Kathleen Wynne rips PC MPP for homophobic attack on Sex Ed

74 posts / 0 new
Last post
Debater
Kathleen Wynne rips PC MPP for homophobic attack on Sex Ed

The PC's have been foaming at the mouth all week over the long overdue update to Ontario's Sex Education program.

----

Wynne suggests Tory MPP homophobic after sex-ed comments

Tuesday, Feb. 24 2015

The Globe and Mail

Premier Kathleen Wynne suggested a Progressive Conservative leadership candidate is homophobic in a sharp rebuke to his opposition to Ontario’s new sexual-education curriculum.

The dramatic Question Period smackdown unfolded Tuesday morning as roughly 200 protesters opposed to the curriculum rallied outside the legislature. It came a day after the government unveiled the new curriculum, which includes instruction on sexual orientation and fighting prejudice.

Tory MPP Monte McNaughton tried to grill Ms. Wynne on the curriculum. But the Premier, the first openly gay head of government in the English-speaking world, swiftly turned the tables. She pointed to one of Mr. McNaughton’s comments from the previous day, in which he said, “it’s not the Premier of Ontario’s job, especially Kathleen Wynne, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate for their children.”

“What is it that especially disqualifies me for the job that I’m doing? 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?” Ms. Wynne thundered. “What is it exactly that the member opposite thinks disqualifies me from doing the job that I’m doing? What is that?”

---

More here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/wynne-accuses-tory-mpp-of-h...

---

VIDEO CLIP:

https://twitter.com/KielDixon/status/570346490813554688

ajaykumar

2007- school funding

2011- foreign workers

2014-100,000 job cuts

2018- Sex Ed

PC party strategists are brilliant!

Debater

Reevely: Tories playing with fire over new sex-education curriculum

February 24, 2015

-

Excerpt:

-

Monte McNaughton, the MPP for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex in southwestern Ontario and pretty definitely the third of the three candidates to lead the Tories, is the worst. He keeps talking about Premier Kathleen Wynne’s “agenda” with the new curriculum.

What, exactly, do you think that agenda is? I asked him after he brought up the “sex-ed agenda” at a debate in Ottawa earlier this month.

“I think she’s started rolling out some of her policy when she had her press conference with two Grade 8 students, talking about starting (to teach) consent with five- and six-year-olds,” he said. “There is a very controversial curriculum brought forward in 2010, it was so controversial that Dalton McGuinty pulled the plug on it within three days, and I think Kathleen Wynne’s going to go down that road again and that’s why I’ve stood up in the legislature and I’ve been very clear to the premier, you know, what are you going to be teaching our kids in September of 2015?”

If there’s an answer to the question in there, I don’t detect it. It’s up to you to figure out what Wynne’s agenda might be. Something about young kids having sex, though.

In politics, this is called a dog-whistle, meant to be clear to a certain kind of voter but to go unnoticed by others. Monday, McNaughton blew that whistle again. In a scrum, he said it’s not the premier’s job, and especially not Kathleen Wynne’s, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate information for their children. Especially not Kathleen Wynne’s.

----

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/reevely-the-tories-play-with...

nicky

Funny how Wynne tolerate Laura Albanese in her caucus after the overtly homophobic campaign she ran agaist Paul Feriera.

jjuares

Debater wrote:

The PC's have been foaming at the mouth all week over the long overdue update to Ontario's Sex Education program.

----

Wynne suggests Tory MPP homophobic after sex-ed comments

Tuesday, Feb. 24 2015

The Globe and Mail

Premier Kathleen Wynne suggested a Progressive Conservative leadership candidate is homophobic in a sharp rebuke to his opposition to Ontario’s new sexual-education curriculum.

The dramatic Question Period smackdown unfolded Tuesday morning as roughly 200 protesters opposed to the curriculum rallied outside the legislature. It came a day after the government unveiled the new curriculum, which includes instruction on sexual orientation and fighting prejudice.

Tory MPP Monte McNaughton tried to grill Ms. Wynne on the curriculum. But the Premier, the first openly gay head of government in the English-speaking world, swiftly turned the tables. She pointed to one of Mr. McNaughton’s comments from the previous day, in which he said, “it’s not the Premier of Ontario’s job, especially Kathleen Wynne, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate for their children.”

“What is it that especially disqualifies me for the job that I’m doing? 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?” Ms. Wynne thundered. “What is it exactly that the member opposite thinks disqualifies me from doing the job that I’m doing? What is that?”

---

More here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/wynne-accuses-tory-mpp-of-h...

---

VIDEO CLIP:

https://twitter.com/KielDixon/status/570346490813554688


I read the article and I don't see the homophobic part. His comments seemed to be the standard boiler plate Con nonsense.

wage zombie

 “it’s not the Premier of Ontario’s job, especially Kathleen Wynne, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate for their children.”

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I'm a middle aged man and sex ed was part of the curriculum when I was in grade school.

I'm not up to speed with the problem the PC's have here.

Are they against sex-ed being taught in grade school,is sex-ed being taught in Kindergarten or are the PC's just pieces of shit?

I think I answered my own question on the latter but I'm curious to know what the problem is.

ctrl190

nicky wrote:

Funny how Wynne tolerate Laura Albanese in her caucus after the overtly homophobic campaign she ran agaist Paul Feriera.

Or her homophobic federal counterparts John McKay, Scott Simms, Jim Karygiannis, Tom Wappel, Derek Lee, Dan McTeague, Joe Commuzi, etc.

Debater

ctrl190 wrote:

nicky wrote:

Funny how Wynne tolerate Laura Albanese in her caucus after the overtly homophobic campaign she ran agaist Paul Feriera.

Or her homophobic federal counterparts John McKay, Scott Simms, Jim Karygiannis, Tom Wappel, Derek Lee, Dan McTeague, Joe Commuzi, etc.

Most of the people you mention are ex-right wing Liberals who are no longer in politics. (and Comuzzi later became a Conservative, and now his daughter is running for the Cons in one of the Thunder Bay ridings).

Scott Simms is definitely not a homophobe personally.  He voted the way the majority of his constituents wanted him to at the time, but I don't think he would make that same decision today.

Debater

wage zombie wrote:

 “it’s not the Premier of Ontario’s job, especially Kathleen Wynne, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate for their children.”

Exactly.  I think jjuares missed the column on dog whistles by Reevely of The Ottawa Citizen above.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

A PC homophobe? Must be a mistake. I thought they just deny evolution.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture
alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I don't know how Toronto has become such a stupid city. You wouldn't see this in Montréal.

Debater

Toronto may have a lot of Liberal & NDP supporters, but it still has a lot more Conservatives than Montreal.  Just look at the Mayors - Rob Ford & John Tory.  2 Conservatives in a row.

Or look at the Federal MPs - quite a few CPC MP's in the Toronto area under Harper, versus NONE in Montreal.

Maysie Maysie's picture

5 Myths and Facts About Ontario's Updated Sex Education Curriculum

Quote:

Myth #1

Explicit sexual content, including oral and anal sex, consent, and rape will be taught to children as young as six.

Key words/phrases:
"graphic content," "young ages," "desensitizing," "innocent minds," "putting thoughts into young minds," "too young to learn about sex," "age-inappropriate content," "explicit content," "children will be taught to consent to sex," "protect our children's innocence."

Truth:

In grade one, children will be taught to identify body parts, including genitalia, using their correct terms (penis, testicles, vagina, vulva) and to recognize exploitative behaviours such as inappropriate touching. In grade two, the concept of "consent" will be introduced very broadly as the right to say "no" in threatening situations. This has been misrepresented by many critics as "teaching children the concept of consent," which is then in turn further misrepresented as "teaching children to consent to sex."

The concept of human and animal reproduction -- presented broadly as the union of the egg and sperm -- has actually been pushed back a grade, moving from grade three to grade four, and the first discussion of sexual intercourse occurs in grade five, the same as in the previous curriculum.

Masturbation is defined in grade six and characterized as normal and not harmful, but students are not "taught masturbation." A 1950s-era sex-ed video that I found in my research describes masturbation more graphically than the 2015 curriculum. Oral-genital contact and anal intercourse are discussed in grade seven. They are listed as potential sexual activities that one should consider abstaining from or delaying -- not described graphically, "taught" or offered up as alternatives to delaying vaginal intercourse. They are described as part of a comprehensive sex education curriculum, which is the only type of sex education curriculum that is proven to reduce teen pregnancy and STI infection rates and raise the age of onset of first sexual activity.

adma

Somehow, w/Albanese, it all seems more about "the campaign she ran" than she, herself, necessarily.  (Which doesn't make it all any less cynical.)

Debater

The bad habits Ontario’s Tories just can’t quit: How sex ed and evolution could undo months of work

February 25, 2015

Excerpt:

--

Instead, the party is embroiled in a once-sleepy leadership race. One that has flown under many Ontarians’ radar as party brass work to make good on a promise following the party’s fourth electoral trouncing since 2003, despite a slew of scandals and police investigations into the governing Grits.

Then, two leadership candidates and one MPP started saying things. Silly things.

The kind of things everyone disavowed when they so unceremoniously dumped Hudak, denying him even the dignity of running the party until his successor was chosen.

Back in the summer of 2014 — seven, maybe eight months ago — the PC caucus, down nine seats after the electoral trouncing, lined up to say Hudak “blindsided” them with the 100,000 jobs cut.

They queued for the cameras to say they learned yet another lesson about the politics of division, just as in 2011, when Hudak’s otherwise centrist campaign was derailed by bizarre social conservative comments about chain gangs and rural candidates’ anti-gay flyers.

---

More:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/25/the-bad-habits-ontarios-tories-j...

janfromthebruce

adma wrote:

Somehow, w/Albanese, it all seems more about "the campaign she ran" than she, herself, necessarily.  (Which doesn't make it all any less cynical.)

Disagree. It's about ones principles and values. If she was quite willing to support her campaign spouting homophobic smears against another candidate even though she may not herself discriminate or feel that way, says shows a total lack of character and suitability to be an elected representative.

It's actually disgusting.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

Unionist

Timebandit wrote:
Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

Geez, hard to believe that this "debate" is still ongoing in Ontario.

In Québec, schools that refuse to teach sex education - or Darwin for that matter - aren't allowed to issue certificates of graduation. Kind of like schools that teach 2+2=Jesus. This has been solved for a decade now:

[url=http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=73dc97c9-2172-466... Quebec ministry of education has told unlicensed Christian evangelical schools that they must teach Darwin's theory of evolution and sex education or close their doors after an Outaouais school board complained the provincial curriculum wasn't being followed.[/url]

That was 2006.

We believe in freedom. Dinosaurs, homophobes, misogynists, are free to leave.

 

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

As it should be, U. Unfortunately, my cuz-in-law has a virulent case of fundamentalist xtianity. I'm surprised a heathen like myself is still on her face space. Personally, I think the whiners should all be told to suck it up and their kids don't graduate without the curriculum. It's also a little insulting that she must consider my kids deeply depraved, as we've made a point of telling them the facts and supplemented with Laci Green's YouTube videos on frank sex ed. Knowledge is power - I don't understand people who want their kids at a disadvantage.

Bacchus

This is one of the reasons I really hate home schooling (which is way bigger in the States than here)

Aristotleded24

Maysie wrote:

5 Myths and Facts About Ontario's Updated Sex Education Curriculum

Quote:

Myth #1

Explicit sexual content, including oral and anal sex, consent, and rape will be taught to children as young as six.

Key words/phrases:
"graphic content," "young ages," "desensitizing," "innocent minds," "putting thoughts into young minds," "too young to learn about sex," "age-inappropriate content," "explicit content," "children will be taught to consent to sex," "protect our children's innocence."

Truth:

In grade one, children will be taught to identify body parts, including genitalia, using their correct terms (penis, testicles, vagina, vulva) and to recognize exploitative behaviours such as inappropriate touching. In grade two, the concept of "consent" will be introduced very broadly as the right to say "no" in threatening situations. This has been misrepresented by many critics as "teaching children the concept of consent," which is then in turn further misrepresented as "teaching children to consent to sex."

This idea goes beyond sexual encounters. Children would benefit from an early age from knowing when someone violates his or her physical boundaries and how to respond appropriately. Even a 2-year-old can be taught how to say, "stop, that hurts."

jjuares

Debater wrote:

wage zombie wrote:

 “it’s not the Premier of Ontario’s job, especially Kathleen Wynne, to tell parents what’s age-appropriate for their children.”

Exactly.  I think jjuares missed the column on dog whistles by Reevely of The Ottawa Citizen above.


You are right. I missed the "especially" and it does change everything.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

A24, I totally agree. The knowledge that you can say no, that you can *not* consent is so much more important than some fluffy idea of "innocence".

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Timebandit wrote:
Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

I am always slightly amused by the the correlation between high teen pregnancy rates and the presence of obstructionist religious types on local school boards. The closer you get to the buckle of the local bible belt, the higher the two seem to be. If you want to console her... I would suggest cheerfully pointing out if her kids discover the gay, it significantly reduces the chances of her being the youngest grandmother at her local PTA.

Rokossovsky

bagkitty wrote:

Timebandit wrote:
Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

I am always slightly amused by the the correlation between high teen pregnancy rates and the presence of obstructionist religious types on local school boards. The closer you get to the buckle of the local bible belt, the higher the two seem to be. If you want to console her... I would suggest cheerfully pointing out if her kids discover the gay, it significantly reduces the chances of her being the youngest grandmother at her local PTA.

They don't have PTAs in Ontario anymore. They have School Councils, run by the prinicple, where one teacher is allowed to represent the staff. All parents are welcome. Direct contact between parents and teachers in forums where they might organize are discouraged, in favour of a parent "consultation" process controlled by the adminstration.

Rokossovsky

Except that of course, a great many of these things are already taught at the grade 1, 2, 3 level, and no one is going to be talking sex to six year olds based on the "new" curriculum. Teachers already teach issues of personal space. This is basic practice.

The provisos in this curriculum on the internet, and safety are probably a good idea, since this needs to be modernized, and giving teachers some guidance here is probably a good thing.

That said, the entire controversy about teaching "consent" in "sex ed" to very young children is a big fat red herring and Wynne knows it. All they have done is repackage basic pedagogic principles that every teacher is taught when they get their B of Ed. It's not like teachers already don't teach the difference between "real violence, and play violence" in school or basic "respect".

Consent issues are basic pedagogic programing in early year teaching already. Please.

What do people think is going on in Ontario schools? Teachers are teaching kids to be abusive to each other, and standing back in the schoolyard when little Billie beats up Omar, or that if Sven wants to give Sally a hug, she doesn't get to say no?

Existing Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education pg 57-58 wrote:
Healthy relationships do not tolerate abusive, controlling, violent, harassing, or inappropriate behaviours. To experience themselves as valued and connected members of an inclusive social environment, students need to be involved in healthy relationships with their peers, teachers, and other members of the school community.

[cut]

In health education, the study of healthy relationships, particularly with respect to bullying/harassment and violence prevention, should include a focus on sexist, racist, and homophobic behaviour. Examination of other types of harassment, including weight-based teasing or teasing based on appearance or ability, should also be addressed. In creating an inclusive and respectful learning environment, teachers should be able to examine their own biases and seek out support for presenting material with which they are not comfortable.

Exemplar from existing Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education pg 201 wrote:

Teacher prompt:“Gender-based violence includes any form of behaviour – psychological, physical, and sexual – that is based on an individual’s gender and is intended to control, humiliate, or harm the individual. When we say ‘gender-based violence’, we are often referring to violence against women and girls. Can you give me some examples?

Student:“It can include physical assault in a relationship, sexual assault, or rape. It can also include things like having your rear end pinched in the hallway, havingyour top pulled down or lifted up, or being held down and touched.

Existing Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education pg 202 wrote:

OVERALL EXPECTATIONS

By the end of Grade 8, students will:

• identify the physical, emotional, interpersonal, and spiritual aspects of healthy sexuality(e.g., respect for life, ethical questions in relationships, contraception);

• identify local support groups and community organizations (e.g., public health offices) thatprovide information or services related to health and well-being;

apply living skills (e.g., decision-making, problem-solving, and refusal skills) to respond to matters related to sexuality, drug use, and healthy eating habits.

Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1-8: Health and Physical Education

I think they already teach "consent" in Ontario Schools, and go into considerable depth about sexual abuse, as well as a gamut of other offensive behaviours. There are some good things here, but mainly what Wynne and Sandals are doing is fomenting controversy by repackaging basic teaching pedagogy and existing curriculum and calling it "sex ed".

Talking about "dog whistle" politics, this looks a lot like a progressive "wedge issue" calculated to get a rise out of "social conservatives", to generate a hue and cry in order to get Wynne's "progressive" allies on side while she deep sixes schools, and makes further deep cuts the education budget.

Speaking of which precisely where can I find the thread on this web site about planned Liberal school closures in poor neighborhoods in Toronto, or Liz Sandals attack on local democracy by ordering the evisceration of the mandate of TDSB Trustees?

adma

janfromthebruce wrote:

adma wrote:

Somehow, w/Albanese, it all seems more about "the campaign she ran" than she, herself, necessarily.  (Which doesn't make it all any less cynical.)

Disagree. It's about ones principles and values. If she was quite willing to support her campaign spouting homophobic smears against another candidate even though she may not herself discriminate or feel that way, says shows a total lack of character and suitability to be an elected representative.

It's actually disgusting.

 

I *did* say, "cynical".

Maysie Maysie's picture

Unionist wrote:
 We believe in freedom. Dinosaurs, homophobes, misogynists, are free to leave.

They have. They're in Ontario. Damn you, Unionist!

I'm glad I don't have anyone in my extended (local) family who believes the crap that people are believing.

The placards from that "protest" would be laughable if it wasn't fucking real. It's like "sex" and "education" are horrible bad words and the less information children have the better. Because that's worked out so well. And teaching that treating LGBTQ folks as if they are human beings is a good thing? The horror!

And yes, consent and knowing one's own boundaries are very important and go far beyond anything sexual. I think about when children are tickled and don't like it, or told "go hug/kiss Aunt/Uncle Whosit" when they don't want to, etc.

 

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

bagkitty wrote:

Timebandit wrote:
Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

I am always slightly amused by the the correlation between high teen pregnancy rates and the presence of obstructionist religious types on local school boards. The closer you get to the buckle of the local bible belt, the higher the two seem to be. If you want to console her... I would suggest cheerfully pointing out if her kids discover the gay, it significantly reduces the chances of her being the youngest grandmother at her local PTA.

Laughing

I run the risk of alienating that segment of my family if I say anything directly.  Having a very small family, I try to keep what I've got. On the other hand, the overall religious fervour is getting annoying - digital witnessing, uff da.

I may have to start passive-aggressively posting up stats about abstinence-only sex ed and teen pregnancy.  Unfortunately, it probably won't make much of an impact.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Maysie wrote:

The placards from that "protest" would be laughable if it wasn't fucking real. It's like "sex" and "education" are horrible bad words and the less information children have the better. Because that's worked out so well. And teaching that treating LGBTQ folks as if they are human beings is a good thing? The horror!

And yes, consent and knowing one's own boundaries are very important and go far beyond anything sexual. I think about when children are tickled and don't like it, or told "go hug/kiss Aunt/Uncle Whosit" when they don't want to, etc.

We had older relatives who were quite upset with us when we let the wild girls determine who they wanted to hug and kiss and didn't make them display affections they didn't feel or submit to contact they weren't comfortable with.

The placards are horrible.  Kids need to understand their bodies and sex in general, and they need a better social understanding of difference.  How can it hurt to learn how to treat people with respect?

mersh

Rokossovsky wrote:

They don't have PTAs in Ontario anymore. They have School Councils, run by the prinicple, where one teacher is allowed to represent the staff. All parents are welcome. Direct contact between parents and teachers in forums where they might organize are discouraged, in favour of a parent "consultation" process controlled by the adminstration.

Rokossovsky is getting at the heart of the matter here. The new curriculum is long overdue and of course not all that outrageous, but it allows Wynne to appear progressive while still not doing anything about the long-standing structural, erm, challenges to public education. A very Liberal tactic to which the PCs responded quite typically.

That said, having had some experience around problems with the TDSB's inability to even "accommodate" (forget fostering inclusion), I hope the public debate on this will at least shift some thinking around gender and identity. But let's not make the Liberals champions of anything other than self-interest, ok?

Rokossovsky

Talk is cheap, so are curriculum guidelines.

Stockholm

Meanwhile Kathleen Wynne just named ROB FORD'S CHIEF OF STAFF to be Executive Director of the Ontario Liberal Party!!!

Unionist

Stockholm wrote:

Meanwhile Kathleen Wynne just named ROB FORD'S CHIEF OF STAFF to be Executive Director of the Ontario Liberal Party!!!

WOWWW! Very on-topic!!!!! That's a gamechanger!!! No more sex-ed, right????????

What next????

The NDP naming a Liberal cabinet minister to be its LEADER!!!!???

Sorry, just hallucinating.

 

Rokossovsky

Unionist wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Meanwhile Kathleen Wynne just named ROB FORD'S CHIEF OF STAFF to be Executive Director of the Ontario Liberal Party!!!

WOWWW! Very on-topic!!!!! That's a gamechanger!!! No more sex-ed, right????????

What next????

The NDP naming a Liberal cabinet minister to be its LEADER!!!!???

Sorry, just hallucinating.

 

As I said this foray into penny-ante "progressive" wedge politics has been very useful at bringing "progressive" allies of Wynne onside to help bury the deeply reactionary core aspects of her administration.

Debater

mersh wrote:

But let's not make the Liberals champions of anything other than self-interest, ok?

Isn't that the raison d'etre of most NDP posters here?  Never give the Liberals credit for anything positive they do?

The Liberals chose the first woman Premier in Ontario history and the first openly-gay Premier in Canadian history.  A huge historic accomplishment that has given many young people a role model to look up to.  Wynne made history as the first openly-gay leader of a major region in the English-speaking world and there were headlines in other countries about it.

Considering how conservative some parts of Ontario still are, the Ontario Liberals took a bold, progressive move in electing Wynne.  They didn't go the safe route by just picking another middle-aged straight white guy like the Conservatives.  And as we can see this week, clearly some conservatives still have an issue with Wynne being a lesbian.

Unionist

The ONDP has been saying clearly for years that sex education must be maintained and improved and is long overdue (1998) for an update. It would be truly depressing if they were to allow the Liberals to step ahead of them on this issue - as they have on pensions - at least in public perception. Did the bet-Rae-al knock the living daylights out of them for the next 10 generations, or are they capable of carving out a niche on the progressive side of the spectrum?

Just asking from afar.

 

Rokossovsky

Debater wrote:

mersh wrote:

But let's not make the Liberals champions of anything other than self-interest, ok?

Isn't that the raison d'etre of most NDP posters here?  Never give the Liberals credit for anything positive they do?

You mean credit for redefining "refusal" as "consent" in the Ontario curriculum conveniently when the last has become a hot topic of conversation because of the shenanigans of a now former-CBC radio personality, and then packaging it as "sex ed", as a dog whistle to call out Social Conservatives to provide more smoke to cover budget cuts and school closures, is that what you mean?

Yeah, I give Wynne credit for that. It's a good plan to soften the impact of the attack on the TDSB, and community schools -- I never said she was dumb.

Debater

Stockholm wrote:

Meanwhile Kathleen Wynne just named ROB FORD'S CHIEF OF STAFF to be Executive Director of the Ontario Liberal Party!!!

FORMER Chief of Staff.  And he wasn't with Ford for that long.  And you do realize that Earl Provost is a long-time Liberal, right?

You also didn't mention that Provost was the Chief of Staff to Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly.

Rokossovsky

Unionist wrote:

The ONDP has been saying clearly for years that sex education must be maintained and improved and is long overdue (1998) for an update. It would be truly depressing if they were to allow the Liberals to step ahead of them on this issue - as they have on pensions - at least in public perception. Did the bet-Rae-al knock the living daylights out of them for the next 10 generations, or are they capable of carving out a niche on the progressive side of the spectrum?

Just asking from afar.

I don't really give a fuck what the NDP is saying on this issue. Curriculum is window dressing. Schools are where the curriculum is taught, and its amazing that Wynne can keep a straight face on this issue while closing them, and cutting staff.

Debater

Unionist wrote:

The ONDP has been saying clearly for years that sex education must be maintained and improved and is long overdue (1998) for an update. It would be truly depressing if they were to allow the Liberals to step ahead of them on this issue - as they have on pensions - at least in public perception. Did the bet-Rae-al knock the living daylights out of them for the next 10 generations, or are they capable of carving out a niche on the progressive side of the spectrum?

Just asking from afar.

The Ontario Liberals have been trying to get an update to the sex education system for years.  They tried in 2011 and the conservatives and their interest groups put up a big fight at the time of the first Hudak provincial election so McGuinty put the new sex ed plan on hold for a few more years to allow it to be studied further.

That's why it's ludicrous for the PC's to call for another delay.  They did that last time.  It's been put off before.

As for the ONDP, it's good if they want to support the new plan.  But they haven't been in power for 20 years so they're not the ones that have had to deal with the conservatives on this.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Unionist wrote:

Timebandit wrote:
Maysie, my cousin's wife has been all over Facebook with those myths and more. She's freaking out over her daughters' threatened innocence, mortally fearful that they'll discover the gay and stop loving Jebus. Truly incredible how overwrought this is.

Geez, hard to believe that this "debate" is still ongoing in Ontario.

In Québec, schools that refuse to teach sex education - or Darwin for that matter - aren't allowed to issue certificates of graduation. Kind of like schools that teach 2+2=Jesus. This has been solved for a decade now:

[url=http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=73dc97c9-2172-466... Quebec ministry of education has told unlicensed Christian evangelical schools that they must teach Darwin's theory of evolution and sex education or close their doors after an Outaouais school board complained the provincial curriculum wasn't being followed.[/url]

That was 2006.

We believe in freedom. Dinosaurs, homophobes, misogynists, are free to leave.

 

 

Work on the racist next.

 

 

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture
RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

This is 2015

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

It's just funny because Unionist constantly brow-beats us with this Quebec stuff. They are truly a very progressive nation.

 

Sorry about the speck in our eye.

 

But it shouldn't be about that. You seem to want to make it that way.

 

You give great guidance to conversation here, leave that where it belongs. Why the pissing match?

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Or if you want, I can play a back and forth with how great Quebec is. Canada is pretty great too. Or both really suck...Have it your way. Perhaps I'm jealous of how Quebec has conquered issues or perhaps I'd just like it for all of us. What purpose does it serve crowing about Quebec when you shit on everything else Canada tries to copy from it?

 

Normally, you're pressing for logical decision making. Seems you have a weakness. Quebec is your partisan issue that you rail against others for having. They have no fault?

Debater

Though federal Conservatives know better, Ontario Tories still fighting the culture wars

 Michael Den Tandt | February 26, 2015

What Southwestern Ontario MPPs Monte McNaughton and Rick Nicholls have done, with their otiose, idiotic declarations about sex education and evolution, is set aside every hard lesson learned by Conservatives — in Ontario, in Alberta, and federally — in the past 15 years. We’re back to Tennessee, circa 1925. It is a tour de force of self-immolation not seen since, well, the last three Ontario provincial elections.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/26/den-tandt-canada-social-conserva...

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Cool stuff Debater, the Libs keep winning provincially, prepare for a conservative onsluaght federally because we're such enemies. I wish you could at least entertain the idea of cooperation.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

I could vote liberal here. They can win. fuck harper

Pages