Eagle Forum Legislative Alerts

Sunday, October 09, 2011

Ad protests Toronto schools

The K-12 schools have taught sex education for a long time, but now they teach sexual identity and orientation, including role-playing exercises.

Parents have no say about this, as the Toronto Equity Inclusive Curriculum says:
Should Schools Send Notes Or Permission Slips Home Before Starting any Classroom Work On LGBTQ Issues? No.

Can A Parent Have Their Child Accommodated Out Of Human Rights Education Based On Religious Grounds? No.

Can Teachers Seek Accommodation From Teaching Materials That May Contradict Their Religious Beliefs? No. The TDSB is part of the secular public education system.

Can Schools/Teachers Choose Not To Address Controversial Issues For Fear Of Negative Parent Response?
No. Teachers are obligated to address all equity issues (issues regarding historically disadvantaged groups). Any omissions that maintain a non-inclusive curriculum and pedagogy are considered to foster a poisoned environment under Section 4.2 of the TDSB Human Rights Policy.
A typcial activity of the Toronto Curriculum (pdf) is the following way to celebrate Valentine's Day:
LGBTQ-Positive Pink Hearts Day
A less time-consuming alternative to the Kissing Booth. Students cut out pink hearts and write LGBTQ-positive messages on them, such as: That’s So Gay is SO Yesterday, I Support LGBTQ Students, Love Knows No Boundaries. Students and staff sign the hearts and the hearts are then displayed in a central gathering place and/or display case in the school. In exchange for the support, cinnamon hearts and chocolate are provided.
There is also "facilitated discussion on whether being LGBTQ is a choice". What is that? It would not be so bad if scientific evidence were being presented in an objective way, but there is no such consensus on whether being LGBTQ is a choice. Facilitated discussion is just a euphemism for teachers brainwashing students with ideological views.

The Institute for Canadian Values bought an ad complaining about this, and a newspaper published it, but then the paper apologized:
Where the ad exceeded the bounds of civil discourse was in its tone and manipulative use of a picture of a young girl; in the suggestion that such teaching “corrupts” children, with everything that such a charge implies; and in its singling out of groups of people with whose sexuality the group disagrees.

The fact that we will not be publishing this ad again represents a recognition on our part that publishing it in the first place was a mistake. The National Post would like to apologize unreservedly to anyone who was offended by it. We will be taking steps to ensure that in future our procedures for vetting the content of advertising will be strictly adhered to.
But the ad merely objects to a mandatory child indoctrination program. Just read it for yourself, and it will only make you glad that your kids are not in the Toronto schools.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Keep comments short. Long comments will be deleted.