Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Lucia Author of The Closing of the Muslim Mind: Queering Education - It's worse than you think

Robert R. Reilly, author of The Closing of the Muslim Mind, has written an article on the goals of activists to normalise homosexuality through the education of children.

June 10, 2013 (Mercatornet.com) - The logic works like this: If homosexual acts are moral, as so many now insist, then they should be normative. If they are normative, they should be taught in our schools as a standard. If they are a standard, they should be enforced. And so it has come, and is coming, to be. Education is an essential part of the drive to universalize the rationalization for homosexual behavior; so it must become a mandatory part of the curriculum.

The infiltration of higher education by LGBT studies is well known. However, less attention seems to have been paid to the effort to spread LGBT propaganda in elementary schools and high schools. Because of the young ages of students K through 12, the introduction of pro-homosexual materials has required a special sensitivity from those who are trying to get away with it. They must avoid the explicit nature of the LGBT courses offered at the college level and disguise the effort in terms of something other than what it really is. Therefore, they use a stealth approach under the cover of issues such as school safety, diversity, and bullying.

One of the primary organizations involved in spreading the rationalization for homosexual behavior in elementary and high schools is the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), begun in 1990 in Massachusetts. According to its mission statement, GLSEN “strives to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. We believe that such an atmosphere engenders a positive sense of self, which is the basis of educational achievement and personal growth. Since homophobia and heterosexism undermine a healthy school climate, we work to educate teachers, students and the public at large about the damaging effects these forces have on youth and adults alike”.

The statement sounds fairly anodyne, though its clear purpose is to make homosexuality acceptable, and for good reason. GLSEN’s founder, homosexual activist Kevin Jennings, spoke at a homosexual conference on March 5, 1995, titled "Winning the Culture War", in which he laid out the rhetorical strategy for success. It is worth quoting at length for what it reveals about the agenda. Jennings said:

"If the Radical Right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language – 'promoting homosexuality' is one example – is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are 'after their kids.' We must learn from the abortion struggle, where the clever claiming of the term 'pro-life' allowed those who opposed abortion on demand to frame the issue to their advantage, to make sure that we do not allow ourselves to be painted into a corner before the debate even begins. In Massachusetts the effective reframing of this issue was the key to the success of the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth.

"We immediately seized upon the opponent's calling card – safety – and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students' safety by creating a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems, and suicide are common. Titling our report 'Making Schools Safe for Gay and Lesbian Youth,' we automatically threw our opponents onto the defensive and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling from day one. "

So successful was Mr Jennings in his framing operation that he was appointed in the first Obama administration to the position of Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, in the Department of Education. The irony was not lost on 52 members of Congress, who wrote to President Obama requesting that he rescind the appointment because Mr. Jennings had, as the letter stated, “for more than 20 years, almost exclusively focused on promoting the homosexual agenda”. Mr. Obama did not do so, and Mr. Jennings served in the position for two years.

GLSEN’s mission of promoting a safe and supportive environment for students of all sexual orientations means providing the approval of those orientations. In the Safe Space Kit: Guide to Being an Ally to LGBT Students, GSLEN provides an examination of conscience for those wanting to be allies to LGBT students. Here are some of the searching questions: “If someone were to come out to you as LGBT, what would your first thought be? Have you ever been to in LGBT social event, march or worship service? Why or why not? Have you ever laughed at or made a joke at the expense of LGBT people?”

With an Orwellian touch, the Safe Space Kit advises that, during casual conversations and classroom time, one should “make sure the language you are using is inclusive of all people. When referring to people in general, try using words like ‘partner’ instead of ‘boyfriend/girlfriend’ or ‘husband/wife’, and avoid gendered pronouns, using ‘they’ instead of ‘he/she’. What’s wrong with referring to a man as “he” and to a woman as “she”? Well, the glossary helps us to understand the definition of gender as “a social construct based on a group of emotional, behavioral and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex”.

Read more: Queering education: it’s worse than you think ~ LifeSiteNews

In New Zealand, all of this not yet that advanced, though the infrastructure is currently being put into place, so that ten years from now (though probably less), everything that has been written above by Robert Reilly will be directly experienced by those that have children in the schools.  Mine will be grown up by that point, so I won't know directly what's going on until I have grandchildren. 

So far, where we are at is the Cabinet Paper on Harmful Digital Communications, which talks about online bullying and the need to have an agency for the bullied to report to, and a Ministry of Education website that has a section which defines bullying.  It's all very vague, in that typical education new speak that might be almost meaningless as it dances around what it's trying to say. Now all that is needed is for people like this HandMirror writer to get herself into an advisory position and we'll be on our way.

8 comment(s):

I.M Fletcher said...

I was going to make a comment on the following before but never did get around to it. New Zealand has had a similar thing in the form of Pink Shirt Day, which seemed to be aimed at stopping bullying and which campaign was directed at children.

The promotion took the form of a trio of cartoon superheroes called Daniel, Manu and Jaz.

In their superhero profiles, the one called Manu is described as neither "he" nor "she", but as a "them"

Manu’s dossier remains largely unknown. Following a relocation with their family, Manu had to attend a new school. For the first four years Manu was at their new school, they didn’t say a word. Most of Manu’s teachers presumed that they were mute or incredibly shy, but they got OK marks, so the teachers let it slide.
Manu was relentlessly bullied; they were excluded from many social cliques and was the subject of much gossip. Still, Manu said nothing.
Then, one day, Manu felt something click inside - they let out a loud yell, and called for help. Manu had felt so alone for so long, and had felt unable to speak up and ask for the help that was needed. A teacher heard their cry, and really listened to what Manu had to say.
When Manu found the Power to Ask for Help, they found the right people were around to help. In addition to their teacher ally, Manu discovered there were other people around who felt just like him. Together, they found that none of them felt so alone, anymore.


Pink Shirt Day, Where’s the Power?

Some of their PDF 'toolkits' have links to curious.org.nz, Q-Youth, Rainbow Youth etc.

The Pink Shirt Day site also had a link to a GLSEN research brief for schools called, 'TEACHING RESPECT:
LGBT-INCLUSIVE CURRICULUM AND SCHOOL CLIMATE' - www.glsen.org/binary-data/GLSEN_ATTACHMENTS/file/000/002/2062-1.pdf

The sites links page - Pink Shirt Day, Resources

In short, it was a campaign designed to appeal to kids (with its team of cartoon superheroes) with a subtle pushing of 'other' sexuality in amongst its anti-bullying campaign.

I'm not saying it is not worth the promotion of anti-bullying (which is worthy in itself), but I think it is also something that can be used to push an agenda.

I.M Fletcher said...

ps, the PSD site has actually been taken down, so the links in my comment above are to a copy of the site on Wayback Machine.

Psycho Milt said...

Am I the only one who finds it remarkable that Mr Reilly can read this:

"We ... explained how homophobia represents a threat to students' safety by creating a climate where violence, name-calling, health problems, and suicide are common.

And decide to quote it as an example of just what an evil threat these GLSEN people are?

Ezekiel Benedict said...

I am sending my kids to catholic schools to avoid all this nonsense. However, I will be watching them very closely, as the enemy never sleeps and will be trying to infiltrate catholic schools as well, and whenever and wherever this occurs it must be opposed with extreme prejudice.

Isumbras said...

“If someone were to come out to you as LGBT, what would your first thought be?
Where is the goddam exit here?
Have you ever been to in LGBT social event, march or worship service?
Not friggen likely
Why or why not?
Because I'd rather stick a hot poker in my eye socket
Have you ever laughed at or made a joke at the expense of LGBT people?”
Oh I would never ever never ever do that, no not ever.....

Have I passed or is it off to reeducation camp for having non approved thoughts.... GLSEN, LGBT FFS!

I.M Fletcher said...

PM, yeh I dunno about that.
There are issues endemic to the gay culture including high suicide rates, health problems, substance abuse etc, that have nothing to do with "homophobia", especially in this age where gays have been accepted as never before in history. I think it is the culture itself that gives rise to these problems and not any phobic behaviour on the part of others (although I do agree that kids can be cruel).

Psycho Milt said...

PM, yeh I dunno about that.

At last, something we can agree on.

There are issues endemic to the gay culture including high suicide rates, health problems, substance abuse etc, that have nothing to do with "homophobia"...

Could well be. But there's a big evidential gap to fill in if you want to claim a logical step to here:

I think it is the culture itself that gives rise to these problems and not any phobic behaviour on the part of others..

Because, if you went to school (ie weren't entirely home schooled), you'll be familiar with the "name-calling and violence" side of the equation. Which means you're effectively saying you don't see any reason why an intensive programme of name-calling and violence against a particular group of kids might tend to result in increased incidence in health problems (physical or mental) and suicide among those kids.

the conservative said...

Just a note to let you know I am having major server problems and my site could be down for a week or so. Sorry about this.
Terry

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.