Warning; We are not a politically correct site. Don't like us? Don't read.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Ontario's sex ed....corrupting young minds, state abuse of parental rights.

Tory MP slams Ontario sex-ed plan: says it must be recalled to prevent kids ‘from being groomed for exploitation’
OTTAWA, February 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Conservative Member of Parliament from Ontario is raising concern that the graphic nature of Kathleen Wynne’s new sex ed curriculum risks putting children in a position to be “groomed for exploitation.”
Cheryl Gallant, MP for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, says the program underscores the need for quick passage of a federal bill designed to protect children from predators.
“Mr. Speaker, if anything demonstrates the need for the House to quickly pass Bill C-26, our Conservative legislation for tougher penalties against child predators, it is the decision by the Liberal Party in Toronto to introduce sweeping changes to how grade school children are taught sex education,” Gallant told Parliament in a members’ statement yesterday.
Bill C-26, tabled by Justice Minister Peter MacKay a year ago, seeks to protect children from sexual offenders. Key measures include:
  • having sexual offenders found guilty of numerous offenses to serve separate sentences consecutively, one after another.
  • increasing jail time for various child sexual offenses.
  • establishing a database of child sex offenders deemed ‘high-risk’ that is available to the public.
The bill had its first reading February 26 of last year.
Gallant showed concern that the sex-ed was written while Benjamin Levin, Ontario’s former deputy minister of education, was at the helm. Levin recently pled guilty to child-related sex charges after an international investigation led to his doorstep in 2013.
“This curriculum was written by someone charged with two counts of distributing child pornography, one count each of making child pornography, counselling to commit an indictable offence, and agreeing to or arranging for a sexual offence against a child under 16. As a hand-picked provincial Liberal deputy minister, this powerful party insider was caught only after an international online probe,” she said.
Groups opposing the updated sex-ed, including Campaign Life Coalition, Parents as First Educators (PAFE), REAL Women of Canada, The Rebel, and others, say the curriculum attacks the innocence of children by sexualizing them from the earliest age.
Critics also highlight what they say is an explicit homosexual agenda in the program, which introduces discussions of same-sex relationships and “gender identity” in grade 3.
Many parents are concerned about what they say is the state seizure of their right to direct their children’s education. Some are even saying that the much-hyped ‘consent’ portion grooms children to respond to the sexual advances of others.
Gallant shares these concerns. “If withdrawal of this Liberal policy can prevent one child from being groomed for exploitation, it really must be withdrawn,” she told Parliament.
“On behalf of the parents, grandparents, and the vulnerable children of Ontario, we demand that the federal party leader order this outrageous policy to be withdrawn now,” she added.
---------------------------
Levin was writing this sex-ed bill while wynne was the education minister???And is now the premier of ontario pushing the same bill written by a paedophile???
So the statement: 
"It’s not the job of the premier, especially kathleen wynne, to tell parents what is age appropriate for their children." (1)
does apply in this case. She is too controversial because of her association with levin.

What also worries us is, some in the academic field, I.E "professors" have a strange idea about moral values...
Meet the academics who are trying to redefine pedophilia as ‘intergenerational intimacy’

As for their "private life" it stopped been that when they decided to make it public...
In this exposer of what should have been kept privaye, we read this little treasure....
“I waited 18 years for her,” says Rounthwaite. “Basically, from the time I met Kath in 1973, I was just waiting through her marriage, through my (own) relationship (with a woman) — I just waited all those years.”
I’m quite serious,” says Rounthwaite when asked again if she had really waited 18 years for Wynne. Nothing changed until a fateful Saturday when Wynne called her and said, “I need you to come and do something with me.” 
Says Rounthwaite: “My partner and I had a whole day planned and I said, ‘Fine, I’m coming,’ and my partner said to me, ‘She just gets to call and our day’s over?’ And I said, like, ‘yeah, pretty much, pretty much.’ ”
SOOOO! What she's saying is, she used this person emotionally, throwing her out like a dirty rag when she was done with her and got who she was obsessed about??????? Brags about in the media...
AAAND, everybody is OK with this???

What this shows is lack of loyalty towards the ones they where with at the time, an obsessive behaviour bordering on the stalking,(18years????)

Never mind the gay thing in this case, and just look at the picture these 2 seem to endorse, when one has a relationship, one is not supposed to lust over another...shows a lack of loyalty if not morality; and if this is promoted as the post seems to imply, as normal behaviour in our society, why get married at all; since it seems to imply we have the perfect right to lust over others???? While we are with someone else???
If this story was heterosexual male politician lusting over another women other than his wife for 18 frigging years, you would have a public hanging all over the media. And the feminists would have a field day with that one....
Is this who we want to teach kids about morality???

Personally, we really don't care who one loves, there has to be some loyalty in ones behaviour, we totally agree with a statement made by a gay man debating another on CNN about how far some in that community have gone...There doesn't seem to be balance and limits amongst "some" of them...
The argument was, "gay pride parades with guys walking around in thongs, promoting promiscuity or walking bare-ass does not represent me or what I am trying to do, and that is to live a normal life and take care of my family".
Or the comment at the end of this picture.
I'n our opinion, the media is also responsible for the problems the gay community are experiencing these days, to promote all out promiscuity, disloyalty in a relationship or obsessive behaviour is causing resentment, and to demonize parents who are not for this exploitation of children in schools will not end well...
"Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, paedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining paedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago."


Forcing an issue so controversial down people throats as Ontario is doing, can cause a backlash, if one was really concern about kids, one would find a balance between legislation and natural laws. Politicians(some) and the media seems to have forgotten this, and those who suffer are children, gay families who just want to live a normal life, and those who have opposing views.
The "your not allowed to have your own opinions", which most expresses politely, then demonized and pushed aside, this, as we said cause resentment, and in some cases, hatred.

We are going through a perfect example with what's going on in the middle east, "it's our way or else" is just not working and giving extremism a path to legitimacy with some of the people over there.
These people use to aspire to be like us, so what the hell went wrong.
And if we are so dim-witted to believe this could never happen here, then we are not as advance as we make ourselves out to be....
There has to be balance, limits, both have a right to exist in peace, but both have to be aware of each other...
For or against...we have to respect opposing views, not trash them and call them names.
It's as simple as that

Wynne will not back down, she will push this and if we are right, call anyone who opposes it, homophobic as she tried with this statement...countering the statement above (1)
“Is it that I’m a woman? Is it that I’m a mother? Is it that I have a master’s of education? Is it that I was a school council chair? Is it that I was the minister of education?”
Personally, been involve in the feminist controlled education system and their effort to replace parenting with the state should take her out, not to mention the corruption she is involved in...ehealth, orange, gas plant, deleted emails, the sudbury affair, so on. But that's us, we expect better behaviour from politicians.

We are headed towards a path where kids are been used to advance certain personal lifestyle, the confusion children are experiencing these days is because of outside interference by the state and it's media. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out they are responsible for increase teen suicides, teen pregnancies, drug and alcohol abuse, welfare dependency, so on...
Of course we had this in the past, but not in such a numerous number...
The majority of parents know better than wynne, always will and if people like her proposes such divisive measures on the account of a few bad ones, well that's her mistake which we will teach her in the next election.
As long as no one gives her an opening and claim they will cut 100,000 jobs...(sarcasm)

TNC does not promote or condone violence against any minority but offer a different point of view, especially when it comes to parental and children's rights...
They are either "OUR KIDS" or we forfeit our rights to the state...
It is and always will be..."OUR CHOICE".
Been against sex ed to kids at such an early age does not make one a prude, and someone who is concerned about teaching alternative lifestyle at such a young age, does not make one homophobic...
It simply makes one...a concerned parent.

No comments: