, should a teacher choose to use them, they need to meet the Ministry of Education prescribed learning outcomes and be used in age-appropriate ways with discretion, professionalism and common sense.

“Concerns have been raised about explicit content in one website on the list. This content is not appropriate for school-aged students and would not be used in Burnaby schools. It is obviously intended for an adult audience.

“Internet filters in the Burnaby School District will not allow students to have direct access to the site in question. The District makes every effort to program our internet filters to block inappropriate websites.”

Out in Schools deletes link to sex pictures

Vancouver Sun blog

Janet Steffenhagen

September 15, 2011

Since my last post, I’ve received more information about the Out in Schools program offered in many B.C. schools and its link to sexually explicit pictures on the Health Initiative for Men website.

Steve Mulligan, who was the anti-homophobia and diversity mentor for the Vancouver board of education, sent me an email Thursday with this explanation:

“Unfortunately the teacher guide includes an organization [HIM] which at the time of printing was running a program for gay youth. They have since discontinued working with youth and their latest and somewhat controversial campaign is designed only for 18+ gay adults. . . . I have spoken to Ross Johnstone at Out in Schools and they are working to fix the outdated reference. In future the list of resources will likely be online where it can be amended as needed. Teachers in Vancouver will be asked to delete this resource in the manuals, but as it is a teacher guide it wouldn’t be in the hands of students anyway.”

Mulligan also described Out in Schools as a well-respected organization that has been “facilitating professional, engaging and always respectful discussions with secondary students in our district since 2004. . . . .

[Link: the above article online.]

“Contacts for Your Out in Schools Concerns"

Will you protest the “Out in Schools” program that has been given access to the schools and so many opportunities to propagandize students in British Columbia? Roadkill Radio has a list of organizations and people to contact to express your concerns. [Click here for this list.]

[For your information, we pass on this news release, received September 12th, 2011:]

SCHOOL PORNOGATE!

Sex activists scam school boards with ‘anti-bullying’ program OUT IN SCHOOLS, luring students to porn sites—and more!

Sept. 12, 2011 (RKRNews) — NDP MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert’s “spouse”, Romi Chandra, is the author of OUT IN SCHOOLS—a gateway program used to sexualise students and introduce them to homosexualist “culture”; OUT IN SCHOOLS is endorsed by the BC Teachers’ Federation and heavily funded by BC taxpayers.

Kari Simpson, former Executive Director of the Citizens Research Institute, and now President of Culture Guard—a new national organization that works on behalf of civil, common-sense Canadians—said today:

“I believe parents will be shocked and righteously angry when they find out what their children have been subjected to. I hope parents sue their local school boards! I doubt that the OUT IN SCHOOLS ‘Youth Resources’, which direct students to hard-core pornography, including ‘gay’ porn and homosexist propaganda, fits within Section 2 of the School Act, which mandates that ‘the highest morality shall be inculcated’.”

The OUT IN SCHOOLS “Teachers’ Guide” states that it is a secondary school resource; but Culture Guard has obtained pictures of OUT IN SCHOOLS facilitators Ross Johnstone and Jen “Jenderfuck” Sung presenting it in elementary schools.

“The scandalous problems associated with the program don’t stop with the OUT IN SCHOOLS-recommended ‘youth resources’ or the political and homosexist left-wing propaganda that fill its pages,” says Simpson. “There are serious and possibly criminal activities involved with this program.”

A news conference will be held at 11 a.m. Tuesday, September 13, 2011 in front of the BC Teachers’ Federation Offices, located at 100-550 West 6^th Avenue, Vancouver.

A video, OUT IN SCHOOLS is No Picnic, is available for viewing now at www.cultureguard.com; Part 2, Scammed, Swooned & Corrupted, will be available after the news conference. Viewers should be warned that portions of the video are explicit, and not suitable for younger viewers—including those of the target ages of the in-school program, OUT IN SCHOOLS.

Members of the media who attend will be given password-limited access to details of the Police complaint to be filed earlier the same day. At the news conference, Kari Simpson will disclose shocking details that Culture Guard has exposed involving the OUT IN SCHOOLS program, and will name some of its major corporate sponsors.

=30=

For more information please contact Kari Simpson 604 514-1614 or by e-mail: cultureguard@gmail.com

August 19, 2011, Press Release from Liberty Counsel:

Teacher of the Year Suspended for Facebook Comment Against Same-S*x Marriage

www.LC.org

Mount Dora, FL – Jerry Buell, last year’s “Teacher of the Year” at Mount Dora High School, has been suspended from the classroom for a comment he made on his own personal Facebook page, expressing his disapproval of legalized same-s*x marriage in New York. Buell commented that homosexuality is a sin and that seeing two “grooms” kissing on a news story revolted him. School officials received a complaint about Buell’s comment on Tuesday from a 2002 Mount Dora graduate, who was never even in Mr. Buell’s class. The Lake County School District responded by taking away his teaching privileges and reassigning him to administrative duties. Liberty Counsel is representing Buell and demanding that he be immediately reinstated with an apology for violating his First Amendment rights.

Buell has been a teacher for more than 22 years, served as the Social Studies Department Chair at Mount Dora High School, and taught American history and government. Buell has always been open to students, including those who identify as homosexual, about his conservative principles but has never forced his beliefs on anyone. Furthermore, Buell’s students understand he has an open line of communication, which has built a high level of trust in his classes.

The school district’s response to Buell’s comments is unconstitutional, violating his right to free speech. Groups who are pushing “same-s*x marriage” and “marriage equality” are claiming any speech that is contrary to their viewpoint is considered “hate speech” and should be censored.

Harry Mihet, Senior Litigation Counsel for Liberty Counsel, commented: “Public school teachers are not constitutional orphans. They, like all Americans, enjoy the freedom to engage in discourse about matters of public concern. Mr. Buell is being investigated and punished for communicating his mainstream objection to homosexual marriage, an objection shared by a large majority of his fellow Floridians who have outlawed homosexual marriage through a constitutional amendment. If the First Amendment does not protect Mr. Buell’s right to voice his personal opinion, on his personal time, from his personal computer, on his personal Facebook page, then the First Amendment means nothing.”

Next Thursday, August 25^th, Liberty Counsel will host the Florida Awake! at the First Baptist Church of Leesburg, where Buell resides. This event will gather support from individuals in Florida to take a stand for their constitutional rights. The rally seeks to motivate, educate, and equip the public to restore our nation’s values, as our founders originally intended

ACLU Granted Access to Catholic Charities Lawsuit, Represents Lesbian Couple.

by Catherine Snow
CitizenLink, Aug. 2, 2011

Sangamon County Judge John Schmidt agreed on Monday to let the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois (ALCU) join the highly publicized lawsuit filed by four Catholic Charities agencies against the state.

The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services had surprised four Catholic Charities affiliates last month when it chose not to renew their longstanding adoption and foster care contracts. The move could have jeopardized the futures of nearly 2,000 children.

The state’s reason for ending the half-century relationship? Catholic Charities opposes placing children — through adoption or foster care — with unmarried couples, including same-sex couples.

The ACLU argued on Friday that the charities were in violation of a federal consent decree when it rejected potential parents “based on sexual orientation or religious belief.” Children, the attorneys argued, were “directly affected and directly harmed by Catholic Charities insistence that they have a right to continue to perform governmental functions based on religious principles that are in conflict with the best interests of the state’s children.”

Peter Breen, executive director and legal counsel for the Thomas More Society and representing Catholic Charities, said “the ACLU’s true colors have now been revealed.

“The ACLU had been advocating for the best interest of children,” he said. “Now the ACLU is putting their preference for homosexual politics over the best interest of the state's children.

. . . .

[Read the whole CitizenLink article.]

California Governor signs law mandating "pro-gay" curriculum

Kathleen Gilbert

Jul. 15, 2011

SACRAMENTO, July 15, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a move that could have ramifications for curriculum across America, California governor Jerry Brown has signed controversial legislation mandating that public schools teach children about “the role and contributions of” homosexual American historical figures.

The law also forbids materials that “contain any matter reflecting adversely” upon gays on the basis of sexual identification.

Brown on Thursday signed into law SB 48, which is designed to take effect in January of next year, although the San Francisco Gate notes that the state’s fiscal crisis is so deep it will be unable to purchase the new texts until 2015 at the earliest.

Pushed as an antidote to gay bullying in schools, the measure mandates textbooks to highlight homosexual persons and their activities in American history. It simultaneously reinforces a gag on religious doctrine, noting that “any sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda contrary to law” is forbidden.

The text of the law ends with a warning shot at private schools in California, stating: “It is the intent of the Legislature that alternative and charter schools take notice of the provisions of this act in light of Section 235 of the Education Code, which prohibits discrimination ... in any aspect of the operation of alternative and charter schools.”

The bill includes no age requirement, meaning the changes could affect even the lowest elementary school grades, notes Baptist Press.

“History should be honest,” said Gov. Brown in a statement upon signing the bill, adding that the law “ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books.”

The Assembly had approved the measure by a 49-25 vote on July 6, following a heated debate. Republican Assemblyman Tim Donnelly expressed outrage over the bill on the chamber floor.

“I think it’s one thing to say that we should be tolerant. It is something else altogether to say that my children are going to be taught that this lifestyle is good,” said Donnelly, according to the Associated Press. “As a Christian, I am deeply offended.”

Meanwhile, family advocates expressed alarm at the new law’s obvious implications for the national textbook market.

“The reality is that the major textbook manufacturers do not create different textbooks for each state,” said Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) president Brad Dacus in a statement July 6. “Instead, they seek to comply with mandates in the largest states, especially California and Texas.

“As a result, many smaller states are pressured into approving California-focused instructional materials, which must now cater to the gay history mandate.”

Earlier this month, in union with other California bishops, Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles strongly criticized SB 48 as an attack on parents’ rights, saying the bill “amounts to the government rewriting history books based on pressure-group politics.”

Victory for Evangelical church over ‘hell-raising’ gay anarchist group

by Peter Baklinski

July 13, 2011

Lansing, Michigan, July 13, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The U.S. District Court of Michigan has awarded victory to an evangelical church in Lansing, Michigan, after it filed suit against a group of self-proclaimed gay “anarchists,” called Bash Back!, over their protest and disruption of a Sunday service.

According to Bash Back!‘s blog, on November 9th, 2008, 30 members of the organization disrupted the most well-attended Sunday service at Mount Hope Church.

“At noon, a small group of folks dressed in pink and black, equipped with a megaphone, black flags, picket signs and an upside-down pink cross began demonstrating outside the church,” they wrote. “The group was extremely loud and wildly offensive.”

Members of Bash Back! in a photo taken from their website

After the group lured the security staff outside the church, over a dozen members of the organization who had already infiltrated the congregation prepared for action.

“A group stood up, declared themselves fags, and began screaming loudly. Upon hearing the loud interruption, other affinity groups went into action. A team that had been hiding under the pews in the closed-off balcony dropped a banner and pulled back the curtains to reveal ‘IT’S OKAY TO BE GAY! BASH BACK!’. Another group threw over a thousand fliers to the entirety of the congregation. The fire alarm was pulled. Queers began making out in front of the pastor. And within a matter of minutes, everyone had evaded the guards and made their escapes.”

According to Right Michigan the protestors also threw condoms, glitter, confetti, and pink fabric.

Mount Hope Church filed suit in March of 2009 with the assistance of the Alliance Defence Fund (ADF). The church alleged that the group’s actions constituted “acts of physical obstruction and intimidation” and “common law trespass.”

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) ADF’s Dale Schowengerdt said, “People should be able to go to church without fear of being attacked for it. In this case, the group Bash Back! were vandalizing and disrupting Church service across the country. Mount Hope filed suit to put a stop to that.”

The injunction against Bash Back!, issued on July 11, 2011, states that they are prohibited from disrupting a religious service anywhere in the United States, and they may not conduct a protest at or destroy any property “on the private grounds of any place of worship in the United States.”

“This injunction is a stiff penalty: a $10,000 fine if they do this again anywhere in the country. So, it protects every Church in the country. It’s a stiff penalty and a stern warning from the courts, ” said ADF’s Schowengerdt to LSN.

“If Bash Back! or any group is thinking about taking similar action against Churches, they had better think long and hard about it because we will be quick to file suits to stop it.”
“The people in this country have a right to go to Church in peace. That’s a constitutional right and one that is strongly protected by federal law.”

NDP’s targeting of ‘ex-gay’ groups a ‘potential attack’ on all Christian charities: Evangelicals

by Patrick B. Craine

Jul 12, 2011

OTTAWA, Ontario, July 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The New Democrat Party’s unanimously-passed resolution to call on the government to revoke the charitable status of “ex-gay” groups is a “potential attack” on all Christian charitable groups, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada warned Tuesday.

“Should members of the LGBT community who, as the result of personal decision, want to discuss changing their sexual behaviour be told there’s nowhere to go?” asked Don Hutchinson, the EFC’s General Legal Counsel, at the Activate CFPL blog. “Should religious charities be forbidden from providing support to those who want to converse, seek counselling or change their lifestyle?”

The NDP’s resolution, passed at their annual convention in Vancouver last month, called on the government to “immediately remove any charitable status currently enjoyed by ‘ex-gay’ organizations” and to ensure they are not granted such status in the future. In his remarks, the sponsor specifically named Exodus Global Alliance, an international Christian group based in Ontario.

Randall Garrison, the NDP’s “queer issues” critic told Xtra that groups like Exodus “prey on vulnerable members” of the homosexual community and “bully them into believing that gay, lesbian and bisexual people are sick and lead sad and lonely lives, and that the only hope is to become straight.”

Hutchinson said, however, tht the NDP’s proposal is an “affront” to Canada’s longstanding recognition of charities dedicated to the ‘advancement of religion’, which he noted is one of the four categories of charity used by the Canada Revenue Agency.

“Advancement of religion includes those acts of service that flow from Jesus’ command to love God and our neighbor,” he said, naming social justice and poverty relief efforts. “So worship, Bible studies, and the like all flow into practical acts of service, and inform how we engage in the public square.”

“This NDP resolution is a potential attack on the heart of all of these types of ministries, not just those offering services to gays and lesbians,” he explained.

“If implemented, this idea would serve only to weaken the Canadian charitable community and rob Canadian citizens of the many benefits they receive from this sector,” he continued. “In short, the NDP policy proposes a very slippery slope that we best not slide down.”

The resolution followed a campaign by the homosexual blog Slap Upside the Head, which was inspired by the New Zealand government’s decision to revoke Exodus Global Alliance’s charitable status in August 2010.

The Exodus ministry, dedicated to communicating the message of “freedom from homosexuality,” had had charitable status in New Zealand for more than ten years, but the government’s Charities Commission ruled that the group did not qualify because its activities offered no “public benefit.”

See Hutchinson’s blog post, ‘Does the NDP Really Want to Revoke the Charitable Status of Select Christian Charities?’, here.

Toronto school board: Parents can’t opt kids out of pro-homosexual curriculum

by Patrick B. Craine

Wed Jun 08, 2011

TORONTO, Ontario, June 8, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a major attack on parental rights, and a direct violation of the stated policy of the Ontario government, the Toronto District School Board is forbidding parents from opting their kids out of classes treating homosexuality.

Their policy suggests children are forced to join the board’s comprehensive “anti-homophobia” curriculum that promotes Toronto’s raunchy Pride parade to kindergarteners and aims to transform students into social activists by the end of high school.

The school board’s curriculum on “equity” for homosexuals, called ‘Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism’, says parents cannot have their children removed from “human rights education” because of religious reasons.

“If a parent asks for his or her child to be exempted for any discussions of LGBTQ family issues as a religious accommodation, this request cannot be made because it violates the Human Rights Policy,” the document reads.

Religious freedom, they write further, “is not absolute” and religious accommodation in the school board “is carried out in the larger context of the secular education system.”

Similarly, the document says teachers are not allowed to opt out of treating controversial issues in the classroom that would violate their religious beliefs. “The TDSB is part of the secular public education system. …Teachers refusing to create an inclusive classroom that is safe and supportive for all students would create a poisoned learning environment.”

Furthermore, it says schools ought not to send home notes or permission slips to parents before dealing with “LGBTQ issues” because treating sexual orientation differently in this way could be deemed “discriminatory.”

Phil Lees, the leader of Ontario’s Family Coalition Party, which is the province’s only pro-life and pro-family party, said the Toronto board is acting as though their “authority supersedes the Ministry of Education.”

While Ontario’s Ministry of Education has vigorously promoted “anti-homophobia” education, particularly through their controversial equity and inclusive education strategy, they have also guaranteed parents the right to opt out of controversial classes.

In a 2008 letter, former Education Minister Kathleen Wynne told pro-family activist Ken O’Day, “Should a component of any course conflict with a religious belief held by a parent or a student aged eighteen or older, the right to withdraw from that component of the course shall be granted on the written request of the parent or student.”

“As usual, Toronto is being influenced by only one side of this issue,” said Lees, noting that the board is promoting the government’s “equity” agenda for homosexuals while flouting the government’s call for religious accommodation.

Though the Ministry affords them the right to opt their kids of controversial classes, parents would likely find this difficult to carry out in practice without completely leaving the system. The Toronto board points out that their “anti-homophobia” plan is a long-term “process” that “permeates the curriculum in all subject areas” and so is not restricted to individual classes.

Their anti-homophobia curriculum employs a pedagogical model called the “James Banks Continuum”, which aims to move the children from merely recognizing the contributions of homosexual “heroes” to a point where they are themselves prepared to engage in “social action” on the issue.

The document profiles major homosexual activists like Brent Hawkes, the Toronto pastor who pushed homosexual “marriage” on Canada through the back-door of the judicial system, and it recommends such controversial organizations as Planned Parenthood, Pride Toronto, PFLAG, and Egale.

Beginning with kindergarten, children are expected to have an initial grasp of homosexual family structures, and are familiarized with terms such as “gay” and “lesbian”.

Activities for junior kindergarten to Grade 3 include a discussion aimed at convincing students of the importance of participating in Toronto’s annual Pride Parade. Though billed as “family-friendly,” the event has often been labeled a “sex parade,” as it regularly features people walking down the streets semi-nude or completely naked, and homosexuals engaging in public sex acts.

The young students read “Gloria Goes to Gay Pride”, teachers are asked to bring in photos from the parade, and the students are encouraged to make posters for the school board’s parade float.

Other books recommended for JK-3 include “Heather Has Two Mommies” and “King & King & Family”.

In grades 4-6, teachers are encouraged to bring in the raunchy homosexual newspaper Xtra!, which is known for featuring prominent ads with naked men, as part of an activity on stereotyping in the media. Another activity has students develop an “action plan” to challenge “homophobic attitudes” in their school.

By grade 7, students are engaging in an activity designed to question the notion that homosexuality is a “choice”, and another has students running surveys to assess the “heterosexist/homophobia temperature” of their school and then formulating an action plan to challenge identified “inequities”. In the end, students are encouraged to organize school-wide activities to raise awareness of “homophobia”.

Lees said that while the school board is treating the Ontario Human Rights Code as absolute, “there are many attending the secular public school system who believe that absolutes are God’s prerogative, not government’s.”

“It would seem that the Toronto District School Board has neither the will, intention, nor the ability to deal with religious accommodations in schools,” he continued.

“This entire problem is the result of a ‘monopoly on education’. It can only be solved by funding of separate religious school boards,” he added, calling on voters to question candidates on this issue leading into October’s provincial election.

A spokesman for the Toronto District School Board was unavailable for comment. LifeSiteNews.com did not hear back from the Ministry of Education by press time.

See the Toronto District School Board’s “anti-homophobia” curriculum here.

Contact Information:

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Education
Mowat Block, 22nd Flr, 900 Bay St
Toronto, ON M7A 1L2
Tel: 1-800-387-5514 (TTY 1-800-263-2892)

Top gay rights leader: kids of religious families are ‘target demographic’ of anti-‘gay bullying’ ad

Kathleen Gilbert

Fri Jun 10, 2011

June 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - After the broadcast of a homosexualist advertisement during the family-friendly Fox show American Idol prompted outrage, the founder of the ad campaign has confirmed that such advertisements are intended to promote the message of the gay rights lobby to young children in households that normally wouldn’t support it. One conservative leader has now demanded that Google, Fox, and Disney-Pixar sever their ties with the campaign.Peggy Nance of Concerned Women for America expressed outrage that the Fox network aired an “anti-gay bullying” advertisement, part of the “It Gets Better” campaign, during the extremely popular competition show.

Doubling as an advertisement for Google Chrome, the ad features several Hollywood personalities, and even a character from the popular Disney-Pixar movie series Toy Story, who speak directly to and encourage an audience of young people identifying as homosexual, telling them that “It gets better.”

On her blog, Nance called Fox’s choice of ad placement a betrayal of trust of conservative households everywhere.

“Apparently, American Idol with the help of Woody from Disney’s Toy Story, thinks that my 4th grader needs to be fully aware of the plight of teens who view themselves as ‘gay.’ I am sorry, but he doesn’t even know about heterosexual sex yet. Can you give me some room here?” wrote Nance. “I am ticked because I feel tricked. Fox blew it last night.

“The point is parents felt secure in allowing our entire families watch this show. They lured us into a false sense of security and broke trust with us last night.”

Dan Savage, a homosexual activist and founder of the It Gets Better project, shot back at Nance, saying that promoting their message to those with religious upbringing was precisely the point.

“Nance’s son was always our target demo,” wrote Savage. “Again, we don’t know if he’s gay. But he might be and, if he is, he needs to hear from us.”

The “primary goal” of the campaign, he explained, is “to reach LGBT kids who are being bullied by their peers and their families.”

“Now I don’t know if Nance’s son is gay, bi, or trans, but if he is, he needs to know more than most that it can get better for him too, that there’s hope for his future, and that the adult world isn’t entirely populated by hateful s***s like his mother,” he wrote, adding “here’s hoping” that “Nance’s son is gay.”

Nance later wrote to supporters that Savage’s response revealed “a serious threat to every family.”

“This campaign isn’t really about stopping gay bullying in school,” wrote Nance, who also demanded that Google, Fox and Disney sever ties with Savage’s campaign. “This is about using the power of prime time television and Google to infiltrate your home and your family and get their message to our sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters.”

June 2, 2011, CitizenLink

Federal Legislation Threatens Faith-Based Adoption Agencies [in the U. S.]

by Jennifer Mesko

Under a bill sitting in the U.S. House, faith-based adoption agencies would be forced to choose between closing their doors and violating their religious beliefs.

The deceptively titled Every Child Deserves a Family Act would force any group that receives federal aid to place kids in foster families and adoptive families without regard to the sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status of the prospective parents.

“It would have the effect of either banning Christian adoption agencies or forbidding them from acting on their faith convictions and their moral convictions in terms of what is in the best interest of a child,” Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, told the Catholic News Agency.

Catholic Charities, the largest private network of social service organizations in the nation, has already ended adoption services in several cities because of similar local and state restrictions.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., has 52 co-sponsors in the House. Sen. Kristin Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is expected to introduce similar legislation in the Senate. . . . .

[Read the whole article on the CitizenLink site.]

Hamilton school board ‘religious accommodation’ policy would exclude moral beliefs

Patrick B. Craine

Jun 10, 2011

HAMILTON, Ontario, June 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Christian pro-family activists are denouncing a new Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board “religious accommodation” policy that they say is deliberately designed to allow schools to exclude traditional moral beliefs.

The school board’s ‘Interim Religious Accommodation Guideline’ unjustly discriminates against Christians by re-defining religion to exclude moral beliefs, wrote Jim Enos, president of the Hamilton-Wentworth Family Action Council, in a submission to the board this week. The board is seeking public input on the policy until June 17th.

The policy is ostensibly designed to protect freedom of religion as part of the Ontario government’s controversial equity and inclusive education strategy. However, it’s definition of “creed” states, “Creed does not include secular, moral, or ethical beliefs or political convictions.”

“The right to freedom of religion … is not absolute,” it states further, adding that the board “cannot … accommodate religious values and beliefs that clearly conflict with mandated Ministry of Education and Board policies.”

“To suggest that one can be Christian without having moral convictions is absolutely false and unveils the Christophobic nature of this Guideline,” wrote Enos. “It is impossible to obey Biblical teaching while having no understanding of nor honouring of the morals and principles put forth in the Bible.”

“It is upon the principles of these Christian morals which Canada is founded and Canadian law is based,” he added.

The policy appears to dovetail with a leaked document from January 2010 in which the school board indicated children would not be permitted to withdraw from classes promoting homosexuality. The document, distributed during “equity” training for teachers, advised the teachers to inform parents who object to “anti-homophobia” curriculum that “this is not about parent rights.”

“As teachers, we do not condone children being removed from our classes when we engage in anti-racism education. This issue is no different,” the teachers were instructed to tell parents. “All children, including yours, have a right to an education free from discrimination.”

This week, LifeSiteNews revealed that the Toronto District School Board has a specific policy forbidding parents from opting their kids out of classes treating homosexuality, and telling schools not to advise parents when the controversial issue comes up.

Toronto’s comprehensive “anti-homophobia” curriculum promotes the city’s raunchy Pride parade to kindergarteners and aims to transform students into social activists by the end of high school.

As boards are increasingly integrating their “anti-homophobia” curriculum across subject areas, parents seeking to protect their children from pro-homosexual curriculum will likely find it impossible to do so without completely leaving the public system. Leaving the system is exactly what Enos’ group is advising. “We continue to recommend that Judeo-Christian families flee the Ontario public school system and support governance which will put an end to such denial and oppression of Christianity,” he wrote.

Enos described the Hamilton board’s efforts to accommodate Christians in recent years as “dismal.”

Based on a guarantee from the Ontario Ministry of Education that parents have the right to opt out of controversial classes, his group and others have also encouraged Christians to submit statements of faith to their schools. According to Enos, until recently the Hamilton school board had mostly respected parents’ wishes. But since the introduction of their new “equity” policy, he says the statements of faith have been “rejected and dismissed as they now seem to be trumped by said human rights which HWDSB deem of greater significance than a family’s commitment to honour and serve God.”

“This is truly Christophobic and blatantly discriminatory,” he wrote.

“This Guideline is disrespectful, dishonouring and discriminatory toward Judeo-Christian principled families,” he wrote. “It has no justified place in a democratic nation founded on the principles of the Supremacy of God.”

The Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board is seeking public input on the ‘Interim Religious Accommodation Guideline’ until June 17th at 4 p.m. For information on how to contribute, visit their website here.

Contact Information:

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky, Minister of Education
Mowat Block, 22nd Flr, 900 Bay St
Toronto, ON M7A 1L2
Tel: 1-800-387-5514 (TTY 1-800-263-2892)
Fax: 416-325-6348
Email: ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org

Elizabeth Witmer, Education Critic
Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario
Rm 422, Main Legislative Building
Toronto ON M7A 1A8
Tel: 416-325-1306
Fax: 416-325-1329
E-mail: Use this form.

John Malloy, Director of Education
Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board
100 Main St. West  P.O. Box 2558
Hamilton, ON L8N 3L1
Phone: (905) 527-5092 ext.2297
E-mail: pat.stones@hwdsb.on.ca (through Executive Assistant)

Find contact information for trustees at the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board here.

British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life is pleased to publish news releases from "Parents' Voice" in the interests of continuing to inform parents throughout the province of the important issues raised by the Burnaby parents' organization:

Parents’ Voice
NEWS RELEASE

Burnaby parents: Burnaby School Trustees to get a lesson in law and democracy

BURNABY, June 21, 2011 (Parents’ Voice) — Now that Burnaby Education Board trustees have passed a controversial “anti-homophobia” policy, members of Parents’ Voice vow to expose and expunge the “shameful bully politics of contempt and discrimination” from their local school board.

“It is a bit of an irony and the upmost act of hypocrisy,” says Parents’ Voice member Gordon World, “that Trustees would resort to name-calling – “Homophobes”, “Bigots”… - and blatant acts of discrimination to enforce a so-called Code of Conduct that has nothing to do with respect and everything to do with creating a toxic school environment of intolerance and discrimination.”

Homara Ahmad, one of the Parents’ Voice members that delivered the nearly 5000 signature strong petition to the Premier’s office last week says, “Perhaps it is time that Premier Clark advise Minister Abbott of his responsibility to educate the Burnaby School Trustees of their lawful obligations of inclusion and respect for all stakeholders within the Burnaby district. What has transpired in Burnaby is regressive, reprehensible, unlawful and shameful.”

Parents’ Voice representative Belinda Bai says, “Parents, students, teachers and other citizens of Burnaby will not sit by idly and allow Burnaby’s Board of Education trustees to implement policies that will discriminate against and label our children. Will the trustees now label each child according to sexual orientation, so they can determine whether Policy 5.45 final.pdf applies to that child? How do they propose to integrate ‘lesbian, gay, transgender, queer, questioning and two-spirited’ issues into the curriculum?

“These and many other questions must be answered. We want children in our public schools to be in an environment where everyone is treated as equal, and where the focus is on education—not on left-wing social engineering led by gay activists.

“We will do what is necessary to protect our children,” she concluded.

Parents’ Voice has developed and begun distributing a document called the Parents’ Directive and requires the school to respect the cultural and moral rights of students and their parents. The Burnaby district already is aware of their legal obligation to accommodate and protect religious and cultural rights. Policy 5.40 Student choice.pdf recognizes and respects the differing views on animal dissection and provides for “alternative delivery” of a curriculum.

“Trustees will have an opportunity to prove they are not religious and cultural bigots by respecting the lawful provisions assigned in the Parents’ Directive,” says Gordon World. “This is the true test; is the intent of the policy to foster kindness or is it a coercive tactic to impose a moral, political and cultural code of thought that violates the sensibilities of civil-minded and informed citizens?”

Momentum continues to build for the Parents’ Voice movement – a movement that promotes respect and equality for ALL students, parents and school district staff. Further, Parents Voice recognizes the primacy of parental rights and responsibilities in children’s education and seeks transparency from the Burnaby School Trustees.
Contact:
Daud Ismail – daudism@hotmail.com
Charter Lau – charterlau2011@hotmail.com
Gordon World – gordonworld@hotmail.ca

Parents’ Voice Press Conference

NEWS RELEASE

For release; June 13, 2011

Thousands of BC parents and students join Burnaby petition drive to put ‘Families First’

BURNABY, June 13, 2011 — Thousands of BC parents, students and teachers have joined Burnaby's Parents’ Voice movement in a petition drive to place Premier Christy Clark and the BC Government on notice that discrimination against children and violation of parental and religious rights and freedoms will not be tolerated in BC ― even if it is camouflaged as an ‘anti-bullying’ measure.

Supporters of Parents’ Voice and representatives of the BC Muslim Association will deliver petitions filled with thousands of names to Premier Clark’s office at Canada Place on Tuesday, June 14th, 2011. A press conference will be held in front of Canada Place at 11 a.m prior to delivery of the petitions.

“The Premier’s slogan has been ‘Families First’,” said Charter Lau, spokesman for Parents’ Voice. “That must include recognizing the rights of all parents and children — not just special interest groups and their unions.”

Parents’ Voice is a parent and student movement that promotes respect and equality for all students, parents and staff and resists the Burnaby Public School Board’s proposed policy No. 5.45, which provides special privileges to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer and Two-Spirited Intersex students without providing the same privileges to all students.

When supporters of Parents’ Voice asked questions on how the policy will be implemented and how students who do not conform to the opinion endorsed by the policy will be disciplined, the Burnaby Public School Board Trustees stonewalled. To date, the Trustees have failed to provide lawfully requested information and refuse to answer these crucial questions.

The Burnaby School Board has announced that changes will be made to the policy — but those changes will not be open to public input, nor will they be made available for public review prior to the June 14th meeting where it is reported, by some media, that the policy will be adopted.

Parents’ Voice believes the actions of the Trustees are both reprehensible and illegal. "The violation of parental trust, political abuse of the classroom and blatant disregard for the Charter values of equality and freedom from discrimination will not be tolerated," said Lau.

"Board Chairman Larry Hayes has been caught with his political pants down, and has no policy protocol to pull them back up with,” said Parents’ Voice supporter, Gordon World. He added, “This Board will be held accountable — politically and in the courts. The Trustees have failed, administratively, ethically — they have violated the BC Human Rights Code and misled the public and the media — they alone are responsible for creating this costly fiasco.”

Parents’ Voice has said it will Boycott the June 14, 2011 meeting. Supporters of Parents' Voice have come by the hundreds to the last three board meetings and, according to media reports, have outnumbered opponents ten to one. Parents' Voice believes that it is a waste of time to attend any additional Burnaby Public School Board meetings when the Burnaby Trustees are wilfully deaf and blind to valid parent and student concerns. The Parents’ Voice movement now appeals to Premier Christy Clark to demonstrate leadership and protect the children of Burnaby from discrimination.

Contact:   Daud Ismail -       daudism@hotmail.com
                Charter Lau –        charterlau2011@hotmail.com
                Gordon World –   gordonworld@hotmail.ca

Burnaby Parents Hold May 24th Rally Over Concerns
About "Homophobia/Heterosexism" Policy

Parents in Burnaby, British Columbia held another rally on May 24th to express their concerns about the proposed "homophobia/heterosexism " policy proposed for their school district.

BCPTL members attended, and later the BCPTL president spoke on "Roadkill Radio" about the rally and the issues involved.

Concerned Burnaby parents decry ‘deliberate descrimination’
in debate over ‘homophobia’ policy

by Rebecca Millette

Tue May 24, 2011

BURNABY, British Columbia, May 24, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a strongly-worded news release issued today, Burnaby public school parents and students who have voiced concerns with the board’s controversial “homophobia” policy demanded that the board and trustees cease their own “deliberate discrimination” against concerned parties. They say that they have learned that the original advisory committee on the policy was composed “exclusively” of gay activists and those sympathetic to their cause, and are demanding transparency about any intended changes to the school curriculum.

The Parents’ Voice, a parent-initiated group to connect and inform concerned students and parents, announced a rally and press conference tonight that will outline the “growing concerns” about draft policy 5.45.

The parents believe the controversial policy, which includes reference to embedding gay-related issues into teacher training and student curriculum, will promote homosexuality to their children and discriminate against those who oppose a homosexual lifestyle. Trustees, on the other hand, maintain the policy merely ensures a safe and caring environment.

Parents have also expressed frustration that trustees have not met their demands for transparency on the policy specifics.

To date, the Parents’ Voice said the Burnaby Public School Board has not released information pertaining to planned curriculum changes, committee meeting minutes, or other pertinent information requested through the Freedom of Information Act.

A growing numbers of students, parents and other tax-payers are concerned that the board’s failure to provide full disclosure may be a deliberate attempt to hide the fact that there is a hidden political agenda — an agenda that doesn’t respect parental rights, students’ rights or the equality rights of Canadians as protected in the Charter, but instead serves the political interests of activist teachers and their union.

It is now evident, claimed The Parents’ Voice, that health professionals, religious leaders and members of Burnaby’s faith communities were deliberately excluded from the committee that developed draft policy 5.45.

“Parents’ Voice … learned that the ‘Ad Hoc Advisory Committee’ was comprised exclusively of LGBTQ activists and their ‘allies’. Religious leaders, members of the faith community and health professionals are apparently not included in the Board’s definition of ‘key educational partners’ or ‘allies.’”

The Parents’ Voice asks, “If the faith-based community is not considered an ally, does this Board of School Trustees consider them to be the enemy?”

Some trustees continue to publicly assert that draft policy 5.45 will not result in any changes to the school curriculum, even though the draft policy includes six separate references to curriculum changes. The Parents’ Voice asks, “Why is curriculum mentioned in the draft policy if there will be no curriculum changes? We wonder if the curriculum changes are a part of the Trustees’ hidden political agenda.”

“The Board has, by their actions, created a toxic and hostile environment, and must apologize to the membership of Parents’ Voice and other excluded stakeholders,” demanded the gruop. “The Board has facilitated a proliferation of misleading information, and has played to media madness; and in doing so has offended a large portion of the community.”

“These acts of deliberate discrimination cannot be tolerated.”

According to retired teacher and administrator for the Vancouver School Board, Ben Seebaran of Burnaby, the Burnaby School District’s existing Code of Conduct already protects against discrimination based on sexual orientation.

In a letter to the Burnaby Now outlining the problems with the draft policy, Seebaran, wrote: “The board has lifted large segments of the existing policies and applied them to the proposed new policy. It seems redundant to create a whole new policy that could be easily subsumed into a more inclusive, comprehensive one.”

“It leads me to think,” he added, “ that there may be a political agenda behind the push and to wonder whether the board may be promoting a pro-LGBTQ+ agenda under the guise of prevention of hostility and cruelty among students.”

The Parents’ Voice said that while they reaffirm the need for the protection of the rights of all students in the Burnaby schools, the existing Code of Conduct already recognizes the “diversity of opinion and background.”

“Discrimination which occurs under the existing code of conduct reflects a failure in enforcement rather than a failure in the Code of Conduct. We request that the Burnaby School District strengthen the existing code through better enforcement rather than create a new draft policy which would promote discrimination against a large number of students and their families.”

In addition they demanded that Burnaby School Trustees provide information requested regarding curriculum changes and a 90 day period for parents to review the information before “open and transparent discussions” addressing any additional concerns.

BCPTL Pictures:

Burnaby Parents Concerned About Proposed "Homophobia/Herosexism" Policy Unite

(For background, see article immediately below this one.)

[Please note the petition that is to be found on "The Parents' Voice.org" website. If you are a B.C. resident, you can help by downloading and signing this petition, getting others to sign it, and sending it to the address given.]

Burnaby parents who are concerned about their school district's proposed "homophobia/herosexism" policy, have united and posted their concerns on a website entitled "The Parents' Voice.org" (added to our list of links in the column to the right). The following news release , taken from that website, makes clear their concern:

theParentsVoice.org Media Update for May 17, 2011

Burnaby School District Draft Policy #5.45

The number of concerned students and parents in Burnaby concerned by Burnaby School District’s draft policy 5.45 on “Homophobia/Heterosexism” continues to increase. Parents’ Voice has created this website to accommodate the growing number of students an parents seeking information.

2. A number of formal requests under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPPA) have been made to the Burnaby Board of School Trustees from individuals and associations. These requests seek disclosure of the information Burnaby School Trustees and district staff have relied upon in the development of policy 5.45. Parents’ Voice finds it regrettable that the district has refused to provide this information to students and parents, requiring concerned individuals to use the FOIPPA process.

3. On May 6th the Burnaby School District advised that there would be a fee of $1425.00 for the information despite fee exemptions in matters of public interest.

4. It has been 25 days since the FOIPPA request was made. Students and parents are becoming increasingly concerned about the secrecy surrounding the disclosure of the information.

5. The Parents’ Voice member Daud Ismail and Heather Leung have written to the Burnaby School Trustees & Superintendent Morelli requesting a postponement of the June 3rd, 2011 deadline for draft policy 5.45 submissions, citing the fact that students and parents cannot address the specific objectives and administrative regulations contained in the draft policy until the Board of Trustees provides full disclosure. The Parents’ Voice members have made a reasonable suggestion that the deadline be extended to 90 days after the Board releases the requested information.

6. Trustee James Wang initiated an invitation to Parents’ Voice to meet with Trustees and school staff. Parents’ Voice has accepted and thanks Trustee Wang for his initiative and will meet after parents and concerned individuals have received the requested information.

7. Another Parent Rally is scheduled for 6pm on May 24th, 2011 at the Burnaby School Board District Administration Offices (5325 Kincaid Street, Burnaby BC)

Contact: Charter Lau - charterlau2011@hotmail.com

Daud Ismail - daudism@hotmail.com

BC public school parents angered at ‘homophobia/heterosexism’ policy

by Rebecca Millette
May 02, 2011

BURNABY, British Columbia, May 2, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Parents of children in the Burnaby School District of British Columbia are angered at efforts by the Board of Education to adopt a “Homophobia/Heterosexism” policy that they say would promote homosexuality and censor all opposition in the public school system.

Outnumbering supporters by ten to one, over 100 parents concerned parents descended on an April 26 public Board Meeting, where they objected to the new policy, holding signs that read “No to 5.45.”

“The writers of this draft policy have made a fundamental error,” said presenter-parent George Kovacic. “They have attempted to eliminate discrimination against one group but in doing so, they have simply displaced the discrimination from one group onto other groups.”

(Read George’s complete statement here.)

The draft policy, approved by the Board of Trustees February 22, defines “heterosexism” as a “mistaken assumption” that “all people are heterosexual and that heterosexuality is superior and the norm by which all other sexual orientation and gender identities are measured.” It says it “perpetuates negative stereotypes and is dangerous to individuals and communities.”

By labeling moral convictions on human sexuality “dangerous,” said Kovacic, the policy “sets an offensive tone which is unacceptable from a public education authority.” The policy would impose on children the idea that their family’s moral beliefs are “perpetuating negative stereotypes,” added Kovacic.

Another parent, Heather Leung, pointed to Article 26.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”

“The Burnaby School Board must respect the right of the parents to the education of their own children and honor this Universal Declaration of Human Rights. No school board or teachers should trample over the rights of parents,” said Leung.

(Read Heather’s complete statement here.)

However, lesbian Counsellor and Member of LGBTQ Adhoc Committee, Debra Sutherland, argued the board would have a legal liability unless the policy were passed. She referenced a situation in the North Vancouver School Board, where she said the board was sued and fined $4000 in damages.

Trustee and policy committee member Gary Wong said the board must examine the laws on the issue. “There are a number of cases out there where school districts have not done enough in the eyes of the human rights tribunal and have actually been found at fault, and there are penalties involved,” said Wong.

“It may be very well that we can’t [examine parental views of the policy],” he said. “It’s not really talking about parents not having the right to teach their children. They have every right to teach their children, but the issue is tolerance and acceptance.”

“It makes me wonder,” said Leung, “what is the hidden agenda behind this policy. Why single out certain groups and certain lifestyles in the name of promoting ‘human rights’, supporting ‘diversity’ and addressing to ‘discrimination’? Why putting all these names and labels on the school children to segregate them?”

Trustees stated that the draft policy would likely be passed before the end of the school year. A Policy Committee meeting on the policy will take place on May 16, during which additional feedback will be brought forward.

The meeting is open to the public for observation only. At that meeting it will be decided if there will be any changes to the policy. Following the meeting, there will be a public board meeting for the board members to vote on the policy.

Board Trustees Tony Coccio, James Wang, and Gary Wong sit on the Policy Committee.

The Burnaby Board of Education draft policy may be viewed here.

Board of Trustees Contact Information:
Larry Hayes (Chair)
604-341-0197
larry.Hayes@sd41.bc.ca

Baljinder Narang (Vice-Chair)
604-805-5824
baljinder.narang@sd41.bc.ca

Ron Burton
roncburton@hotmail.com

Tony Coccia
604-298-3178
tony.Coccia@sd41.bc.ca

Diana Mumford
604-434-9757
Diana.Mumford@sd41.bc.ca

James Wang
604-715-6685
james.wang@sd41.bc.ca

Gary Wong
604-420-1310
gary.wong@sd41.bc.ca

Christian psychotherapist found guilty of professional misconduct for reparative therapy

by Hilary White

LONDON, June 1, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Christian psychotherapist may be “struck off” and barred from practicing after a tribunal declared last week that her efforts to help homosexuals leave the “gay lifestyle” was “reckless,” “disrespectful,” “dogmatic” and “unprofessional.”

The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) found Lesley Pilkington guilty of professional malpractice after she let her “personal preconceived views about gay lifestyle and sexual orientation … affect her professional relationship in a way that was prejudicial.”

The case against Pilkington was a sting operation conducted by homosexual activist and journalist Patrick Strudwick, who approached her in 2009 asking for help in overcoming his same-sex attraction. Strudwick secretly recorded the conversations in their two therapy sessions and used the recordings to lodge a complaint against Pilkington with the BACP.

Although the rulings of the tribunal were supposed to remain confidential, Strudwick published excerpts in the Guardian newspaper. In response, the Christian Legal Centre has published other excerpts, among which was the comment from the BACP that Strudwick had “in significant ways deliberately misled [Pilkington] into believing that he was comfortable and accepting of her approach” and that he had “manipulated the content of the sessions to a considerable extent in order to meet his own agenda.”

Despite this, the BACP found Pilkington guilty of professional malpractice for having extended the session with Strudwick over the allotted hour and for failing to counsel Strudwick after a meeting with her husband while the gay journalist had been out of the room.

The ruling stated that Pilkington’s membership in the BACP will be suspended and that she would be struck off the register if she does not undergo training.

Strudwick published a transcript of his meeting with Pilkington in the Independent newspaper in February 2010. In his piece in the Guardian this week, Strudwick defended his actions, claiming to be an “out, happily gay man”.

He admits that he asked Pilkington to help him, saying, “I asked her to make me straight. Her attempts to do so flout the advice of every major mental-health body in Britain.”

Pilkington is appealing the decision and has defended “reparative therapy,” saying, “I am deeply concerned that the privileged and confidential relationship between a counselor and her patient will be undermined by a journalist seeking a sensationalist story without any substance.”

“It is an abuse by the Guardian newspaper. Accordingly, I propose to act with restraint.”

She added, “Reparative Therapy is a valid therapy that many people want and it should not be damaged by irresponsible reporting. The hearing is still subject to an appeal.”

[British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life is not a religious organization. We do ". . .support the legitimate rights of parents . . . to deternmine the nature of their chilodren's education," and ". . . seek to have schoools supportive of universally applicable principles of morality" (quotations from "Article 2: Purposes" in our constitution). The statement which we publish in somewhat abridged form below is important because it expresses very clearly a viewpoint of a large number of our members and supporters, including many who are not Roman Catholic]

"Holy see statement on ‘sexual orientation’
By Archbishop Silvano Tomasi
Issue: May 2011" [Catholic Insight]

Human sexuality … is not an ‘identity’

Mr. President, The Holy See takes this opportunity to affirm the inherent dignity and worth of all human beings, and to condemn all violence that is targetted against people because of their sexual feelings and thoughts, or sexual behaviours.

We would also like to make several observations about the debates regarding “sexual orientation.”

First, there has been some unnecessary confusion about the meaning of the term “sexual orientation,” as found in resolutions and other texts adopted within the UN human rights system. The confusion is unnecessary . . . .[1] The ordinary meaning of “sexual orientation” refers to feelings and thoughts, not to behaviour.[2]

Second, for the purposes of human rights law, there is a critical difference between feelings and thoughts, on the one hand, and behaviour, on the other. A state should never punish a person, or deprive a person of the enjoyment of any human right, based just on the person’s feelings and thoughts, including sexual thoughts and feelings. But states can, and must, regulate behaviours, including various sexual behaviours. Throughout the world, there is a consensus between societies that certain kinds of sexual behaviours must be forbidden by law. Pedophilia and incest are two examples.

Third, the Holy See wishes to affirm its deeply held belief that human sexuality is a gift that is genuinely expressed in the complete and lifelong mutual devotion of a man and a woman in marriage. Human sexuality, like any voluntary activity, possesses a moral dimension: It is an activity which puts the individual will at the service of a finality; it is not an “identity.” In other words, it comes from the action and not from the being, even though some tendencies or “sexual orientations” may have deep roots in the personality. Denying the moral dimension of sexuality leads to denying the freedom of the person in this matter, and undermines ultimately his/her ontological dignity. This belief about human nature is also shared by many other faith communities, and by other persons of conscience.

And finally, Mr. President, we wish to call attention to a disturbing trend in some of these social debates: People are being attacked for taking positions that do not support sexual behaviour between people of the same sex. When they express their moral beliefs or beliefs about human nature, which may also be expressions of religious convictions, or state opinions about scientific claims, they are stigmatized, and worse—they are villified, and prosecuted. . . . .The truth is, these attacks are violations of fundamental human rights, and cannot be justified under any circumstances. (Zenit.org, March 24, 2011)

NOTES [given in the version of the statement from which the above is taken, at Catholic Insight online . Please go to this version for the full statement including notes]

This address by Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, permanent representative of the Holy See to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva, was delivered at the 16th Session of the Human Rights Council on “sexual orientation” (Zenit.org, March 24, 2011).

Ontario’s big brother is watching you

by Fr. Alphonse de Valk, publisher and editor of Catholic Insight

Fri Apr 15, 2011

Question: Who is this Big Brother?

It is the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC), an extra-judicial body but since 2008-2009 elevated to a new and higher status by Ontario’s Premier Dalton McGuinty. It fully approves of same-sex marriage and the homosexual lifestyle. So does McGuinty. In January 2011, OHRC issued a document entitled “Student discipline under the Code and Equity strategy” (Evadne Macedo, OHRC, Jan. 27, 2011).

First, we learn that “the new Ontario human rights system was invented in June 2008. It has three pillars: OHR Tribunal; the OHR Legal Support Centre, and the OHR Commission (p. 3). The Tribunal decides on applications and the Centre provides legal help to “claimants.” The Commission does everything else: initiates policy; promotes the Code; and enforces compliance. It also reaches out to the police, and the housing and education sectors.

The Code covers 15 grounds including “systemic discrimination for gender issues” (p. 6). With the full approval of the then-Minister of Education, self-confessed lesbian Kathleen Wynne, schools and education are now OHRC’s main field: it oversees the complaints, initiates discipline, and controls the collection of data. It covers everything in schools: policies, leadership, relationships, religion, discrimination, accountability, transparency, etc. (p. 9).

The document makes clear that “The Code has primacy over the Education Act,” (page 11).

Nota bene: This is important. The Education Act acknowledges the public school and Catholic and French school systems in Ontario as autonomous systems with their own authorities. This Act was again approved and constitutionally guaranteed in 1982 when Canada’s BNA Act was repatriated from Britain.

In the spring and summer of 2010 trustees and education officials still thought that the E&IE (Equity and Inclusive Education) strategy was to be implemented within the Educational Act. Now we know that Ontario’s Human Rights Commission stands over and above the Education Act. (See “Catholics’ constitutional rights no safeguard under Ontario Equity Strategy,” LifeSiteNews.com, Sept 7, 2010.)

Here is another threat: “Human rights’ strategies set the tone for all other work in school boards including discipline” (p. 12).

Page 19 repeats, under the heading “(school) Boards,” to “Remember the primacy of the Code (high standard that applies to everything)” and to…”Bring the Code into board policy rather than using board policy to keep the Code out.”

This is a manifesto of complete dominance directed essentially at and against the Judeo-Christian communities. Catholic schools have always aimed at providing a safe and welcoming environment for each student according to God’s First and Second Commandments.* But today Premier McGuinty and his OHRC have made sexual orientation (i.e. the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle) part of God’s commandments to be observed at all times contrary to the teaching of the Church.
. . . .

[Read the whole of the above article on LifeSiteNews.com .]

Burnaby School Board Votes for an Extensive “Anti-Homophobia” Policy

Unsurprisingly, Xtra, a periodical which bills itself as “Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News,” reports with evident satisfaction the latest Lower Mainland school board “anti-homophobia” policy. At the same time Xtra cites an activist who regards this extensive policy as “a good start,” and apparently a precursor of further measures in the future.

In its March 4, 2011 online edition, the periodical reports that on February 22^nd Burnaby School board voted unanimously to implement an “anti-homophobia policy.”

The policy [reports Xtra] proposes education initiatives inclusive of gays that speak to their positive
contributions to society and a commitment to promote a systemic response to homophobia.

     "Teachers shall be encouraged to embed and integrate LGBT issues into existing curriculum in age-
     appropriate ways to help students acquire the skills and knowledge to understand the impacts of
     homophobia and transphobia upon society," the policy reads.

     The strategy directs every elementary and secondary school to appoint a staff person as a "safe contact"
     for queer students and requires all counsellors in the district be educated in queer issues. Every school
     will also be required to address homophobia and transphobia in their student codes of conduct.

    The policy also encourages teachers to support student-led initiatives to establish gay-straight alliances.

     The ad hoc LGBT committee recommended the district establish a permanent LGBT advisory committee,
     which would report to the superintendent.

In the actual policy document presented to the school board for approval, perhaps some of the accompanying definitions most clearly reveal the philosophy behind the proposals. “Heterosexism [we are told] refers to the mistaken assumption that all people are heterosexual and that heterosexuality is superior and the norm by which all other sexual orientation and gender identities are measured. Heterosexism perpetuates negative stereotypes and is dangerous to individuals and communities.”

“LGBTQ+” is defined as “an acronym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning. The plus sign [we are informed] recognizes that not all people identify with these terms and may prefer terms such as Transsexual, Queer,Two-Spirit Intersex. LGBTQ+ is meant to be an inclusive term for a very diverse group of people.” (All this is likely to be very confusing for those not initiated in the jargon of those who promote the idea of a “gender spectrum” where there is a multiplicity of genders not limited by the biological sex of those claiming them.)

The policy clearly reflects that promoted by the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation. According to the Xtra article, too, it was the Burnaby Teachers’ Association president and a fellow-teacher who originally “prompted the board to establish an ad hoc LGBT committee tasked with addressing homophobia in the district's schools.” Apparently it was their efforts that led to the promotion of the policy voted on by the Board on February 22^nd.

[The above article was posted on this BCPTL website Mar. 23, 2011.]

Homosexual Group GLSEN Yanks Links to Pornographic ‘Gay’
Hook-Up Site

. . . .
Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth, www.aftah.org

A Facebook page affiliated with the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) — to support homosexual student clubs and GLSEN’s upcoming activist “Day of Silence” in schools nationwide (Friday, April 15) — was linked for several weeks to a pornographic “gay” hook-up website containing full-frontal nudity and personal ads expressing interest in dangerous homosexual practices popular in the homosexual male subculture.

A Facebook page affiliated with the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) — to support homosexual student clubs and GLSEN’s upcoming activist “Day of Silence” in schools nationwide (Friday, April 15) — was linked for several weeks to a pornographic “gay” hook-up website containing full-frontal nudity and personal ads expressing interest in dangerous homosexual practices including anal sodomy, “rimming” and various sadistic sex fetiishes popular in the homosexual male subculture.

The GLSEN ”Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page was also linked to a “Gay Trip Thailand” Facebook page with shirtless Thai males — luring men to that notorious sex-tourism destination — as well as a movie about two male lovers that is sponsored by a leading “gay” pornographic video distributor. When the salacious links were exposed April 11 by Mission America, a pro-family group, they were quickly removed from the GLSEN Facebook page.

The pornographic links evidently remained posted on the GLSEN-sponsored Facebook page for weeks. At least one ”photo” ad for the homosexual male hook-up site “NEXGAY” had been posted on the GLSEN Facebook page since at least January 15, 2011, based on a favorable comment responding to the ad and posted on the GLSEN site that date. (See four NEXGAY photo-ads with male models in the lower right corner of the graphic at right.) . . . .

[The whole of the above article can be found on the Americans for Truth website.]

March 2, 2011:

President Obama’s Support Emboldens Same-Sex Marriage Activists

Posted by Jennifer Mesko on CitizenLink, Mar. 2, 2011

On Feb. 23, the Obama administration announced it no longer will defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court.

About 30 minutes later, the two attorneys who have sued to overturn California’s marriage-protection amendment cited the president’s decision in a request to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that it immediately allow same-sex marriages in the state. Some marriage advocates are questioning whether the president and the attorneys were working in tandem.

“Our concern is that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been collaborating with the litigants in the Proposition 8 case behind the scenes,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council (FRC).

“If there is a quiet partnership, the alliance would be both unethical and highly damaging to America’s rule of law. (The) DOJ’s job is to defend laws that Congress enacts — not help to undermine them.”

FRC has requested a record of all correspondence between the DOJ and those who oppose Prop. 8.

On Tuesday, California Attorney General Kamala Harris joined the cry for same-sex marriage; she, too, cited President Obama’s decision in her letter to the 9th Circuit.

She wrote: “The President and the United States Attorney General have determined that they will not continue to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. … While it lacks the force of law, Attorney General (Eric) Holder’s reasoned analysis is entitled to consideration.”

For their part, Ted Olson and David Boies, who sued on behalf of two gay couples, wrote: “The events of this morning demonstrate that proponents likely cannot prevail. … These new developments … the Attorney General’s announcement that the government will no longer defend DOMA … are materially changed circumstances that warrant vacatur of this court’s decision to grant a stay pending appeal.”

Gay activists and their allies want the court to allow same-sex marriages while the voter-approved marriage amendment — Prop. 8 — is tied up in the California Supreme Court, as well as the 9th Circuit. . . .

[Click here to read the whole of the above article.]

Ontario Government Equity Policy

[from a REAL Women of Canada e-mail alert dated March 2, 2011]

The Ontario government has provided an “Equity and Inclusive Education Policy (EIE)” which it requires all publicly funded school boards, both public and Catholic, to implement.

Disguised as an anti-bullying strategy and a way to end racism and sexism, the government’s equity policy goes beyond these goals. All individual school board equity policies are expected to recognize sexual orientation as grounds for non-discrimination. The education ministry also suggests that schools celebrate Gay Pride events, use texts by homosexual authors and promote gay-straight alliance student clubs.

If this policy is successfully implemented in Ontario without objections from parents and others, prodded by homosexual activists, it will be quickly adopted by other provincial governments. This cannot be allowed to happen.

We have already witnessed the fall-out from the implementation of such school equity policies by way of anti-bullying legislation passed on May 3, 2010, in the state of Massachusetts (see “MassResistance.org). Since then, the 2011 state budget has included extensive funding for the promotion of homosexuality in the schools. For example, $100,000 was allocated directly to a homosexual commission on youth with a further unspecified (i.e. unlimited), access to $11.7 million for “school health services” in public and non-public schools; $100,000 for anti-bullying programs; access to $5.9 million for homosexuals in crisis housing and sexual violence; and access to a $8 million fund to provide homosexual groups with training and outreach and to promote homosexual diversity. Gay Day in high schools and amusement parks have been proclaimed; homosexual teachers have “come out” in assembles and encouraged students to do so as well; homosexual “Days of “Silence” have been held in high schools, etc. The list is endless.

. . . .

If insensitivity is really a problem in our schools, instead of an equity policy based on sexual preference, lifestyle choice, or race, we must demand a general equity anti-harassment policy, not an anti-homophobia equity program in the schools. This truly inclusive policy would address all students who face ridicule, no matter what the reason. It would promote true tolerance, equality and acceptance. A school equity policy should teach acceptance, kindness and respect for all students and staff without placing the primary focus on particular issues such as homophobia and heterosexism.

All parents and ratepayers in Ontario must speak out and become involved in this Equity Policy. . . . .

. . . .

Canadian Catholic school board ‘bullied’ into scrapping pro-family policy

by Patrick B. Craine

· Wed Jan 19, 2011

HALTON, Ontario, January 19, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Dozens of homosexual activists flooded the Halton Catholic District School Board offices Tuesday evening as trustees voted 6-2 under heavy pressure and intimidation to scrap a pro-family equity policy that sought to ensure that only Catholic moral teachings on sexuality would be presented in board schools.

The policy, which was passed by the previous board in November as part of the equity and inclusive education strategy mandated by the Ontario government, had been praised for including explicit wording to prevent instruction that undermines Catholic teaching on homosexuality.

But it came under heavy fire in recent weeks through a campaign focused against their ban on gay-straight alliances (GSAs). That campaign included numerous national news stories centered around interviews with homosexual activists, and even a condemnation from homosexual celebrity blogger Perez Hilton.

[To read the whole story, go to: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canadian-catholic-school-board-bullied-into-scrapping-pro-family-policy/ .]

Catholic school board [committee] votes to [recommend move to] abandon Catholic teaching on homosexuality

Patrick B. Craine

Wed Jan 12, 2011

HALTON, Ontario, January 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - After pressure from homosexual activists, a committee of the Halton Catholic District School Board voted Tuesday night to recommend the scrapping of a policy that required schools to be faithful to Church teaching in the area of homosexuality.

In a 6-2 vote, the committee - composed of all nine trustees - recommended the rescinding of the current equity policy, which had won praise from pro-family groups, and replace it temporarily with a controversial Catholic template policy.

The effort was launched by trustee Paul Marai, a homosexual activist elected in October, who was supported by lobby groups such as Egale and Change.org.

“Does Egale now have more influence on the board’s teaching on morals than the Catholic bishops and the Catholic community?” asked Alissa Golob of Campaign Life Catholics. “By voting to rescind their policy conforming to the Catholic Church’s teaching, the Halton board has voted to go against the faith, the teachings of the Church on homosexuality.”

“They’ve also put themselves in direct disobedience to the Ontario bishops with regards to gay-straight alliances,” she added.

The mainstream media, Marai, and other homosexual activists have focused discussion on the board’s decision to ban gay-straight alliances (GSAs), a policy that was instituted based on a directive from the Ontario bishops; but the targeted policy does much more than that.

It includes explicit wording to prevent instruction that undermines Catholic teaching. It also requires that teachers consult the Catholic Catechism’s teaching on homosexuality (paragraphs 2357-2358) when they address the topic, makes no mention of “sexual orientation,” and notably inserts “unjust discrimination” where the template policy had merely condemned “discrimination.” The policy also emphasizes that “equity” and “inclusion” must be interpreted in accordance with Catholic teaching, and are not acceptable unless they do.

The Catholic template policy that would replace the existing one, on the other hand, has drawn sharp criticism in part because it recognizes “sexual orientation” as a prohibited ground for discrimination, in direct opposition to a Vatican directive.

The Halton policy’s fate is expected to be determined by a vote at the board’s next meeting, January 18th, though there are hints that it could be delayed to February.

The board defended the policy as recently as Friday, saying they oppose GSAs because they “necessitate students to self-identify according to sexual orientation,” while the Church “neither defines nor catalogues [people] according to their sexual orientation.”

Trustee Jane Michael, who voted in favor of the current policy Tuesday night, told LifeSiteNews that the policy “encourages other dialogue groups that can achieve the objective of promoting understanding, while remaining consistent with Catholic teaching that reminds us that persons with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity, while being called to a life of chastity.”

Pro-family groups had warned in December that Marai would use his influence to overturn the policy. Though he made little issue of his activism during the campaign, he made his move only a month after being installed. On his website, Marai calls the ban “inappropriate” and accused the previous board of “wasting time dividing people” by enacting it.

Yet according to Paul Tuns, editor of The Interim, Canada’s life and family newspaper, it is actually the effort to rescind the policy that is divisive. “The board, rescinding the former policy, divides [itself] from its Church, and parents and their children from the education in the Catholic faith they have chosen,” Tuns explained.

“We should make sure the school board knows faithful Catholics and other pro-family voters, parents and stakeholders will not go away,” Tuns continued. “The board can choose between a noisy opposition of activists who are often opposed to the Catholic Church or a movement that fights to uphold the teachings of the Church. It’s their choice.”

The Halton Catholic board has been under a lot of pressure from elements in the Ontario Catholic school system, who claim the government’s equity and inclusive education strategy is designed to combat “homophobia.”

Chris D’Souza, a former equity officer for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic School Board, and one of the major advocates of the equity strategy in the Catholic schools, claimed in an interview with the Ottawa Citizen that the public should not confuse Catholic teaching with the mandate of the government-funded Catholic school system. D’Souza, who has delivered over 1,400 workshops across Ontario in the last eight years, with presentations in over a dozen Catholic boards, has made it a key point in his presentations to Catholics that “equity” involves accepting the homosexual lifestyle itself.

“Just because we’re Catholic doesn’t mean we are anti-homosexual or against the eradication of homophobia,” he told the Citizen. “It’s the right-wing Christian groups and some of the other right-wing fundamentalists whose ideology bleeds over or taints Catholic education systems.”

Golob called on the Ontario bishops to exercise their leadership by calling on the board to stay true to Church teaching. “It remains to be seen what action the bishops will take before the final vote, but the parents and children of Halton, and all Ontario, need them now,” she said.

To respectfully voice concerns:

Trustees
Alice Anne LeMay (905) 632-6300 lemaya@hcdsb.org
Jane Michael (905) 319-6582 north@cogeco.net
Arlene Lantomasi (905) 529-6155 iantomasia@hcdsb.org
John Morrison (905) 639-4718 john@braintanksolutions.com
Mark Rowe (905) 877-9510 mrowe6@sympatico.ca
Ed Viana (905) 632-6300 vianae@hcdsb.org
Diane Rabenda (905) 632-6300 rabendad@hcdsb.org
Anthony Danko (905) 825-9159 dankoa@hcdsb.org

Most Rev. Gerard P. Bergie, Bishop of St. Catharines
Chair, Ontario Bishops Education Commission
Catholic Centre
P.O. Box 875
St. Catharines, ON L2R 6Z4
Tel: (905) 684-0154
Fax: (905) 684-2185
E-mail:bishop@stcatharinesdiocese.ca

Most Rev. Douglas Crosby, O.M.I., Bishop of Hamilton
700 King Street West
Hamilton, ON L8P 1C7
Tel: (905) 528-7988
Fax: (905) 528-1088
E-mail: wdunn@hamiltondiocese.com

Most Rev. Thomas Collins, Archbishop of Toronto
President, Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario
1155 Yonge Street
Toronto, ON M4T 1W2
Tel: (416) 934-3400 #609
Fax: (416) 934-3452
E-mail: archbishop@archtoronto.org

A Brief of the BCPTL to the Surrey School Board [presented June 3, 2003--on pro-homosexuality resources]

Never Too Young to Indoctrinate

[For background to the above article, see the article "Catholic school board bans gay-straight alliances," as well as the article immediately below.]

. . .Ontario Catholic board voting [on move] to repeal ban on homosexual clubs . . .

Patrick B. Craine

Tue Jan 11 10:18 EST

HALTON, Ontario, January 11, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The homosexual activist recently elected as a trustee to the Halton Catholic District School Board has launched a campaign to overturn the board’s new equity policy, which had won praise from pro-family groups for its explicit protections of Catholic teaching.

Paul Marai, who is the board’s first openly-homosexual trustee, says he will raise the issue of overturning the board’s ban on gay-straight alliances (GSAs), which was included in the equity policy, at a policy meeting Tuesday evening.

“The decision to ban Gay-Straight alliances was inappropriate and should be reversed,” he writes on his website. “I want to know why the past board was wasting time enacting this ban in the first place - wasting time dividing people when we can concentrate on actually improving the schools we represent.”

For the ban to be repealed it must go to a vote before the whole board, and the next meeting is January 18th.

LSN has learned that an organized campaign by homosexual activists is underway to lobby the trustees, who are expecting a huge turnout for tonight’s policy meeting. They have all received dozens of emails from homosexual activists throughout North America.

The board passed the equity policy in November in response to a province-wide mandate from the Ontario government called the equity and inclusive education strategy. The ban on GSAs was included after a directive from the Ontario bishops, which stated that the clubs “imply a self-identification with sexual orientation that is often premature among high school students.” The policy also included explicit wording to prevent instruction that undermines Catholic teaching in the area of homosexuality.

The policy was passed, however, before the new trustees from the October election were installed. According to the National Post, several members of the new board have vowed to overturn the ban. In particular, pro-family groups warned in December that Marai, who was among the new trustees, would use his influence to overturn the policy.

“We warned them that this would be coming down the pipe and here it is,” said Jim Hughes, national president of Campaign Life Coalition. “The Halton board did a very good job with their policy. Now we need them to stick to their guns.”

“Trustees have a duty to support parents in their effort to promote Catholic faith and morals,” Hughes continued. “We pray that they won’t sell out on these kids in the face of pressure from homosexual activists.”

“We are still hoping and praying the Catholic bishops of Ontario will play a leadership role in this and protect Catholic teaching in the schools,” he added.

The Halton policy has garnered international attention in the last week after board chair Alice Ann Lemay defended it in an interview with the Canadian homosexualist paper Xtra. “We don’t have Nazi groups either. ... Gay-straight alliances are banned because they are not within the teachings of the Catholic Church,” she is reported to have said. “If a gay student requests a gay-straight alliance they would be denied. ... It’s not in accordance with the teachings of the church. If they wanted to have a club outside of school, fine, just not in school.”

Though she later said the comments were taken “out of context,” they sparked vehement denunciations from homosexualist groups such as Egale, and the homosexualist social action platform Change.org launched a petition against the ban. The media coverage provoked a slew of anti-Catholic blog posts, and it even caught the attention of homosexual celebrity blogger Perez Hilton. A Facebook group to “fight” the ban has attracted nearly 300 members, and apparently a protest is being planned for the next board meeting.

Even after pressure, the board had defended the ban in a January 7th statement, saying they oppose GSAs because they “necessitate students to self-identify according to sexual orientation,” while the Church “neither defines nor catalogues [people] according to their sexual orientation.”

Yet, LeMay told the Globe and Mail Monday that she’s not sure how she’ll vote at Tuesday’s meeting.

Suresh Dominic of Campaign Life Catholic warned that the GSAs could “undermine the faith of Catholic youth who, in being caused to doubt one core moral teaching, may come to doubt other fundamental Catholic Christian beliefs.”

Contrary to claims that GSAs merely promote a safe environment for students, Dominic said the clubs “tend to agitate for the normalization and affirmation of the gay lifestyle, something which would clearly violate Catholic moral doctrine.”

Dominic called on concerned individuals to contact the Halton trustees by phone and e-mail.

LifeSiteNews did not hear back from the Diocese of Hamilton by press time.

Neil MacCarthy, spokesman for Archbishop Thomas Collins of Toronto, said they are discussing the issue among the various education partners, but have no comment at this time.

To respectfully voice concerns:

Alice Anne LeMay (905) 632-6300 lemaya@hcdsb.org
Jane Micheal (905) 319-6582 north@cogeco.net
Arlene Lantomasi (905) 529-6155 iantomasia@hcdsb.org
John Morrison (905) 639-4718 john@braintanksolutions.com
Mark Rowe (905) 877-9510 mrowe6@sympatico.ca
Ed Viana (905) 632-6300 vianae@hcdsb.org
Diane Rabenda (905) 632-6300 rabendad@hcdsb.org
Anthony Danko (905) 825-9159 dankoa@hcdsb.org

Most Rev. Douglas Crosby, O.M.I., Bishop of Hamilton
700 King Street West
Hamilton, ON L8P 1C7
Tel: (905) 528-7988
Fax: (905) 528-1088
E-mail: wdunn@hamiltondiocese.com

'They'll have to fire me': Sask[atchewan] marriage official

Tuesday, January 11, 2011
CBC News

A Saskatchewan marriage commissioner says the government will have to fire him if it expects him to perform same-sex marriages.

Larry Bjerland of the east-central Saskatchewan community of Rose Valley said he was "very disappointed" by a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal opinion Monday dealing with proposed changes to the Marriage Act.

The province's highest court ruled that two proposals from the Saskatchewan government that would let marriage commissioners opt out of performing same-sex marriages on religious grounds would be unconstitutional.

The decision was hailed by gay rights advocates, but Bjerland said it may result in his losing his appointment.

"I do not intend to marry any gay couples and so, therefore, I’m not going to resign," said Bjerland, who has been a marriage commissioner for 10 years. "They’ll have to fire me." . . . .

[Read the whole article on the CBC website.]

the spec.com
Cynthia Vukets and Louise Brown
Tue., Jan 11 2011

Catholic board bans gay-straight student alliances

A controversial new ban on gay-straight student clubs by the Halton Catholic District School Board has sparked outrage from human rights groups, a thumbs-down from celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, a Facebook protest petition and a promise from a newly elected Catholic trustee to fight the move.

Paul Marai, 22, who is gay, said he has no idea “why this ban was enacted in the first place” and pledged to challenge the policy at the next board meeting.

But what catapulted the issue into the blogosphere was a comment by board chair Alice Anne LeMay that gay-straight alliances, recommended by Queen’s Park as one way to support gay students, do not fit the teachings of the Catholic Church. For the same reasons, she added in an interview with gay and lesbian newspaper Xtra, the board does not allow Nazi groups.

LeMay has since apologized on the board’s website for the comparison, but the board insists it will not allow gay-straight alliances in its schools, partly to protect the privacy of students whose sexual orientation might be compromised by such groups.

[Read the whole of the above article at thespec.com .]

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS

University: Dump Christian beliefs on homosexuality, or else

Demands student get re-educated, attend 'pride' event

Posted: December 06, 2010

By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Jen Keeton

Augusta State University graduate student Jen Keeton alleges school officials demand she be re-educated in morality, giving her the choice of giving up her Christian beliefs on homosexuality or being expelled from the school's counseling program.

But now, after months of battling the university in court, a pair of free-speech organizations have joined her in the fight.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the National Association of Scholars have filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, asserting it a violation of the First Amendment for the Georgia university's officials to require Keeton's beliefs be "influenced" by remedial sensitivity training or face expulsion.

According to a complaint filed against the school earlier this year, school officials demanded Keeton, 24, go through a "remediation" program after she asserted homosexuality is a behavioral choice, not a "state of being" as a professor said.

[Read the whole article on WorldNetDaily.]

Study: 18% of Vancouver gay men have HIV

· Patrick B. Craine

· VANCOUVER, British Columbia, November 25, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The authors of a new government-sponsored study are calling for increased condom distribution after finding that 18% of homosexual men in Vancouver are infected with HIV.

The study, organized by the Public Health Agency of Canada and several provincial health organizations, found that there are 150-190 new HIV cases among homosexual men in B.C. each year, and 1,800 homosexual men were infected in the last decade.

The authors note that in 2008 the Public Health Agency of Canada estimated 51% of people with HIV in the country were homosexual men.

The ‘ManCount’ study ran from August 2008 to February 2009, with researchers taking blood samples and conducting questionnaires from 1,139 homosexual men at Vancouver’s main homosexual venues.

Of those studied, 2.5% were unaware that they were HIV positive.

Older men were more likely to have contracted HIV, with 34% of those 45 and older testing positive, compared to 7% of those under 30. Nevertheless, they point out that this is no reason for optimism because “young men under 30 now may see the same HIV prevalence among their peers when they reach 45 as seen in older gay men today.”

About a third of the men surveyed had one or no sexual partners in the previous six months, a third had two to five partners, and another third had more than five (though they note that some had many more than that).

The authors used the results to call for greater distribution of condoms at Vancouver’s gay venues. They also advocated a campaign to promote more frequent HIV testing, recommending a test every 3-6 months. They suggested this should target, in particular, men under 30, noting their finding that 23% of such men had never been tested.

Because only those who frequent Vancouver’s homosexual venues were surveyed, the researchers admitted that there is a potential the sample is biased. They also pointed out that their figures are estimates, and may vary by a few percentage points.

The Canadian study comes as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control released a new report this week on sexually transmitted diseases showing that syphilis and Chlamydia are rising, especially among homosexual men.

See the ManCount report here.

See the CDC report here.

European Parliament wants EU countries to recognise existing same-sex unions

The European Parliament's Intergroup on LGBT Rights
November 23rd, 2010

On Tuesday the European Parliament reaffirmed that the effects of civil documents (birth and death certificates, marriage certificates, etc.) must remain the same throughout the European Union. This implies that all couples, including same-sex couples in marriages or civil partnerships must retain their rights in all EU countries.
Currently same-sex couples often lose the rights given by their existing marriage or civil partnership when travelling in the European Union.

In its just-adopted report on civil, commercial, family and private international law, the European Parliament “strongly supports plans to enable the mutual recognition of the effects of civil status documents”, and “stresses the need to ensure mutual recognition” of such documents by EU countries. This entails recognising the effects of all existing marriages and partnerships when citizens move in the EU.

Following this vote, the European Commission will propose ways to enable the recognition of the effects of partnerships and marriages throughout the EU, regardless of whether they unite same-sex or different-sex partners. . . . .

[From the website of The European Intergroup on LGBT Rights]

[We publish this story without comment, even though it appears to be from a homosexual site, because the story raises several issues worth considering: the rights of students in schools promoting a certain agenda, the rights of teachers, and the role of school boards in deciding what the rights of both should be.]

Michigan Teacher Reprimanded in ’Free Speech’ Flap

by Kilian Melloy
Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2010

A Michigan teacher has been accused of bullying students in an incident sparked by the teacher himself wearing a purple shirt in a gesture of support toward gay students who suffer at the hands of bullies.

Jay McDowell, a teacher at Howell High School in Livingston, Mich., wore the shirt to class on Oct. 20, a day on which supporters were encouraged to wear purple in solidarity with bullied GLBT youth, a Nov. 2 Daily Press & Argus story reported. When a student asked about the garment, McDowell explained its significance, and set off an argument between himself and two students that led to one student being sent out of the classroom.

The argument involved 16-year-old Daniel Glowacki, who, upon hearing about the shirt’s significance, protested because McDowell had asked another student to remove a belt buckle depicting the Confederate flag. According to McDowell, when he asked the student to stop wearing the belt buckle, she did so without protest.

But Glowacki did protest. The argument between Glowacki and the teacher grew so heated that McDowell sent Glowacki out of the classroom.

The letter of reprimand read, "You went on to discipline two students who told you they do not accept gays due to their religion. After a failure of getting one student to recant, you engaged in an unsupported snap suspension, rather than allow the student his beliefs."

The letter added, "You also state you routinely do not allow this expression [the Confederate flag] in your classroom because it offends you, and you personally connect this symbol to a list of oppressions and atrocities. You do, however, allow the display of the rainbow flag, to which some of your students have voiced opposition."

McDowell responded in his own statement that there are no rainbow flags in his classroom--only the American flag, the newspaper article reported. Moreover, McDowell noted that restrictions on the Confederate flag were not limited to his own classroom: "the district has for the last year asked students to remove Confederate flags that have flown from the back of cars and trucks in the school parking lot," McDowell’s statement said. "The reprimand states that the wearing of the Confederate flag and the statement, ’I don’t accept gays,’ did not cause a substantial disruption to the educational process and, therefore, I violated the students’ First Amendment rights.

"I disagree," the statement from McDowell went on. "I believe any symbol or speech that can cause a student to sit in fear in the classroom whether or not there is an outward show of that fear is by its very nature a disruption to the educational process." McDowell went on to say that he had abided by school district policies and emphasized that he did not punish the student for his religious beliefs or political opinions, but rather sent him out of the room for disruptive behavior.

The school district did not waver. "These violations created adverse reactions, were not in the best interests of your students, and will not be tolerated," district officials told McDowell, who has been ordered to attend a First Amendment Rights training and punished with a one-day unpaid suspension.

"The Howell Education Association is dismayed that administrators have chosen to suspend and reprimand a teacher for upholding Howell High School’s very mission statement," stated the teachers’ union. "We, the Howell Education Association, are proud that Mr. McDowell has the moral fiber and integrity to stand up to intolerant speech, as well as symbols of hate in our community and in our classroom."

"The student was speaking out on being offended by the gay and lesbian lifestyle because it’s against his religion," Howell Public Schools Superintendent Ron Wilson said on Oct. 28, the newspaper reported on Oct. 29. "The teacher said that wasn’t appropriate."

Added Wilson, "All the student was doing was voicing an opinion. The same thing would have been done had the student been on the other side. As superintendent, it’s my responsibility to foster fair, respectful treatment of all staff and students, and the teacher didn’t do that."

Wilson went on to say that several parents had emailed him to claim that their children had been harassed at school for not wearing purple shirts. Wilson suggested that those alleged incidents of harassment were examples of bullying.

Meantime, Glowacki sought to set the record straight after rumors started up that he was prejudiced against gays, the Daily Press & Argus reported in an Oct. 28 follow-up article.
"I don’t really care what people think, but I don’t want people to think I’m against gays," the young man told the press. "That’s just not true."

The young man’s mother met with McDowell on the day the argument took place in what the article reported was a "productive talk," but even so she pulled her son our of McDowell’s class and now says she is considering hiring a lawyer. "The things people have been saying online about my son have been terrible," said Glowacki’s mother, Sandy. "My son is being bullied. This is the United States of America. Just because someone has a different opinion doesn’t mean they’re a bad person." Added the student’s mother, "My son is not a bigot. He has a very diverse group of friends that includes some gays. If a gay student was being picked on in class, he’d stick up for them."

Student’s Eye View

According to Glowacki, he disputed McDowell’s instruction to the classmate who wore the Confederate belt buckle by pointing out that several students, like McDowell, were wearing purple clothing. The purple garments and the belt buckle were both examples of political expression. However, Glowacki said, the teacher told him that the Confederate flag stood for racist violence. Glowacki says that McDowell then told the student that if he had something against gays, he could leave.

"I never said I was against gays, but I did leave the class," said the young man. "I got a referral and had to talk to the assistant principal, but that was it." The article explained that a "referral" is a citation for misconduct and goes into a student’s permanent file. Glowacki’s referral was later expunged from his record.

In Oregon, a student teacher was pulled out of a school last month for explaining that he was not married because legally he and his same-sex partner are not allowed to wed.

23-year-old Seth Stambaugh was student teaching in the town of Beaverton, Ore., a town seven miles west of Portland, when he was abruptly transferred to a school in Portland after answering questions from one his fourth-grade students, reported local TV news station KGW on Oct. 18.

Stambaugh was sent to teach at a school in Portland, outside of the Beaverton school district. The student teacher’s advisers at Lewis & Clark College were reportedly asked by the school district to pull Stambaugh out of Sexton Mountain Elementary and send him elsewhere.

"The student asked me if I was married," Stambaugh told the news station. "I responded, ’No.’ He asked, ’Why?’ I said it was illegal for me to get married. I said, ’It’s because I want to marry a man.’ "

Stambaugh was reassigned shortly after that Sept. 10 conversation, and was not told the reason--though he thinks he knows why. "I felt extremely hurt and discriminated against," Stambaugh told KGW. "Everyone in the school is free to talk about their marital status as long as they are heterosexual." . . . .

[The whole article is found at the website "edge, Boston, Massechusetts." This appears to be a homosexual magazine, but it does give two sides of the story, in contrast the treatment in another homosexual magazine.]

Paraguay Rejects Homosexualist 'Youth Rights' Agreement

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman, Latin America Correspondent

PARAGUAY, November 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Despite heavy pressure from international organizations and the nation's media, the Chamber of Deputies of Paraguay has refused to ratify the "Iberoamerican Convention on the Rights of Youth," a document that grants a panoply of controversial "rights" to anyone from the ages of 15 to 24.

The Convention imposes sex education "at all educational levels" (article 23), which will teach the "personal full acceptance and identity of youth." It prohibits "discrimination" against adolescents for any reason whatsoever, including "sexual orientation," "opinion," "living place," or "any other condition or personal or social circumstance of the young person."

The document potentially lowers the age of sexual consent to 15 years by dictating that "youth have the right to freely choose a partner, to common life and to the constitution of marriage on the ground of equality among its members" in article 20. Adolescents at the age of 15 will also have the right to choose their own religion and to vote, according to articles 17 and 21.

Among other controversial and unusual provisions of the Convention are the claim that all young people have the right to "an individual identity, consisting in the building of one's own personality," which includes "characteristics of sex," "affiliation," and "sexual orientation." It also gives oversight responsibilities to a supernational "Iberoamerican Youth Organization" (OIJ).

After objections were made against the document by the Federation of Associations for Life and Family (FEDAFIVA), the Chamber of Deputies rejected the document by 50 votes, according to the news agency Ultima Hora. Pressure continues to be applied by the Paraguayan media and executive branch to achieve ratification.

The Convention has already been ratified by seven countries: the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Honduras, Spain, Uruguay, and Bolivia. It has been signed but not yet ratified by Cuba, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Nicaragua, Portugal, and Venezuela.

To read the text of the Convention:

Iberoamerican Convention on the Rights of Youth

Convención Iberoamericana de Derechos de los Jovenes

Homosexual Conference for Youth Held in Surrey, British Columbia
[re-titled; excerpt from article in Xtra online, Oct. 23, 2010]
[Xtra is a homoxexual magazine.]

More than 70 teachers, students, graduates, parents and allies took over the Tamanawis Secondary School cafeteria for the second Dare to Stand Out Conference on Friday.

This past March, the Vancouver School Board organized its first queer youth leadership conference at St Mary’s elementary school (also called Dare to Stand Out), but Friday’s conference was a first for Surrey.

Co-organized by Tamanawis’s ambitious gay-straight alliance (GSA) and James Chamberlain, assistant director of professional and social studies with the BC Teachers' Federation, the daylong event offered everyone a chance to share ideas and challenge oppression in schools.

Provocative live theatre (Berend McKenzie’s Tassles), a workshop on GSA organizing (Jeremy Dias) and the personal storytelling of Vancouver writer Ivan Coyote gave those in attendance a chance to discuss how to progress the movement for queer equality in local schools. . . . .

"Supreme Court to hear gay sex discrimination case"

By Janice Tibbetts, Postmedia News October 28, 2010

OTTAWA — In a case that will consider whether you can love a person but hate what they do, the Supreme Court agreed Thursday to weigh in on whether it violates human rights laws against discrimination based on sexual orientation to disparage gay sex.

The appeal is expected to reach the court within the next year or so after a three-judge panel accepted an appeal application from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

The commission is challenging a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal ruling that sided with William Whatcott by concluding that his distribution of flyers denouncing "sodomites in our public schools" is a permissible contribution to public policy discussion.

At issue is whether the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission's protection based on sexual orientation includes sexual practices, and, if so, to what extent. . . . .

Read the whole article on The Gazette website.

CDC: 20% of Gay Men Have HIV, and Nearly Half Are Unaware of Status

By Peter J. Smith

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 27, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Nearly half of sexually active homosexual men infected with the virus causing AIDS are unaware that they are carriers of the deadly disease, according to a new study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

The now released CDC study of 21 U.S. metropolitan areas in 2008 found that out of 8,153 sexually active homosexual and bisexual men, one out of five (1562) tested positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Of those infected, 44 percent (680) were unaware that they were carrying – and by implication spreading – HIV.

The CDC says that men who have sex with men (MSM) expose themselves to far greater risks for infection with HIV.

According to the CDC the rate of new HIV diagnoses among homosexual men is more than 44 times that of heterosexual men.

The CDC also reported that MSM were responsible for 53 percent of new HIV infections in the United States in 2006. That year, the CDC recorded an estimated 56,300 new HIV cases.

CDC's National HIV Behavioral Surveillance system (NHBS) collected the data by interviewing men 18 years and older at venues where they expected active homosexuals to gather, such as bars, clubs, and social organizations.

The US Food and Drug Administration has been under pressure to lift its ban – in place since 1983 – against MSM donating blood, arguing that current blood tests can detect the presence of HIV.

But defenders of the FDA policy have pointed out that there is a period of up to six months after a person becomes infected in which blood tests do not reveal HIV. This raises the chance for an HIV-positive individual to transmit it to someone else.

The FDA also states that HIV tests can fail to detect all infected blood donors. Since over 20 million blood transfusions each year, the FDA says that even a very small failure rate increases the chance of having undetected HIV in the donor population.

The CDC findings were published in September 24 edition of the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

See related coverage by LifeSiteNews.com:

U.S. Blood Ban for Gays Remains
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10061402.html

CDC: Gay Men Over 44 Times More Likely HIV+ than Hetero Men
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10031715.html

High Occurrence in Africa of HIV among Homosexual Men Study Finds
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09072102.html

Last Catholic adoption agency faces closure after Charity Commission ruling

Telegraph.co.uk
By Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent

August 19, 2010

The last remaining Roman Catholic adoption agency to resist Labour’s equality laws is facing closure, after the charity watchdog ruled that it could not avoid considering same-sex couples as potential parents.

Catholic Care had been given hope earlier this year that it could get around the controversial anti-discrimination rules that forced other agencies either to close down or sever their links with the church.

In March a High Court judge had ordered that the Charity Commission consider whether to allow the agency's request to continue refusing to consider same-sex parents, thanks to a loophole intended to protect homosexual charities.

Catholic Care had argued that a clause of Labour’s Sexual Orientation Regulations, inserted to ensure gay organisations could not be sued for discrimination, entitled it to change its "charitable objects".

But in a judgement published on Thursday, the quango has ruled that it will still not allow Catholic Care to restrict its services to heterosexuals only.

The Charity Commission agreed that organisations can sometimes bend the rules and it conceded that Catholic Care, whose adoption agency is part of a wider social care organisation run by the Diocese of Leeds, offered a “valuable, high-quality service”.

But it ruled that discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is a “serious matter” because it “departs from the principle of treating people equally”, and that religious views cannot justify such bias because adoption is a public matter.

The watchdog added that it believed same-sex couples can be “successful” adoptive parents and that even if Catholic Care closes down, the children it would have helped would be placed with new families through “other channels”. . . .

[Read the whole article on the Telegraph.co.uk website.]

[U.K.] Teacher Kicked out of Tory Party for Christian Views on Homosexuality Issued ‘Warning’ by School

By Hilary White

PAISLEY, Scotland, August 10, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A teacher who was kicked out of David Cameron’s Conservative party for his unwillingness to go along with the homosexualist agenda will not be sacked for his views, a disciplinary committee has decided.

The Renfrewshire Council, which runs the Rashielea Primary School, had suspended Philip Lardner over his remarks but decided to issue only a written warning, a decision Lardner says he will appeal.

Lardner told the Christian Institute, “If I don’t challenge this, other teachers will never be able to voice personal opinions in the future.”

A primary teacher at the school, Lardner was dropped as a candidate for the Tories just nine days before the May 6th general election after writing on his website that homosexuality was not something that should be privileged by the state. Homosexual behavior, he wrote, is “not normal” and should not be promoted to school children. After being deselected from the Tory candidacy, Lardner stood as an independent candidate.

Lardner later told LifeSiteNews.com that he had no interest in retracting his statements in order to curry favor with the new Tory leadership. “The vast majority of my local membership of the Tory party have been resolute on support for my opinion,” he said. Asked if he expected to suffer repercussions for his views with his employers, Lardner, who had already been placed on “cautionary suspension,” said that he was unafraid.

At an August 1st meeting of the Freedom Association, a libertarian lobby group, Lardner was defended by Roger Helmer, a Member of the European Parliament. Helmer expanded his comments on his blog, writing that Lardner came across in the comments as a “a reasonable, careful man, falling over himself to be courteous and respectful – indeed, almost apologetic.”

Lardner’s position, Helmer said, “is a traditional view with which many Christians (and most Muslims), and indeed many citizens of no particular religion, but of a broadly conservative turn of mind, would agree”.

Helmer blasted the Tories for their action saying the party had been merely “desperate to appease the strident homosexual zealots in the run-up to the election.” Helmer pointed out that even under the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, mandating freedom of religious expression and “right to a private life,” Lardner’s remarks are “clearly protected”.

“But the Conservative Party, despite its new-found enthusiasm for all things European … was not prepared to respect them.”

The offending piece on Lardner’s website read, “I will always support the rights of homosexuals to be treated within concepts of (common sense) equality and respect, and defend their rights to choose to live the way they want in private, but I will not accept that their behaviour is ‘normal’ or encourage children to indulge in it.

“The promotion of homosexuality by public bodies … was correctly outlawed by Mrs. Thatcher’s government. Toleration and understanding is one thing, but state-promotion of homosexuality is quite another. Why should Christian churches be forced by the Government to employ homosexuals as ‘ministers’ against all that the bible teaches? They are being forced by the Government to betray their mission…”

He said that Christians, who make up the majority of the British population, believe that homosexuality is “somewhere between ‘unfortunate’ and simply ‘wrong’” and “should not be penalised for politely saying so”.

“The current ‘law’ is wrong and must be overturned in the interests of freedom as well as Christian values.”

Helmer wrote, “It seems that these days our expectation not to be offended takes precedence over the basic human right to free speech”.

Lardner told LSN that he believes David Cameron "must make clear whether or not he wants Christians to vote for the Conservative party."

"By suspending me, he has effectively said there is no place for Christians in the party. Does he or does he not want the vote of Christians who share my views?" he asked.

Read previous LSN coverage:

‘I Stand by My Statement Absolutely’: Scottish Candidate Sacked by Conservatives for Opposing Gay Agenda
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10042802.html

School board supports Pride events

Vancouver Courier July 28, 2010

The Vancouver School Board will be among the dozens of participants in this weekend’s Pride parade.

Board chair Patti Bacchus and some other schools trustees will be on the VSB’s float—a decorated old school bus.

Bacchus says the district has long supported social responsibility and promoted inclusiveness through its anti-homophobia mentor and Pride Advisory Group.

This year, the VSB hosted a Dare to Stand Out conference in March, and secondary schools have Gay-Straight Alliance clubs. Students and staff were also encouraged to participate in Wear Pink Day, which focused on reducing bullying, especially homophobic bullying and name calling.

C-FAM, June 24, 2010:

US Administration Launches All-Out International Homosexual “Rights” Offensive

By Terrence McKeegan, J.D.

     WASHINGTON DC, June 24th (C-FAM) United States (US) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed a reception at the State Department, proclaiming that “human rights are gay rights and gay rights are human rights, once and for all.” The reception celebrated “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month,” as was officially proclaimed by President Barack Obama for the month of June, and follows a recent incident at the United Nations (UN) where U.S. representatives made loud demands for immediate action on accrediting a homosexual “rights” group to the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

     Secretary Clinton used her address at the reception as an opportunity to set forth a very explicit agenda of promoting the homosexual “rights” agenda throughout the world. “We are elevating our human rights dialogues with other governments and conducting public diplomacy to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons,” said Clinton. “Our Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor produces an annual Human Rights Report that include a section on how LGBT persons are treated in every country.” Additionally, Clinton noted that, “The Bureau of African Affairs has taken the lead by asking every embassy in Africa to report on the conditions of local LGBT communities. And I’m asking every regional bureau to make this issue a priority.”

     Demonstrating just how much of a priority this issue is, Clinton offered a few examples of US diplomats actively promoting homosexual “rights” agenda overseas. “In Albania, a young man named Klodian Cela recently came out on a popular television program called Big Brother. Soon after, our ambassador, John Withers, went on television to publicly express support for this man.”

     Earlier this month, at the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) Committee hearings where 19 UN Member States review applications from NGOs for accreditation with the UN, the application of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) provoked a fierce debate. After the Egyptian delegate posed questions for the group including concerns that IGLHRC position’s could threaten the rights to religious freedom and expression of individuals, the US delegate attempted to suspend additional review of the group by calling for an immediate vote to accredit the group.

     Egypt countered by observing that its questions had not been "answered in a straight way” by the group and asserting its right to have a full review process. Egypt then asked for a procedural “no action” vote to be taken on the US motion for an immediate vote. This procedural vote was carried by a majority of the members of the committee, leaving the US and other Western countries to issue strong condemnations of the committee and even individual members. Despite this outcome, some diplomats privately stated that the US and other Western countries would try to bypass the NGO Committee and call for a vote on the IGLHRC application at the upcoming ECOSOC meeting in July.

     Finally, President Obama, in his White House proclamation for Father’s Day this year, did not miss the opportunity to stress that “nurturing families come[s] in many forms” including children being raised by “two fathers.”

President Obama Proclaims Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month

We in Canada may have largely missed the import of the proclamation by President Obama of June, 2010, as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month" in the United States. The proclamation is a very open declaration of Obama's plans to further the goals of activists in those communities.

Here are excepts from the proclamation of May 28, 2010:

". . . This month, as we recognize the immeasurable contributions of LGBT Americans, we renew our commitment to the struggle for equal rights for LGBT Americans and to ending prejudice and injustice wherever it exists. . . ."

"Much work remains to fulfill our Nation's promise of equal justice under law for LGBT Americans. That is why we must give committed gay couples the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple, and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. We must protect the rights of LGBT families by securing their adoption rights, ending employment discrimination against LGBT Americans, and ensuring Federal employees receive equal benefits. We must create safer schools so all our children may learn in a supportive environment. I am also committed to ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so patriotic LGBT Americans can serve openly in our military, and I am working with the Congress and our military leadership to accomplish that goal. . . . ."

"NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2010 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. . . . ."

Williams Lake school district restricts anti-homophobia events

By Erin Hitchcock - Williams Lake Tribune
May 18, 2010

The president of the Williams Lake Gay Straight Alliance says she’ll risk suspension later this week in protest of School District 27 canceling an anti-homophobia event planned for this week at Columneetza Secondary School.

Lexi Saffel says she will participate in a gender bender day Friday, where students had been invited to dress as a member of the opposite sex.

“I don’t think it’s fair at all for the school district to cancel [the day],” Saffel says. “We’re not doing anything wrong as long as we dress in an appropriate manner for school.”

She expects at least 50 people to participate, despite being warned that it could lead to suspension. She says the students who plan to participate in gender bending day can’t be suspended, even though she says she was told otherwise.

“Technically, they’re not allowed to suspend us for wearing the opposite gender’s clothing, as long as it is in an appropriate tasteful manner,” Saffel says.

“There’s nothing in the dress code that says guys have to wear guys’ clothes and girls have to wear girls’ clothes.”

The gender bender day was cancelled Friday by the district, and an assembly planned for yesterday also didn’t occur. Saffel says the assembly would have featured herself and another student discussing their experiences with homophobia, and a video with students discussing discrimination against gay, bisexual, and trans-gendered people.

“I’m really disappointed — we don’t get to make as much of a difference as I was hoping,” Saffel says.

“The original reason we heard was that we were promoting gayness. I feel like what was behind (parent complaints) was homophobia.”

She says discrimination and homophobia are issues that need to be addressed at Columneetza and in Williams Lake.

“Students need to have the information,” she says.

School District 27 superintendent Diane Wright says there have been no discussions about suspensions in relation to gender bender day, which she confirms was cancelled.

She says it was cancelled after the school principal was made aware of how some students were planning to handle gender bending day on Friday.

“Some of the students were going to make a mockery of it,” Wright says, adding that she met with the president of the Cariboo Chilcotin Teachers Association, the teachers who were sponsoring the events, and the principal on Friday and discussed the issue.

Other events, including the assembly on Monday, a rainbow day on Tuesday — which would entail students wearing different colours — a walk Wednesday, and face painting and free hugs Thursday, are allowed to happen, as long as they don’t take place during class time, Wright says.

She says parents expressed concern with some events being held during class time, especially since exams are three weeks away.

She says some parents were also concerned about not being notified in advance of the activities that were planned at the school for anti-homophobia week.

“I can appreciate that,” Wright says.

“It’s important families have those discussions with their children and any topic that could be deemed sensitive.” . . . .

[Read the whole article in the Williams Lake Tribune online.]

"Queer posters demand respect"

Sardis secondary Grade 12 student Brittany Sandve stands by her work-a series of posters depicting couples in gay, lesbian and bisexual relationships designed to raise awareness about sexual orientation issues and to combat homophobia at the school. She hopes to have the posters up around the school by next week.

Cornelia Naylor/TIMES

"Let boys be girls." "It's OK to question." "You don't have to accept it, just respect it."

Cornelia Naylor, The Chilliwack Times

April 23, 2010

These captions on bright posters featuring images of gay, lesbian and bisexual couples are sure to raise a few eyebrows at Sardis secondary next week.

The work of Brittany Sandve, the school's Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) president, the posters are intended to raise awareness about sexual orientation and homophobia at the school. There are five in all depicting each of the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning) identities.

Based on photographs of Sardis GSA members, the images are stylized silhouettes of hugging couples. The boys' skin is hot pink, the girls' is shades of blue. "There was a lot of thought put in to it," said Sandve. Among other things, she hopes the posters drive home the fact that there are LGBTQ students at Sardis. . . .

[Read the whole article online.]

Angry parents plan sex-ed protest

Will Rally in Toronto May 10

From TheSpec.com

April 20, 2010

Carmelina Prete
Leaders of self-described "family-focused" groups are planning a protest in Toronto on May 10 to oppose the province’s new sex education curriculum.

But Premier Dalton McGuinty stands by the new curriculum . . .

Ontario elementary schoolchildren will learn more detailed sex education in earlier grades under a new province-wide curriculum that begins this September.

The revised curriculum, to be taught in all school boards in Ontario, also means for the first time, children will learn about "invisible differences" such as sexual orientation and gender identity in Grade 3.

In addition to learning about healthy relationships, self-esteem and the value of delaying sexual activity, students will learn about some potentially controversial issues such as:

* In Grade 6: personal pleasure in masturbation, vaginal lubrication and wet dreams.

* In Grade 7: sex acts such as oral sex and anal intercourse.

Some parents and educators don't support such explicit teachings about sexuality.

Protest details are not yet available. For more details about the group protesting the curriculum, visit www.stopcorruptingchildren.ca

- With files from Canadian Press

Excerpts from the 2010 Physical Education and Health curriculum document for teachers:

Grade 3: Describe how visible differences ... and invisible differences (e.g., learning abilities, skills and talents, personal or cultural values and beliefs, gender identity, sexual orientation...) make each person unique, and identify ways of showing respect for differences in others

Teacher prompt: “Sometimes we are different in ways you can see. Sometimes we are different in ways you cannot see – such as how we learn, what we think, and what we are able to do. Give me some examples of things that make each person unique.” (p.110)

Grade 6: Describe how they can build confidence and lay a foundation for healthy relationships by acquiring a clearer understanding of the physical, social, and emotional changes that occur during adolescence.

Teacher prompt: “Having erections, wet dreams, and vaginal lubrication are normal things that happen as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring your body by touching or masturbating is something that many people will do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not harmful and is one way of learning about your body.” (p.159)

Grade 7: Identify ways of preventing STIs, including HIV, and/or unintended pregnancy, such as delaying first intercourse.

Teacher prompt: “Engaging in sexual activities like oral sex, vaginal intercourse, and anal intercourse means that you can be infected with an STI. If you do not have sex, you do not need to worry about getting an STI.”(p.180)

[See the whole article on TheSpec.com ]

Day of Silence, Day of Truth Make Bid to Influence the Nation's Youth [in the U.S.A.]

[From CitizenLink, April 12, 2010]

by Kim Trobee, editor

'It's time for an honest conversation about the biblical truth for sexuality.'

One of the nation's largest gay-activist groups, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), is promoting its annual Day of Silence on Friday.

Daryl Presgraves, public relations manager for GLSEN, said the event encourages kids to take a vow of silence for the day to highlight what the group calls "safer" schools.

"What the Day of Silence does is it raises awareness about a pretty pervasive problem," he said. "Nearly nine out of 10 LGBT students tell us that they experience harassment at school."

But a closer look at the materials being distributed to educators and students shows there is more than an anti-bullying message being pushed.

For example, GLSEN's data sheet for kids called "How to Get What You Want—With an Ask!" encourages students to use the Day of Silence to get a "queer-friendly prom," as well as homosexual-themed books and teacher trainings in their schools.

Teachers are encouraged to discuss the Day of Silence with their students and observe five minutes of silence in the classroom as a show of solidarity.

Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family, said the event turns kids into political lobbyists for GLSEN's adult-driven agenda.

"We agree that every student should be protected from bullying and harassment," she said, "and that no student should be hurt or ridiculed, no matter who they are or what they believe. But parents need to be aware that the Day of Silence unnecessarily politicizes and sexualizes the school environment, paving the way for classroom lessons that advocate and normalize things like same-sex marriage and cross-dressing."

One alternative would be to allow kids to participate in the Day of Truth on Thursday.

The Day of Truth is sponsored by Exodus International and promotes a respectful dialogue among students on the issue of homosexuality. This year's theme is "Get the Conversation Started." Students will be handing out cards between classes that read:

"People with differing, even opposing viewpoints, can freely exchange ideas and respectfully listen to each other. It's time for an honest conversation about the biblical truth for sexuality. Let's get the conversation started!"

[The whole article from which the above was selected is found on CitizenLink.]

Ugandan social workers back anti-gay bill; Exodus opposed

[a selection published on the Exodus International website]

A recent article in the Baptist Press describes the difference of opinion between NASWU and Exodus International on the Uganda anti-gay bill.

By Erin Roach

March 30, 2010

"Although the NASWU seems genuinely concerned in helping those struggling with same-sex attraction, the organization fails to see that Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 -- as any legislation that criminalizes homosexuality -- does more to hurt than help homosexuals," Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, said.

"Exodus continues to urge Uganda's parliament to reject this hurtful legislation; we also ask the country's evangelical churches to take the lead in offering hope and healing to all people, regardless of their particular struggles."

In addition to prosecuting homosexual behavior, the proposed legislation would require pastors, missionaries, health care providers and counselors to report people suspected of such behavior. Last fall, Exodus wrote a letter to Uganda's president expressing disapproval of the legislation.

In the statement issued March 22, Chambers wrote, "Exodus International believes that every human life, regardless of an individual's sexual behavior, is of inestimable worth to God and that defending this principle is foundational in offering a Christian response to any issue.

...

'Anti-homophobia' conference seeks to mold narrow minds

School board rallies gay activists

The Vancouver Courier

Published: Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Ever wondered what a gay activist boot camp for kids looks like?

If so, hurry over to Queen Mary elementary in West Point Grey. It's a beautiful old brick building on Trimble Street, home to the purple and gold Royals--and today until 3 p.m--the Dare To Stand Out conference. Billed as a "youth leadership conference for LGBTQ youth and allies," the event welcomes roughly 120 high school students, Grade 8 to 12, from around the province.

During an interview last Friday, Stephen Mulligan, the school board's "anti-homophobia consultant" and driving force behind the conference, said most of the attending students represent student councils or Gay/Straight Alliance student groups. "It allows the kids to do some thinking and some planning of how they might take the information that they learn at the conference back to their school."

So what will the kids learn and take home? What lessons are the taxpayers paying for? According to the conference mission statement, organizers want to "plan a world without homophobia or gender stereotypes."

A world without gender stereotypes. Say it ain't so. I'll miss them. Millions rely on them. Western culture was built on them. But all good things must come to an end.

More importantly, organizers claim the conference targets bigotry--homophobia, to be exact. Obviously, any fruitful discussion about bigotry in public schools must include a diverse panel representing a wide array of cultural backgrounds. To promote tolerance and understanding, differing opinions must be discussed and respected. So who'll speak at the conference? Mulligan and company have compiled an impressive list of speakers, dubbed "advocacy heroes."

There's Janine Fuller, manager of Little Sister's sex shop/bookstore, whose scholarly knowledge of dildo history is sure to stimulate young minds. And Morgan Brayton, a columnist for gay newspaper Xtra! West, who in a 2006 column detailed her experience in a public orgy. Foul-mouthed lesbian comic Kimothy Shaughnessy will make an appearance, as will Vancouver Pride Society president Ken Coolen.

Not only is the speaker list inappropriate for young teens, but much like Coolen's stream of stereotypes on display each summer in the gay pride parade, it provides a narrow view of Vancouver's gay population.

Conference co-architect Jeremy Dias, an Ontario resident who parlayed a human rights commission complaint (and an eventual lucrative out-of-court settlement) into one of Ontario's most ubiquitous gay lobbying groups, will conduct a "panel discussion on ethnicity, religion and sexuality."

Oddly, Mulligan, the aforementioned anti-homophobia consultant, didn't know who'd join Dias on the religion panel. A pastor? Priest? Rabbi? Imam?

"No, not pastors," cautioned Mulligan. "I'm not sure exactly who makes up that panel."

Speaking of religion. Before the speakers take centre stage, Berend McKenzie, an actor/social commentator, will perform a one-man show in the Queen Mary gymnasium. McKenzie's no stranger to Vancouver crowds. His X-rated puppet show titled Get Off the Cross, Mary! ran at the 2007 Vancouver Fringe Festival. While details of the show aren't worth repeating, it featured raunchy re-enactments of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion . . .

Confused, I contacted school board chair Patti Bacchus, who quickly granted the conference her full--albeit somewhat blind--support. "I haven't looked at it in great detail, but I can tell you that the board is very supportive of the work Steve Mulligan and the folks he's working with are doing."

Indeed. Our democracy depends on citizen participation including organized political activism and advocacy--gay, straight, right wing, left wing, whatever. But there's no room in the public school system for an activist jamboree laughingly veiled as an anti-bigotry conference.

However, on the bright side, Dare To Stand Out offers a revealing glimpse inside the Vancouver School Board and another argument for private schools.

mhasiuk@vancourier.com

[You can read the whole of the immediately-above article in the online version of The Vancouver Courier.]

Dare to Stand Out Conference a Success--According to Pro-Homosexuality Activist Magazine

The "Dare to Stand Out Conference" was a success, according to the pro-homosexuality activist magazine Xtra (Vancouver section, online, March 26, 2020 edition).

The article, "Dare to Stand Out Conference a success" reveals that besides the Vancouver School Board, four other organizations (Day of Pink, Jer's Vision, Out in Schopols, and Qmunity Gab Youth) sponsored the conference. It also reveals that "Ten districts and four independent schools sent more than 200 students and teachers" to the conference, according to the Vancouver School Board's "anti-homophobia and diversity" consultant.

The According to Xtra, "Attendees had their choice of one of seven workshops: advocating for change; ethnicity, religion and sexuality; BC's queer history; challenging anti-queer bias; starting a gay-straight alliance; and games, dialogue and interactive theatre to challenge bias."

A Grade Eight Student who attended is quoted as saying:
"I'm going to stop people from ignoring us and I'm going to shove it in their faces and throw it in the air until we have pride flags on every street corner.

"I've never seen so many queer people all in the same area, all out there showing their colours. I'm going to try to work on our GSA because there aren't a lot of members. And our events like pink T-shirt day and Day of Silence aren't very well publicized. So I'm going to work on that."

Day of Pink, Jer's Vision, Out in Schools, Qmunity Gab Youth

Social justice dispute heads for full hearing

By Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver SunMarch 12, 2010

A discrimination complaint against the Abbotsford school district over its handling of a new social justice course, which included information about sexual orientation and gender identity, is headed for a full inquiry by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal.

In a decision released this week, the tribunal rejected a bid by the district to have the complaint quashed after it agreed in 2009 to allow students to take Social Justice 12, despite a community controversy over the subject matter. That was a reversal from September 2008, when it ordered W.J. Mouat secondary school to cancel the provincial course and offer a local substitute to the 90 students who had registered.

The substitute, Global Studies and Active Citizenship, was described by critics as a "watered-down" version of Social Justice 12 because it was similar, but excluded mention of sexual orientation, gender identity, homophobia or heterosexism. This year, Mouat students may take Social Justice 12 providing they have parental permission.

That requirement for permission was added to the discrimination complaint, filed originally in October 2008 by Murray and Peter Corren. Although the district argued that it was not unusual to seek parental consent for school activities, the Correns said Social Justice 12 is the only provincially approved elective with that stipulation.

After reviewing the arguments, tribunal member Tonie Beharrell issued a 19-page decision saying the district had failed to convince her that the Correns' complaint is groundless and said the matter can be resolved only through a full hearing that will consider all evidence from both sides.

Beharrell did order the Correns to reduce their claim to represent 19,000 Abbotsford students and parents, noting they had tried to contact the 90 students who had registered for Social Justice in 2008 but as of January had received consent from only 10. . . . .

In an e-mail Thursday, association president Rick Guenther said the grievance was filed after the district sent school principals a list of conditions under which Social Justice 12 could be offered. "As far as we could determine, no other optional Grade 12 class in the district has ever been subject to any restrictions of that sort," he said. "We contend that the restrictions create a discriminatory work environment." . . . .

Murray Corren could not be reached for comment; Peter Corren died late last year.

[Click here to go to the full version of the above article in The Vancouver Sun online.]

Parents pull kids from public schools over gender teaching. Concern over new policy misplaced, say proponents.

From MountainNews.com

By Gord Bowes, News Staff

News

Mar 04, 2010

Tricia Cooper says she removed her two children from the public school system because she could see increasing infringement on her parental rights.

As a family with strong religious beliefs, Cooper wanted to take her daughters out of an environment she feels teaches her something contrary to what she believes.

“My child should not be taught in junior kindergarten that a woman can love a woman or a woman can be a man,” the Hamilton resident told the Mountain News. “It’s really up to me in my home to provide that kind of information.”

. . . .

Ontario school boards are required to implement equity and inclusive education policies, covering everything from ethnicity and race, to classism and gender, by September.

Cooper, who enrolled her children in a Catholic school this year, said she and many other parents are concerned about the gender equity and sexual orientation portion of the Hamilton public school board’s policy, which they feel will permeate the entire curriculum.

Concern about the policy picked up steam last month when Hamilton Community News managing editor Mark Cripps wrote a column about a Hamilton public school board information sheet for teachers which some believe shows the board believes it can trump parental rights when it comes to teaching about sexual orientation.

The gender equity policy is still in draft form.

. . . .

[Read the whole article in MountainNews.com .

How to Respond to Teachers Pushing Pro-Gay Curriculum: Family Group Advises Parents

By Patrick B. Craine

February 19, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The B.C.-based pro-family group Parents for Democracy in Education (PDE) have released a set of answers that parents can provide to teachers who ignore their complaints about the spread of homosexualist “propaganda” through the curricula of Canada's schools.

The new document offers responses to a controversial new sheet that has been distributed to Canadian teachers, entitled “Objections to Anti-Homophobia Curriculum in Schools?” The sheet offers “quick responses” to common objections given by parents who object to the treatment of homosexuality in their child’s school curriculum.

This “quick response” sheet for teachers was published by the Hamilton Mountain News last week after it were leaked to a reporter with the paper by teachers in the Hamilton public school board. The same sheet was also distributed by the British Columbia Teacher's Federation, which led PDE to issue their response.

The teacher sheet advises teachers to tell parents who complain about pro-gay classes that they “do not condone children being removed from our classes when we teach about Aboriginal People, people of color, people with disabilities or gays and lesbians.”

In response, PDE suggests parents state, in part: “It’s really not relevant what you condone. These are not your children. We are their parents.” “Your teaching should be consistent with and supportive of family principles, not undermining those principles,” they add.

Further, they point out that the teacher should be told: “You're mixing unlike categories when you compare homosexuals to Aboriginals, people of colour, or disabled people.” “Race is not a behaviour,” they write. “Homosexuality is. Race is not injurious to the person’s own health and well-being; homosexuality is.”

The teachers' quick response sheet also advises teachers to tell parents: “You can teach your child your own values at home. Public schools teach everyone about respecting diversity and valuing everyone.”

In this case, PDE suggests parents remind teachers that they “cannot and must not use their authority to tell children their parents are wrong.” “That’s an abuse of authority that deserves dismissal,” they continue. “We agree children should be taught to respect diversity and value everyone — but that can surely be achieved without teaching that sexual perversions are meritorious and praiseworthy.”

Another response for teachers reads: “All children, including yours, have a right to an education free from discrimination.” PDE points out that in this response, “we have a logical error caused by propagandistic thinking.” “To learn to discriminate between what is right and what is wrong is an essential part of education,” they write.

Further, to teachers who argue that they have a duty to provide “accurate information,” PDE responds that the schools' “pro-‘gay’ propaganda is full of mis-information. It does not inform students of the very real and serious physical and mental health risks associated with homosexual behaviour.”

The full document, with end notes and supporting documentation, can be found here.

Feb 15, 2010 by Candi [from the Citizen blog Drive Thru]

President Obama Plans to Increase Controversial “Safe Schools Czar’s” Budget

President Obama and his administration have continued to ignore the loud outcry over the appointment of a radical gay activist, Kevin Jennings, to head up the nation’s “safe schools” office.

Not only have they remained deaf to these concerns, but now they plan to give Jennings significantly more of our money to spend! President Obama’s proposed 2011 budget would allocate $410 million for programs overseen by Jennings. That’s an increase of $45 million.

So want does Jennings intend to do with this money?

For starters, he says he’s going to make “school climate” measurement a top priority—and, in fact, he’d love for “school climate” to eventually be made part of the “Common Core” national standards movement! He plans to begin with “a new grant program coming out of this department where we’ll be providing possibly as much as $70 million for investments in school climate projects.” (He revealed all this and much more in this month’s Phi Delta Kappan magazine. Scroll down to the “Safe at School” title.)

So at this point, you might be wondering, What on earth does “school climate” really mean? I think it’s best to take that definition from Kevin Jennings–based on his record as the longtime founder and leader of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network).

Under Jennings’ leadership, GLSEN has provided students with a “school climate” continuum measurement tool. This tool reveals a lot about Jennings’ true goals: A positively rated “inclusive school,” for instance, is defined as one where “LGBT themes are fully integrated into curricula across a variety of subject areas and grade levels.” . . . .

By contrast, a “hostile school,” is one where “Curricula are devoid of LGBT themes” and homosexuality is “characterized” as “sin.” . . . .

Is this how Kevin Jennings will use taxpayer-funded money to measure our schools and force changes?

It remains to be seen, since his plans are still in the baby stages—but parents should stay on the alert.

[Abridged from the Citizen Blog Drive Thru]

From Times Online

March 7, 2009

Parents face prosecution over 'gay' education class protest

Sara Dixon

Gay Reversal Advocates Say School Libraries Banning Their 'Ex-Gay' Books

Thursday, October 22, 2009
By Diane Macedo

Visit most public school libraries and you'll find an array of books that address the subject of homosexuality. Many include sexually explicit content, and some even include graphic images.

But if you're looking for a book that refers to the possibility that homosexuality can be "reversed," a Chicago-based group says your best bet is the banned books list.

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) says there's an entire community of people across the world who say that their sexual orientation changed from gay to straight. But they're not getting their message out, the group says, because libraries across the country refuse to carry literature that describes these experiences or any studies that support them.

So a book like "My Genes Made Me Do It!: A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation" — which argues that sexuality is shaped by a variety of factors, not just biological — can't get a spot on the school library shelf.

Neither can "You Don't Have to Be Gay," which describes author Jeff Konrad's struggle to overcome his unwanted same-sex attractions.

But "Baby Be-Bop," the coming-out story of a gay teen, which includes descriptions of his sexual encounters in bathroom stalls with men he never talks to, makes the stacks

[Click here to read the whole of the article immediately above.]

Monday, October 20, 2008

'Gay' pedophilia and Obama['s Appointee]

Linda Harvey asks if senator agrees with his GLBT supporters

[This article from October of 2008 has gained additional significance since the appointment of Jennings to head up "safe schoools" efforts for the U.S. federal Department of Education.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd been wondering what Kevin Jennings was doing these days. Jennings is the founder and long-time head of the radical homosexual group GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. GLSEN's mission has been to plant "gay" clubs and training programs in as many schools as possible. GLSEN now claims 4,000 "gay-straight alliances" exist, although this number is doubtful.

Certainly, there are way too many. The group's target has been to place these clubs in all U.S. schools, K through 12. If you think a kindergartener signing up for a "gay" club is ludicrous, you are not alone.

But Jennings has moved on to better things. He's now the Obama campaign fundraising co-chair for the "LGBT" community – that's "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered." You can listen to Jennings lay out the rights-oriented rhetoric in two interviews with Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign, on the website "LGBT for Obama."

Their conversation, reviewing Jennings' record, dwells on preventing bullying of "gay" kids. Jennings constructed this Trojan horse for access to schools despite the ability of every community to punish school bullying without accommodating the "gay" agenda. This smokescreen hides the pornographic reality of GLSEN's "support" for kids under Jennings' leadership.

Remember the book "Queering Elementary Education," with the gushing blurb on the back from Obama's radical "social justice" colleague Bill Ayers? Well, the same book has a foreword written by Jennings. In researching GLSEN over the years, I've found horrific elements of what can only be called child sexual corruption. The more closely one reads the GLSEN material, the worse it gets.

Just about every type of sexual practice imaginable is apparently acceptable and even worthy of "celebration" by any age student or teacher as far as GLSEN is concerned. GLSEN also supports gender-distortion through cross-dressing, even for elementary school children.

Is this the kind of "school reform" Obama has in mind?

Some of GLSEN's recommended reading material implicitly condones criminal sexual contact between adults with minors. Many such incidents are described in erotic and nostalgic passages. I've yet to see "warnings" about the episodes in these books, which surely mislead thousands of vulnerable kids. I wrote in detail about what I will share below in 2002, yet the books in question, and many more just as objectionable, are still offered by GLSEN for sale on its site.

The problem starts with Jennings' own writings in books like "One Teacher In 10." Jennings' dream world is one where openly "gay" teachers serve as role models who influence students' sexual conduct. In the first edition of this book, Jennings, a former teacher, relates his encounter with a homosexually inclined male student:

"Toward the end of my first year, during the spring of 1988, Brewster appeared in my office in the tow of one of my advisees ... to whom I had been "out" for a long time. "Brewster has something he needs to talk with you about," she intoned ominously. ... On a hunch, I suddenly asked, "What's his name?" Brewster's eyes widened briefly, and then out spilled a story about his involvement with an older man he had met in Boston. I listened, sympathized, offered advice. He left my office with a smile on his face. ... "("One Teacher in 10: Gay and Lesbian Educators tell their Stories," Alyson Publications, 1994.)

What did Jennings recommend to Brewster that brought a smile to his face? It sounds like he affirmed this teen/adult homosexual relationship, instead of contacting the boy's parents or the authorities. Is this just the kind of wisdom we hope Obama consultants use in formulating education policy? Child predators as implementers of "social justice," perhaps?

The book "Growing Up Gay/Growing Up Lesbian," recommended on the GLSEN website for kids in grades seven to 12, describes two 10-year-old boys in a very graphic sexual encounter (pp.99-100). In the same book, an adult man named Eliot reflects on his youth:

"My first experience was with a much older man, a friend of Derek's [his father]. ... When I was 15, he must have been 29, 30 ... I seduced him. ... It was a wild night. We did everything."

This is the dearest fantasy of pedophiles and pederasts – the pretense that the youth seduces them.

Another GLSEN recommended book, "Rainbow Boys," features an episode of homosexual sex between one of the main characters, a 17-year-old boy, and a 29-year-old man he has just met via the Internet ( p. 148). Again, a great influence for kids.

Fluid sexual activity and homosexual experimentation is another common theme in GLSEN-recommended books. "My sexuality is as fluid, infinite, undefinable, and ever-changing as the north-flowing river. ... Sexuality is not black or white ... it is gray. ... I know that defining myself is not so simple. ..." writes a 16-year-old in "Revolutionary Voices : A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology" (p.167). . . . .

I could go on and on, unfortunately. The GLSEN "Book Link" introduction states that the selections are recommended to "... empower our mission to ensure safe schools for all LGBT students."

So finally, then, this is what is meant by "safe schools": lots of weird, early sex by kids, some of it with adults.

Obama needs to remove Kevin Jennings immediately from this position. And voters need some answers to the following questions:

Does Obama believe children are "born gay" and should be able to declare this identity in grade school and join a "gay" club? Kevin Jennings does.

Does Obama believe consensual relationships between 15-year-olds and 29-nine-year-olds are OK? Jennings thinks so. (Some think Planned Parenthood does, too – another question for Obama.)

Does Obama believe a "safe" school is one where no one can criticize homosexual behavior? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that, with the CDC reporting HIV rates rising around 12 percent per year for 13 to 24-year-old males who have sex with males (MSM), we still cannot tell our boys to abstain from homosexual behavior? Will he appoint clueless federal health officials? Kevin Jennings would approve.

Does Obama believe kids can decide at age 9 or 10 that they were born in the wrong body, want to switch genders and have schools support this disorder? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe [that] the Christian moral standard that homosexuality is wrong needs to be suppressed and depicted as "hateful" in the public square, including schools? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that if same-sex "marriage" is legalized, this new "law" should be shoved down the throats of all children and their parents via social engineering in public schools? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that "social justice" and "school reform" require students to not just tolerate, but approve of homosexuality and gender change? That the "yuck" factor simply will not be allowed, because it reflects bigotry? Jennings does. . . .

[You can read the whole of the above article online on WorldnetDaily.]

-------------------------------------

Linda Harvey is president of Mission America and author of the new book "Not My Child: Contemporary Paganism and the New Spirituality" (AMG Publishers).

Boycott of California Schools in the Making

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - Oct. 21, 2009

SaveCalifornia.com has launched a new drive to protest a pro-homosexual bill recently signed into law.

Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, tells OneNewsNow he is calling for a boycott over a law designed to force students to honor a deceased homosexual activist. . ..

"With Harvey Milk Gay Day now the law for California government schools, and a handful of sexual indoctrination laws already existing that are in effect throughout the entire school year, parents have to at least boycott Harvey Milk Day or days or week," Thomasson urges.

The boycott, he says, needs to be established by parents to protect their children, but also to drive home a point that they do not want their children indoctrinated with a pro-homosexual philosophy. Thomasson feels that taking students out of the government school system is the only way to accomplish this protection. He adds that parents also need to be aware of the quality of education their children are receiving in California.

Thomasson reports that "on the academic chart, California is among the lowest academically in the country. On the sexual indoctrination chart, California leads the pack with Massachusetts following."

Given these statistics, the West Coast pro-family, pro-child organization hopes that the boycott will convey the message that time in the classroom should not be used in a way that might risk losing average daily attendance funds. In addition, Thomasson believes California parents need to be concerned enough about the welfare of their children to begin homeschooling or sending them to private or religious schools.

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done to Massachusetts

After the law giving the governmental stamp of approval to same-sex "marriages" was passed by the Canadian parliament, some who had fought against the measure
thought it was time to move on. But the introduction of that measure has profound consequences, particularly for the children and youth of our land. MassReisistance.org has put out a listing of consequences which they have seen for the American state of Massachusetts. A number of these consequences have already come to pass in British Columbia, either before or after the introduction of same-sex marriage by federal law. Other consequences are ones we may expect
--ones the citizens of tis province should be concerned about. The document referred to is at:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.pdf .

President Obama Speaks at Gay-Activist Event

[ From CitizenLink at: http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000011196.cfm --Oct. 12, 2009 ]

by Steve Jordahl, senior correspondent

Address renews the administration's vow to promote homosexual agenda.

President Barack Obama spoke Saturday at the annual fundraiser for the gay-activist Human Rights Campaign (HRC).

The president told the crowd he supports the gay activist agenda.

"When you look back on these years," he said, "you will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognized relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman."

Obama promised that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the Clinton-era policy that allows gay men and women to serve in the armed forces as long as they don't reveal their sexual orientation.

Robert Knight, senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries, said the president is simply trying to please a powerful and vocal constituency.

"Homosexual activists learned long ago that if they scream loudly and often, they get more of what they want," he said. "So even if they get 95 percent of something, they say, 'What have you done for us lately'?"

The president also promised to pass hate-crimes legislation and repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

He said those who uphold marriage between one man and one woman, "hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes."

"That would be the Bible," said Knight. "All people who think it's normal and natural for marriage to be between a man and a woman, the president of the United States is saying that's old and outworn."

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Watch President Obama's entire speech to the Human Rights Campaign.

. . . .

Obama Criticizes People with "Old Attitudes" in Keynote Speech at Homosexualist Dinner
Promises to repeal the "so-called Defense of Marriage Act"

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In his speech to the homosexualist Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Saturday evening, President Obama again professed loyalty to the homosexual agenda and criticized people who hold to "old attitudes" about homosexuality. The President also vowed to repeal the "so-called Defense of Marriage Act" and praised the U.S. House's approval of homosexual hate crimes legislation on Thursday.

Obama began his speech, which was interrupted numerous times by applause, by thanking the HRC for the invitation and "for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard in their jobs and care deeply about their families -- and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender."

"Despite the real gains that we've made, there's still laws to change and there's still hearts to open," Obama told the cheering crowd.

"There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones -- good and decent people -- who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted. And that's painful and it's heartbreaking."

The President's remarks reflect his statements while campaigning for the presidency last year, when, despite asserting that he believed marriage was "between a man and a woman," he simultaneously supported various aspects of the homosexual agenda. Similarly, in his speech Saturday, President Obama expressed warm support for granting homosexuals "the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country," while not specifically mentioning whether such couples should be granted the title of marriage.

On Saturday, President Obama called the movement's quest to normalize homosexuality on various fronts a quest for "basic equality."

"I'm here with a simple message: I'm here with you in that fight," he said.

Obama also praised the passage of homosexual hate crimes legislation in a House defense policy bill on Thursday, and said he was preparing to sign the law after it passes Congress.

In the course of the speech, Obama vowed to repeal the prohibition against open homosexuals in the military, and to support an "affirmative action" bill against employer discrimination in hiring homosexuals.

Addressing the lobby's concern over Obama's perceived lack of zeal in dismantling federal marriage laws and other such issues, Obama said Saturday: "I also appreciate that many of you don't believe progress has come fast enough. I want to be honest about that, because it's important to be honest among friends."

He assured the group that "my commitment to you is unwavering," and pointed out that he has called on Congress to "repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act."

The homosexual lobby was critical of the administration in May when the White House website removed all references to Obama's campaign promise to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the 1996 law that says that for federal law purposes marriage can only be considered as between a man and a woman. Obama says that he now favors dismantling DOMA by the legislative process rather than by executive fiat.

The President expressed broad support for HRC's mission to drastically alter America's cultural perception of marriage and the family.

"My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see ... a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman," said Obama.

"Our common ideals are a force far stronger than any division that some might sow," he concluded. "Day by day, law by law, changing mind by mind, that is the promise we are fulfilling."

Conservative leaders expressed dismay at the President's speech.

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said that "the radical cultural changes that the President promised to this audience" were "shocking."

"What the President neglected to mention was that all of this will be forced on the American people who in the last election gave the President a mandate to fix the economy - not enact radical social policy changes such as allowing homosexuals to serve in the military," said Perkins.

"President Obama tried to hide his pro-homosexual agenda during the presidential campaign. With the election behind him and a liberal Congress beside him, he is now positioned to move forward an agenda with the ultimate goal of redefining marriage at the expense of religious liberty."

Though Obama appeared to throw his weight squarely behind the group's agenda, however, some homosexual commentators expressed dissatisfaction with the speech, saying that the President should have set a timetable for his proposed legislative maneuvers.

Andrew Sullivan, blogger for the Atlantic, wrote of the speech: "There were no meaningful commitments within a time certain, not even a commitment to fulfilling them in his first term; just meaningless, feel-good commitments that we have no way of holding him to. Once the dust settles, ask yourself. What did he promise to achieve in the next year? Or two years? Or four years? The answer is: nothing."

(Read Obama's complete speech here)

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

President Obama Declares June 2009 'LGBT Pride Month'
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jun/09060208.html

Obama Administration Announces Radical Homosexualist Agenda on White House Website
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jan/09012109.html

From CitizenLink, October 5, 2009:

Firestorm Erupts over Obama's Education Appointee

by Kim Trobee, editor

'Parents should be most concerned about the harmful and radical policies he could enact today that would negatively impact public schoolchildren.'

Yet another controversial presidential appointee is in the national spotlight. Safe Schools czar Kevin Jennings has been accused of inappropriate statements and actions, including the failure to report evidence of sexual activity between a teenager and an adult.

Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said you don't have to look back 20 years to be concerned about Jennings.

"Parents should be most concerned about the harmful and radical policies he could enact today that would negatively impact public schoolchildren," she said.

The best evidence is Jennings' 13-year track record as leader of the largest homosexual advocacy group in the nation, devoted entirely to promoting homosexuality to kids: GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

Under the quise of "safe schools," GLSEN promotes classroom activities that not only give biased portrayals of Christian and socially conservative viewpoints, but also turn students into lobbyists for its extreme left causes.

[Click here to read the whole CitizenLink article online.]

From the homosexual periodical XtraWest online, September 10, 2009:

Parental consent for Social Justice 12 discriminatory: teachers union

EDUCATION / About 50 schools across province offering SJ 12 this year

Natasha Barsotti / Vancouver / Thursday, September 10, 2009

Requiring Grade 12 students to seek parental consent to take a gay-friendly elective course contravenes the BC Human Rights Code, the Abbotsford teachers union contends.

The union recently filed a grievance with the Abbotsford school board challenging the parental consent requirement to take Social Justice 12.

"I filed a grievance with the board claiming that this kind of action is contrary to the non-discrimination aspects of the Human Rights Code,"

Abbotsford District Teachers' Association (ADTA) president Rick Guenther told Xtra West Sep 3.

Guenther, who filed the grievance at the end of the last school year, says there have since been discussions with district staff but the matter has yet to be resolved.

"We never see trustees in any of these matters. We always work with the district staff," Guenther notes when asked if there was any communication from the board itself.

Last fall, the Abbotsford school board angered students at WJ Mouat Secondary School who had signed up for Social Justice 12 only to be told they could not take the class.

About 90 students had signed up for the course, which introduces concepts such as homophobia, heterosexism and cultural imperialism. It was developed as part of a settlement reached three years ago between BC's Attorney General and Murray and Peter Corren, who had filed a human rights complaint against the province alleging the omission of gay realities from the classroom was discriminatory.

The board eventually reinstated the course after a student-led protest last September, followed by a hundreds-strong social justice rally in December.

But in reinstating the course, the board developed a series of guidelines to govern its offering. Among the guidelines sent to administrators in a memo dated Apr 16 is a requirement that the district superintendent or designate must "annually inform administrators of the requirement for obtaining informed, active, and written consent from parents of any students under the age of 19 enrolling [in] the course."

The memo also states that school principals must ensure that written parental consent is obtained prior to any student attending the first class of Social Justice 12; that the school timetable be developed in such a way that no student is programmed into the elective "by default, i.e. because no other elective is available;" and that a copy of the Intended Learning Outcomes be made available either electronically or in print form to the parents of any student who selects the course.

Guenther says as far as he's aware requiring Grade 12 students to have signed permission from parents in order to take the course is unique to the Social Justice 12 course.

"No other optional Grade 12 course has that requirement," he says. "So in some sense, it's still receiving some discriminatory or preferential treatment depending on your point of view."

Guenther says a copy of the grievance is now lodged with the BC Teachers Federation (BCTF). "The BCTF lawyers will actually decide which of the guidelines are the ones that will be taken to an arbitration, if it gets that far," he adds.

The Abbotsford school board's media liaison, Dave Stephen, confirms that the board did receive "something in late spring, early summer" when asked if a grievance had been filed with the board.

"It is in due process and we would have no further comment on that at this point," Stephen told Xtra West Sep 3.

Asked why students had to get parental consent for this particular course, Stephen says the board's feeling was that "they would like that course to move ahead with parental permission" and that that was "their prerogative."

He says the board had heard "a variety of viewpoints" and "felt that was the appropriate process to move forward with the course here."

Stephen says only two schools in the district - WJ Mouat and Bakerview Centre for Learning, a continuing education facility - are now offering Social Justice 12. "It's open to any school to run," he adds.

BCTF vice-president Susan Lambert says it's "quite an interesting and ridiculous situation that children who have access to all the information the television provides are then forced to ask their parents for permission to attend a school course that seeks to give them the skills to critically analyze what they see in the mainstream media."

Lambert told Xtra West that at least 30 new schools across the province are offering Social Justice 12 this year. That's in addition to the 20 that offered it last year, she notes.

"I'm told that six out of 10 Richmond district high schools are offering Social Justice 12 this year," she says.

"We found that the ban in Abbotsford was actually helpful in the long run because it drew attention to the course offering and actually resulted in a lot of interest," Lambert adds.

Meanwhile, the BCTF filed its own grievance with its employer, the BC Public School Employers' Association (BCPSEA), in December asking that it ensure all school boards enforce a 2007 ministerial order that all school districts and their schools develop codes of conduct.

The ministerial order was handed down following spring 2007 legislation that mandated school boards to make sure school codes of conduct referenced the BC Human Rights Code, which includes sexual orientation as a category protected from discrimination.

Lambert says the BCPSEA was given until the end of June to advise boards to get into compliance.

"We believe that time is up. We'll go to the next step: arbitration," she says.

BCPSEA media liaison Deborah Stewart confirms that the Teachers Federation filed a grievance in December but the matter was in abeyance until Jun 30.

"We have not heard back from [the BCTF] as of yet, so unfortunately we don't have a lot to say," Stewart says.

However, the BCPSEA does not view the codes as an employment issue, she says. "We advised the [BCTF] that should the matter proceed to arbitration, we would bring a preliminary objection that the matter is not grievable or arbitrable." Meanwhile an education ministry spokesperson says "as far as the ministry understands, every single school district has a code of conduct in place that they believe meets the ministerial order."

Our thanks to Mission America for sending us the following regarding a New York Times article:

Coming Out in Middle School

NY Times Features Casual Article about Child Corruption

Here's how the horrific article in the September 27 NY Times magazine, written by an openly-gay author, starts:

"Austin didn’t know what to wear to his first gay dance last spring. It was bad enough that the gangly 13-year-old from Sand Springs, Okla., had to go without his boyfriend at the time, a 14-year-old star athlete at another middle school... But his boyfriend couldn’t find anyone to give him a ride nor, Austin explained, could his
boyfriend ask his father for one. 'His dad would give him up for adoption if he knew he was gay,' Austin told me. 'I’m serious. He has the strictest, scariest dad ever'..."

The article ends with a dad taking his middle school son to a 'gay' pride parade, where the son ogles men in Speedos. This is the New York Times' version of enlightened journalism.

ARTICLE continues HERE.

A "Safe" Place for Kids to Learn Homosexual Sex

[from missionamerica.com--downloaded Sept. 6, 2009--title slightly changed]

The real story about community ‘GLBT’ youth centers

By Linda Harvey

***There's no required parental notification or consent, but kids are assured of “confidentiality.”***

---------------------------
It’s Friday at 5:00 p.m. Do you know where your kids are?

Your sixth grader, Nick, stayed after school with his new buddy, Joel. They’ll be home soon on their bikes, because they had a last-minute homework assignment in the library. Or so they told you.

There’s one place in the neighborhood most parents might never think their kids would end up. It’s the local community center for homosexual kids. That’s right—for kids. And your sixth grader would be welcomed there by adult volunteers and staff, and allowed to socialize with high school and college age ‘gay’ youth, without your permission or knowledge. All he or she has to do is show up, and many are located conveniently on bus lines, for kids under driving age.

“No parents” plus homosexual approval is the reason these centers call themselves “safe” places. There is a homosexual youth center now in virtually every medium or large city in the U.S. Many are funded by private foundations or connected to a local adult center for “GLBT” (“gay, lesbian bisexual and transgendered”) people. Some are even funded by United Way. . . . . [Click here to read the whole article.]

CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN'
Lawmakers: Schoolkids must study 'sexual predator'
. . . .

Lawmakers in California have voted to pressure all schoolchildren in the state to study and "honor" the life and values of homosexual activist Harvey Milk, whose biography tells of sexual escapades, including relationships with young boys.

In addition, it was Milk who publicly advocated for the late Jim Jones, the leader of the massacred hundreds in Jonestown, Guyana, in 1978. Jones led the "Peoples Temple Agricultural Project," and in an audiotape of the deaths, described the 918 fatalities – mostly from drinking cyanide-laced flavored drink – as a "revolutionary suicide."

The California State Assembly now has passed a bill calling on all California public schools to hold an annual "day of significance" honoring the life and values of Milk. SB572 was approved on a 45 (all Democrats) to 27 (all Republicans) vote yesterday. . . . .

The bill now returns to the Democrat-controlled state Senate, which approved the plan in May, and ultimately will be sent to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who did veto the measure a year ago. . . . .

[Click here to read the whole of the above WorldNetDaily article.]

[The following excerpts from an article in the mainstream press tell only part of the story of the effect of reactions to the $400,000 Canadian federal government's contribution to "Toronto Pride.}

Backlash against Pride funding worked
[From The ChronicleHerald.ca]
STEPHEN MAHER LETTER FROM OTTAWA
Sat. Jul 25 - 4:46 AM

ON JUNE 15, Diane Ablonczy, the federal minister of state for tourism, was photographed with a group of drag queens as she presented $400,000 to Toronto Pride, a gay and lesbian festival . . . .

This angered evangelist preacher and activist Charles McVety, a longtime crusader against same-sex marriage, abortion and homosexuality. Mr. McVety launched a campaign on the Institute for Canadian Values website, under the headline Conservatives Announce New Program to Fund Sex Parades. . .

The campaign worked.

On July 6, Saskatchewan Tory MP Brad Trost told lifesitenews.com that Ms. Ablonczy had lost control of the tourism program after Conservative MPs objected to the grant to the Pride parade.

"The pro-life and the pro-family community should know and understand that the tourism funding money that went to the gay pride parade in Toronto was not government policy, was not supported by — I think it’s safe to say by a large majority — of the MPs. This was a very isolated decision."

Many Homosexual (and Similar) Events Reported
as Funded by the Canadian Conservative Government

David Akin: The Harper Government's
long history of funding gay and lesbian activities
[From National Post online, July 09, 2009, 10:45 AM by NP Editor]

. . . . a little birdie helpfully provides the following list of gay and lesbian (and bisexual, etc.) events funded by the Harper government

Recipient: Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives
Minister: Hon. James Moore
Funding received - $175,000.00
Purpose: Arts in Communities
Date: 2009-03-26
Recipient: Vancouver Out on Screen Film and Video Society, Vancouver, British Colombia
Minister: Hon. Josée Verner
Funding received: $32,000.00
Purpose: Project: 20th Anniversary Vancouver Queer Film Festival, Programming
Date: 2008-2009, March 4, 2008
Recipient: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual, Transgender Pride Toronto
Funding received: $21,000.00
Date: ** Last modified, 2008-02-19
Recipient: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual, and Transgenderal Pride Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Minister: Hon. Josée Verner
Funding received: $35,000.00
Purpose: Arts in Community
Date: 2007-04-23
Recipient: Inside Out Lesbian & Gay Film Festival Inc. Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Funding received: $20,000.00
Purpose: Project: Toronto Lesbian and Gay Film and Video Festival, Programming
Date: 2008-2009
Recipient: Winnipeg Gay & Lesbian Film Society Inc, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Funding received: 4,000.00
Purpose: Project: Reel Pride Film Festival, Programming
Date: 2008-2009
Recipient: Reelout Arts Project Inc., Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Funding received: $7,000.00
Purpose: Project: Reelout Queer Film & Video Festival, Programming
Date: 2008-2009
Recipient: Queer City Cinema Inc, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Funding received: $13,000.00
Purpose: Project: Queer City Cinema 7, Programming
Date: 2008-2009
Recipient: Inside Out Lesbian and Gay Film Festival Inc.Funding received - $26,000.00
Date: 2008-2009 Last modified, 2008-02-19
Recipient: Darren McAllister, Ontario Canada,
Minister: Hon. Peter MacKayFunding received - $550.00
Purpose: To allow Darren McAllister to present his short film "Confessions of a Drag Queen" at the Outfest Gay and Lesbian Film Festival in Los Angeles, California from July 6 to 17, 2006.
Date: 2006- 2007
Recipient : Michael Mew, British Columbia, Canada,
Minister: Hon. Peter MacKayFunding received - $900
Purpose: To allow Michael Mew to present his short film "Peking Turkey" at the London Gay and Lesbian Film Festival in London, United Kingdom from March 28 to April 6, 2007.
Date:2006-2007

. . . .

REAL Women of Canada Sends a Strong Protest Against $400,000 Federal Government Donation to Gay Pride Parade

On July 13 (2009), REAL Women sent a letter to both Prime Minister Harper and Minister of Business and Tourism, Diane Ablonczy, expressing its strong objections to the $400,000 grant given in June to support the Toronto Gay Pride parade and related activities. The letter said in part:
"REAL Women of Canada is deeply offended that your government has given $400,000 of the taxpayers’ money to support the Toronto Gay Pride Parade in June 2009. According to newspaper reports, part of this funding was to be directed towards marketing and programming of the 10-day activity which, according to CTV.ca will “make sure that these events continue to be competitive on the world stage”. Why does your government regard this as significant?
"The Gay Pride Parade is well known for its full nudity, open engagement in public sexual acts and its deliberate disregard of behaviour acceptable to most sectors of Canadian society. The parade is about hedonistic exhibitionism and narcissism, promoting a deadly form of sexuality. The parade is designed to shock and titillate and the week-long “celebration” has become an excuse for partying, drug use and promiscuity . . . ."

Here is the complete text of the letter:

REAL Women of Canada

“Women Building a Better Society”

NGO in SPECIAL consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations

July 13, 2009

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper

Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2

Dear Mr. Harper:

Re: Federal funding of Toronto’s Gay Pride Parade

REAL Women of Canada is deeply offended that your government has given $400,000 of the taxpayers’ money to support the Toronto Gay Pride Parade in June 2009. According to newspaper reports, part of this funding was to be directed towards marketing and programming of the 10-day activity which, according to CTV.ca will “make sure that these events continue to be competitive on the world stage”. Why does your government regard this as significant?

The Gay Pride Parade is well known for its full nudity, open engagement in public sexual acts and its deliberate disregard of behaviour acceptable to most sectors of Canadian society. The parade is about hedonistic exhibitionism and narcissism, promoting a deadly form of sexuality. The parade is designed to shock and titillate and the week-long “celebration” has become an excuse for partying, drug use and promiscuity.

To argue that this grant has an economic and tourism benefit is to naively accept the homosexual propaganda that over a million individuals actually attend the event. This is not possible because, if this figure were correct, the crowds would have had to be 80 deep along the 3.1 kilometer parade route. This is an absurdity. The crowd density was, on average 4-6 people deep and the total number of people can be generously set, at most, at approximately 154,000 persons: far fewer than attend Toronto’s annual Caribana Parade each August. It is also highly questionable that the “celebrations” that week contribute millions to the economy, as alleged, as this figure again appears to be part of the air of unreality surrounding the event.

There can be no long-term stimulus by giving taxpayers’ money to homosexual groups. Such individuals do not make a substantive contribution to society by producing and raising children – essential for the future of our country. Instead, their high medical and social costs are not a public benefit. Canadian families are struggling in these difficult economic times, and a grant of this magnitude, to promote a hedonistic lifestyle, serves only to devalue their struggle.

The Conservative government’s decision to contribute to the promotion and marketing of the Toronto Gay Pride Parade condones the homosexual life style. It is an indication of your government’s abandonment of your political base. A low voter turnout in federal elections is already a concern, and this grant will only serve to exacerbate this problem for the Conservative government.

Yours truly,

Cecilia Forsyth

National President

[The article immediately following is taken from the homosexual online publication Xtra.ca . Apparently pro-homosexuality activists are quite upset about proposals to have parents’ rights being enshrined in the Alberta Human Rights act. ]

Alberta bill threatens lessons on gay life

EDUCATION / Queer leaders and teachers unite in opposition

Kaj Hasselriis . . ./ National / Thursday, May 21, 2009

The Alberta government has proposed a new law that gay and lesbian leaders say will seriously hamper teachers' ability to raise the issue of sexual orientation in schools.

"It's a huge step backwards," says Melissa Luhtanen, president of the Calgary Outlink Centre for Sexual and Gender Diversity. "It's really going to have an effect on Alberta, where issues are already hidden."

The Alberta government's Bill 44 proposes to enshrine the words "sexual orientation" in the province's Human Rights Act, making it the last jurisdiction in the country to do so. But at the same time, the bill proposes to allow parents to opt their children out of any lessons that involve religion, sexual orientation and sexuality.

"It seems they pandered to the rightwing by bringing in the parental rights clause," says Brendan Van Alstine, a social worker with the Pride Centre of Edmonton.

Luhtanen, a human rights educator with the Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre, says that the parental rights clause opens up a huge can of worms, because the government is proposing to add it to the Human Rights Act. That means teachers and school administrators could be hauled before a human rights tribunal if they talk about what some consider taboo subjects without parents' permission.

"Teachers won't be able to raise things on an impromptu basis and they won't be able to respond to kids who do, either," says Laurie Blakeman, a Liberal MLA from Edmonton who is leading her party's opposition to the bill.

"This clause starts to insert itself into biology, English literature and other subjects," she says. "It creates a problem for teachers who don't call a halt to discussions."

According to Luhtanen, it also creates a problem for teachers who avoid subjects like sexual orientation, especially when kids are subjected to homophobic bullying. As the mother of a grade one student, she wants her kid to learn that being gay is okay. "It puts schools between a rock and a hard place," she says.

For instance, Luhtanen's daughter's teacher encourages students to bring books to class, to read out loud to their classmates. Recently, her daughter brought One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dad, Blue Dad to class. Luhtanen fears her daughter's teacher would think twice about reading that book to her class, if the new bill becomes law.

Organizations that represent Alberta educators are coming together in opposition to the bill. Already, the Alberta School Boards Association, the Alberta School Councils' Association, the College of Alberta School Superintendents and the Alberta Teachers' Association have all united in anger against the province's Conservative government.

"These are not usually groups who come together and support each other," says Blakeman. "It's quite remarkable." . . . .

What makes Luhtanen especially frustrated is that parents in Alberta already have the authority, under the province's School Act, to yank their kids out of lessons dealing with sexuality and religion. She doesn't feel it's necessary to add it to the Human Rights Act, where she doesn't think it will hold up in court, anyway.

"It will probably be overturned and thrown out," she says. "But that will take years."

In the meantime, Liberal and NDP opposition members are campaigning to stop the bill with a petition, an upcoming rally and proposed amendments. Blakeman says the government's move has caused its own caucus to become divided between Red Tories, who tend to be fiscally conservative but socially progressive, and rural MLAs, who preach so-called family values. . . . .

Commentary: American Psychological Association Changes Tune on Genetic Nature of Homosexuality

Commentary by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH

May 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In 1998, the American Psychological Association (APA) published a brochure titled "Answers to Your Questions about Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality."

This particular document was ostensibly published to provide definitive answers about homosexuality. However, few of the assertions made in the brochure could find any basis in psychological science. Clearly a document anchored more in activism than in empiricism, the brochure was simply a demonstration of how far APA had strayed from science, and how much it had capitulated to activism.

The newest APA brochure, which appears to be an update of the older one, is titled, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality."

Though both brochures have strong activist overtones (both were created with "editorial assistance from the APA Committee on Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns"), the newer document is more reflective of science and more consistent with the ethicality of psychological care.

Consider the following statement from the first document: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality."

That statement was omitted from the current document and replaced with the following:

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."

Although there is no mention of the research that influenced this new position statement, it is clear that efforts to "prove" that homosexuality is simply a biological fait accompli have failed. The activist researchers themselves have reluctantly reached that conclusion. There is no gay gene. There is no simple biological pathway to homosexuality. Byne and Parsons, and Friedman and Downey, were correct: a bio-psycho-social model best fits the data.

On the question of whether or not therapy can change sexual orientation, the former document offered a resounding "no." However, the current document is much more nuanced and contains the following statement: "To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective."

Of course, no mention is made of the Spitzer research, the Karten research, or the recent longitudinal research conducted by Jones and Yarhouse -- all of which support the conclusion that some people can and do change.

Of the Spitzer research, psychologist Dr. Scott Hershberger (who is a philosophical essentialist on questions of sexual orientation) conducted a Guttman analysis of the study sample, and declared:

"The orderly, law-like pattern of changes in homosexual behavior, homosexual self-identification, and homosexual attraction and fantasy observed in Spitzer's study is strong evidence that reparative therapy can assist individuals in changing their homosexual orientation to a heterosexual one."

The Spitzer study found no evidence of harm. Neither did the Karten study, nor the Jones and Yarhouse study.

For the rest of this commentary please see the website of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality here:
http://www.narth.com/docs/deemphasizes.html

From an editorial by Paul Schratz, BC Catholic, May 4, 2009:

Today’s Scripture, next year’s hatred

When the B.C. NDP calls for the removal of a Liberal election candidate because of “disturbingly homophobic comments,” it might be chalked up to politics as usual.

However, when the leading opinion shapers in the province echo those sentiments, it’s evidence that a sea change has occurred in terms of public support of homosexuality.

It’s also evidence that it may not be long before publicly stating elements of our faith becomes not just uncomfortable, but risky.

Liberal Maple Ridge – Mission candidate Marc Dalton, a teacher at Pitt Meadows Secondary School, made remarks about homosexuality in an e-mail 12 years ago.

At the time, the B.C. Teachers Federation was adopting a policy to eliminate “homophobia and heterosexism” in the public school system, and Dalton circulated a petition opposing the BCTF move.

He placed homosexuality in a category with gambling, abortion, adultery, and pornography as issues that “large segments of our society” don’t see eye to eye with.

The comments were resurrected during the current election coverage, and a media fire storm ensued. Dalton apologized for any pain he had caused and said he “wouldn’t use those words now.”

Those words, however, were enough to bring calls for his resignation and accusations of hatred against him in radio programs, letters to the editor, and by newspaper columnists who expressed dismay that anyone could hold such intolerant views, today or back then.

Dalton made it clear, 12 years ago and last week, that he believes in respect for others. He clearly distinguished between homosexuality as a lifestyle he couldn’t support, and homosexual people, whom he respects.

No matter. The sheer fact that he didn’t embrace all aspects of homosexuality was sufficient to haul him over the coals.

The Dalton incident came within days of a similar uproar at the Miss America contest, when contestant Miss California Carrie Prejean was asked her views on “gay marriage.”

In a very respectful manner, Prejean said she couldn’t support such unions because of her personal beliefs.

The reaction to her answer made the Dalton incident look like a tea party. The audience booed and contest judge Perez Hilton, known primarily for being a gay blogger, went to the Web and excoriated her with language leaving no question about what constitutes hate speech.

Next, a British MP made an on camera remark about the possibility of Prejean being murdered. Facetious or not, such remarks, like bomb jokes on an airplane, are distinctly unfunny, and a police investigation resulted.

So this is where we have arrived. A decades-long campaign to end hatred and unreasonable discrimination against homosexuals has morphed past “gay marriage” and into a doctrinaire age that brooks no criticism of homosexual behaviour. . . . . [Click here to read the whole of this article.]

In the United States:

[From CitizenLink, May 7, 2009]

Federal Bill Would Add Pro-Gay Policies to Public Schools

Family advocates are concerned by the so-called Safe Schools Improvement Act, which was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives this week.

The anti-bullying bill would require many public schools to add special protections for students based on sexual orientation and gender identity, in addition to race and religion.

Candi Cushman, education analyst at Focus on the Family Action, said this bill would force an adult political agenda into schools under the guise of “safety.”

She said laws that spell out special classes of protection give gay activists the leverage they need to force schools to host "diversity trainings" and introduce curriculum promoting homosexuality.

“That’s why the interest groups pushing this bill are so adamant about getting those special categories included," Cushman said. "They see them as the tools they need to get what they want.

"So, if we care about maintaining control of our schools and not exposing our school officials to threats from political activists, then we should be very concerned about this bill."

GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, applauded the legislation. . . . .

[Click here to read the whole article above at its source.]

A Message with Information Passed on by the Catholic Civil Rights League:

The following (about the day of silence) is from an American group, but the ideas may be applicable here.

Sincerely,
Sean Murphy, Director
CCRL Western Region

Liberty Counsel -

April 16, 2009

Students Have the Right NOT to Remain Silent on the Day of Silence

www.LC.org

The annual "Day of Silence," sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), will be promoted tomorrow in many public schools. This event encourages students to remain silent, by not texting or responding to anyone, including teachers, administrators, or students at school. GLSEN claims the event counteracts bullying, but it is merely promoting an anti-heterosexual viewpoint. Schools can teach students the value of respect without accepting GLSEN’s propaganda event. Many states, like Florida, for example, have laws that require abstinence-based education when sexuality is discussed, so the school cannot recognize the Day of Silence without promoting abstinence.

Parents can choose to keep their children home on the Day of Silence or support their children in a counter-observance of sexual purity. Liberty Counsel has a legal memorandum explaining how to protect schools from being hijacked by GLSEN’s political agenda. Student conduct causing a substantial disruption or material interference with school activities is not protected under the First Amendment. If a teacher asks a student a question during class, the student does not have a right to remain silent.

Please pray that students will be protected from forced indoctrination by GLSEN, especially next week, and that the truth will prevail.

Liberty Counsel is encouraging students to mount a counter-celebration to promote a positive message of purity on the Day of Silence. Students are encouraged to wear white and to distribute flyers promoting sexual purity whenever other students are permitted to distribute literature promoting the Day of Silence.

Read our News Release for more details.

Read our Memo about the Day of Silence.

Please help inform as many people as possible by forwarding this Liberty Alert to your entire e-mail list of family and friends, and encourage them to subscribe.

Liberty Counsel does not charge clients for representation, so we depend on individuals, groups and churches who care about advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family. Liberty Counsel is recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization that accepts tax-deductible donations. Donate or order resources from the Liberty Counsel online store.

Mathew D. Staver - Founder and Chairman
Anita L. Staver - President
Liberty Counsel - 1-800-671-1776
PO Box 540774 - Orlando, FL 32854

Catholic League President Urges Congress: Don't Let "Hate Crimes" Chill Religious Free Speech
Conservatives concerned that bill fails to define "sexual orientation"

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Catholic League President Bill Donohue issued an open letter yesterday to the U.S. Senate urging legislators to include protection for religious leaders preaching against homosexuality in the newly-introduced "hate crimes" legislation. Donohue added his voice to criticism from other conservative leaders who warn that the measure's current form threatens to chill free speech and give special protection to all forms of sexual deviancy including pedophilia, voyeurism, and exhibitionism.

A version of the bill passed the House last week 249-175.

"The driving force behind the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act is the desire to provide additional penalties to criminals who assault homosexuals because of their sexual orientation," wrote Donohue, referring to the legislation recently introduced by Senators Edward Kennedy and Patrick Leahy.

Setting aside the "propriety of hate crimes legislation in general," Donohue said, "the central problem with this bill is its chilling effect on religious speech."

"To be specific, the bill would criminalize religious speech that was critical of homosexuality if it were linked to a crime against a gay person." he continued. "How do I know this? Because when the bill was considered in the House, that is exactly what Rep. Louie Gohmert was told when he raised this issue.

"While assaulting anyone, independent of sexual orientation, is rightly considered a criminal offense, the prospect of criminalizing religious speech that proscribes certain sexual practices is beyond worrisome-it is downright dangerous."

Donohue pointed out that the bill's potential to chill free speech among clergy addressing sinful behavior "flies in the face of the spirit of the First Amendment."

"Surely there are ways to protect homosexuals from being singled out by anti-gay thugs without trespassing on the constitutional rights of priests, ministers, rabbis, imams and others," he wrote. The Catholic League president concluded by urging the Senate to include an amendment to the bill that would protect the speech rights of religious leaders.

Earlier in the debate Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Tex.) also voiced a concern shared by many conservatives, that the term "sexual orientation" remains undefined in the bill, which he says opens the legislation up to a broad interpretation. While there exists in law a strict definition of sexual orientation, Gohmert objected, "there is nothing in this bill that references the definitions in the Hate Crimes Statistical Act…it's not there. We asked that it be added so we could get a specific definition. It is not there."

Gohmert claimed that the lack of a definition left only "the plain meaning" of the term "sexual orientation," which he says could include "anything to which someone is orientated" - essentially protecting all forms of sexual aberration.

The Family Research Council is sponsoring a petition against the federal hate crimes bill (go to: http://www.fighthatecrimes.com/).

Capitol Hill switchboard:
202-224-3121

To find your U.S. representative:
http://www.congress.org

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality;
San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

[ From CitizenLink, April 28, 2009 at http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000009904.cfm ]

British schools will be required to teach children as young as 11 about same-sex relationships, following a six-month review of the current sex-education curriculum.

Secondary schools will teach about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, The Times of London reported. The changes come after decades of campaigning by so-called sexual-health organizations.

“We can take a lesson from what’s happening in British schools because the very same trends are mirrored in our own nation’s public school system," said Candi Cushman, education analyst at Focus on the Family Action.

She pointed to a San Francisco Unified School District Web site dedicated to the gay agenda — including curriculum for elementary classrooms.

"A taxpayer-funded school district now has an entire division dedicated to promoting homosexuality,” Cushman said. “And the Web site makes a point of stating that parents will NOT be notified when homosexuality and transgenderism are discussed with their children."

Cushman said it's time for parents to make their voices heard in their children's schools, rather than standing by while their schools are taken over by adult political agendas. . . . .

— Jennifer Mesko

Want to Know How the British Columbia Teachers' Federation Advises Teachers to Deal with Parents who Object to the Pro-Homosexuality Program?

The BCTF has a web-page entitled "Objections to Antihomophobia Curriculum in Schools." A list of suggestions follows the sentence "Here are some quick responses for educators when talking to parents." Here is a sampling of parental statements under various headings and suggested responses to them (as downloaded April 26, 2009):

"Parent Rights"

"This is against our rights as parents to teach our own set of family values."

As teachers, we do not condone children being removed from our classes when we teach about Aboriginal people, people of colour, people with disabilities, or gays and lesbians.

You can teach your child your own values at home. Public schools teach everyone about respecting diversity and valuing everyone.

Religion and Cultural Objections

"This is against our religion/culture."

As teachers, we do not condone children being removed from our classes when we engage in antiracism education. This issue is no different.

All children, including yours, have a right to an education free from discrimination.

Sexuality

"It's recruitment or teaching about sex!”"

Antihomophobia education at the elementary level does not include discussion about sex or sexual practices.

Secondary students need accurate information about relationships and safe sex. Lack of information can have tragic consequences for youth.

Age Appropriateness

"My child is too young for this topic!”"

All families deserve to be represented in the curriculum. The mandatory provincial curriculum includes diverse family structures.

It is our job as educators to teach accurate, up-to-date information to every child, including yours.

To read the complete list of suggestions, go to http://bctf.ca/SocialJustice.aspx?id=10394 .

“Gay and Lesbian Educators” Resource (Listed by Government for Social Justice Twelve Course) Peddles Propaganda in the Name of Education

(a brief review of the 2004 edition of Challenging Homophobia in Schools)

The Gay and Lesbian Educators handbook entitled Challenging Homophobia in Schools has now acquired additional importance, since it is listed by the British Columbia Ministry of Education as a resource for the Social Justice Twelve course instituted as a result of the Corren Agreement.

Some years ago we had an opportunity to review the first (2000) edition. Looking over the second (2004) edition, one notes some changes. The second edition does not have an introductory commendation by Svend Robinson, though he is acknowledged in the later edition as having had a part in the development and production of the first. No doubt there are other changes. But what characterized the first edition also characterizes the second: a lack of scholarship in a book being promoted as an educational resource, and propaganda masquerading as education.

Once again, for example, there is a list headed “Famous Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Persons.” Among those listed is “Augustine (Saint) – (354 – 430) English Roman Catholic Bishop, Religious Writer.” (For some reason, almost all nouns in the list are capitalized.) (Probably the handbook authors picked up on something Augustine of Hippo wrote in his Confessions regarding his life before conversion, and confused him with the Augustine who was a missionary to the Anglo- Saxons.)

Also included in the list is David, who is described as “Israeli King, Biblical Lover of Jonathan.” The lack of evidence for the assertion regarding David may be an indication of a similar carelessness regarding the truth in the selection of many of the other names on the quite extensive list. Also listed are William Shakespeare, Leonardo da Vinci, and Popes Benedict IX, John XII, Julius III, Leo X, Paul II, and Sixtus IV.

No specific references are given for the particular people listed, though sources are given at the end of the list. These sources include a work called Outstanding Lives: Profiles of Lesbians and Gay Men (M. Bronski, editor) and Who’s Who & Who’s Gay—Alphabetical Listing (Internet, December, 1997); also The Unofficial Gay Manual (Dilallo, Kevin & Jack Krumholtz).

It would appear that the authors of Challenging Homophobia in Schools have left few stones unturned in the attempt to carry out their avowed aim of creating a “K to 12 resource . . . to aid in the support of, and education about Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender youth and families.” (title page). One needs to examine the book as a whole to get the full impact of the authors’ intentions. All we can do is give examples illustrative of those intentions and the authors’ methods. In the “Background” section of this work, pages 49 – 56, is a chart entitled “The Impact of Systemic Oppression.” In this chart, under the heading “Institution” are listed the sub-headings “Social System, Values and Beliefs,” “Family,” “Education,” “Religion,” “Legal,” “Health," “Economics,” and “Media.” Opposite “Religion,” in a column headed “Homophobia and Heterosexism,” is written “-only heterosexual unions acknowledged by most religions” –an apparent reference to the teaching that marriage is a male-female union.

Challenging Homophobia in Schools is indeed intended for the whole range of grade-school. For example, an outlined lesson on “Celebrating Same-Gender Families” (“Lessons,” pp. 11-12) is intended for Kindergarten to Grade 3. The teacher following the lesson plan will read his or her class the books One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dad, Blue Dads and ABC—A Family Alphabet Book. Among the suggested activities connected with the lesson is the following: “Ask your students to think of things that they like to do with their mom(s) or dad(s). Generate a class list together. Have them imagine double these good times if they had two moms or two dads.” (The mathematics seems a bit odd here.)

A lesson for students in Grades 8 to 12 is entitled “Queerly Canadian Role Models” (Lessons, pp. 63-66). Associated with this is a sheet of “Queerly Canadian Identity Cards,” featuring the names of such luminaries as Libby Davies, James Chamberlain and Murray Warren, and Svend Robinson.

The examples given in this article do not enable a full analysis, but convey some of the flavour of this handbook. What is needed is ongoing research by a group of people to determine the nature of the resources listed by the Ministry of Education as the effects of the Corren Agreement work their way through the curricula of many subjects as new courses are introduced and existing ones are revised. What is also needed is a concerted effort to recommend educational resources that will indeed educate rather than propagandize; that will meet the undoubted needs of a generation of children and young people who can only suffer confusion from the flood of inaccurate information and biased expression of opinion which is being let loose upon them.

For an extensive analysis of the first edition of Challenging Homophobia in Schools, see Challenging Homophobia in Schools: A Critical Review by Chris Kempling, M.Ed., M.A., R.C.C., reproduced at the end of this page.

NEWS RELEASE [from Kari Simpson]

For immediate release March 16, 2009

Kari Simpson seeks human rights ruling against BC government, BCTF and Murray Corren

VANCOUVER , March 16, 2009 — Kari Simpson, well-known social activist and host of RoadKill Radio.com today filed a complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal against the B.C. Ministry of Education, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation and Murray Corren for discriminating against those who suffer from homosexuality and other dysfunctional sexual orientations, by failing to provide needed services, including psychological help. “This complaint is about helping the hurting” says Simpson.

In her complaint Simpson states: “The B.C. Ministry of Education has failed to provide funding and access to relevant counseling strategies within the public education system for B.C. students suffering from sexual identity disorders and crisis.

“Sexual re-orientation therapies have helped thousands of individuals to recover from such dysfunctional orientations. It is common and accepted knowledge that sexual identity confusion is often the result of childhood trauma and/or family dysfunction. B.C. students should not be denied access to effective psychological help for such conditions.

“School counselors are being denied the tools to be effective advocates for students in need of sexual re-orientation help, and they should have access to resources and training that will equip them to properly counsel students.”

Ms. Simpson continues: “The B.C. Teachers’ Federation blatantly continues to actively discriminate against students within the B.C. public education system by publishing, promoting and adhering to a policy that denies students important psychological help. BCTF Policy 12.25 states that the BCTF is opposed to:

“(a) using and/or promoting reparative therapies aimed at

changing lesbian, gay or bisexual students’ sexual orientation; and

“(b) referring students to therapists who promote and practice reparative therapy.”

Murray Corren recently published (December 9, 2008) this discriminatory statement on a blog in the Vancouver Sun. He states (under “Your Comments”): “One would hope, of course, that the kind of counselling being offered to students as regards sexual orientation would be supportive, and not intended to ‘cure’ LGBT students. The BCTF has policy which specifically prohibits school counselors from employing ‘reparative therapy’ or referring students for such treatment.”

Simpson goes on to advise the BCHRT that: “The situation is on-going. The Ministry of Education does not provide training or funding to school counselors to effectively help students suffering from dysfunctional sexual orientations whose origins are founded in, or in part result from family dysfunction, trauma and child sexual abuse.

“The BCFT policy discriminates against these students, who need psychological help, by publishing and promoting opposition to such therapy, based on an antiquated and propagandistic view of homosexuality.

“Teachers and counselors should have access to scientific and proven therapies, and should not be ignorant about issues relating to the origins of homosexuality.

“Murray Corren is a gay propagandist, and he is provably aware of some of the factors associated with the origins and factors that contribute to homosexuality; he has admitted that his own childhood experiences compare to identifiers that are common to the family dysfunctions associated with dysfunctional homosexuality. Murray Corren should be prohibited from discriminating against others who are in need of help.”

The remedies Kari Simpson is asking for:

1. That the B.C. Ministry of Education provides funding in the amount of $20,000.00 to a 7-member committee, with Kari Simpson as Chair. Other members to include: two mental health professionals associated with and recognized by NARTH (the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), two parents, a school counselor, and a teacher. This committee will develop a resource guide for school counselors and educators to facilitate a scientific and therapeutic understanding of the issues involved in homosexuality, instead of relying on the gay propaganda that ignores the facts and simply perpetrates the myths associated with ‘gay’ politics and political privilege.

2. Further — this guide will provide a list of agencies and other resources, to ensure that students needing psychological help will not be denied.

3. Further — On-going funding in the amount of $10,000.00 each year to ensure that current training is received and developed within the BC public education system, to help students in need of psychological care associated with sexuality identity confusion and dysfunctional homosexuality.

4. Further — that the BCTF forthwith rescind its policy of opposing re-orientation therapy for those suffering from a dysfunctional sexual orientation.

5. Further — that Murray Warren make a public apology for his socially unjust and harmful comments, and receive sensitivity training; and that he further be made to pay $5000.00 to Kari Simpson for the harm and hurt he has inflicted on those suffering and needing help. Kari Simpson, on behalf of those discriminated against, will use the $5000.00 to purchase important resources for teachers, schools and public libraries that factually debunk the myth and propaganda about gender identity confusion.

When asked by the BCHRT why she is making this complaint, Kari Simpson states:

“It’s to ensure those who are suffering from dysfunctional homosexuality and/or sexual identity confusion and/or other psychologically problematic sexual orientations are not denied help by those who, because of their sexual politics, seek to selfishly, hatefully and ignorantly discriminate against a group of people who would benefit from re-orientation therapy.”

-end-

contact Kari Simpson (604) 514-1614

More information about this complaint can be heard on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 at 7:30 pm (PST) at www.roadkillradio.com

British Columbia Teachers' Federation Promotes Day of Silence in BC Schools.
Parents for Democracy in Education Calls on Parents to Keep Students Home April 17th [2009]

On April 17th, 2009, parents in some schools in British Columbia may expect that the "Day of Silence" will be promoted and recognized. "The BCTF supports provincial student and teacher participation in the Day of Silence project," we are informed on the BCTF website: What is the "Day of Silence"? Well, the "Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network" describes it in the following terms:

    The Day of Silence, a project of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), is a student-led day of action when
     concerned students, from middle school to college, take some form of a vow of silence to bring attention to the name-calling, bullying and
     harassment -- in effect, the silencing -- experienced by LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) students and their allies.

The day provides a ready opportunity to engage students in the work of propagandizing their fellow-students. Of course name-calling, bullying and harassment should not be endured by any students, but by exclusively singling out students who self-identify as lesbian, gan, bisexual, and transgendered, sympathy for the pro-homosexual caused is generated, and this sympathy is used to promote homosexual behaviour as nomal and acceptable, against the beliefs of parents of traditional moral beliefs.

Parents for Democracy in Education, a British Columbia organization, is calling on parents to iwthdraw their children from schools where the "Day of Silence" is being recognized. A newsletter issued by the group states:

Parents for Democracy in Education is joining a national coalition of pro-family 
organizations urging parents to pull their children out of school
April 17.

That’s the day designated for this year’s ‘Day of Silence’, when students
and/or teachers will purposely remain silent during instructional time to
protest so-called discrimination, and to gain sympathy for those who identify
as homosexual or transgender.

(In some schools, e.g. in Victoria, the ‘Day of Silence’ is being observed
April 11 or 18.)

The ‘Day of Silence’ is now a yearly event sponsored by the partisan
political action group, Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
(GLSEN) and by Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs (GSAs).   The purpose is to
intimidate those who believe homosexuality is immoral.

It is the belief of the sponsors of the Student Walkout that parents should no
longer passively accept this political usurpation of taxpayer-funded public
school classrooms.

‘Day of Silence’ organizers demand that teachers either create activities
around or exempt silent students from any activity that involves speaking.
DoS participants have a captive audience, many of whom disagree with and
are made uncomfortable by the politicization of their classroom.

The BC Teachers’ Federation endorses the DoS in BC; many universities
and schools across Canada participated last year.

Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute explains, “While it is
appropriate to teach students that tolerance requires that society should treat
everyone with civility, it is not appropriate to teach that tolerance requires
students to accept the view that homosexual conduct is moral.”

Higgins further emphasizes: “The worthy end of eliminating harassment
does not justify the means of exploiting instructional time.”
. . . .

Parents are encouraged to call their children’s schools to ask whether the
administration and/or teachers intend to permit students to remain silent
during class on the Day of Silence. If so, parents can express their opposition
by pulling their children out of school on that day, and sending letters of
explanation to their administrators, their children’s teachers, and all school
board members. . . . .

The "Day of Slence" is only one of the progams and events promoted by the BC Teachers' Federation which readily lends itself to pro-homosexuality indoctrination.  
It promoted "Think Pink Day," held on Febraury 25th of this year.  It is promoting a "Week Against Homophobia" from May 11th to 15th, and the "" "International Day
Against Homophobia," to be held on May 17th.  In addition, the BC Teachers' Federation is active in promoting Gay-Straight Alliances, and--through the provision of 
various teaching resources--the positive portrayal of homosexuality in classroom teaching in the province.

[The following news release, which we have slightly abridged, is most revealing for what it says about the plans of the pro-homosexuality activists who are using "social justice" to promote their agenda. --Editor of this website]

NEWS RELEASE

FEB. 25, 2009

Parents for Democracy in Education

BCTF ‘Social Justice’ conference at UFV told

teachers how to manipulate student attitudes

by Ron Gray

Feb. 20 and 21, I attended the first “Social Justice conference” staged by the BC Teachers’ Federation at University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotford.

It was an eye-opener!

Although the stated purpose of the conference was to show teachers how to approach the Social Justice 12 curriculum adopted under BC’s Corren Settlement Agreement, an underlying purpose was clearly revealed by a graphic of a staircase, distributed by the BCTF in its information packages: the goal is to move students’ attitude towards LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered and questioning) people beyond “tolerance” to “acceptance”—and then further along to “support,” “admiration,” “appreciation” and finally “celebration” of deviant sexuality.

Most Canadians have never seen what constitutes “celebration” of homosexuality; but our big cities’ annual “Gay Pride” parades clearly show the reality: public nudity (partial and/or total), simulated fornication, lasciviousness—and open mockery of traditional morality.

This exposure of the BCTF’s real goal—to manipulate the attitudes of students until the “Prescribed Learning Outcome” of celebration is attained—reveals that the teachers’ union is actually in violation of its own code of ethics, which forbids using the classroom for indoctrination.

What has given the BCTF this extraordinary power to manipulate the attitudes of BC’s children? The cowardice of a pusillanimous government, and especially of two cabinet ministers—Education Minister Shirley Bond and Attorney-General Wally Oppal—who reached a secret agreement with two homosexual activists without ever allowing debate in the Legislature.

Those same ministers have consistently resisted efforts by parents’ groups to have a countervailing voice in the education of their children on sensitive topics.

This BCTF conference similarly lacked any opportunity for input from parents who want to resist manipulation of their children’s curriculum to make acceptance of homosexuality a goal.

The February conference was the first of four planned to train BC teachers how to implement the Correns’ ‘Social Justice 12’ curriculum. It did not deal with the companion—and more radical—teacher’s guide Making Space, Giving Voice, which the Correns were able to force on a supine Ministry of Education. Making Space, Giving Voice instructs teachers how to make every subject, at every level from Kindergarten to Grade 12, ‘gay’-friendly.

In one workshop, a teacher suggested that if a student says his or her parents disapprove of homosexual behaviour, he (the teacher) deflects the comment by saying, “Well, different people have different ideas about sex.”

“That won’t accomplish the kind of change we need,” said . . . . a professor in the Department of Social, Cultural and Media Studies at UFV. “Students feel silenced by that kind of comment. ‘What does everybody think?’ is a bigoted comment. We need to decide who we want silenced.”

So such students are to be told that their parents’ ideas are wrong. Perhaps not all parents: Prof. Dow repeatedly identified “Evangelicals and Fundamentalists” as the perceived problem.

That theme recurred in several sessions. The result of the BCTF’s unilateral advocacy that “gay is good” can only be to drive a wedge between children and their parents. And the long-term social result of that alienation would be worse than the problems they are trying to correct.

However, the BCTF apparently operates on the assumption that they are in possession of an absolute truth—even though peer-reviewed science has discredited every claim of discovery of a “gay gene”; and even though medical studies indicate that homosexual behaviour shortens life expectancy dramatically. To “true believers” in the BCTF dogma, such facts are apparently irrelevant.

Their position is essentially religious—a fact that was vividly highlighted by a teacher who said in a Friday workshop, “I don’t think I can teach this without being converted.”

The conference was lamentably short on factual information—but presenters were quite willing to reiterate falsehoods, like the “10 percent myth”, based on the discredited 1948 and 1953 Reports of self-styled “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey. (Kinsey alleged that 10 percent of the population is homosexual; however the 2003 Canadian Community Health Survey showed that only one percent of the population identify themselves as homosexual.)

Dr. Judith Reisman, in her book Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, revealed that Kinsey’s “research” included criminal sexual abuse of infants, and that a substantial part of his survey population was drawn from prison inmates and ‘gay’ bars—but they were represented by Kinsey as typical of the whole population. Kinsey himself was a homosexual who died from orchitis, an inflammation of the testes often caused by excessive sexual self-abuse.

. . . .

The conference was not without merit: participating teachers were given some useful tips on correcting students who use slurs or bully other students.

But the underlying theme—BCTF’s absolute certainty that only their pro-‘gay’ dogma is correct, and they have the right to impose it on BC’s children because “we’re professional educators”—was terrifying: such use of government power to compel conformity is the very essence of fascism.

(945 words)

Ron Gray is a former journalist (Vancouver Sun, Chilliwack Progress, BC Report, Fiji Times, Richmond Review) and was a member of the founding administration of Fraser Valley College, the forerunner of University of the Fraser Valley. He is currently Vice-President of Parents for Democracy in Education.

Contact:

Ron Gray, (604) 534-3319

From a Mass Ressistance, Dec. 28, 2008 e-mail

From latest GLBT Youth Commission meeting: Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health funding homosexual / transgender movement in schools - to make up for budget cuts!

The madness continues. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) is giving full support to the homosexual / transgender movement in Massachusetts schools, according to DPH Commissioner John Auerbach (who is "married" to another man).

The DPH has given $150,000 of its budgeted money to the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender (GLBT) Youth to make up for the $150,000 which the Governor cut from the Commission's $850,000 budget in October because of the massive budget crisis in Massachusetts. In other words, money which was meant for public health is now being diverted by the DPH to homosexual programs in the schools.

The Mass. Dept. of Public Health will also begin pushing acceptance of "transgenderism" and will even begin bringing transgender people into its leadership roles.

(Ironically, less than a month ago the DPH issued a report linking homosexuality with health problems and destructive behavior.)

This was all revealed at the public meeting of the Mass. GLBT Youth Commission last Monday evening, Dec. 15.

The article immediately following, from a Vancouver, British Columbia, publication by and for homosexuals, illustrates better than anthing else we have seen, how, under cover of the concept of "tolerance" (one that can be a noble word in its meaning in our society), pro-homosexuality indoctrination can take place and is taking place in our schoools. Sections and words bold-faced have been marked for emphasis by the editor of this BC Parents and Teachers for Life website. For anyone not fully convinced of the importance of our confronting the pro-homosexuality program in the schools, this article is a must-read.

[From XtraWest online]

From tolerance to celebration

EDUCATION / The making of a gay-friendly elementary school

Patti Shales Lefkos / Vancouver / Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Five and a half years ago, I became principal of the West End's Lord Roberts Elementary School and its annex. I was ecstatic.

Lord Roberts on Bidwell St has all of the elements I love in a school community: a multicultural population, inner-city funding and programs, bright students, involved parents with high expectations and a dedicated, diverse staff. However, having spent a week at the school in April 1998, I harboured no illusion that I was in for an easy ride.

First, there was the story of the rainbow flag. To celebrate the opening of the school's new playground, the principal who preceded me ordered several flags. Unwittingly, one of them was a rainbow flag.

A few hours after it was raised there was an uproar in the parent community and a Grade 7 student started a petition to remove it. Due to parental pressure the flag was taken down.

Then there was the story of the photo exhibit called All Kinds of Families. For one week, photos were displayed in the main hall depicting families of various ethnic backgrounds, single parents, and same-sex parents. Parents raised concerns yet again.

Staff decided to tackle the issue head-on. That's when I made my entrance.

We began with a two-day staff retreat featuring presentations by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC (GALE). We decided each teacher would lead a class meeting to discuss name-calling. If students did not bring up homophobic names, the teacher would. So began our journey from tolerance to celebration.

That fall, we developed a Code of Behaviour for the school. While it did not directly address sexual orientation, it did highlight respect for all people and the importance of honouring diversity. This allowed staff to begin classroom discussions around the question of what constitutes diversity and to take those discussions beyond race into sexuality and family composition.

Having facilitated the development of a Code of Behaviour in three other schools, I knew the process was as important as the product. The involvement of students, staff and parents is crucial, as is the ritual of yearly review, editing and recommitment.

In the last few years, our September Signing Ceremony has evolved into a joyous celebration. Students, staff and parent representatives sign the Code each fall in a school assembly to indicate their commitment to its stated values for the coming year.

The assembly ends with staff members presenting an energetic dance to "We Are Family" which invariably causes a barely contained riot of student applause.

It is obvious to students that staff care for and respect each other and have fun working together. The Code is illustrated by the Respect Mural on the gym wall facing Bidwell St, which provides a daily reminder to all.

In order to gauge the Code's success, we then designed a Respect Rubric (one of those charts with the word "respect" spelled out down the left side and attributes beginning with each letter described and assessed on the right). Teachers and parents use the rubric each term to evaluate student growth in social responsibility. Students use it as a self-evaluation tool.

We also made it school-wide policy to include anti-homophobia lessons within discussions of diversity at all grade levels, starting in Kindergarten. Picture books depicting all kinds of families provide an effective way to broach the topic in the primary grades.

. . . .

Recently, Lord Roberts celebrated Pride Week, planned by the newly formed school Pride Committee, a group of gay and straight staff members. "You Can Be Anyone You Want to Be" by the Flirtations was played over the public address system, the rainbow flag was raised in the playground, open classroom discussions took place without giggles, and anti-homophobia posters featuring a gay staff member and his partner were displayed. There were no complaints from students, parents, or community.

We have come a long way at Lord Roberts. Both gay and straight staff members now feel it is a gay-friendly school. All our gay and lesbian staff are out to colleagues and most are now out to students and parents, as well.

Though diversity is a part of every community, I feel that directly addressing homophobia is especially crucial in a West End school if we are to truly honour all members of our local community.

I commend the ongoing leadership of gay and straight staff and parents that has brought us to this point. It is my privilege to have been part of the continuing journey from tolerance to celebration.

There have been bumps in the road. There may be more to come.

The Vancouver School Board's anti-homophobia policy provided me with welcome ammunition to back up my personal beliefs when addressing parent concerns. The government's new Grade 12 elective Social Justice course is another positive initiative that will hopefully be chosen by future leaders.

. . . . I

Patti Shales Lefkos was principal of Lord Roberts Elementary School and Lord Roberts Annex for the past five and a half years. She retired in December 2005 after 36 years in education.

School holds surprise 'Gay' Day for kindergartners
Parents outraged at public elementary's secretive 'coming out' event

October 22, 2008

By Chelsea Schilling [from WorldNetDaily]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in "Coming Out Day" at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.

One mother of a kindergartner who attends Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, a K-8 charter school in Hayward, Calif., said she asked her 5-year-old daughter what she was learning at school.

The little girl replied, "We're learning to be allies."

The mother also said a Gay Straight Alliance club regularly meets in the kindergarten classroom during lunch.

According to a Pacific Justice Institute report, Faith Ringgold opted not to inform the parents of its pro-homosexual activities beforehand. The school is celebrating "Gay and Lesbian History Month" and is in the process of observing "Ally Week," a pro-"gay" occasion usually geared toward high school students.

The school is scheduled to host discussions about families and has posted fliers on school grounds portraying only homosexuals. According to the report, a "TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud" will take place Nov. 20. Students will listen to traditional stories with "gay" or transgender twists, to include "Jane and the Beanstalk."

[Click here to read the rest of this WorldNetDaily article]

An Analysis of Some Aspects of the Social Justice Twelve Course
as approved by the British Columbia Ministry of Education

The Social Justice Twelve Course is one striking illustration of the Education Ministry’s lack of positive response to the concerns so many have expressed about the Corren Settlement Agreement and its results.

In the first place, this unresponsiveness was shown in the way in which the draft curriculum for the new Social Justice Twelve course was released.The Settlement Agreement with the Correns¹ states: “Prior to release of the Social Justice 12 Response Draft for public review and response, the Respondent [the Ministry] will provide the Complainants [the Correns] with a draft of the sexual orientation/gender identity portion for their review, and will make revisions as appropriate in light of the comments received. The Complainants may consult experts, on a confidential basis, to assist them in providing such comment.” We note the fact that this consultation with the Correns was to take place before the draft course was released to the general public. (Settlement Agreement, Section 3A)

Though a pilot version of the new course was to be completed on or before June 30, 2007, the draft program or draft “Integrated Resource Package” (IRP) for the course was withheld from public review till August 1, 2007. This was in spite of the fact that the draft course was to be used as a pilot course the next month. This late release in the summer of 2007 meant that already in September of 2007 some students would be exposed to this course before those who might be critical of the course had a proper chance to review it and ask for changes.

When we looked at the draft course, the first startling fact we noted was that it failed to include information on recommended learning resources for the course. In fact, we were told that these would not be available until the final publication of the IRP. In other words, the general public had no input into the selection of recommended learning resources, in contrast of course to the role of the Correns. Since the nature of recommended learning resources can, to a large extent, determine the nature of the course, this means that the general public was excluded from providing input regarding a very important aspect of the course.

An examination of the approved Social Justice 12 course now published reveals that grave concerns about the course which were expressed following the release of the draft course are still justified.

It may be important to note that this is an elective course so far, but this does not mean that we should be unconcerned about it. The nature of the course, as we shall see, is such that it lends itself readily to the introduction of propaganda, and this indoctrination could create a cadre of student activists who in turn could influence a whole school.

Under “Considerations for Program Delivery,” on page 16 of the approved IRP for Social Justice 12, we read this curious sentence: “Ensure students are aware that their parents may have access to the schoolwork they create only insofar as it pertains to students’ progress.” We cannot help but wonder, "What does this mean?" Does this mean that certain assignments (given though not counted for assessment) are to be kept secret from parents? If so, what type of assignments would they be?

On page 21 of the approved IRP, under “Prescribed Learning Outcomes,” we read: “Prescribed learning outcomes are content standards for the provincial education system; they are the prescribed curriculum. Clearly stated and expressed in measurable and observable terms, Prescribed Learning Outcomes set out the required attitudes, skills, and knowledge – what students are expected to know and be able to do – by the end of the specified course.” We should note that not only are measurable and observable skills and knowledge prescribed, but attitudes as well. Students, then, are expected to have certain attitudes. What attitudes are these, and what are the consequences for those students who fail to develop them and thus fail in this respect to have the prescribed learning outcomes?

Under “Student Achievement: Key Elements,” in the subsection “Defining Social Justice, “ the following is given in the set of indicators which may be used to assess student achievement: “Students who have fully met the Prescribed Learning Outcomes are able to identify and define a range of concepts and terms of social justice (e.g., ableism, ageism, anthropocentrism, colonialism, consumerism, cultural imperialism, dignity, discrimination, diversity, economic imperialism, economic liberalization, empowerment, equality, equity, ethics, extremism, fairness, feminism, fundamentalism, genocide, globalization, hate crime, hegemony, heterosexism, homophobia, human rights, humanitarianism, humility, inclusion, individual responsibility, marginalization, misogyny, oppression, peace, persecution, power, prejudice, privilege, racism, sexism, speciesism, stereotype, stewardship, systemic, transformational leadership, truth, value, worth.)” (p. 34)

It is worthwhile to examine the definition of these terms in the “Glossary” which accompanies this curriculum (on pages 49-54). (There was no glossary in the draft version of Social Justice 12.) According to this glossary, “diversity refers to the ways in which people within a society differ from each other. Some of these differences may be visible (e.g., race, ethnicity, sex, age, ability), while others are less visible (e.g., culture, ancestry, language, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background). Honouring diversity is based on the principle that, if these differences are acknowledged and utilized in a positive way, it is of benefit to the quality of life for all in society.”

We would agree that many differences can be “acknowledged and utilized in a positive way,” but there is surely a danger in not recognizing that some characteristics may actually be harmful and not capable of being so utilized.

In the definition of “homophobia” we read that homophobia is: “a fear, dislike, or hatred of homosexuality or homosexuals, or of people or behaviours perceived to be homosexual.” We are further informed that “Homophobia manifests itself as prejudice, discrimination, harassment, and/or acts of violence. Homophobia can exist at personal, institutional, and societal levels. Also transphobia: fear, dislike, or hatred of transgendered or transsexual people. See also heterosexism.” Here we have adopted the usual stereotype used by pro-homosexuality activists that those disliking homosexuality will demonstrate “prejudice, discrimination, harassment, and/or acts of violence.” “Heterosexism” is defined as “the assumption that heterosexual orientation is better than other sexual orientations and therefore deserving of public acceptance and legal privilege.”

The term “two-spirited” is listed as “a modern term for a traditional North American Aboriginal concept implying a masculine spirit and a feminine spirit in the same body. Two-spirited individuals were found in many, if not most, pre-contact Aboriginal communities, and played important societal roles within communities. There are terms for these individuals in the various North American Aboriginal languages, and their social function varied from nation to nation. In present-day parlance, two-spirited is also used to refer to gay, lesbian, and bisexual Aboriginal people.” (The authority for the statements about pre-contact aboriginal communities is not given.)

It is only fair to say that many of the other definitions in the glossary are unobjectionable. When matters of sexual orientation are defined, however, we can see the distorting influence of the Corren Agreement.

Under the heading “Recognizing and Analysing Social Injustice” (p. 40), a suggested achievement indicator is that students should be able to “apply principles of social justice to analyse specific historical and contemporary examples of injustice in Canada related to . . . people who are LGBT (e.g., criminalization, institutionalization, marriage, adoption, employment discrimination, spousal rights, immigration, censorship, hate crimes, school safety).” Here it becomes obvious that the until-recent limitation of the official use of the term “marriage” to male-female unions is to be regarded as an injustice, as is the denial of adoption rights to homosexuals. Will students be expected to also regard as unjust, religious teachings which limit marriage to the union of man and woman?

In the subsection on “Recognizing and Analyzing Injustice” (pp. 24-25), we are told that one of the prescribed learning outcomes is that students will be expected to describe social injustice based on certain characteristics. These characteristics are to include age, marital or family status, mental or physical ability, nationality or "rationality," political affiliation, race and ethnicity, religion and faith, sex, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. (p. 23). While the list is suggestive of many topics worthy of consideration by students, one wonders what descriptions of social injustice in certain of these categories will be considered acceptable. For example, will a student be expected to describe same-sex marriage as a move towards justice when discussing marital status and sexual orientation? Such questions become particularly relevant when we read (on Page 40) that students will be expected to apply principles of social justice to analyze specific historical and contemporary examples of injustice in Canada related to . . . people who are LGBT (e.g., criminalization, institutionalization, marriage, adoption, employment discrimination, spousal rights, immigration, censorship, hate crimes, school safety)” (emphasis supplied by the present writer). On Page 41 we are told that students should be able to “identify legislation and public policies that relate to human rights in Canada” and an example of legislation given in the Civil Marriage Act.

This would certainly indicate that students are expected to regard as an injustice the limitation of the legal definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples: a definition only recently jettisoned.

Serious questions arise regarding the many concepts that may be inculcated in this course and regarding the attitudes students are expected to adopt when we consider that students are to be expected to “analyze the social justice implications of legislation, public policy, and other forms of government action in Canada with specific reference to . . . ” (and among the legislation included is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the BC Human Rights Code, and the Civil Marriage Act), the.Human Rights Code, and the Civil Marriage Act).

Students will also be expected to assess the contributions of particular individuals and groups who are identified with struggles for social justice. What individuals and groups will they be expected to assess the contributions of? After all, those whom some would regard as identified with a struggle for social justice others will regard as working for social injustice. While practically all in our society might regard Wilberforce as an example of someone working for social justice (the abolition of the slave trade and of slavery), others would be much more controversial. For example, pro-abortion supporters would regard Morgentaler as having worked for social justice, but pro-lifers would regard his work as a source of

"Life Views"

Exposing and Opposing the Pro-Homosexuality Agenda

Are Anti-Discrimination Policies Bullying Christian Schools and Families?

Who Are the Supporters of "Out in Schools?"

Out in Schools: Debate . . .

Vancouver Sun blog

Out in Schools deletes link to sex pictures

[For your information, we pass on this news release, received September 12th, 2011:]

ACLU Granted Access to Catholic Charities Lawsuit, Represents Lesbian Couple.

California Governor signs law mandating "pro-gay" curriculum

Victory for Evangelical church over ‘hell-raising’ gay anarchist group

NDP’s targeting of ‘ex-gay’ groups a ‘potential attack’ on all Christian charities: Evangelicals

Toronto school board: Parents can’t opt kids out of pro-homosexual curriculum

Top gay rights leader: kids of religious families are ‘target demographic’ of anti-‘gay bullying’ ad

Federal Legislation Threatens Faith-Based Adoption Agencies [in the U. S.]

Hamilton school board ‘religious accommodation’ policy would exclude moral beliefs

Concerned Burnaby parents decry ‘deliberate descrimination’ in debate over ‘homophobia’ policy

Christian psychotherapist found guilty of professional misconduct for reparative therapy

Related Story:

Witness in Christian therapist case threatened

Ontario’s big brother is watching you

President Obama’s Support Emboldens Same-Sex Marriage Activists

Catholic school board [committee] votes to [recommend move to] abandon Catholic teaching on homosexuality

. . .Ontario Catholic board voting [on move] to repeal ban on homosexual clubs . . .

'They'll have to fire me': Sask[atchewan] marriage official

Tuesday, January 11, 2011 CBC News

Catholic board bans gay-straight student alliances

University: Dump Christian beliefs on homosexuality, or else

Demands student get re-educated, attend 'pride' event

Study: 18% of Vancouver gay men have HIV

European Parliament wants EU countries to recognise existing same-sex unions

Michigan Teacher Reprimanded in ’Free Speech’ Flap

"Supreme Court to hear gay sex discrimination case"

CDC: 20% of Gay Men Have HIV, and Nearly Half Are Unaware of Status

Last Catholic adoption agency faces closure after Charity Commission ruling

The last remaining Roman Catholic adoption agency to resist Labour’s equality laws is facing closure, after the charity watchdog ruled that it could not avoid considering same-sex couples as potential parents.

School board supports Pride events

US Administration Launches All-Out International Homosexual “Rights” Offensive

Williams Lake school district restricts anti-homophobia events

"Queer posters demand respect"

Cornelia Naylor/TIMES

"Let boys be girls." "It's OK to question." "You don't have to accept it, just respect it."

Cornelia Naylor, The Chilliwack Times

Excerpts from the 2010 Physical Education and Health curriculum document for teachers:

Day of Silence, Day of Truth Make Bid to Influence the Nation's Youth [in the U.S.A.]

Social justice dispute heads for full hearing

President Obama Plans to Increase Controversial “Safe Schools Czar’s” Budget

Parents face prosecution over 'gay' education class protest

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done to Massachusetts

President Obama Speaks at Gay-Activist Event

Firestorm Erupts over Obama's Education Appointee

A "Safe" Place for Kids to Learn Homosexual Sex

Federal Bill Would Add Pro-Gay Policies to Public Schools

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality; San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

"Parent Rights"

Religion and Cultural Objections

Sexuality

Age Appropriateness

Concerned Burnaby parents decry ‘deliberate descrimination’
in debate over ‘homophobia’ policy

Tuesday, January 11, 2011
CBC News

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality;
San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site