Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
QuebecOverCanada

200 Muslim students exempted from sex education in Québec

Recommended Posts

Just now, Goddess said:

My children both went to French Immersion, despite us not living in a "French" province.  My son has used his French fairly extensively and my daughter works for a government agency that pays her extra $$/hr because she speaks French - which she uses every day.  Both have also learned enough Spanish to converse because the languages are so similar.

Neither of them has expressed any regrets or feel abused for having to learn another language.  It's only been a benefit to them as they grew up and began working.

 

Well good for them. They made out well, while the rest of the kids suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ProudConservative said:

Did they force you to take 9 years of French in public school? They waste 20% of a students time learning a language they should never have to use, just to appease the French people, who hate our guts anyways. I consider making 7 year olds learn French, child abuse.

Canada was forced to become a bilingual country by old man Trudeau many many decades ago. Now one pretty much has to know or speak some french to get a job in the french controlled federal government in Ottawa. Advantage french Quebeckers. The game was rigged for the french when bilingualism became official in Canada. I have liberal friends who had both their children put into french immersion. They both work on jobs here in BC where they do not need to speak french. What a waste of time for them. 

As you said, the french hate our guts, but yet the English keep kissing their azzes. Go figure, eh? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ProudConservative said:

 French people, who hate our guts anyways

This kind of generalization that you slip in by the bye... just painted your argument as another plaint of the easily offended.

Please don't project your issues into whole provinces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Great.  So do we know why some applications are allowed and others not?

 

The scandal seems to be that one region had more exemptions than others.

First of all, thank you for acting in good faith and not deflecting from the subject, and I say that unironically.

And the scandal is that it comes from this region more than others, and that the articles say that it was lead by the initiative of a Muslim parent, and that it was followed by other fellow Mosque-goers in Gatineau area, just next door to Ottawa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

First of all, thank you for acting in good faith and not deflecting from the subject, and I say that unironically.

And the scandal is that it comes from this region more than others, and that the articles say that it was lead by the initiative of a Muslim parent, and that it was followed by other fellow Mosque-goers in Gatineau area, just next door to Ottawa.

No problem on the good faith.

So it stands to reason that religious people, especially devout Muslims would be against sex education I suppose.

Does this explain why Muslims supported Doug Ford so much more than average voters?

Personally, I would have the Ministry of education work with religious people to work out a deal to accommodate people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No problem on the good faith.

So it stands to reason that religious people, especially devout Muslims would be against sex education I suppose.

Does this explain why Muslims supported Doug Ford so much more than average voters?

Personally, I would have the Ministry of education work with religious people to work out a deal to accommodate people.

I don't know about the demographics when it comes to Ford's victory. I thought he won the suburban areas more than Toronto, but don't know about Muslim support for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

I don't know about the demographics when it comes to Ford's victory. I thought he won the suburban areas more than Toronto, but don't know about Muslim support for him.

I have a source that says that they favoured him, and I suspect that the reason is sex education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Michael Hardner said:

I have a source that says that they favoured him, and I suspect that the reason is sex education.

I wouldn't know, I didn't follow the debates when it came to sex education in Ontario. I know that Wynne (Liberal) wanted an updated, maybe a bit ideologically driven sex education program depending to sayings of who's for and who's against, but was it a determining issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

I wouldn't know, I didn't follow the debates when it came to sex education in Ontario. I know that Wynne (Liberal) wanted an updated, maybe a bit ideologically driven sex education program depending to sayings of who's for and who's against, but was it a determining issue?

Given the story here, I would assume so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

I don't know about the demographics when it comes to Ford's victory. I thought he won the suburban areas more than Toronto, but don't know about Muslim support for him.

Ford has never been against sex education. He criticized the type of curriculum being used. It did not discuss anatomy and dental hygiene, it was a script on teaching children about gender identity and gender identity lifestyles  when they are 4,5,6. Rainbow flags in elementary school do not belong anymore than heterosexual flags do or any other flags do other than the municipal, provincial or federal flags. 

The curriculum used in elementary schools was written by a pedophile. It is completely distorted by that pedophiles projections as to sexuality and how children should perceive sexuality when they are pre-pubic. He used homosexual lifestyle as a cover. Gay parents as much as straight parents who I both support I spoke with and agree, sex education is about hygiene, health issues and learning what is private. Teaching about gender identity choices belongs later on in human relations classes. The two are not and should not be assumed to be the same.

Gay parents have just as much rights as straight parents to assure their children can remain innocent and unencumbered by issues they should not have to deal with until they are better equipped. We will not allow children to be neutral and innocent. Children already accept us as we are. They don't need our crap projected on them. When they reach puberty, then and only then we have to be honest, open and non judgmental about why people make choices and what it means to make a choice based on free will and consent.

Ford was not and is not the issue. Neither are fundamentalists who have been told its ok for them to expect their rights be imposed on us in public systems. The issue is with us-parents of children. We need to speak up and get involved and teach our children and not off ramp everything onto the school system which has become anything and everything society no longer wants to deal with-so its dumped in the schools. Schools are one size fits all hospitals, social service agencies, criminal enforcement agencies, day cares, chauffeurs. They are anything but teaching institutions these days.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rue said:

1. Ford has never been against sex education. He criticized the type of curriculum being used. It did not discuss anatomy and dental hygiene, it was a script on teaching children about gender identity and gender identity lifestyles  when they are 4,5,6. 

2. The curriculum used in elementary schools was written by a pedophile.  

3. Gay parents have just as much rights as straight parents to assure their children can remain innocent and unencumbered by issues they should not have to deal with until they are better equipped.

4. We will not allow children to be neutral and innocent. 

5. We need to speak up and get involved and teach our children and not off ramp everything onto the school system which has become anything and everything society no longer wants to deal with-so its dumped in the schools.  

1. He used this for political purposes, though.  And there was more than just gender to the new curriculum, which was old and didn't mention online etc.

2. This is an alt-right slag and from what I have read just false.  No one person writes a curriculum so this is just trying to condemn by association.

3. I would like to trust educators and program development teams to put together, as much as they can, education that provides for societal and individual health.

4. Then let's take education out of politics and create an apolitical board of experts, at arm's reach from government.  How do you think the religious zealots would like the idea of having their influence on education eliminated ?  Would Doug Ford go for that ?  I'll bet John Tory would.

5. Sure, but as with all progress the mantra is "you first".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. He used this for political purposes, though.  And there was more than just gender to the new curriculum, which was old and didn't mention online etc.

2. This is an alt-right slag and from what I have read just false.  No one person writes a curriculum so this is just trying to condemn by association.

3. I would like to trust educators and program development teams to put together, as much as they can, education that provides for societal and individual health.

4. Then let's take education out of politics and create an apolitical board of experts, at arm's reach from government.  How do you think the religious zealots would like the idea of having their influence on education eliminated ?  Would Doug Ford go for that ?  I'll bet John Tory would.

5. Sure, but as with all progress the mantra is "you first".

1. He had a constituency he defended no different than you do yours and Wynne did hers. He didn't use it. He openly made it clear what he was defending not defending unlike the Liberals who lied about the curriculum and played politics with it trying to cater to the same fundamentalists for votes they alienated. Ford played no politics. He was unlike Wynne from the get go transparent on his position.

2. No its not al alt-right slag. The guy who wrote the curriculum was a pedophile. He hid behind the gay community for righteous cover and there is no way this man should have been hired to dictate which he did the curriculum which perceives it to be acceptable to introduce sex identity issues to 4-6 year olds. Perceiving children as prepared to listen to and have to accept sexual identity issues is a projection by this man who had a lot of leftist sympathizers who have not taken ownership of who he was and what he stands for and what they stand for which is to project their political views as to sexual identity onto children in the name of leftist righteousness.

3.Why would I trust anyone let alone an educator with the best things for my children? I trust myself. No I do not blindly hand over or delegate that trust to authority. That's a liberal concept I disagree with. I believe such trust has to be earned and parenting begins and ends at home and if you want me trust you as an educator then show me apolitical neutrality for public institutions not deliberate bias agendas that cater to specific political views. Its intellectually lazy to be liberal and delegate to governments that which you need to define for yourself. Schools should not have to tell you what to think, only how to think. Who you choose to sleep with is no business of any school. How a body functions and how to keep it safe and clean is.

4.Experts my ass. You just want to delegate common sense. How much expertise do you need to be told how to explain bodily functions. Get real.

5. You first I do not understand. I am not first, second, third. I am an individual. I have children whose formative years I am responsible for.  I can not and should not dump on teachers any job of explaining to my children what their body is and does or why some people have different choices than others and how we do NOT impose our views on others nor do we allow others to impose their views on us as we treat people as we want to be treated. I also could not be more crystal clear-if you have an agenda to teach that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice that is acceptable, do it at home. Do not expect the school to play that role. Its role is to be neutral. The only role it has is to make sure adults do not touch or molest their students. Health and wellness is not rocket science. The so called experts are idiots who I had the pleasure of attending school with at OISE. Experts my ass. They get ph.d's in self serving political biases and opinions. Expert. Right. I do not need a ph.d to teach me we treat people the way we wish to be treated and if there is no consent, something is wrong. This need to shove political opinions in peoples' faces is a liberal concept where you want to impose a state agenda on everyone.  I do not need the state stuffed in my face like a large tit. I do not need to be breast fed thank you. I didn't like Fellini movies either for the same reasons. The man's liberal obsession overly focused him on breasts.  I mean God bless Sophia Loren but not everything is about breast feeding the public.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Rue, you say leave the politics out of it then post a pile of partisan opinion and reject my suggestions to push it to experts.

Let the record show I offered a compromise.  You want to dig in, then we will all have to wait until the older attitudes die off I guess.

 

Have a great day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My disdain over so called experts is  not a partisan concern it is one of concern for a bunch of self professed ivory tower academia of which I was one and am. It comes from me knowing I  have  bull shit degrees,  and spent many days teaching in bullshit institutions. My real  expertise did not come from academia it came from clinical exposure, i.e., listening and witnessing trauma not engaging in the academia-street reality and clinics straightened me out but good mot statistics and bullshit theories based on them. The disdain is for me and my kind who are full of shit and made things worse. I am being very honest with you. I am not afraid to say a lot of what I studied and was told to teach is bullshit

Thanks but I have no problem with health sciences nd what nurses teach thank you. Having obtained bullshit psychology post graduate training at the same place as the pedophile who wrote the curriculum I admit am an ivory tower shit head. Its being honest Michael. Common sense is what raises children not so called experts on what goes in a curriculum.  Its an opinion of course but hardly a partisan one other than I did say and its true Liberals have great faith in authority and the state to dictate how we should live and I do not. Been there done that with Hitler, Stalin and lots of other state agencies. Me no like nor trust  Big Brother  For me a state is a last resort of protection not a first resort to tell you or me how to think. I don't like schools being used as propagation centres. Big brother gone amuck. I respect your opinion. I appreciate it but I 

Get back to me when you can define what an "expert" is.

Edited by Rue
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine, you don't want to use experts then you will get politics.  Common Sense is based on experience and enough of us have seen bullying and thick-headed religious nonsense to know what common sense is.

 

Didn't Doug Ford end up keeping the sex Ed program largely intact anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to your second question, precisely which is why I made my point. His arguments were about what you write and when you write about gender identity choices which I am sorry doesn't require an expert. You do not need to be an expert to know how to teach tolerance and respect for people with different values. Its basic politeness and why people need a government or expert to tell them not to pick their nose at the dinner table is beyond me. Likewise with ear wax.

In regards to politics you can't get more political than the world of academia, particularly in social sciences. Its all about preconceived political opinions that then shape the focus of the theories. Its why I prefer health sciences based on objective physical explanations. I say it again to all the nurses out there. A Registered Nurse does a far better job explaining health matters than a psychologist or some shmuck like me who spent most of job with sex perverts. I like Nurses as health teachers. Nurse Sue was the best sex educator in the world precisely because she was totally neutral in her explanations. I love her model of teaching. The next was Xaviera Hollander. She actually as you know was an escort but her explanations and analysis were used all over the world in sexology faculties precisely because of her objectivity and lack of politics in what she said. Neither of these two is an academic but considered by many the two best explainers of sexual behaviour and physical anatomy. My issue is what age you switch from health science education to human relations and lifestyle choices and that to me should be in grade 8 and 9 not elementary school or kindergarten as Wynne wanted it to be.

Enough with sexualizing children. They can learn about their bodies without having to worry about sexual behaviour choices.

Our world of business which requires we sell products based on manipulating sexual feelings and insecurities is what has caused all this confusion and pressure on children. No expert is willing to discuss that because its common sense and because universities depend on those same businesses for funding. Experts bah. Give me Nurse Sue.

I did teach sexology once. Never again. The curriculum was ridiculous. I hold in high esteem nurses at Sick Kid's hospital and in medical clinics across Toronto and pediatricians and certain volunteers in women's shelters or certain people that work in children's aid as social workers and for that matter certain police. Their clinical or street training is what  makes them experts. What makes them experts is they are non judgmental and they deal with the here and now.

I admit I have a different view on this. In one sense it is a  very strong advocate of sex education but at the right time and with the right content. I never had an issue with Ford. He is not a prude. He certainly did not suck up to fundamentalist religious groups on this issue. Not his style. He was making an argument about what the content should be.

You and I do not disagree we need sex education just on what forms it should take and maybe at what age and even then you and I do not disagree. I just have a prejudice against myself and those in my field. Psychology of Law made me understand at best all we learn is an approximate attempt and it must always be challenged and we need to listen to the victims and the children and the people we lecture to and be prepared when people panic and resist discussing issues that make them uncomfortable to be like Nurse Sue-matter of fact, blunt but not alarming. Man she was good at talking down ignorance. She never raised her voice or judged anyone. Some of the comments I got in class made me want to cringe. People can and do bring very entrenched cultural and religious views with them and hide behind multi-culturalism to demand their views be imposed on others.

For example. I had a group of students complain I was inappropriate because I explained about sexual assault and common assault and explained the difference. They complained I talked about sex in the class. I was teaching the difference between criminal sexual assault and civil common assault and battery. The university told me not to upset them. I asked the school to come observe what I was teaching and they refused and did not provide me an example of how to teach sexual assault without upsetting people who don't want to hear about it. Universities today cater to whoever pays them cash and have taught students they get whatever they want when they pay cash. Since that means international students who pay cash we are told not to upset them, i.e., fail them, expect them to read or write or think critically. I am not being hired back at one university because I refused to not teach about this.

That is what happens. We faculty are all temporary now and told we are expendable if we upset students for any reason and I mean any reason. Education is so competitive now students call the shots at colleges and universities and what we have and I have taught at over 12, are not experts, but frightened faculty who avoid any meaningful, critical discussions for fear of upsetting students from cultures with different views than ours about crime, sexual behaviour, morality, religion.

Sorry but thinking the world of academia is going to help you is naive. Its compromised and as tainted politically as it gets.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2019 at 11:30 AM, Rue said:

 

2. No its not al alt-right slag. The guy who wrote the curriculum was a pedophile. 

 

Do you have a cite for that? Because I would think even a fake Internet lawyer would know you can't make up vile libel based on nothing without risking a lawsuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give it a rest with that  routine.,,...Go look it up yourself its public domain,. He was convicted of having child porn. Its old news and you pull that b.s. feigned shock.  

 Yah you didn't know. 

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a bit more sexually modest probably wouldn't hurt Canadians.  Canadians are promiscuous and get knocked up a lot, ever since the sexual revolution  Can't say that about Muslims.  You don't see a lot of Arab single mothers, or South Asian single mothers.  Usually only widows.  These people treat sex like we did in the 1950's, for better or worse.  Elvis shakes his hips ZOMG!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rue said:

Give it a rest with that  routine.,,...Go look it up yourself its public domain,. He was convicted of having child porn. Its old news and you pull that b.s. feigned shock.  

 Yah you didn't know. 

Who are you referring to? As I said, Ben Levin didn't write the curriculum.  So you are libeling the people who did. Actual lawyers would agree that's a stupid thing to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:

Not ready yet to admit you made a foolish mistake and libeled the actual writers of the curriculum? What character!

You done? 

Blubber Miley you have zero credibility. Now suddenly  you know who Ben Levin is and that  he is a convicted child pornographer and registered sex offender but deny he wrote the curriculum? As well you falsely  claim I claimed other people in the Ministry of Education are pedophiles which I never stated, then you want to come back and puff up your ego?  Tough guy. You got a handle on it do you. Run along before you get hurt by the facts.

Education Minister Wynne’s attempt to deny Levin had anything to do with writing the curriculum in question was in fact exposed as a lie by no less than Levin himself.  The references below come from:

https://torontosun.com/2015/03/02/liberals-cant-deny-levins-role-with-sex-ed-curriculum/wcm/744836e1-03e8-44c0-b10f-615c26ba14ff

“ On March 6, 2009, Levin wrote and signed a memo that put himself in charge of Ontario’s school curriculum.

“Dear colleagues, I am writing to provide an update on our sector’s agenda … I will be filling the ADM (assistant deputy minster) position previously held by George Zegarac … The division formerly headed by George Zegarac will be renamed as ‘Learning and Curriculum.’ It will have responsibilty for curriculum and for Special Education including Provincial Schools.”

Then on April 6, 2009, Levin penned a memo saying, “Today, the ministry released its new equity and inclusive education strategy paper … This provincewide strategy has been a priority for our Minister of Education Kathleen Wynne and me.”

On June 24, 2009, Levin wrote that the “Realizing the Promise of Diversity: Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy” sets out a “vision for an equitable and inclusive education system.” He wrote “the principles of equity and inclusive education should be embedded into all aspects of board and high school operations including program, employment, research, curriculum, resources, instructional and assessment practices.”

In an interview with OISE’s winter 2009 newsletter, Levin said: “I was the deputy minister of education. In that role, I was the chief civil servant. I was responsible for the operation of the Ministry of Education and everything that they do; I was brought in to implement the new education policy.”

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is what Bubber Miley also "forgot" or is "confused" about:

https://torontolife.com/city/ben-levin-child-pornography-sting/

Here is the source of the curriculum from Ben Levin Bubber Miley denies:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242526006_CURRICULUM_POLICY_AND_THE_POLITICS_OF_WHAT_SHOULD_BE_LEARNED_IN_SCHOOLS

Just to  be clear Levin had a lot of supporters in the academic community and I for one state he was not alone in what he did but he was the principle player and author behind the curriculum which other academics went along with and here is a synopsis of what they went along with and who some of them were:

https://globalnews.ca/news/1863258/reality-check-whats-the-evidence-behind-ontarios-sex-ed-curriculum/

The actual curriculum is at:

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health.html

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He did not write the curriculum. You are making that up. Deputy Ministers don't write curricula. You're just trying to tar a whole group of educators who had nothing to do with Levin's crimes because you are otherwise unable to make a sound and coherent argument.

But that's what we would expect from a fake internet lawyer.

Weird that the Ford government would continue to be using this "pedophile" curriculum, isn't it? Wouldn't that strike you as odd if what you said wasn't libelous BS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...