Politics and Society today

LGBTQ Sex Ed in Schools


Unchartered territory:

Children as young as four years old are going to be taught as a mandatory part of education (UK, September 2020) that we can choose the most rudimentary part of our identity: that of whether we are male or female… or something else. Some state schools have already begun to implement these “relationship” lessons and have told children there are up to 100 gender identities. The purpose to all this is to combat a bully-attitude towards a small number of families who may have an adult in their make-up who identifies as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transvestite or queer. The thinking is that by indoctrinating such thinking into young minds, bullying will end, and as a bi-product children will discover a freedom society has never enabled before: that of gender choice. 

Never before in the history of mankind has government denied the truth: that basic biology demonstrates that as human beings we are either “male” or “female”.

But what of the further consequences on these young minds?

Cracking a nut with a sledge hammer:

Bullying is mean and unwanted regardless of who the target of the bullying might be. But to bend society to a tiny proportion of people is not anti-bullying; it is in fact another kind of bullying, which is attacking innocent children and heterosexual families.

What is our role as Mothers?

As mothers, we are inherently protective of our children. We want what’s best for our children and can identify that other mothers want the same. Do we believe bending biological reality in the mind of every child is a “best answer” to the issue of bullying toward a disproportionately small minority of people?

Mothers, is this what you want: Do you want your child confused or taught to choose their sexual identity? Do you consider it a choice whether you are a boy, a girl or something else? Do you consider it a reasonable question to ask a 4 or 6 or 9 year old? 

To those readers from a household who do have an LGBTQ person, is this what you want to impose upon society? Is this turning of the tables something you really want to do to innocent children?

What is at the root of this?  

Is this a trendy curiosity, a funky time in post-modern times? Rather, isn’t this simply a dangerous experiment, a manipulation of our children to attempt to normalise what is actually an unscientific and disproportionate emphasis of social engineering to placate 1.5% of the population, which also has, incidentally, a disproportionate number of cases of depression and suicide (which is not being addressed by this new strategy)?

Children do not belong to the State:

There has been for quite some years a move towards getting all children into pre-school. The State is keen to influence children from a very young age, and seems to be skeptical of parenting and family authority, presumably because some homes are not the best environment for children — though surely these are the exceptions not the norm. 

The family is the most fundamental social unit in society. Its strength, purpose and influence has been gradually eroded by a number of factors, some to include the internet in the home, 2 working parents, and single family homes. So much erosion has taken place that the word “family” has been redefined in an attempt to fit current reality.

It is my belief that we need to grip onto what influence we still have as leaders and moulders of our children’s minds, values and mores. We need to come against government education policy in “relationship education” and speak common sense into these ridiculous claims that people aren’t necessarily either male or female; the biology proves otherwise.

Analogy: what our children are facing is like…

Consider John and Susan, typical happy-go-lucky children in a reception class. In fact there will be some 20 or 30 children, a mixture of Johnnys and Susans, in said class. A teacher — who is to any child, a parental figure and a Godlike figure in their minds — begins to read to them that boys are not necessarily boys nor are girls necessarily girls. And then the teacher says, “Are you a boy, a girl or a transvestite? Do you feel happier in girls’ clothes or boys’? And did you know there are up to 100 gender identities that you can choose from? What will you be today? Or tomorrow?”

It’s like putting a child in a candy store and asking, “Which candy would you like?”

Or it’s like asking a child to pick a puppy from several in a puppy shop, and then saying after they’ve taken the puppy home, “By the way, you can change your puppy tomorrow if you like.”

Only the consequences over the issue of sexual identity in the long term is far more grave than eating too many different candies or not bonding with a pet. 

Our core identity begins with our sexuality. It is our most personal and private sense of dignity and ownership. In messing with the maleness or femaleness of our children, we are tampering with their mental stability and inner sense of self worth. Proof is in the damage done to children who experience sexual abuse.

What shall we do?

We shall not riot. We shall not hate. But we do need to protest in our own unique way to come against this onslaught of sexual imposition upon our children’s bodies and manipulation of our children’s minds. 

The easy route is to cry:

In total frustration, I sometimes find it soothing to cry, whenever I find something hard to deal with. But this is not a time to cry.

The tougher route is to dig in and to resist the tide.

For those who believe:

For those of us who follow Jesus, we know this notion of choosing our sexuality is unbiblical teaching. But how do we combat it in a society which has turned its back on GOD?

My way is to speak to mothers’ hearts. We speak to the common ground we do have: that of common sense and biological fact. Yes, we can offer the Good News too, but this battle is both spiritual and natural. We battle in prayer, and we battle in practice, with the vigour of Wilberforce* in a society that has lost its moral compass and does not heed Biblical truth.

*William Wilberforce was the Member of Parliament who stood against slavery for years before it was finally undone legally, through laws being changed by government.