“Safe Schools” and the War Against Children and Parents

Yesterday I wrote about the “Safe Schools” programs against the backdrop of the global sexual revolution sweeping the West. As I documented there, this is not happening by accident, but activist groups are deliberately and militantly pushing all this.

It involves very worrying anti-family, anti-child, anti-morality, and anti-religion elements. The Marxist and cultural Marxist war against these things is being promoted by these activist groups and agendas. See what I wrote there: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2018/04/18/safe-schools-and-the-sexual-agenda-big-picture/

Here I want to specifically look at the main base of the SS program: La Trobe University in Melbourne, its Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society (ARCSHS), and four key players. Looking at what these four have said and done should worry every single one of us.

Roz Ward

Here I want to document what each of these activists have said, offering the sources of their quotes. Roz Ward is perhaps the most famous – or infamous – character associated with the SS programs. I have written often about Ward in the past so will not repeat too much of that here. Simply look over these 43 articles: https://billmuehlenberg.com/category/education/safe-schools/

Ward has very clearly told us that the SS program is ‘not about stopping bullying…but about supporting gender and sexual diversity’. This comes straight out of the horse’s mouth – see this video, which was shot in Melbourne in June 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5uNocBCw3Q&feature=player_embedded

Ward also admitted that it is all about pushing Marxism in the schools. As Ward proudly stated, ‘I not only teach people how to be gay, I teach them how to be gay and communist, so invite me to your school if you will.’ This quote is from a 2013 Marxism Conference Ward proudly spoke at: https://twitter.com/Marx_Conference/status/317775712499159041

And Ward makes it clear that parents should just butt out of all this: As one report puts it: “A Safe Schools national symposium was told by the program’s Victorian co-ordinator, Roz Ward, that schools could ignore concerns raised about the agenda. ‘When people do complain then school leadership can very calmly and graciously say, “You know what? We’re doing it anyway, tough luck!”’ she told more than 300 attendees.”

This is also from the June 2014 video. See more here:

Ward continues to push this anti-parent agenda: “Discussions about gender and sexual diversity are in the Australian curriculum, they’re in the Victorian curriculum and there is no reason why they should need parental consent any more than long division in maths. It undermines the whole purpose of the Safe Schools coalition which is to be inclusive.”

Joel Radcliffe

Radcliffe is another Safe Schools coordinator and co-author of the program. He too is a radical activist, and he too boasts about how these programs can bypass parents: ‘Safe Schools project manager Joel Radcliffe, a fellow academic at La Trobe University, which spawned the program, told a June 2014 audience that “Parents don’t have the power to shut this down”.’ The same links provided above apply here (see the YouTube and Australian links).

And more recently the Andrews’ government gave Radcliffe even more power to target our children. The Australian, February 17, 2017 headline says this: “New role for Safe Schools author Joel Radcliffe”. The article begins:

One of the key players in the Safe Schools program has been appointed to a senior Victorian Education and Training Department position to help to manage the rollout of its similarly contentious Respectful Relationships program. Joel Radcliffe, a former Safe Schools Coalition Victoria co-ordinator who co-wrote its teaching guide with outspoken Marxist activist Roz Ward, was the subject of controversy himself last year when it emerged that he had boasted publicly that parents did not have the power to shut down the so-called anti-bullying program.

Much more can be said about him. If you have Facebook access, this one is a real eye-opener. It shows Radcliffe on his own page proudly singing the praises of the SS program, with a picture of himself. On the wall behind him is a photo of a child, and right beneath it a photo of a man exposing his erect penis. Creepy!

Um, I don’t want people like this teaching my children – and neither should you!

Dr Steven Angelides

If this aberrant interest in children and sexuality sounds a bit off, it gets worse – much worse – with my last two La Trobe academics. There sadly seems to be a paedophile connection here. Let me begin with Dr Steven Angelides and simply feature a number of his quotes on this subject, complete with the references to where they first appeared:

“What to do with the fact that the sexual child, such as N, is not the passive recipient of the adult gaze or adult sexuality. Often she looks back, speaks back, touches back, and indeed initiates and colludes with adults, not to mention often strips for them or has sex with them voluntarily (with or without parental consent).”
“What’s behind sex panics? The Bill Henson scandal”
Angelides, S. (2011). What’s Behind Child Sex Panics? The Bill Henson Scandal. LAMBDA NORDICA (Sweden), Issue 2, pp 101-125.

“What to do with the fact that the sexual child, such as N, is not the passive recipient of the adult gaze or adult sexuality. Often she looks back, speaks back, touches back, and indeed initiates and colludes with adults, not to mention often strips for them or has sex with them voluntarily (with or without parental consent).”
A chapter in Erogene Gefahrenzonen (Erogenous Danger Zones), 2013.
Angelides, S. (2013) The Uncanny Sexual Child. In Insa Haertel, ed., Erogene Gefahrenzonen: Aktuelle Produktionen des (infantilen) Sexuellen (Erogenous Danger Zones: Effective Productions of the (Infantile) Sexual). Berlin: Kulturverlag Kadmos.

“There is research to show that, as well as feeling a sense of power and control in sexual encounters with adults, children can frequently experience sexual pleasure … It is imperative that children’s sexual desires and sense of power and pleasure not only be recognised but also normalised.” “Sex and the Child.” Meanjin, Volume 63, Issue 4, 2004.

“The problem is that our culture demands that any eroticized parent-child emotions and any overt childhood sexual desire remain unexpressed. We simply do not have a language to speak childhood sexuality, let alone a language to articulate the erotic bond between children and parents. These topics are taboo. We are not even expected to talk about them, let alone admit to having such desires. But without a language to work through these prohibited desires, the grief, guilt, and shame they engender remain unresolved. And this only intensifies the original trauma of infantile sexuality. How do we then deal with these highly intense and inarticulable incestuous and pedophilic desires?”
“Historicizing affect, psychoanalyzing history: pedophilia and the discourse of child sexuality,” Journal of Homosexuality 46(1-2):79-109 · February 2003

Angelides, S. The Fear of Child Sexuality (under contract), University of Chicago Press.
Angelides, S. (2001) A History of Bisexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.”

Dr Gary Dowsett

Gary Dowsett is a longstanding homosexual activist and the deputy director of the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society at La Trobe University, where the Safe Schools Coalition project originated. He has unashamedly advocated for pedophilia and its legalisation. Consider a 1982 article by Dr Dowsett, published in Gay Information which spoke to this. In it he said:

“And I also have a friend, a paedophile, who is working very hard on making sense out of his relations with boys. These relations consist of, among other things, a large amount of nurture and support for these boys, a real caring for their welfare and growth… So what is the problem?” (p. 35)

“First, we have three legal/social questions to win: custody rights for gay men and lesbians; the legal right of paedophiles and their young loves; and finally, the sexual rights of children as a whole….” (p. 35)

“The current paedophilia debate then is crucial to the political processes of the gay movement: paedophiles need our support, and we need to construct the child/adult sex issue on our terms.” (p. 36)

“Our new kinds of arrangements collectively create a new politics of child/adult relations. Is this a bit of gay chauvinism, gay pride, a fond idealistic hope? Maybe, but since when have we too regarded pride as a sin?” (p. 38)
Gary Dowsett, “Boiled Lollies and Bandaids,” Gay Information: A Quarterly Journal, Spring 1982, issue no. 11, pp. 34-38.

Until recently the link to this article proudly appeared on his La Trobe University resume page. I saw it there myself. But now, due to public concern, it has been taken down. The first link offers the latest page, while the second link offers the original page with it in:

Also, in his 1996 PhD thesis, “Practicing Desire: Homosexual Sex in the Era of AIDS,” Dowsett describes “sexual encounters of various kinds” between “adolescent (and occasionally younger) boys” … “and to a lesser degree, with men, in and outside family life. This homosexual activity is more commonplace and normal, even worthy of being thought of as altruistic.”
Dowsett, Gary, W., (1996), “Practicing Desire: Homosexual Sex in the Era of AIDS,” Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

I like how one commentator, Christopher Akehurst, put it: “A pity that Dowsett is not a Catholic priest: that would wake them out of their torpor. Instead, he is only a priest of the New Sexuality, but that’s enough to protect him. He’s on the right side.” “Immoral relativity,” Spectator, 26 March 2016.

In March 2016 Liberal Nationals MP George Christensen used parliamentary privilege to accuse the Safe Schools program of being linked to a “paedophilia advocate,” Dowsett from La Trobe University. So how did the University respond to these allegations? Did they fire him immediately, or profusely apologise, or seek his retraction?

No, a statement was issued by a spokesman from La Trobe: “We are appalled that a respected academic has been attacked using parliamentary privilege. This is a blatant attempt to distract attention from the independent endorsement of the highly effective Safe Schools program. We stand by the important work of Professor Dowsett and his team.”

As mentioned, these are four of the major players all closely involved in the “Safe Schools” programs, and all have very nasty anti-family, anti-parent, and anti-child ideas. It seems that some of these ideas can be described as nothing other than a defense of paedophilia.

Our children and grandchildren should NOT be getting their understanding of human sexuality – or anything else for that matter – from these radical activists and sexual militants. Parents, be warned.


In my previous article on this topic I mentioned various activist organisations which have close links and are all pushing this sexual anarchy. I mentioned two key groups, IASSCS and ARCSHS. The latter is the La Trobe University one. Many of the folks mentioned here are involved in a number of these other groups. For example, Dowsett is (was) a board member of IASSCS.

A few years back these two major groups established SexualityStudies.net. This is how they describe themselves:

SexualityStudies.net is a website for people engaged in the study of human sexuality – researchers, teachers, students and those working in the field. Our aim is to provide a hub for the community of people working in this area to interact, share information and engage critically with key questions concerning sexuality studies.

This site is the product of an ongoing project to develop an international short course in sexuality theory and research methodologies. The project is housed at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society (ARCSHS), La Trobe University and is run in partnership with the International Association for the Study of Sexuality Culture and Society (IASSCS). The project and this website have been funded by the Ford Foundation.

Among the numerous institutions it lists are:
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission
International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)
Kinsey Institute
Margaret Sanger Center International
Sexual Freedom Network

This particular web name no longer seems to be current. I assume they simply morphed into other extant groups. More investigations will be forthcoming on all this. The various connections and networking is very ominous indeed. These are not isolated individuals and organisations, but well-connected and networked bodies working together to push their very radical agendas.

Thus we have our hands full as parents and concerned citizens as we seek to protect our children and preserve their innocence from these well-heeled and well-connected activists.

[2080 words]

11 Replies to ““Safe Schools” and the War Against Children and Parents”

  1. I have Gary Dowsett’s pre 2010 resume available for researchers to see if he’s done any more papers that promote paedophilia.

    Scribd Legal Officer Jason Bentley who on his linkedin profile links to his blog where he blogs about watching children have sex on public transport, and gay dating sites took out my whole scribd page as well as the location where an ABC Journalist uploaded “Boiled Lollies and Band Aids” claiming Gary Dowsett “is alleged” to have wrote that paper. Details on this saga are provided on the link on my name – at the bottom of the technical article.

    After I complained they he took out my old account. Researchers may contact me or Bill who have a copy of his pre-2010 resume.

    Ironcally I got revenge by getting them to host it on their own helpdesk website when complaining about the censorship:


    From the support ticket:


    That link was censored. It was uploaded by An ABC Telivision State media journalist claiming he allegedly published it but the leader of safe schools said he loved boy sex in a paper and put put it on his unviersity resume attached.”

    So gay activists will even censor ABC gay journalists for gay pride. Nothing is safe from LGBT censorship these days!

  2. I agree Bill, it has nothing to do with bullying. The gay activists who fetch up in schools and are given a platform, could not care a hoot about children being bullied. They probably tell them to stop winging and put up with it. After all everyone gets bullied, whether its because someone is obese, too short or got ginger hair. What they really want is to bully the “homophobes”, those will not celebrate or affirm homosexuality. They will want to perform witch hunts and root out any kind of resistance to their agenda.
    This is similar to the way witch hunts and mass hysteria are created. During the Chinese cultural revolution Certain clothing and potted plants, like geraniums, were condemned because they were deemed to be bourgeois by the wife of Mao Zedong, Madam Mao. It will soon be enough for a brand of sports trainer, word, look, sandwich, or even with whom we hold hands to be defined as homophobic simply because they have caused alarm or distress, in the mind of a homophile snowflake. On the other hand , certain brands of rainbow coloured trainers and non- gender specific clothing are already being advertised in high street stores as gay and trans friendly. This is not opinion but fact . Reasoning or anything connected with it such as reading will be deemed to be homophobic. Under the regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia, populations were driven out of the cities into country and anyone wearing glasses was executed.

    David Skinner UK

  3. I present here an edited version of a letter the group, B4U-act sent in response to a Harvard Mental Health Publication. This a group, using the same arguments as the gays , is attempting to normalise paedophilia .
    “Dear Editor:
    We wish to respond to the article “Pessimism About Paedophilia” published in your July 2010 issue. A broader examination of the facts demonstrates that pessimism as a professional response to paedophilia and hebephilia is unjustified and leads to serious undesirable consequences.
    People who are attracted to children or adolescents can and do contribute positively to their communities and to society…..….inaccurate stereotypes lead to dehumanization. As the stigma article notes, “people who are stigmatized experience social death when others in society hold attitudes and behave in ways to turn the stigmatized person into an ‘other,’ or a non-person…..If stigma is primarily psychological, then eradicating it may involve psychotherapy to help patients boost self-esteem….. If it is more of a social construct, the way to fight it is through awareness campaigns to change public opinion and policies…..And if stigma is a moral issue, then it may be necessary to advocate for basic human rights…..”
    If one looks at the signatories to the letter one will notice the name Professor Eric Anderson of Winchester University UK .
    During a lecture, given by Dr Eric Anderson at Trinity College Oxford University in 2011, the commentator, Frances Reed reported:
    ‘A controversial professor in Sociology gave a provocative talk in Trinity College last Thursday on ‘Why gay sex is better than straight sex’……
    ‘When it was suggested that Anderson is a sexual “predator”, he said “yeah” and laughed. Anderson claimed to have had had sex with “easily over a thousand people”. He said: “I like sex with 16, 17, 18 year old boys particularly, its getting harder for me to get them but I’m still finding them….I hope between the age of 43 and the time I die I can have sex with another thousand, that would be awesome, even if I have to buy them, of course, not a problem, you pay for all kinds of entertainment and pleasure.”
    Further on it was reported,
    He said that he and his boyfriend like to travel on cruise ships because “it’s like sex tourism, which is just amazing” and “I always screw the dancers”. He went on to say “we stop at a different port every night, go to a gay club every night and have sex with people….you don’t need to know their names”.
    When asked whether he thought he had taken emotional or physical advantage of some of the thousand people he had slept with, Anderson replied that he thought that team sports were “more damaging” to adolescents than sex. He went on to claim: “The damage that’s caused by child molestation ( rape) is socially constructed by the western world;” he contrasted this to other cultures where children engage in sexual activity with adults as a rite of passage.( He is speaking of the Sambian tribe where boys are systematically raped and molested by older men in order to make them men.’
    Professor Anderson certainly has the platform with regard to leveraging himself in the public domain He requires no “outing “ from individual members of the public [2,3].
    He’s frankly delighted that porn helps make monogamy seem even more obviously boring and untenable: “I suggest that the pornification of society, the early age at which we begin sex, and the marvellous psychosocial effect of the internet have made us all grow somewhat desensitised to monogamous sex. But instead of problematising the pornification of our culture, I celebrate it, suggesting that it both liberates and improves our sexual selves.” [4]
    Here he promotes an end to shame[5]

    [2] Eric Anderson Inside Out BBC
    [3] BBC Breakfast,
    [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0EOWv75214

    David Skinner UK

  4. Perhaps worse, than those who under the guise of academia and fake scholarship, like Professor Anderson of Winchester University [1], flaunt their sexual depravity, are those who protect them.
    A TV celebrity, Sir Allan Titchmarsh, whilst on the point of being made the Chancellor of Winchester, was approached by many asking him not to take up the appointment, until Anderson had been removed [2]

    In response to our asking for the sacking of Anderson, Titchmarsh wrote.

    “I was extremely dismayed by the contents of your letter and have explored matters thoroughly with the Vice Chancellor of Winchester University.
    Like you I totally deplore what Professor Anderson said in his talk and in no way share his views. The lecture you mention took place over three years ago, and at the time Professor Anderson was severely reprimanded by the senior management team of the University. ……I am a committed Christian who admires and respects the university’s inclusive Christian ethos……”

    But in the next breath he recovers from his shock by claiming that Anderson is a respected researcher and that our views on morality are subjective. He wrote,

    “You may argue that his views will not have changed and that it is these which you find reprehensible. I would only say that we live in a society where free speech, opinions and social mores (even those with which many of us profoundly disagree) are allowed to be expressed and exercised, provided they remain within the law. Although most people do not share his extreme views and find them, at the very least, distasteful, Professor Anderson is a respected authority on the subject of sexuality.
    It is an uncomfortable subject for many, and there are countless differing views as to what sort of behaviour is acceptable among consenting adults. This is something which a great many of us find difficult to assimilate, and I am very sympathetic to your feelings.”

    He then attempts to claim moral rectitude by saying,

    ”However, there are boundaries which should not and must not be crossed; boundaries which are very clear in law, especially when it comes to the protection of children. This is something of which I am profoundly aware and an area in which I will have no hesitation in making my views known and in encouraging action which I think is both appropriate and justified. With a conscientious and dedicated approach I will execute the role of Chancellor to the best of my ability and in what I hope will be regarded as a responsible and vigilant fashion.” [3]

    But then he finished by saying he was a committed Christian and deplored the professor’s comments, but felt it was ‘not justifiable’ to sack someone ‘because their sexual mores differ from one’s own’ [4].

    Bearing in mind that he had previously hosted Anderson on his TV show and allowed him to peddle his immoral ideology [5] and that his own raunchy TV programmes were full of smut [6]and that he had written books entitled, “Ladies that like Bonking [7] one can see why he would not want to put his own head above the parapet, in case the spotlight was put on his own moral failings.

    Bearing also in mind that our universities are riddled with cowardly senior academic and crazy lesbians like Elizabeth Stewart, the Vice Chancellor of Winchesters [8] paedophiles will always be able find a safe haven behind their walls.

    [1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2926064/Titchmarsh-gay-lecturer-row-teenage-sex-TV-host-slams-professor-beds-youths.html
    [2] http://www.alansangle.com/?p=1571
    [3] http://www.alansangle.com/?p=1652
    i) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2926064/Titchmarsh-gay-lecturer-row-teenage-sex-TV-host-slams-professor-beds-youths.html
    [4] http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11601759.Lecturer__who_likes_to_bed_17_year_olds__should_be_sacked_say_pressure_group/
    [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bal5VDG3R9A
    i) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZpu-9vLo0
    ii) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-521148/Alan-Titchmarsh-hits-rock-erogenous-feature.html
    [7] http://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,215961,00.html
    i) http://www.andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/bios6/stuart01.html
    ii) http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/culture/religious-studies/video-interview-catholic-bishop-elizabeth-stuart

    David Skinner UK

  5. We know that close to 50% of recorded sexual offenses on children are on boys and done by men yet the rate of homosexual attraction is around 1.3%, even including bisexuals. You don’t have to be Einstein to work out that this means the rate of pedophilia among homosexuals is vastly higher than that for people of normal sexuality and this is before you consider that the 1.3% includes a large proportion of bisexuals who not only are vastly over-represented in gaols, they are also responsible for a significant proportion of the attacks on young girls, further indicating the massive difference between people whose sexuality has been debased and those of moral sexuality. The authorities obviously know this but none of this was remotely considered when marriage was being redefined to disrespect the rights of biological parenthood.

    The basic confusion between natural affection and sexuality is the basis of a large part of the problems we see here yet very few are speaking about this. The normal, instinctual condition of biological parents is to definitely not have sex with their children but the confusion being espoused by these “academics” promotes the idea that sex and affection are essentially the same thing. Very obviously this is the whole basis for undermining parental rights, demonizing parents, giving homosexuals access to children, sexualizing children in the schools etc.. Sexuality and affection are not the same thing and never were and very clearly what these people are espousing means homosexual “parents” are meant to have right of sexual access to children.

    Wake up Australia. Promoting homosexuality not only defiles the individual is defiles the entire nation, exactly as the Bible says. Redefining marriage was one of the worst, most immoral things this nation has ever done.

  6. The Pink beatitudes
    1.Blessed are the proud for all the children of the nation are theirs to molest.

    2.Blessed are those who flaunt their depravity for they will be comforted by all manner of paedophile perversion.

    3. Blessed are the defiant, like Sir Ian McKellen, the founder of Stonewall, who blaspheme against Jesus Christ and boast of ripping up Bibles, for they like him will be given the keys to the children of the nations and be given all manner of honours by the Queen for promoting the molestation of boys and babies.

    4. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for all manner of Pink deception, dishonesty, denial, dissimulation, duplicity, deviance , defiance, disobedience, disrespect, diversity, discrimination, distortion, dysfunction, disorder, dysphoria, derangement, deconstruction, destruction, detestableness, disgrace, depravity, degradation, decadence, degeneracy, debauchery, dehumanisation, despair, death wish, damnation and devil worship for they will filled by all manner of goods and services, provided by an endless supply of defenceless babies and children.

    5. Blessed are merciless homosexuals for, like Ernst Roehm and leaders of the Nazi party, they will become judges, Queens, Presidents, Prime Ministers, head of the Armed forces, head of the police, the judiciary and head of the Church.

    6. Blessed are the impure in heart for they will one day meet face to face with the man of lawlessness and the father of all lies.

    7.Blessed above are pink paedophiles for they will rule and be called children of Equality, Diversity and Human Rights, for it is they who divide us into warring, minority, victim groups with themselves dominating us all.

    8. Blessed are those who are tortured by their consciences for molesting children and driven to drugs and suicide for they will be able to claim even more victimhood and demand to have all their hospital bills, sex therapies and counselling never – endingly paid for by all the World’s nations.

    But I say, walk by the Spirit of Lucifer, and gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit of Jesus Christ which are against the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent the paedophiles from giving full reign to their insatiable lusts. But if you are led by the Spirit of Lucifer. you are not under Stonewall’s (Pink Law), but do these things naturally, according to the flesh……

    David Skinner UK

  7. This article covers some appalling subjects. The worst that I can see is talking about a sexual relationship between a parent and their child! This is very wrong. It would be illegal. Children should be able to trust their parents. Parents are supposed to set a good example for their children. If this does happen then the child protection authorities should come straight away! Anti-discrimination laws are supposed to relate to employment and access to services. People of different races and religions should be able to gain employment or go to a restaurant or a country club. Women should be able to find employment in many different industries. Anti-discrimination laws should not apply to sexual behaviour or practices. Not all sexual orientations are equal. Not all behaviour is equal. If someone wants to adopt or foster children they should be straight and in a healthy marriage. Sexual orientation should not be treated the same as a quality like racial background. African-Americans can apply for jobs, use services and adopt or foster children. Homosexuality is different to being of different races. Sexuality is NOT the same as race, religion, gender or age. Diversity needs to have boundaries. There are more important considerations such as the protection of children. The welfare and safety of children IS more important than gay rights or any other diversity issues. Child safety should be paramount. All societies should protect their children. We should stand up to the Safe Schools program. The authors of this program also seem to think that they know better than the parents. This is a condescending and superior attitude. All sex and relationship education in schools should give notice to parents. Parents should have the right to opt-out their child if they do not want their child to participate in these programs. Parents are supposed to bring up their children and not the government. Parental rights should be enforced. Also the Safe Schools program has been implemented in an underhanded way. If the authors of the Safe Schools Program had a good program there would be nothing to hide. They have a bad program and that is why they have been so secretive. Why else would they introduce their program in such an underhanded way?

  8. Helen, I would advise a more direct approach, Old fashioned commonsense no longer operates in these “reason and moral free zones” called schools.

    I have four, maybe five lessons I would give my child on health and safety:
    1) Don’t take sweeties from strangers.
    2) If a teacher, scout master, priest, no matter who, starts to talk about sex, tell the child to seek immediate safety by contacting his or her parents. This should be practised with the child like any fire drill.
    3) If all else fails, teach children self – defence by getting them to use their fists, knees, feet, teeth, or any blunt or sharp implement that comes to hand and then flee to a safe place.
    4) Teach children in their science lessons about homosexual practices, with biological diagrams and techni- coloured photographs of the diseases and physical damage caused by abusing their reproductive and digestive system- starting at the mouth and finishing with the anus.
    5) If all fails get children to persuade their dads to become temporarily Mohammedans. Get their fathers to wear baggy trouser, grow long beards and sport two foot long daggers.
    This story of a school in Luton UK , clearly shows that Muslim kids have the advantage.:

    Ofsted [1]staff were forced to abandon their inspection of a Muslim primary school in Luton on Thursday after being confronted by parents angry that their children as young as nine had been questioned in private about their attitudes to homosexuality.
    The inspectors, including a senior employee, cut short their review of the Olive Tree primary school, an independent Muslim faith school, after the group of parents said they would withdraw their children from the school as long as the inspectors remained.
    Ghulam Shah, a parent of one of the children interviewed by the Ofsted inspectors, said his 10-year-old son was upset by the way the questioning was carried out, and that as a parent he was concerned he had not been told the inspectors would be discussing sex with his children.
    “He was sat with a male adult who looked him in the eye and said, ‘What do you know about gays?’ What that made him do, it made him panic, and he said ‘I don’t want to continue this conversation,’ because he felt scared, intimidated,” said Shah. “It’s horrible for a child to be in a room with somebody they’ve never met before, who’s not with a teacher and not with a parent.”….
    Shah said his son told him about the conversation with the inspectors after he picked him up from school on Wednesday.
    “He said, Dad, when they took us to the side room, they said ‘Do you guys know what gay means?’. My son said, yes, I do know what it means, what’s that got to do with our education? They said, ‘Are you exposed to it in any way, good or bad, does the school teach you anything about it? My son replied, no, the school has not taught us anything about it but I have heard of the word and I’d rather not have this conversation with you at all.”…..
    One of the parents said to them, and all of us agreed, this is a safeguarding issue, we are not comfortable about adults speaking to our children about issues of sexuality. Therefore either you stop the inspection now or we pull our kids out, and they’re in the middle of Sats.
    “When they realised we were serious about that, they left,” Latif said. “This is about sexualising young children.” [2]

    [1]Ofsted: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ofsted
    [2] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/15/ofsted-luton-olive-tree-school-homosexuality

    David Skinner UK

  9. Thanks for your detailed, well researched and thoughtful exposure. We must ‘stand firm then’. Living out God’s plan for blessing requires self control, order etc. Let us be well equipped, deliberate, prayerful and organised. ‘For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, power and a sound mind’. We’re called to use these gifts. Unashamedly.
    ‘Evil prospers where good men and women do nothing.’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *