Friday, 20 February 2015

Surgery no cure for “gender confusion”

I am grateful, once again, to the excellent Family Education Trust's January bulletin, which reports on a Wall Street Journal article about another deeply negative dimension of sex  education and its potential disastrous impact on our children's lives.

A top psychiatrist, writing in the Wall Street Journal, has written of the dangers arising from an “everything is normal” sex education. He writes of school “diversity counsellors” who promote transgender surgery as a means of banishing psycho-social problems, and who (“rather like cult leaders”) encourage youngsters to distance themselves from families advising against such drastic actions. Paul McHugh’s article was entitled TransgenderSurgery Isn’t the Solution.

If you are concerned about what is happening in schools in the name of sex education, please contact SPUC at politics@spuc.org.uk to find out how you can challenge parliamentary candidates in the forthcoming general election on this issue and on other vital pro-life issues.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Wednesday, 18 February 2015

Department for Education promotes “traffic light” tool that condones under-age sex

In a fact-packed January bulletin, the excellent Family Education Trust carries a compelling story on its front page showing how guidance backed by the Department for Education is encouraging unlawful sexual activity. (The Family Education Trust is a charity committed to researching the causes and consequences of family breakdown and promoting the welfare of children and young people.)

The UK law is clear that sexual activity under the age of 16 is unlawful. Nevertheless, the Department for Education has funded[1] and recommended as a useful resource a Brook “traffic light” system that condones underage sex. The system has been adopted by at least one County Council[2]. (Brook Advisory Service is one of Britain's leading abortion referral organisations, specialising in advising young people - including those under 16 - about abortion, sex, STIs etc). 

The traffic light system is not distributed to young people but is intended to “inform” teachers and other professionals working with children and young people.

The tool identifies green, amber and red behaviours. Green behaviours – according to Brook – “reflect safe and healthy sexual development”[3], and “provide opportunities to give positive feedback”. Those behaviours include “consenting oral and/or penetrative sex with others of the same or opposite gender who are of similar age and developmental ability” – even where those engaged in the activities are in the 13-15 age group.

Activities classified as amber rather than red include “following others into toilets or changing rooms to look at them or touch them” and “pulling other children’s pants down/skirts up/trousers down against their will”. These behaviours, according to Brook, merely “have the potential”[4] to be unsafe and unhealthy behaviour.

Brook have denied that the tool condones any particular sexual behaviours, but Norman Wells, director of the Family Education Trust, comments that “if giving positive feedback to sexually active children aged 13, 14 and 15 isn’t condoning and encouraging underage sex, then I don’t know what is!”.

If you are concerned about what is happening in schools in the name of sex education, please contact SPUC at politics@spuc.org.uk to find out how you can challenge parliamentary candidates in the forthcoming general election on this issue and on other vital pro-life issues.


[1] The funding is confirmed at http://www.foundationpsa.org.uk/page.asp?ID=16
[2] Cornwall County Council – March 2014 – see http://www.cllrandrewwallis.co.uk/cornwall-council-launches-traffic-light-tool-for-positive-relationships-and-healthy-sexual-development/
[3] See http://www.brook.org.uk/old/index.php/guidance?tid=6
[4] See http://www.brook.org.uk/old/index.php/traffic-light-tool-0-to-5

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Tuesday, 17 February 2015

Parents must be at the centre of sex education, says Safe at School

Antonia Tully
SPUC's Safe at School campaign has said that parents must be at the centre of sex education, in response to the report from the House of Commons Education Committee on PSHE and SRE in schools.

Antonia Tully of Safe at School told the media this morning:
"Parents constantly find themselves having to battle with schools in order to protect their children from inappropriate sex education. The recommendation from the Education Committee that parents can continue to withdraw their children from sex education, isn't addressing this problem."

We don't need new sex education guidelines either. We already have guidelines for schools which repeatedly stress that parents must be involved. What is missing is a robust mechanism to ensure that schools really do engage with parents.
Parents are the primary educators of their children, they are natural sex educators of their children and they are the experts on their own children."
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Monday, 16 February 2015

Both you and I are incompatible with life, Ms Daly

Clare Daly TD
Last Tuesday, a pro-abortion private member's bill was defeated in the Dáil (the Irish Parliament) by 104 votes to 20.

The Bill, introduced by Clare Daly TD (pictured), of the Socialist Party, was defeated by 104 votes to 20. The bill was designed to allow abortion in the cases of babies with life limiting conditions i.e. babies who are expected to die at birth or soon after.

Patrick Buckley, Director of European Life Network Ireland and one of SPUC's UN consultants, says:
"There has been a persistent attempt by Clare Daly and her pro-abortion colleagues to legalise abortion of children with life limiting conditions, such as anencephaly and Trisomy 18 or 13 - children who are being callously described by Daly ond others as being ‘incompatible with life’.

"This most inhumane attack on the most vulnerable members of our society was perpetrated under the guise of women’s rights and it must be resisted at all costs. Disabled babies have a right to life, the most fundamental right, shared by all members of the human family."
In the event, the bill was deemed to be unconstitutional, due to clause 40.3.3. (the Eighth Amendment) of the Irish constitution which states:
“The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”
Enda Kenny, the Prime Minister, had been briefed by the Irish Attorney General that the bill was unconstitutional and the cabinet as well as all Labour TDs were told to vote against the bill for this reason.

Clare Daly during the Dáil debate disputed the unconstitutionality of the bill and has called for a referendum to repeal the Eight Amendment.

Pat Buckley warns:
“It would be foolish to take comfort from the result on the basis that the government could not have voted in favour of a bill they had been advised was unconstitutional. There is no doubt that Daly mounted a strong campaign judging by the fact that many of those who voted against the bill expressed sympathy with its objectives, including the Minister for Health Leo Varadkar. Three members of the Fianna Fail party also voted for it, including the health and justice spokesmen. Daly’s approach ignores the hundreds of women who decide to give life a chance and allow their babies to live as long as they possibly can. It is also very hurtful to such women when Daly and her colleagues describe their babies as ‘non-viable’ and ‘incompatible with life’.”
I would add: "Incompatible with life", in this context, means a person will die, as does "non-viable". Just in case you don't know, Ms Daly, if you must use such language, both you and I are "incompatible with life" and "non-viable".

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy