LGBT in schools vs religious parents

[SpookyFrank]

Do you teach children about the human rights act ?

I don't but it's part of the curriculum. It comes under 'citizenship' here but different settings will probably call it something else.

 

[Aladdin]

I know it wasn't aimed at me but we do at primary. A series of lessons based around the convention on the rights of the child.

Yes.. we did too...
We also taught the human rights act..to the over 15s.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The same as your observation regarding the "type of people backing her case".

If the only people on your side are cunts, you might be a cunt.

For a case study of this effect, see any thread you've ever posted on.

 

[Aladdin]

I don't but it's part of the curriculum. It comes under 'citizenship' here but different settings will probably call it something else.

Its a good place to start SpookyFrank .
I think.
There's a balance that's important. Inclusivity is important. All teachers should know the Act.

 

[Aladdin]

If the only people on your side are cunts, you might be a cunt.

For a case study of this effect, see any thread you've ever posted on.

See.... you've been throwing around a lot of aggression on this thread.
Please... give this a bit of thought cos you've already informed many Christians that they shouldn't have kids. And you've pretty much ridiculed everyone and anyone who has a belief in a God. Last I looked...it was a human right to practice religion / faith without persecution.
And don't match my quote please with anything related to anti LGBTQ+ ... I am fully in favour of people living exactly as they wish to. Unlike you..I believe this right is for all.

 

[Sweet FA]

She's a Christian. It's wholly unsurprising that she'd receive support from a Christian organisation.

They are complete arseholes though - against homosexuality, same-sex marriage, pre-marital sex, pornography. Have tried (and lost) cases against the 'Islamic Mafia' (ie Muslims basically existing).

 

[Spymaster]

If the only people on your side are cunts, you might be a cunt.

For a case study of this effect, see any thread you've ever posted on.

I'll wear that as a badge of honour, coming from you.

 

[Spymaster]

They are complete arseholes though - against homosexuality, same-sex marriage, pre-marital sex, pornography. Have tried (and lost) cases against the 'Islamic Mafia' (ie Muslims basically existing).

For sure. It's not clear whether they're actively backing/financing her, or just weighing-in with their opinion though.

A question that Broggers' piece does raise though, is why was a trans activist on the original appeal panel which found against her. If for no other reason than it's going to be clear grounds for a complaint of bias, which is what has happened.

 

[InArduisFouette]

This personnel trade mag piece appears to give one of the fuller accounts of the case.

It offers a few more elements, including:





Certainly gives an impression of the sort of people funding/backing her case.

whenh the Grftian Legal Centre are involved you know what the motivation is , it;s to enforce a Theocracy in the UK and USA

 

[InArduisFouette]

The same as your observation regarding the "type of people backing her case".

it;s well know that the Christian Legal centre are homophobes, transphobes, racists and misogynists who obtain funding from the far right.

they are also well known for making untruthful statements in court e.g. 'Keira' Bell whose 'legal name' (as much as there is one in the UK ) remained Mr Quincy Bell throughout that case and who apprently is now going by Keiron and is back on T - never mind they recieved no clinical interventions from GIDS

 

[InArduisFouette]

She's a Christian. It's wholly unsurprising that she'd receive support from a Christian organisation.

the Griftian Legal centre is a far Right front organisation

i'm questioning whether you pass the first part of the two part 5 question consideration ... as your thought processes do seem to be under the influence of something

 

[InArduisFouette]

They are complete arseholes though - against homosexuality, same-sex marriage, pre-marital sex, pornography. Have tried (and lost) cases against the 'Islamic Mafia' (ie Muslims basically existing).

CLC took on the 'Keira'Bell case becasue they saw the opportunity to damage Gillick , because crazily GIDS claims to both use and ignore Gillick at the same time

 

[InArduisFouette]

For sure. It's not clear whether they're actively backing/financing her, or just weighing-in with their opinion though.

A question that Broggers' piece does raise though, is why was a trans activist on the original appeal panel which found against her. If for no other reason than it's going to be clear grounds for a complaint of bias, which is what has happened.

define 'trans activist' or do you mean anyone who doesn;t share your unscientific, unevidenced bigotry ?

 

[SpookyFrank]

See.... you've been throwing around a lot of aggression on this thread.
Please... give this a bit of thought cos you've already informed many Christians that they shouldn't have kids. And you've pretty much ridiculed everyone and anyone who has a belief in a God. Last I looked...it was a human right to practice religion / faith without persecution.
And don't match my quote please with anything related to anti LGBTQ+ ... I am fully in favour of people living exactly as they wish to. Unlike you..I believe this right is for all.

I've said many times people can be as religious as they like provided they accept that is a personal choice and not something that gives anyone the right to dictate to other members of society.

I've also said that the idea that the kind of bigotry being discussed is an inherently religious thing doesn't hold water, as proven by all the religious people who aren't bigots.

The children thing, again I was referring to hateful ideas and behaviour, not religion. Religion is a red herring. It was a Christian school that fired this woman FFS, clearly her having the wrong religion isn't the issue here. Although it is the issue for many children trying to get into Christian schools, places in which outnumber actual Christian children by roughly 2:1.

As for the little 'unlike you' dig at the end, fuck off with that. Of course people should be able to live as they chose. For centuries this biggest obstacle to that in this country at least has been your lot, so I'd knock the high-horsery on the head if I were you.

 

[brogdale]

For sure. It's not clear whether they're actively backing/financing her, or just weighing-in with their opinion though.

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said:

“We now press on in this important case. For Kristie’s case to be heard at the Court of Appeal is a huge moment for Christian freedoms and the freedom of any employee to be able to express opposition to LGBT+ ideology without fear of losing their jobs.”

 

[Spymaster]

define 'trans activist' or do you mean anyone who doesn;t share your unscientific, unevidenced bigotry ?

Or maybe someone who her lawyers couldn't have had recused for bias?

In taking her case to the EAT, lawyers successfully appealed the inclusion of two appeal panel members for their apparent bias, one a trans activist with links to Stonewall, the other a senior trade unionist at the National Education Union, which had backed making RSE mandatory in primary schools.

 

[Rob Ray]

define 'trans activist' or do you mean anyone who doesn;t share your unscientific, unevidenced bigotry ?

Spymaster is very prone to labelling people he doesn't agree with collectively as loons, morons, activists (presumably a bad thing) etc and does like to talk about "trans ideology" as though it's a cult while simultaneously complaining about others' bad manners and intolerance. At least some of the time it's trolling, but it's not really worth the time teasing out the difference between that and when he's being serious imv (hence I've got him on block).

 

[InArduisFouette]

Spymaster is very prone to labelling people he doesn't agree with collectively as loons, morons, activists (presumably a bad thing) etc and does like to talk about "trans ideology" as though it's a cult while simultaneously complaining about others' bad manners and intolerance. At least some of the time it's trolling, but it's not really worth the time teasing out the difference between that and when he's being serious imv (hence I've got him on block).

indeed anyone who talks about 'LGBTQ+ ideology' while taking the views of religious zealots as facts, really does draw questions over whether they pass the 2 part, 5 question assessment of Capacity

 

[Spymaster]

Spymaster is very prone to labelling people he doesn't agree with collectively as loons, morons, activists ....

Read the link. It's not me!

 

[JimW]

Or maybe someone who her lawyers couldn't have had recused for bias?

So her opinions expressed outside work don't affect her capacity to do the job, but the position of the union one panellist belonged to precludes them from delivering a fair verdict?

 

[InArduisFouette]

Read the link. It's not me!

but you chose to directly quote that , despite the fact anyone with a modicum of english language skills realise that this is an approach ( aloong with outright science science denial ) used by the far right to cover up the fact their wank-addled pornsick fantasising about LGBTQ+ people is exactly that; wank -addled pornsick fantasising

 

[Spymaster]

So her opinions expressed outside work don't affect her capacity to do the job, but the position of the union one panellist belonged to precludes them from delivering a fair verdict?

Well we'll see what the verdict of an unbiased panel is in the next hearing wrt her abilities to do the job and whether her sacking was reasonable, but I don't think that even the most clamorous against her would have too much trouble with the idea that a "trans activist with links to Stonewall" may not be an ideal person to impartially judge a trans-critical case!

 

[InArduisFouette]

So her opinions expressed outside work don't affect her capacity to do the job, but the position of the union one panellist belonged to precludes them from delivering a fair verdict?

but don't forget in the wordlview of the right wing 'White Jesus' Christian, their fantasy world view is correct regardless of the evidence base and the actual Basic Sciences that drive the Evidence base

 

[InArduisFouette]

Well we'll see what the verdict of an unbiased panel is in the next hearing wrt her abilities to do the job and whether her sacking was reasonable, but I don't think that even the most clamorous against her would have too much trouble with the idea that a "trans activist with links to Stonewall" may not be an ideal person to impartially judge a trans-critical case!

i'm guersing you think Forstater 'won' her case and impunity to be a bigot ditto Allison Bailey ...

amazing how many people who think transphobia is permitted by the Forstater verdict haven't read it , and therefore don't realise just how narrow the protected delusion belief of being Gender Critical is ...

 

[Sweet FA]

For sure. It's not clear whether they're actively backing/financing her, or just weighing-in with their opinion though.

A question that Broggers' piece does raise though, is why was a trans activist on the original appeal panel which found against her. If for no other reason than it's going to be clear grounds for a complaint of bias, which is what has happened.

It's already been pointed out on the thread that "both legally and socially trans women, even without surgery, can be and are in most circumstances regarded as women".

Do you label everyone who supports that as a 'trans activist' or espousing 'trans ideology'? Is someone who points to the laws re racism, homophobia etc a 'race activist' or espousing 'gay ideology'?

 

[Spymaster]

It's already been pointed out on the thread that "both legally and socially trans women, even without surgery, can be and are in most circumstances regarded as women".

Do you label everyone who supports that as a 'trans activist' or espousing 'trans ideology'? Is someone who points to the laws re racism, homophobia etc a 'race activist' or espousing 'gay ideology'?

Once again, "trans activist" was a direct quote from the piece quoted by Broggers, and the basis of that person being recused.

Read the piece.

 

[two sheds]

I hope there aren't any Christians on the 'unbiased panel'.

 

[Sweet FA]

Once again, "trans activist" was a direct quote from the piece quoted by Broggers, and the basis of that person being recused.

Read the piece.

I did.

I see the confusion though. In the original piece posted by Brogdale, it refers to "a trans activist with links to Stonewall"; when you click the link, it refers to "an LGBT rights activist".

I read the most recent version on the thread - the link in your post #1,096

 

[PTK]

They're not religious views though, as evidenced by the large numbers of people who share the religion but none of the cancerous opinions.

Whether people should have kids or not is a meaningless question. Why someone with these views would want to have kids, knowing that they will grow up surrounded by sinful perverts hell bent on their moral destruction, is a question it seems fair to ask.

The Shakers are a Christian sect who believe that it is wrong to have children. There are very few of them left.

 

[bemused]

When my kids were at school they changed relationship education to talk about families led by different family leads gay, grandparents, foster, siblings etc. The school held a meeting to discuss the changes and a group from a local church turned up and where very hostile. They outed gay teachers cur mg the meeting and suggested they were trying to teach kids how to be gay - how you do that who knows?