Give nursery children lessons about same-sex relationships, say UK teachers


Teaching nursery children about homosexual relations is now “age appropriate.” One word:  HOMESCHOOL.

From Daily Mail: Nurseries should teach toddlers about same-sex relationships and transgender lifestyles to reduce hate crime, say teachers.

The National Union of Teachers voted yesterday for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) matters to be taught to children aged two to four.

They want nursery teachers to deliver ‘age-appropriate content’ on the subject and to challenge homophobia and transphobia. However, critics say the subject would simply confuse toddlers.

It was revealed last month that primary schools are likely to be legally obliged to teach about same-sex couples as part of new compulsory relationships education. But the NUT believes the new law does not go far enough and wants children to be made aware of the issues at an even younger age. They also want teenagers in secondary schools to be taught more about safe sex between gay and bisexual couples including how to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

General secretary Kevin Courtney said it was important children get ‘well-balanced, age-appropriate information’ on relationships. ‘The alternative is many pupils being isolated, bullied or misinformed and, for many, there is an impact on health and wellbeing that can last well beyond school years,’ he told the union’s annual conference.

From 2019 all primary school pupils will learn about safe and healthy relationships as part of a new mandatory curriculum to prepare them for modern life. All secondary school pupils will also have compulsory sex education.

These classes will have to comply with the Equality Act, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation – so same-sex relationships will be included.

The content will be ‘age-appropriate’ and it is understood younger children will simply be taught about stranger danger and inappropriate contact with adults, as well as healthy relationships.

Nurseries are not obliged to teach sex and relationships education, but because the NUT has nursery school members yesterday’s motion could see them introducing it voluntarily.

The NUT also resolved to provide training to members on how to teach about LGBT matters and challenge discrimination. However Laura Perrins, co-editor of the Conservative Woman website, said: ‘Parents send their children to nursery to be cared for – not to be confused by this transgender nonsense pushed by a minority of activists who care nothing for the needs of young children.’



17 responses to “Give nursery children lessons about same-sex relationships, say UK teachers

  1. Why teach them about gay sex when they don’t know what straight sex is yet?

    Liked by 4 people

  2. NUT seems to be a fitting acronym for these mindless edu-porno hacks.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. The union certainly has an appropriate acronym. It should be plural.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. I think it was Voltaire who joked that, when Christian salvation is no longer relevant, appearing ever so relevant becomes the new form of salvation. This is what characterizes a wind-up windbag like Kevin Courtney, who has no clue who authored the thoughts in his head he takes for his own, but thinks they make him ever so relevant, like open borders and same-sex “love” (i.e, coprophilia).

    Whatever the kosher BBC and press working to annihilate English culture tell him to think he thinks. There are no countervailing moral forces for a miseducated boob like him to consider since he already “knows,” courtesy of that same media, that everything that made his country great in the first place needs to go.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. When the pervs start that crap with my grandchild grandpas coming and it ain’t gonna be pretty.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. When you think the crazies can’t get any crazier, well, here they are again.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. We can make fun of the snowflakes but this is no laughing matter. The same is being pushed here in this country, if only a little bit less radical, and as a parent you cannot opt out. Technically this means you have no parental rights and are not the one to determine what your child is exposed to or taught. Everyone says to home school, but what about those families where both parents have to work? I don’t know how much more 1984 it can get and all I can say is I am glad I no longer have children in school.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. I believe it was Randy Engel who wrote “Sex Education: The Final Plague.” It was a great read, and she was absolutely right, of course.
    Rather than argue the issue morally and preach to the already converted, I would argue it economically, after a fashion. What should back up a currency—gold or silver? Certainly no economic system can be backed up by both: GRESHAM’S LAW would apply. In other words, the bad money would drive out the good.

    In other words, when we allow moral standards to be relaxed, in the name of fairness or equality, or any other reason, those moral standards just keep on slipping. Have we learned anything from the Sexual Revolution at all??? Back in the 1970’s, when the tumultuous ’60’s were over, the sex-ed advocates came out, onto the talk shows and every other venue they could. “Would you rather have your children learn about sex on the streets?” they asked, rhetorically. (As if we ourselves heard nothing from our peers!) And they took not bold, but strategic, moves. They did not enter law. They did not enter law enforcement. They did not enter medicine. THEY ENTERED EDUCATION. “Give me a child until the age of five, and I will make them a Communist for life!” Lenin quipped. And, CAUSALLY, he was correct.
    So we decry what has been done, and what the entire human race has lost: MAKE NO MISTAKE: THE FUTURE OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE HAS BEEN LOST. THE BAD HAS DRIVEN OUT THE GOOD. The Rubicon has already been lost.
    Did Vatican II do us any favors? Did St. John Paul II do us any favors? Oh, Sure, he warned us about “The Culture of Death,” and he was right, insofar as he went. But he did not help us to overcome. He did not make the right strategic moves; He was more concerned, apparently, about having interfaith religious dialogues with pagan religions.
    So much for defeating the Culture of Death. And now we have a Pope who is “very concerned” about rehabilitating Martin Luther (and any other heretic he can claim!)

    We might as well focus on what we can do to save our own souls. At the age of 61, I have made my mistakes. I’m not going back to college now. It is what it is. Rather, I place my focus on what I can do to save my own soul—as well as keeping a roof over my head. In other words, the Moral Apocalypse is coming; We have to prepare for the moral tsunami, and deal with it.
    There are many bricks of EXTINCTION PROTOCOLS in the Great Wall of Benthamite Eugenics. We’re not SJW’s or never-Trumpers, howling at the outcome of the election! We understand that this election was not about electing one man: It was about putting and cementing the right ideology in place.
    So it shall be with some future generation. Remember that Rome, eventually, did fall. It took the Dark Ages and the Renaissance to repair the damage. Thus Our Civilization SHALL recover, after the Coming Fall. But the recovery SHALL come. In the meantime, pray to Our Lady of Quito, and pray for the People of England. They’re going to need it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • P.S.
      (I was interrupted.)
      I meant to say above that “the Rubicon has been CROSSED.”

      At any rate, it seems to me that, with the advent of sociology as a valid science, the intellectuals (and the other reigning powers) made a very bad, very FATAL mistake: We (I mean “THEY”) exchanged Moral Man for Sociological Man. I see what has been happening, after an analogous fashion: With this mistake, Judas has given Our Lord the Kiss of Death he betrayed Our Lord with. (In this case, Judas has morphed into Marx, and we are charged to take the Role of Our Lord).
      I sincerely believe that the Church—and the rest of Humanity—will have to re-enact the Passion of Our Lord. Christ Our Lord has already confronted Pontius Pilate in this Drama; We are now on our way to Golgotha.
      Analogously, historically and ontologically, this is what is happening. Fair is Fair: Christ died for us. Now we shall repeat His Passion. Jesus is looking for witnesses; His angels shall separate the wheat from the tares at the End.


      • Small point about witnessing–yesterday I had lunch with a couple, probably evangelicals but I don’t know, and they had me holding hands with them and saying grace in the restaurant. No need to guess where they stand on Christian morals. And thanks to them I’ll be asking my grandchildren to say grace at the table next time I’m out with them.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. We used to have a name for people who wanted to expose children to sex. Pedophile…

    Liked by 1 person

  10. The U.K. is crawling with pedophiles and perverts. There is but one solution to this depravity, parents must rise up against these out-of-control “educators” and their representatives. They must demand, through local politicians, that sex education be banned from the curriculum in nursery and grades through the age of 12 yrs. Such “education” should then be an elective, and require affirmative consent from the parent(s). The Prime Minister has just called for an election, this assault on children’s education should be made a prominent issue.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I fail to see why sex ed should be taught before the kids reach puberty,..

    I Mean, after all, they don’t each driver’s ed, before the kids are old enough to get a driver’s license

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Many 2 year olds are still trying to absorb the meaning of potty training.
    This is conditioning the parents in order for these deviates to have unfettered access to innocents. First they talk about it, then what?
    Everyone knows children of that age simply cannot understand what they are being told.
    My child would never darken the doors to any establishment that pushes this pedophilia behavior.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. This is easy to suss out. They are going after the children. It should be all good peoples duty to keep these perverted insects off of the flowers. If this is allowed, it will never stop. Nuff said.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. I just returned from a conference paid for by my district that introduced the “new” Social Studies Framework ( the skeleton upon which any future standards or book adoptions for CA must be placed….probably for the next 20 years…b/c the last “framework” was adopted in 1998)…and a KEY part of it was the CA “FAIR” act…which mandates that (in short) “others” of alternative/varied sexual persuasions/practices be represented and explained in our social studies coursework as we teach it from K-12.

    So……yooo-hooo….12 years ago, b/c I have mulitple qualifications in CA public school sys…. I “ran away from history to art.” At the time, I did so b/c we adopted a “pro-muslim” text in our district for teaching history, K-12…just years after 9-11….Even so, I still, b/c of my credentials,and over-populations in our enrollments, am assigned a history class or two as a part of my “regular” present art teaching assignment…or, “in addition to” (extra pay) my regular load of art courses per day. And, with this recent manate, it appears that I have no where to run to….

    I just don’t know what to tell you, the general public. I am so troubled by having to teach that people must be given”wide berth” according to what they prefer to do with their genitals, esp. to MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS who, let’s face it….are thinking 24/7 about what to do with their genitals……. .It puts ME…a teacher….in a position to walk a very razor-thin line about teaching sexuality “norms” and variations ….instead of ART or HISTORY. I am very happy to accept people at face value…what they mean to me…what they did in history…or in art/art history….BUT….do I HAVE to teach about what they thought about or did with their genitals?????? Do I HAVE to make this point with 11-13 year olds??????? Why do I HAVE to teach that they were one of the greatest artists/foreign policy presidents/blah blah that ever lived, but they preferred to apply their genital activities to a same-sexed person?????OF WHAT FREAKING VALUE IS THAT TO MY MIDDLE SCHOOL KIDS?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s