如何完成安大略省教育课程和首个《父母权利法案》的网上调查(即将截止！）

[focus on today]

 

[focus on today]

英文版的 online survey 参考答案： http://bbs.comefromchina.com/threads/1656035/

 

[focus on today]

如果教育厅出台一个家长权益法，英包括哪些要点？
这些可不可以：
parent's right: 1. rights to determine which school the child would go for elementary and secondary education，有权 决定上那所学校
2. rights to determine if the child is at the age to participate in sex-health related class， 有权决定孩子的年龄是否适合上 与性健康有关的课程
3. rights to know how the child performs in school classes and programs， 有权知道孩子在学校和课堂上的表现
4. right to determine to opt out for their children in sex related education.
5. right to know what to teach before the teaching time about sex education in writing.

Following policy, in my opinion, needs to be revoked from current policies:
"There is no age limit on making an accommodation request, and young students have the same rights to privacy and to have accommodations made on their behalf with or without their guardians' knowledge."

 

[focus on today]

 

[focus on today]

 

[focus on today]

”accommodation request" 在小学和中学环境里是指什么呢？以上可以看着是个解释吧。如果我没理解错的话，包括 与gender expression 有关的“厕所问题”， 以尊重"privacy" 为由， 向“guardian" 隐瞒某些“情况”。young children 的“privacy” 需要向家长或监护人 隐瞒？ 这个孩子到底是谁在养育他她？想不到，学校竟然有这样的“保护” 政策！

 

[focus on today]

据说教师工会在游说保留15年的大纲， 15年的大纲是什么样？ 为什么那么多家长反对？

https://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/sex-ed-curriculum
Grade 4 (age 9): Romantic dating

• Will introduce children to the idea of being “more than just friends” and “going out” with classmates whom they may “like”. See excerpt below from the actual 2015 curriculum.
  
  
  
  
  
• Many parents would find that introducing this idea of dating at age 9 is not age-appropriate. On its own this content might not seem too serious, but in the context of the other controversial lessons, plus the curriculum’s connections to a confessed child pornographer (jump to link) and to unsavoury groups who promote anal play, group sex, sadism/masochism, and bondage (jump to link), parents are prudent to see a red flag here.
  

Grade 6 (age 11): Masturbation

• Encourages masturbation as a "pleasurable" way for children to learn about their bodies. See excerpt from the actual 2015 curriculum document below.
• Regardless of what any person's moral stance is on the practice of masturbation, all fair-minded people should agree that the government has no business actively promoting/encouraging 12 year olds to masturbate.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• • In addition to promoting the practice of masturbation, the curriculum will teach about "vaginal lubrication".
  • It is unclear how this teaching can possibly be retrofitted with a "Catholic lens" in order to make it suitable for Catholic religious schools. Catholic doctrine teaches that masturbation is an immoral practice that violates the purpose of human sexuality, which is ordered towards marriage, procreation and the mutual fulfillment of husband and wife.

 

[focus on today]

Grade 7 (age 12): Anal intercourse & Oral Sex

• Under the pretext of encouraging abstinence from behaviours associated with high risk for STDs, the curriculum uses a sleight of hand to sneakily introduce to children the concepts of "anal intercourse" and "oral-genital contact". Those are ideas that many of these 12-13 year old kids might not be aware of, or at least, have never seriously considered as an act they could be taking part in now. In another sleight of hand, "anal intercourse" is lumped in as a sexual act of the same kind as vaginal intercourse, with no differentiation between the two types of sexual acts, either morally or with respect to risk for sexually transmitted disease, for which the former carries dramatically higher risk.
• Was the goal in this sneaky introduction of graphic sex acts to avoid the accusation that the Premier was promoting a gay agenda, seeking to normalize gay sex in the minds of kids? By claiming that this curriculum is about encouraging kids to "delay" these high risk sexual activities, many casual readers won't notice that what has actually occurred is that the teacher has planted ideas in the minds of children that might not otherwise be present, regarding "anal intercourse", "oral-genital contact", etc.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Anal intercourse is not an activity to which the government should be giving any semblance of approval whatsoever. It is the most efficient method of transmitting the AIDS virus, so much so, that despite all the "safe sex" and condom education over the past 30 years, epidemiologists still predict that 50% of men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) will eventually contract HIV.
• In fact, the Ontario government's chief epidemiologist publishes a report on the spread of HIV every 4 years. In the most recent study, collecting data between 2005 to 2008, it found that almost 1 in 4 MSM who live in Toronto (21.9%), are currently infected with HIV. See chart on the right.
• Extrapolating the current growth rate for infection tells us that by the time 2012 public health data becomes available, almost 1 out of every 3 actively gay men in Toronto will be infected with HIV. So, why exactly does Kathleen Wynne think its a good idea to get 12 and 13 year olds thinking about "anal intercourse"?
• If the government's going to talk about anal sex at all, it should be at older ages and the message should be: "That's a risky, potentially fatal activity. Don't do it". The curriculum makes no mention that anal intercourse, in the context of male-on-male sex, leads directly to the death of a large percentage of those who practice it, and is generally unhealthy for all practicioners.
• People have a right to know about serious health risks before they choose to engage in it. Withholding such vital information is an inexcusable moral failure that puts lives at risk.
• In fact, Kathleen Wynne's sex-ed curriculum leaves 12 and 13 year olds with a distinct impression that "communicating clearly with each other when making decisions" is all that's required for this activity to be "responsible and safe".

 

[focus on today]

Grade 7: Sexual Pleasure
Teacher may help 12-yr-olds to appreciate an “understanding of your own body, including what gives you pleasure”.

 

[focus on today]

Grade 7: Keep a condom with you

• Children will be taught to keep a condom on their person in case there's a chance "they will be having sex sometime soon".
• This is an overly explicit suggestion to children which once again will leave the impression with kids that we adults expect they are now having sex. For some, it might even be felt as pressure to become sexually active. For some kids, this type of lesson will only arouse curiosity to try things sooner than they would have planned to on their own. It is a recipe for launching children into a lifestyle of promiscuity.
  
  
  

 

[focus on today]

Grade 8 (age 13): "Make a personal plan' about your sexual activity

• To a lot of parents, reading a curriculum suggestion for grade 8's in which the teacher is to help students make a sexual plan for themselves sounds a little perverse. Is it age-appropriate to suggest to grade 8's that they should make a plan in which they decide how far they're willing to go with sexual activity, and then "stick to what I had planned".
• Many parents feel this has an undertone that is too sexually permissive and is giving license to promiscuity. Keep in mind that at this age, children cannot legally give consent. It may actually be illegal for adults to instruct underage children to have sex.
  
  
  

 

[focus on today]

• The next teacher prompt once again risks sending the message to grade 8 kids that "we expect you may be having sex or will very soon".
  
  
  
  
  
• Is there a risk this will put pressure on kids to become sexually active? Or on others who are curious, especially boys, the encouragement to go ahead and do so? Well, a 2014 poll of UK teens conducted by the Institute of Public Policy Research suggests that the answers may be YES. Researchers found that a large majority of both boys & girs complained that sex education often presents promiscuity as normal, putting additional pressure on them to become sexually active before they might otherwise do so.

 

[focus on today]

加拿大共产党也是名单上？

an we know a curriculum by the company that it keeps?
It's not average moms and dads who are asking for this curriculum to return. In fact 160,000+ Ontario parents have signed petitions against it. So who is actually pressuring the Liberals to bring back the controversial curriculum?

Several radical organizations, or those with ties to radical groups have been publicly lobbying the Liberals to bring back the 2010 curriculum since it was first retracted by Premier McGuinty. These include:

• OPHEA (The Ontario Physical & Health Education Association): partners with a "sex education expert" called Sexpressions which offers explicit, classroom teaching aids like "The Guide To Getting It On Book"
  
• Planned Parenthood Toronto: promotes abortion, anal play (e.g. anal fisting), sex toys, and the viewing of pornography. See excerpts below from Planned Parenthood's educational resources for 13-year-olds. Please note that these perverse resources are NOT in the Liberal curriculum. They are merely meant to show the deviant mindset of those who have influence on the Liberal government.
  
  
  

• Queer Ontario: promotes bondage, sadism/masochism, casual sex and group sex (see below from their website). Again, please note that these perverse ideas are NOT in the Liberal curriculum. They are merely meant to show the radical worldview of those who have influence on the Liberal government. Queer Ontario admits to having helped the Liberal government write amendments to Bill 13, the so-called Accepting Schools Act which was imposed the Wynne/McGuinty government in 2012.
  
  
  
  
  

• Communist Party of Canada (Ontario): like all communists, it seeks to throw off "the shackles" of God's moral laws in society and bring about an atheist utopia where virtually all areas of public and private life are dominated by an all-powerful state. Read their demand letter.

When groups who advocate for the normalization of sadism, group sex, anal play and viewing pornography are demanding the return of the 2010 Sex Ed curriculum, parents cannot be blamed for believing that these classroom lessons will have the effect of sexualizing young children.

Keep the pressure on Premier Doug Ford to uphold his pledge to repeal the curriculum
Parents across Ontario are immensely grateful to Premier Doug Ford for repealing the Wynne/Levin sex curriculum.

However, the biased mainstream media has orchestrated a fake news campaign to try to pressure Ford to lose his nerve, and betray his campaign promise to parents. The left wing media has unleashed hundreds of articles and news reports making ludicrous, unhinged claims, like that “transgender” and "gay" children would literally die if Ford were to repeal the curriculum.
That is a total lie of course.
It is Kathleen Wynne’s age-inappropriate and anti-scientific sex curriculum that puts children’s physical and psychological health at risk. And makes them more vulnerable to sexual predators, not less so.
------
现在又加上教师工会 要保留这个”sexy" 大纲。 估计这是反对党 NDP 的毒计。如果福特不能成功废除韦恩新性教纲，一定会对保守党连任不利。鉴于自由党已沦为小三， NDP 估计正幻想着 下一届执政呢！

 

[focus on today]

这样的大纲教出来的孩子，大概高中毕业就该结婚生子了，婚姻课也不用上了。这里没有提到 grade 11-12 教什么，是不是该教如何带baby 啦！

 

[uglyducking]

这样的大纲教出来的孩子，大概高中毕业就该结婚生子了，婚姻课也不用上了。这里没有提到 grade 11-12 教什么，是不是该教如何带baby 啦！

在这个非木族出生率逐年降低的时代，这是一件好事儿啊，小土豆在下一盘大旗