Friday, November 01, 2019

Parents Outraged at Austin's New Sex-Ed Curriculum That Trains Children to Become LGBT Activists

On Tuesday morning, the Austin Independent School District (ISD) school board approved a radical new sex-education curriculum for grades 3-8 that encourages all kinds of sex at young ages, urges kids to join LGBT "pride" parades, and aims to redefine biological sex and erase the words "mom" and "dad" from children's vocabulary.

More than 100 people testified against the new curriculum on Monday night, and testimony lasted until after midnight. Yet the school board unanimously approved the new curriculum.

"This vote by the Austin ISD Board sends a clear message: people of faith and traditional moral values are not welcome in Austin ISD," David Walls, vice president of Texas Values and a parent in Austin ISD, said in a statement. "By passing this curriculum, Austin ISD has broken the sacred trust that parents put in their children’s schools. Austin ISD parents have no reason to entrust their children to a school district that weaponizes education to indoctrinate children into the LGBT political movement."

In a document revealing the radical nature of the curriculum, Texas Values drew attention to materials for the Grades 3-5 curriculum that encourage children to abandon the terms "mother" and "father" or "mom" and "dad."

"Use Gender Inclusive Language," the curriculum advises teachers. "It is important to avoid terms which refer only to 'male' and 'female' identities when speaking with young children as this can limit their understanding of gender into binaries and can exclude children who may not identify within these identities. For example, when discussing family members or adults they may have in their life, try not to only use terms like 'mom' or 'dad'. Try integrating words like, 'parents' or, 'guardians' to include children whose parents might not fit into 'traditional' concepts of family structures."

While the curriculum gives this advice to teachers, it would likely have the effect of teachers telling kids to stop using words like "mom" and "dad" but instead to employ gender-neutral language.

Another exercise encourages teachers to avoid the phrase "your mother gave birth to you," and instead to ask, "Are you close with your birth parents?"

This erasure of biological sex runs throughout the curriculum. In the draft document for Grade 6, the curriculum defines "biological sex" as something arbitrary — assigned and "decided" by the doctor, rather than rooted in DNA and merely recognized at birth.

The Grade 6 materials define "biological sex" as "sex assigned at birth according to genitalia," and encourage teachers to "explain that when someone is born, a doctor looks at them and decides what sex they are. Usually if a doctor sees a pen*s they will say the baby is male, if they see a vag*na they will say the baby is female, and if they see that the baby’s genitalia don’t quite look like either, they’ll say the baby is intersex. Explain that although people usually assume that people with a pen*s are boys and people with a vag*na are girls, sex does NOT always match with gender identity (i.e. someone with a penis might identify as a girl)."

Contrary to this pro-transgender definition, biological sex is not "assigned" and it is not "decided" at the whim of a doctor. People with two X chromosomes are female, and people with one X and one Y are male, from the moment of conception. Even before birth, males and females develop differently. Biological sex is not arbitrary, but this propagandistic lie is politically convenient for transgender activists who wish to emphasize gender identity over biological reality.

The curriculum does not just use political propaganda to turn kids into LGBT activists, however. The Grade 6 materials also encourage students to attend a "pride rally" or to become "an ally to someone who identifies as LGBT by showing support and acceptance." The curriculum suggests these activities as tools to teach students to "challenge homophobia."

Across the grade levels, teachers are encouraged to normalize LGBT identities and relationships. Materials include a "sexuality match game" and videos promoting homosexuality. One story attempts to normalize homosexual activity by narrating the relationship between 14-year-old Peyton and 17-year-old Jordan — a relationship in which Jordan pressures Peyton to have sex. Peyton hides his relationship with Jordan from his "parent."

More than 7,000 people have signed Texas Values' petition against the sex-ed curriculum.

Human beings are male and female, and the natural way of reproduction involves one male and one female, also known as a father and a mother. It is truly Orwellian to push teachers to reject these terms and the more affectionate "Mom" and "Dad." These activists would undermine reality — inserting their ideology into the sacred bond between parent and child.

Americans need to speak out against the transgender revolution and the sexualization of children.


Bristol University hires slavery history professor to see whether it needs to apologise for colonial past

Bristol University has hired a professor of slavery history in an attempt to discover whether it needs to apologise for its colonial past.

The institution has commissioned Prof Olivette Otele, an expert in the history of colonialism in Britain and France, to carry out a two year research project into the involvement of the University of Bristol and the wider city in the transatlantic slave trade.

The university said it will decide at the end of the two years how to appropriately acknowledge its past links with colonialism, which could include making a public apology or statement.

It comes after a campaign by Bristol students to rename the Wills Memorial Building, which was named after the university's founding chancellor Henry Overton Wills III. The Wills family derived their wealth from shipping tobacco from the New World into Bristol.

The university announced in 2017 that it would not rename the building, saying: "We cannot alter the past but we can enable reflection upon it and add to knowledge about slavery past and present."

Bristol is the latest institution to investigate its past links with colonialism. Earlier this year, Glasgow University became the first in Britain to announce a package of reparations for its benefit from the slave trade.   

It pledged to raise £20 million over the next 20 years to fund a new research centre which will be a joint venture with the University of the West Indies.

Cambridge University has also launched an inquiry into how the 800-year-old institution benefited from the slave trade.

Researchers have been commissioned to pour over the university’s archives to how much it gained from the “Atlantic slave trade and other forms of coerced labour during the colonial era”. 

The two-year inquiry will examine whether financial bequests made to departments, libraries and museums were made possible from the profits of slavery.

It will also probe how far Cambridge academics “reinforced and validated race-based thinking between the 18th and early 20th Century”.

Bristol's official participation in the transatlantic slave trade started in 1698, though experts say Bristolian ships illegally traded in slaves well before then.

Bristol merchants financed more than 2,000 slaving voyages between 1698 and 1807, with ships carrying more than 500,000 people from Africa to slave labour in the Americas.

Professor Judith Squires, Bristol University’s provost and deputy vice-Chancellor said: “As an institution founded in 1909, we are not a direct beneficiary of the slave trade, but we fully acknowledge that we financially benefited indirectly via philanthropic support from families who had made money from businesses involved in the transatlantic slave trade.

 “This new role provides us with a unique and important opportunity to interrogate our history, working with staff, students and local communities to explore the University’s historical links to slavery and to debate how we should best respond to our past in order to shape our future as an inclusive University community.” 


‘Unconscionable conduct’: Australian private college fined $4.2m

A private education college that deliberately targeted disadvantaged and illiterate prospective students by offering them free laptops has been fined $4.2 million by the Federal Court.

Unique International College, which operated out of a single room in Granville in Sydney’s west, sold online diploma courses worth up to $25,000 often targeting vulnerable communities in former Aboriginal missions in regional NSW.

In six separate cases, Unique International College was found to have failed to inform students of the cost of the course they were signing up to, did not tell them they would incur a debt and did not give them copies of the contract they signed.

One judgment, relating to a 19-year-old with learning conditions who was signed up by Unique in Wagga Wagga, stated it was “exploitation of an obviously very vulnerable person for financial gain”.

“(Unique’s conduct) involved the exploitation of an uneducated indigenous person with no understanding of what he was agreeing to in return for a laptop which was worth substantially less than the debt which was being incurred,” Justice Nye Perram found in his Federal Court judgment on Thursday.

“It is difficult to imagine unconscionable conduct which could be worse.”

Each of the six people were left with a VET FEE-HELP debt of $26,400, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

“These students enrolled by Unique were unlikely to be able to complete the courses, but would have been left with significant lifetime student debt,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims said.

“Some of these consumers enrolled in courses by Unique had poor literacy skills, and others could not use computer or did not have an internet connection.

“The ACCC will always prioritise taking action against businesses which engage in egregious conduct impacting vulnerable and disadvantaged consumers,” Mr Sims said.

Using the new VET FEE-HELP student redress measures, the government in the process of cancelling the debts of eligible consumers enrolled by Unique.

In 2017 the Federal Court found the college made false or misleading representations and engaged in behaviour amounting to unconscionable conduct, following evidence that more than 3100 students never completed a single unit of any of the college’s management or marketing courses, costing taxpayers more than $47 million in student loans.

During the trial the court heard evidence that the owner of the college, Amarjit Singh, transferred $22 million from his business account to his family’s account on one day in 2015, in addition to transferring a $5.7 million Kenthurst property owned by the college to another family member in the same year.

But in 2018 the company successfully appealed, with the Federal Court finding there was insufficient evidence that its conduct amounted to a system of unconscionable conduct beyond the six consumers still currently involved in the matter.

Justice Perram found Unique acted deliberately in remote communities on a number of occasions, including Walgett in October 2014, Wagga Wagga in March 2015 and Bourke in June 2015 but “was ignorant” to the fact it was contravening consumer law.

“One of Unique’s employee witnesses stated in cross-examination that he had not in fact heard of (Australian Consumer Law),” Justice Perram wrote.

The college has been found to have acted unconscionably in connection with goods or services, made false or misleading representations, failed to inform of a termination period, did not give a required document to a consumer and contravened requirements for all unsolicited consumer agreements.

It has previously had its registration cancelled and is no longer operating. The college operators have 28 days to pay the fine.


No comments: