The limits of “diversity”
I have been wondering how many other types of “diversity” we are expected to celebrate in the coming months and years. I ask because of the latest upset and offence caused to homosexuals and feminists by none other than Ed Balls, whose amendment has allowed state-funded faith schools to opt out of compulsory worship of homosexual acts, abortions and contraception.
The British Humanist Association are furious that some schools want to teach about sex and relationships according to their ethos.
The BHA, the Children’s Rights Alliance for England and the Accord Coalition have condemned a new Government amendment to its own Children, Schools and Families Bill, describing it as discriminatory.
It is discriminatory, yes. Just as forcing people to accept beliefs and behaviour that are at best alien to them discriminates against them. But that’s all right, isn’t it? This is how it works. Nobody is allowed to be discriminated against except those people who don’t do as they are commanded by the state. No matter how unfair or crazy.
A great myth has grown which says that discrimination is wrong. Any discrimination. Personally, I discriminate all the time, don’t you? Some food I love and others I detest. Some people I find are wonderful and others I avoid. How many parents don’t discriminate when it comes to choosing a babysitter? Fortunately, not many.
I have looked at the members of the aforementioned Accord Coalition on their website. They include The British Humanist Association themselves, British Muslims for Secular Democracy, the Hindu Academy, The Lesbian and Gay Christian (sic) Movement, The Socialist Education Association and the admittedly feminist Women Against Fundamentalism.
In other words, this is a political/religio-political attack on faith schools to further an atheistic/secular/humanist/socialist agenda. Dress it up as children’s rights and they think they can get away with anything.
The BHA encouraged its supporters to email their MPs,
Please do this today to ensure all young people have access to accurate, balanced SRE that promotes equality and diversity, and to prevent faith schools from teaching that same sex relationships and the use of contraception are wrong.
They go on to elaborate on the importance of promoting equality, diversity and rights: three of the main pillars of political correctness.
Ian Dunt, writing for politics.co.uk, was also upset. He wants faith schools ‘banned’. As I commented under his article,
I’m not sure if this is meant to be satirical, but it sounds like it. Mr Dunt is a ‘libertarian’ (he says) who naturally hates government interference – except when it comes to parents’ choices in how their children are educated, then they should have no choice. Despite the majority of the population having a faith, the author thinks their children should be herded into secular state institutions to be conditioned not to be ‘too religious’. I wonder what he thinks about the news that faith schools are best at building social unity:
“It found that secondary schools run by faith groups scored eleven per cent higher for their promotion of community cohesion when compared with secular schools.
“The report also concluded that faith-based schools outperformed secular schools by almost nine per cent when it came to tackling inequality.”
The Dunts and Dawkins of this country need to mind their own business when it comes to how parents bring up their own children. Oh, and stop using people’s aversion to homosexuality as a reason for getting your own angry way.”
And this is another great myth, that people who are against homosexuality being approved to children do it on grounds of hatred. We get this word discrimination as usual. That’s exactly what it is – like the babysitting example I gave above, parents and schools discriminate because they see it as the right thing to do by their children. This is their right.
Then the word homophobic gets thrown around. Never religiophobic (if that’s a word), because religious people are now, by default, in the wrong. Let us not be misled; when humanists promote homosexuality as normal, they do so against the biological evidence. Theirs is also a belief system. They believe it is right and I believe it is wrong. Why do they expect their beliefs to carry more weight than mine?
To conclude, then, what is next? How much more diversity are we meant to teach children, or be accused of the next invented ‘phobia’? Some children are already being groomed to be dysfunctional through state sex education that tells them anything goes and here are your free condoms and this way to the abortion clinic – your parents won’t find out.
This increases the underclass dependent on state intervention at every turn: the single mothers on handouts, the unemployed and unemployable, the depressed, the diseased, those for whom life has no meaning because they are used to their every whim being catered for and being shielded from the real world.
This attack on freedom of conscience and parental responsibility is demonic. For what benefit?