CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Another Reason To Reform Our Education System

Oct 9, 2006

It is not hard to produce solid reasons as to why our school system is in need of a major overhaul. On a daily basis horror stories can be found indicting our out-of-control education system. The stranglehold of political correctness, secular humanism and leftist ideology seems to grow by the day.

The latest outrage concerns a 13-year-old school girl who was failed because she refused to write an assignment on life in a gay community. The Year 9 student at Windaroo Valley State High School, south of Brisbane, did not wish to do the assignment because of her religious and moral convictions, but the teacher simply failed her instead of giving her an alternative.

And to make matters worse, the students in the class were warned not to tell their parents about the assignment. I wonder why.

Opposition Leader Jeff Seeney said it was time to get common sense back in the classroom: “It’s no wonder our kids are struggling with the basics when the Government is allowing this sort of rubbish to be taught in the classroom. The Beattie Labor Government has created a system that tries to tell kids what to think instead of teaching them how to think. It is completely out of line for students to be graded on their moral beliefs. It’s not the job of our schools to politicise our children. It is their function to provide our kids with the basics, like reading, writing and maths.”

Exactly. Why do 13-year-olds even need to be debating such controversial topics? It is perhaps one thing for older teenagers to discuss such issues, but to push a radical homosexual agenda on such young students, and seek to drive a wedge between parent and child, is reprehensible.

This is just another glaring example of how brainwashing and indoctrination have increasingly replaced education in our school system. We seem not to be concerned about getting our kids to think, to read, to count, and to master basic concepts. Instead, we seem to want our children to be PC zombies, all mouthing and living the same PC dictates.

Such cookie-cutter indoctrination was of course the stuff of the former communist police states. But it should have no place in a modern democratic nation.

This story in fact is just another very timely example of what Education Minister Julie Bishop complained about last week when she spoke of a left-wing dominance of our school system. Is it any wonder that so many parents are voting with their feet and putting their kids in private schools or resorting to home-schooling?

Parents are fed up with the rubbish being force-fed our children. And rightly so. It is clearly time for a thorough cleanup of our education departments. The left-wing bureaucrats will put up a fight of course. They have had their own way for too long. But our children deserve better.

This sad story can be read about in the October 8, 2006 Sunday Mail:

www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20542442-5007190,00.html

[493 words]

15 Responses to Another Reason To Reform Our Education System

  • Thanks Bill. My only thought is that the federal government should seriously consider restricting education funding to states allowing this intrusion into family life. This kind of thing has been left untended far too long. One of my daughters brough home her social studies sex manual from her ACT high school and it was so explicit I immediately burnt it. That was 26 years ago! Much of the offensive material now being taught is increasingly not known to parents. Some 30 years ago I was on a federal committee developing a national ‘core curriculam’ for implementation by the states and territories. It was to be implemented suject to all states agreeing. Two states (WA Qld) did not accept the proposal and it failed. I feel only funding as an implement of change will alter this unwanted situation. It might also encourage an acceptance of the latest curriculum proposal of the government. However, teacher training could be a problem as it seems secular humanism has it seeds well planted there as well as with the Teachers Federation.

    Peter Rice

  • The Lunar Homosexual Colony Assignment is part of the curriculum that all public school kids must learn.

    See here:
    http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/yrs1to10/kla/hpe/docs/modules/qhm063.pdf

    Someone has to stop this.

    Nick Green

  • I could not believe what I have just read. Who was the radical thinker who decided that homosexuality be taught in our schools? Where have the parents rights gone to have the responsibility to teach their children about these matters? I do not see why the rest of society has to be bombarded with such trash. Good on you and the young lady who refused to participate in the assignment. “God” created “Adam and Eve”, not “Adam and Steve”.

    Rae Wallace, Devonport

  • The latest outrage concerns a 13-year-old school girl who was failed because she refused to write an assignment on life in a gay community.

    The assignment asked students to imagine what it would be like to be a heterosexual living in a mainly gay colony on the Moon, in order to explore what it is like to be part of a minority. Try not to misrepresent the situation: it only makes you seem dishonest.

    The stranglehold of political correctness, secular humanism and leftist ideology seems to grow by the day.

    Utter hypocritical garbage, Bill. That the school was eventually forced to withdraw the assignment in order to placate one student’s bigotry is a clear-cut case of the right-wing political correctness that threatens to hold the education system–not to mention to ability of professional educators to do their jobs–to ransom. (If the Howard government gets its way, that is.)

    I mean–what next? Shall we ban the use of Mississippi Burning or Rabbit-Proof Fence in schools, lest we offend some racists? Shall we proscribe all mention of the Holocaust in case the sensitivities of Nazi students are compromised? Shall we banish evolution from the science classroom, so that the same Queensland schoolgirl doesn’t have to find her beliefs “challenged” in biology? (Wait a minute–you want that, don’t you?)

    This is just another glaring example of how brainwashing and indoctrination have increasingly replaced education in our school system. We seem not to be concerned about getting our kids to think, to read, to count, and to master basic concerpts. (sic) Instead, we seem to want our children to be PC zombies, all mouthing and living the same PC dictates.

    Oh, the irony. What was it the girl’s mother said? Oh, that’s right:

    “She was being challenged, but she should not be challenged like that at her age.”

    We don’t want our children to be PC zombies. We want them to be Christian zombies. Got it.

    And to make matters worse, the students in the class were warned not to tell their parents about the assignment. I wonder why.

    Stupidity and cowardice on the part of the school. It had nothing to be ashamed of, and it had nothing to hide.

    Arthur Vandelay, Perth

  • Nice to finally see some public reaction. This has been going on in state schools for 30 years.

    The only response I’ve seen that has muscle is the federal governments recent idea to arrest control of curriculum from the states. My concern is that if they rely on anyone trained at our universities to fix the problem they will just end up with more of the same.

    Education reflects the world view of the educators. How do we change that from secular to Biblical Christian? Anything less will just produce a new brand of athiest.

    I suggest we need to continue major reformation of our Churches which is starting at a grass roots level. What we lack is a major reversal of liberalism (evolutionary humanistic based theology) in our seminaries.

    Andrew Snowdon

  • Thanks Arthur

    But in a democracy, parents should have every right to assess and critique what they are getting for their tax dollars. And parents have a right to know that their children are not being force-fed values that are radically at variance with their own.

    Moreover, most Australians do not feel schools should be a place for pushing radical homosexual agendas (or any other radical agendas for that matter). Schools should not be a place for social engineering. Teachers should teach, and not use the schools to push their own political and social agendas.

    (And thanks for pointing out the typo.)

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • The only response I’ve seen that has muscle is the federal governments recent idea to arrest control of curriculum from the states.

    And what happens when the federal government changes hands, and the new nationalised curriculum falls under the control of the evil secularists? After all, your Howard utopia isn’t going to last forever.

    I suggest we need to continue major reformation of our Churches which is starting at a grass roots level. What we lack is a major reversal of liberalism (evolutionary humanistic based theology) in our seminaries.

    And how exactly will this change anything? This is Australia–a secular democracy–not Iran, and the mullahs don’t run things here (yet). See Section 116 of the Australian Constitution.

    But in a democracy, parents should have every right to assess and critique what they are getting for their tax dollars.

    Doubtless. But no amount of “democracy” will make pi = 3. Educational professionals should have the independence to do what they are most qualified to do. Allow (unqualified) politicians to determine the content of school curricula, and what you have is a dumbed-down, politically-compromised education system.

    And parents have a right to know that their children are not being force-fed values that are radically at variance with their own.

    What are you saying, then? That schools should be force-feeding values to children, as long as those values are in consonance with the values of parents?

    Tell me: should David Irving advocates have the right to demand that their children not be “force-fed” the Holocaust in history classes?

    Arthur Vandelay, Perth

  • If educators want to “inform” the impressionable about the homosexual lifestyle how about some honesty.

    Tell our children about adverse health outcomes – mental, physical & spiritual associated with being “gay”.

    g weedall

  • Sounds to me like Arthur Vandelay is happy to have public schools push his evolutionary secular humanistic religion onto the rest of us. That’s very tolerant and democratic of him, but as for me, I prefer the Truth!

    Ewan McDonald, Victoria

  • Thanks Arthur

    But it just seems to be a case of sour grapes on your part. You do not like the fact that the majority of Australians have values, beliefs, even religious convictions, that you do not like. People are entitled to share their concerns, be it in the schools, the political arena, or whatever.

    No one is stopping you from pontificating all you like about your point of view (which you do on your website) but you really seem to object to other people doing the same.

    Regards
    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Hey Bill,
    I don’t see why Arthur shouldnt object to people forcing their views on him, and I don’t see that as a case of sour grapes. If that’s how you define sour grapes, then every person who actually takes the time to think about politics, religion, and philosophy must experience this!!! For one, the views you hold are not held by the majority of Australians, and the views that Arthur holds are not held by the majority either. Therefore, why shouldnt he be able to express his views and show distaste for yours – it’s not like you don’t show distaste for his and other people who disagree with you. In reference to something you said a couple of weeks ago, your ‘truth’ is very different to Arthur’s (and my) ‘truth’, so the ability to convince one another that one is right and one is wrong is very unlikely to occur.
    The reason I am commenting here is that you seem to have a double standard – in some posts, you encourage debate, but your recent comment above seems to be an attempt to end this discussion, by using a simple cheap shot at someone who actually wants to share his opposing views with you.
    Matt Page, Melbourne
    PS: why did g weedall put the word gay in quotation marks – I am curious cos I have only started seeing fundamentalists doing that in recent times, in an attempt to suggest that gays don’t exist…….

    Matt Page, Melbourne

  • Thanks Matt
    The point I was trying to make is that Arthur (who has his own website where he regularly slams me and others) seems to be upset that the majority of Australians simply do not share his radical and secular point of view. The case in point in this article (the pushing of a radical agenda on school kids) is one that most Australians find problematic.

    But of course in the end, truth is ultimately not determined by numbers, by majorities, by committees.

    I am quite happy to dialogue and discuss issues. In a democracy this is vital, although some seem less happy than others for this debate to take place.

    Thanks again for your remarks.
    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Arthur, you make an observant comment about the ‘Howard Utopia’. A future change of government could create a worse dilemma. Although how about a Costello Utopia?

    I agree with Arthur that most of the rest are ‘evil secularists’, (although I’m quite unhappy about a number of Howard policies, e.g. media ownership). However, federal control would be a possible short term solution and I don’t see you making any solutions of your own to the dominant secularism.

    Now Arthur, your question about how reformation helps, you see, Australia is a democracy and although it is not governed or controlled by a particular Christian denomination (back 100 years ago they might have referred to the Anglican religion, now we would say Anglican denomination) it has always been Christian in many respects as you would be aware. However, from a practical stand point, it is secular, only to the degree that Christian people either 1) abstain from politics or 2) enact secular politics.

    When Christians rediscover the historicity of the Bible they become more hopeful and even visionary. I have often observed how individuals become politically engaged and clear in their thinking. Would you really want to live in a world where secularist get everything they want? Remember, the ultimate relativist is the psychopath.

    I hold the view that all people are political by nature although not always by inclination. In a democracy every one can play a part and make a difference even if it’s just a small difference. This is a significant part of the protestant view. It is not all up to the clergy although they can play a part as many do.

    It is interesting that you refer to the Mullahs running everything. How do you propose to stop them?

    Andrew Snowdon

  • How many of our politicians, let alone parents, realize that this disgraceful indoctrinatory assignment was not just the work of one screwball teacher, but part of the government curriculum written by radical educrats?

    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

  • Sorry to come so late to this thread.

    I notice Arthur operates under at least three misapprehensions:

    1. “And how exactly will this change anything? This is Australia–a secular democracy–not Iran, and the mullahs don’t run things here (yet). See Section 116 of the Australian Constitution.”

    That clause prohibits the government from institutionalising a religious denomination, or requiring a religious test for public office. It does not grant the Australian people any “freedom from religion”.

    2. But no amount of “democracy” will make pi = 3.
    I think this is the fourth time I have explained this one recently. Someone must have majored on this fallacy somewhere.

    The short answer is that the description refers to inside circumference but outside diameter. If you deduct 8 inches (two spans of 4 inches each) the inside diameter and the inside circumference are in the proportion of 3.14 and always have been.

    3. Educational professionals should have the independence to do what they are most qualified to do. Allow (unqualified) politicians to determine the content of school curricula, and what you have is a dumbed-down, politically-compromised education system.

    Since that is precisely what we have, wouldn’t the answer be to release the school system from government control and finance, Arthur? Or would that come uncomfortably close to allowing parents to control what their children learn?

    What we have lost is the correct understanding of in loco parentis, and schools have become in substio parentis (with apologies to those who know their Latin better), displacing parents from their authoritative role in teh raising of their children.
    John Angelico

Leave a Reply