Tuesday, March 19, AD 2024 5:39am

Transparent Indoctrination

Further evidence that tolerance has never been the goal of the left in this country:

Last week, the Los Angeles Times reported that the California State Board of Education voted unanimously to include study of the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans in history and social-science classes. This LGBT-focused content will be taught in elementary, middle, and high-school grades. Teachers will give students, beginning in second grade, information about diverse family structures, including families with LGBT parents, to help students “locate themselves and their own families in history and learn about the lives and historical struggles of their peers,” according to the text of the framework.

In grade four, as students study the history of California, they will consider the history of LGBT individuals in their state and learn about the emergence of the nation’s first gay-rights organizations in the Fifties. The framework provides the following example of LGBT history:

In the 1970s, California gay rights groups fought for the right of gay men and women to teach, and, in the 2000s, for their right to get married, culminating in the 2013 and 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decisions Hollingsworth v. Perry and Obergefell v. Hodges.

Fourth-grade students will also learn about Harvey Milk — “a New Yorker who was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977 as California’s first openly gay public official” — in the context of immigrants who come to California from across the country and the world.

Eighth-graders will learn about the role of gender in history, including the role it played in “constructing the enslaved as in need of civilization and thereby rationalizing slavery.” Additionally, eighth-grade students will study the way in which movement toward the Western frontier allowed for significant alterations in gender norms. Southwestern women, the framework says, “felt trapped or limited by their gender in a place and time so dominated by men.” Students will also learn that boarding schools removed Native American children from their families and imposed “Christianity, U.S. gender binaries, and social roles.”

Go here to read the rest.  As commenter Dale Price once opined, the left aren’t having kids, so they are intent on stealing yours.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
32 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Foxfier
Admin
Thursday, July 21, AD 2016 11:02am

http://www.k12.wa.us/HealthFitness/Standards/HPE-Standards.pdf

Page 29:
5. Self-Identity
Kindergarten: Understand there are
many ways to
express gender.
H1.Se5.K

1st:
Explain that there are
many ways to
express gender.
H1.Se5.1

2nd:
Understand there is a
range of gender roles
and expression.
H1.Se5.2a
Understand
importance of
treating others with
respect regarding
gender expression.
H1.Se5.2b

3rd:
Explain that gender
roles can vary
considerably.
H1.Se5.3a
Understand
importance of
treating others with
respect regarding
gender identity.
H1.Se5.3b

4th:
Identify how friends
and family can
influence ideas
regarding gender
roles, identity, and
expression. H2.Se5.4
Demonstrate ways
to show respect for
all people. H4.Se5.4
Define sexual
orientation. H1.Se5.4

5th:
Describe how media,
society, and culture
can influence ideas
regarding gender
roles, identity, and
expression.
H2.Se5.5a
Promote ways to
show respect for all
people. H8.Se5.5
Identify trusted
adults to ask
questions about
gender identity and
sexual orientation.
H2.Se5.5b

Yes, that tops out at 11 years old.

CAM
CAM
Thursday, July 21, AD 2016 8:02pm

Shades of the Soviet Union after school Pioneer Clubs..separate the child from the parents and inculcate them with the party line. Next the teachers will be questioning the students about what their mommy and daddy teach them at home. What about parental rights??
Express gender? How does one explain made up genders to kindergartners?
Furthering the LGBT agenda and destroying childhood innocence.

Foxfier
Admin
Thursday, July 21, AD 2016 8:09pm

There have already been some “incidents” with teenage boys in the girls’s shower.
There’s been some push-back.

We’re leaving the state.

TomD
TomD
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 9:50am

“As commenter Dale Price once opined, the left aren’t having kids, so they are intent on stealing yours.”
This is the literal truth in Norway, where the state child protective agency has systematically been taking thousands of immigrant children and giving them to Norwegians. The Czech president has compared them with the Nazi taking of Aryan looking children.

Foxfier
Admin
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 10:08am

Where the government has been accused of systematically removing immigrant children.
Please keep in mind the kinds of abuse that is known to happen, and be ignored by “child welfare advocates,” in the population involved. Ritual sexual mutilation, beating, burning and eventual murder are horrifyingly common.

Foxfier
Admin
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 10:11am

Holy crud, even the articles written with no input from officials, entirely from the alleged victim family’s POV, are worrying– dressing a 10 year old so she can attract a husband?
And the mentions of hundreds of minors who were put in protective custody being kidnapped and removed from the country?
Please tell me I’m not the only one who’s aware of the human trafficking issue where girls are “engaged” in their early double-digits, taken out of country and married if they wish it or not?

Foxfier
Admin
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 10:14am

Apparently Norway has some really strict privacy laws, so it literally cannot comment on a lot of reasons for kids being removed…but some articles mention that children were removed from families and placed with relatives.

.Anzlyne
.Anzlyne
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 1:22pm

I’m just reeling from all of this. Help! God! Help!
What can we do about public school indoctrination?!
Even talking with midwestern small town kids, I see that they already listen with suspicion when grandma or catechism teachers protest some of the bathroom issues or seem “intolerant”.
They have been strengthened in their no rules anything goes mercy by what they see as trusted adults – teachers- who confide to them that they just have to let old grandparents carry on- “they grew up a long time ago you know and they still have those old ideas…,”

TomD
TomD
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 3:30pm

Apparently Norway has some really strict privacy laws, so it literally cannot comment on a lot of reasons for kids being removed
How convenient.

Foxlier, the Norwegian Supreme Court actually ordered children returned to one family and the child protective services (the Barnevernet) refused and announced it would proceed with their adoption by a Norwegian couple, on the grounds that after 2-3 years of foster care their return would be too traumatic.

Then we have the case of the Bodnariu family from Romania: they were initially investigated because their children sang hymns at school and when questioned we found to have been abused by having been told about sin and hell (of course an admission of a spanking didn’t help either). The Barnevernet began adoption proceedings with their children before any court had ordered the termination of their parental rights! Only a international uproar stopped them and forced the return of the children (gee, must not have been that serious after all).

Look, I fully know that child abuse and trafficking are major evils, but their existence is no excuse for the cases that have piled up in Norway. When you read a report, or see a BBC report, or hear that the Czech President is making Nazi comparisons, you have to sit up and say these are not mere allegations.

“­­While Norway is certainly entitled to make its own laws, Peter Costea, a Texas civil rights attorney, argues that its system violates the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which it has signed.” “Barnevernet is structured to operate as a law unto itself”

http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/18/read-about-norway-stealing-these-kids-then-tout-democratic-socialism/
http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/06/under-international-pressure-norway-reunites-seized-children-with-family/



Foxfier
Admin
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 3:53pm

How convenient.

Oh? You would rather they publish it all, and to heck with the effect on the kids?
Wouldn’t that be lovely.
“Here’s the name of the kids who were sexually abused by their parents or household members! Here’s the ones that had to have reconstructive surgery!”
Even the US doesn’t give that many details– I know because my cousin is one of those “stolen” from her family for abuse. Her biological family burned her toes off. It was listed as simply “abuse.” (We only were told because my mom was afraid we’d notice and say something during the family reunion– bunch of kids playing in the lake.)
***
From the one link admitting there’s a bit more going on than “religious indoctrination”, at your first link:
Spanking is banned in Norway, so it is possible that some of the alleged child abuse in question would not be considered abuse by evangelicals in the United States. The child abuse allegations go beyond spanking, however, and further, whether or not the alleged abuse took place is irrelevant to the larger point at hand—the it is grossly misleading to center accusations of “Christian indoctrination” as the key issue in this case when in fact the key issue is accusations of child abuse.
In fact, according to the children’s uncle, the formal accusations didn’t even mention religious indoctrination, focusing instead only on child abuse.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/01/norways-bodnariu-children-removed-over-child-abuse-not-christian-indoctrination.html#sthash.0yCLr8AG.dpuf

Kennybhoy
Kennybhoy
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 5:55pm

“At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? 2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. 6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” (Matthew 18:1-6)

TomD
TomD
Friday, July 22, AD 2016 6:55pm

“You would rather they publish it all, and to heck with the effect on the kids?”
Of course not. I never even implied that, and you are wrong to state otherwise. All I was maintaining is that an agency that regards itself as a “law unto itself” would find such laws very convenient to avoid oversight.

As far as the child abuse issue in the Bodnariu case is concerned, I am well aware of the facts. I mentioned it in my earlier post. If you read the second link you will see quite clearly that the Barnevernet DID see Pentacostal religious beliefs to be abusive.

This thread concerns governments abusing children. I fail to understand why my posting facts about such a pattern in Norway can generate such a reaction. From a legal perspective the promotion of the adoption of children who are not legally the wards of the state is wrong. Period. It is obvious that the Barnevernet is operating with agendas that differ from protecting children. Seizing children and putting them in foster care when the facts do not warrant such action is abuse too.

Foxfier
Admin
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 9:53am

TomD on Friday, July 22, A.D. 2016 at 6:55pm (Edit)
“You would rather they publish it all, and to heck with the effect on the kids?”
Of course not. I never even implied that, and you are wrong to state otherwise.

Please, square the circle on how they’re supposed to comment on the specific details of why the kids are removed, but not publish information on why the kids are removed. Since you already declared how it is “convenient.”
***
I fail to understand why my posting facts about such a pattern in Norway can generate such a reaction.
Because you posted on a specific story where the vital detail of CHILD ABUSE was relegated to a tiny “oh, there’s some disagreement about why,” and tried to make it into a complete picture on every case that’s there.
And according to the relatives of the people involved, it was about child abuse.

TomD
TomD
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 2:55pm

“Please, square the circle on how they’re supposed to comment on the specific details of why the kids are removed, but not publish information on why the kids are removed. ”
Here’s how to square the circle: During proper oversight of the agency’s actions, the agency should be presenting reports to their superiors in government on exceptional cases without names. Oh wait, that’s right, there was no proper oversight, such as that which exists in every other democracy. Again, I need to point out to you that my comment about ‘How convenient’ applies to oversight and not to any other situation.

“Because you posted on a specific story where the vital detail of CHILD ABUSE was relegated to a tiny “oh, there’s some disagreement about why,”…”
If you (and anyone else) were to read all of the facts on the Bodnariu case you would know that the school principal and the medical professionals did not agree that the level of physical abuse was at the level that required removal. There was no bruising, every medical test showed that the children were not injured, and the children stated they were not afraid of their parents. Every professional involved in this case outside of the Barnevernet believed that counseling would be sufficient. Read the links I posted, they said so, as do some of the links inside the article you linked to.

“…and tried to make it into a complete picture on every case that’s there.””
Did you see the BBC film to it’s conclusion? It moves on to talk about one of the Czech immigrant cases that provoked the Czech president to make his Nazi comparison. It’s another ugly story, but the facts are even uglier than the those of the Bodnariu case. The Barnevernet seized an infant from the hospital on the grounds that she had not bonded with her parents.

“And according to the relatives of the people involved, it was about child abuse.”
I don’t care what that Patheos article says. The linked article of the uncle’s opinion is old, subject to translation errors (including the fact that the uncle likely intended to say that the Barnevernet verdict on their religious beliefs WAS that it was child abuse, and the Patheos author misrepresented this for her own agenda), and conflicts with well researched articles that stated otherwise, some of which I supplied the links above.

Foxlier, I have to say that this is the second time I have had a go-around with you in which you took offense at something and then proceeded to ignore the facts in follow-up posts of mine. You continue to raise the same objections over and over. Please stop.

TomD
TomD
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 3:04pm

BTW, I have been searching for an article which states that immigrant families in Norway are over (as I recall) 300 times more likely to have their children seized by the Barnevernet than native Norwegian families. My apologies, I will keep looking for it and will post the link if I find it. Human nature being what it is, there is no way that number can be justified – Norwegians cannot be that relatively virtuous, not immigrants that relatively depraved. The Barnevernet MUST be engaged in discriminatory activities.

It’s like the traffic stats in 1990’s South Africa, where whites owned 90% of the automobiles and 80% of traffic fatalities were black pedestrians. THAT tells a story of one kind or another. We all know the saying about lies and statistics, but sometimes stats don’t lie at all.

Foxfier
Admin
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 3:19pm

Again, I need to point out to you that my comment about ‘How convenient’ applies to oversight and not to any other situation.
You said it in response to “they cannot comment on the reasons kids were removed.” That would be public comment. The subject that was on hand, because you were complaining about there not being public statements from the agency on why the kids were removed.
Unless you’re now saying that you think they had no internal documents for why the kids were taken, even though the uncle who was allowed to comment on it said that the documents they got said child abuse?

TomD
TomD
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 9:25pm

Again, we are going round and round here. Do you know of any child protective agency in the U.S. that does not have public oversight? Do you know of any that could maintain a wall of silence around its decision making process in the manner seen in Norway, after the involved families go public with every fact they know? (Just who’s privacy is being protected here? Not the children’s) In my experience the answer is no. If the Norwegian laws are so ‘strict’ that they prevent proper oversight then they are wrong. Please stop defending them.

Foxfier
Admin
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 9:45pm

Again, we are going round and round here.
No, you keep running off at random to make another extreme accusation in the form of a statement of fact.
Usually after a counterpoint is made.
Very different.

TomD
TomD
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 10:00pm

Fine. I’ll put it to a vote then. Does anyone else care to read this thread, watch the video in full, read all the linked articles, and then tell me that I’m making “extreme accusations”? Come on TAC readers, let me know what you think.

Foxfier
Admin
Saturday, July 23, AD 2016 11:34pm

Again, jumping off in a new direction rather than supporting your claims, accusations and mind-reading.
Truth isn’t determined by a vote.

TomD
TomD
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 1:13am

“Truth isn’t determined by a vote.”
I knew you were going to write that. My only answer must be that a person who believes that to apply to an exchange like this must have little respect for judges and juries. My evidence is not Divine, and neither is yours’. It is not that kind of truth.

Let me ask you directly: is this acrimony the result of the hideous experience of your cousin? That poor child was horribly maimed, properly taken into state custody by the authorities, the parental rights of the monster(s) who maimed were taken away by a judicial proceeding, and then placed in an adoptive home that was carefully screened again by the authorities. That child was not “stolen”, she was protected. I don’t understand how you connected the facts of your cousin’s case with these Norwegian cases (your use of the word “stolen” shows that you did connect them). The severity of these cases are worlds apart. You must know that. As an adoptive parent I understand how the process is supposed to work.

BTW, may I ask, how is your cousin today? I hope she is well.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 4:11pm

Truth doesn’t matter to you. Got it.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 4:12pm

It is gobsmackingly wrong that you’d appeal to the authority of juries while doing the thing that makes them somewhat useful– dismissing the relevant evidence and only consider that which supports your prior assumption.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 4:13pm

Perhaps you knew I’d say that I would say that, because you know it as well.

TomD
TomD
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 5:26pm

Foxlier, you are the one who has repeatedly dismissed the evidence I’ve presented.-No, dismissed is the wrong word, ignored is more accurate,

I wrote the last time you with this crap around with me, that the only other person who has been so irrational in a debate with me on a Catholic site is Mark Shea. At this point Don McClarey is going to have to ask me to stay, or I’m out of here. Enjoy your echo chamber.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 5:37pm

Pointing out evidence from your own source which contradicts your conclusion is not “ignoring” or “dismissing.”

TomD
TomD
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 7:11pm

You cherry-picked from that one source, ignored the remainder of that source, and ignored the other sources. Less than 5% of the evidence supports you.

Here’s ANOTHER piece of evidence (but then, you’d say it is ‘going all over the place’:
From http://www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/2704-an-unfinished-debate-on-barnevernet

…A challenge in modern democratic states is how to provide for children at risk of poverty, abuse, neglect and other dangers that might inflict harm. The main dilemma is how to provide for and protect children without intruding on the parent’s rights of privacy and their right to a family life of their own choosing. Moreover, child welfare services’ practices in some cases make the issue of child welfare more controversial than conflicting. One of the best illustrating examples of this problem is the latest barnevern crisis between India and Norway. Two kids of the NRI couple were taken under protective care last May by Barnevernet, which claimed emotional disconnect with the parents, and placed them in foster parental care as per the local Norwegian court’s directive.

Cultural Biases and Misconceptions

The family had accused the Norwegian authorities with cultural misunderstandings and prejudice as they were taken for being fed by hand and sleeping in the same bed as their parents in addition to insufficient toys to play in the house.After Indian Foreign Ministry intervened the investigation, the Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre helped children to be handed to children’s uncles.

Russians Mobilized against Barnevernet with Russian Women’s Statements

Even though this case was resolved in peace, it did not help to stop criticism against Norwegian children welfare authorities, who are said to abuse their power and be ignorant against cultural differences. The Indian media blamed the authorities for being arrogantly insensitive to child rearing under a different culture. Vanitha Srinavasan from The Hindu Business Line accused Norway of enforcing ‘one size fits all’ in human rights or child care. While similar articles are being published at Indian media, a group of Russians involved in the process. Outside the Norwegian Embassy in Moscow, the members of the youth organization of the ruling party, the United Russia made a demonstration with strong slogans.

The protests came after Russian media have recently run a series of issues about how more and more Russian women living in Norway are deprived of their children. Especially two cases on Russian media were strong enough to mobilize the protestors. One of these news stories featured a Russian citizen, who lives in Norway, whose name is Maya Kasayeva. Her shocking staments took many newspapers’ front pages: “During the court hearings, the judge told me: ’We give you residence permit, and you give us your son.’ I refused, and then the repressions started.”

Child Abuse Accusation against Host Families

The claims in the second case were more outraging. Irina Bergseth Frolova, a Russian woman living in Norway, had found out that her ex-husband, a Norwegian citizen, as well as his friends and relatives, had been raping their four-year-old son. The reports also remind another foster father who was previously been found guilty for child pornography and child sexual abuse in Stavanger.

In fact, the practices of Barnevern do not only worry Russians and Indians. There is a deep rooted skepticism among local groups towards an increased use of home based measures. A report prepared by Gruppen til Familiens Selvstendige Rett (GFSR), Redd Våre Barn (RVB) and BarnasRett concludes that current practices in the Norwegian Child Protection system are not compatible with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Arild Holta, as an activist against children’s segregation from their parents asks for an urgent need to re-evaluate the fundamental principles along which the Child Protection system works in Norway. Familiestiftelsen is a foundation run based on similar concerns by a group of parents and grandparents. They feel upset at the lack of respect for the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child with regard to the protection of children against mental and physical abuse and separation from parents and grandparents.

A Growing Industry Open to Corruption

Professor of linguistics at the University of Bergen, Marianne Haslev Skånland points out another problematic dimension of the child welfare system. According to Skånland, it is turning into an industry, which pays incredible amounts, especially to psychologists, for “reports” and to foster “parents”. They advertise for people to be foster parents and announce a yearly pay of, say, NOK 430.000 (€ 30.000) plus paid holidays and regular “time off” from the foster children plus allowances for building their house or buying an extra car plus pension entitlement. The business also, of course, provides extra income and extra jobs for social workers, writes Skånland. She also notes that child care cases often rely on information from anonymous sources. She thinks one never knows who the sources are, and whether the sources are reliable. Or whether the sources possess first hand information, or are pure rumors.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 7:55pm

You cherry-picked from that one source, ignored the remainder of that source, and ignored the other sources
You claimed they were removed for abuse via “having been told about sin and hell.”
That is flatly false, according to the the uncle of the kids.
The spanking that “didn’t help” is 1) child abuse in that country, and 2) not the worst abuse.
When it was pointed out that the case actually involved child abuse, not “they were abused because of religious instruction,” you claimed you’d already covered it, dismissed it based on your judgement, and ran off to talk about something else. Then you’re pissed because I’m not persuaded by your assertion, and not running right along behind you.
****
Here’s a radical idea, how about talking about something related to the actual subject of the post? If you want to write so much about it, do a blog article.
I’m interested in the “teach the kids stupid radical junk is true starting when they’re too young to know better” subject, especially since I’m raising several and have to watch that we don’t move to a place where we’re required to do it, too.

TomD
TomD
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 8:51pm

Foxlier, you are just obtuse. I started my post of the general Norwegian situation, which IS indirectly related to this post, and the first case I cited was NOT the Bodnariu family but the Czech families. Go back and look, it’s true! The Bodnariu case was the SECOND case. YOU are the one who attempted to turn this into a debate that is solely ab9out the Bodnariu family. When I bring in other facts as cases (Indian, Russian, etc) you then criticize me for straying from the Bodnariu case, but it was NEVER entirely about the Bodnariu case. You know what? Even if you are right about the Bodnariu case, that does not negate those other cases!

Am I pissed? You bet I am. Last of all I’m pissed off because now you ask “If you want to write so much about it, do a blog article. I’m interested in the “teach the kids stupid radical junk is true starting when they’re too young to know better” subject…” You know what? You want collaboration? Sorry, collaboration requires trust, and I don’t trust you. You and I both want to fight the good fight against the evils we face, we should be allies, but you have twice now treated me as an enemy. If you want to defeat junk and help the kids you should not be acting as you are. Enjoy your echo chamber.

Foxfier
Admin
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 10:08pm

The guy who’s repeatedly failed to respond to pretty dang basic points, or responded in ways that don’t actually address the points, is saying I’m slow to understand….
You alluded to a general situation. You said/paraphrased this: The Czech president has compared them with the Nazi taking of Aryan looking children but actually cited, eventually, the Bodnariu family.
Having finally been given a specific case, I looked at the case– and pointed out it wasn’t as you described, since you’d decided to ignore a huge chunk of the known facts involved, since you figured they didn’t matter.
****
You want collaboration?
No.
As I’ve said repeatedly,
I want to talk about
the original post.
You seem to very much want other people to listen and agree with your views on a totally different subject, to the point of flying off the handle when validation isn’t forthcoming.
and I don’t trust you.
What a coincidence, that’s pretty much where I ended up when you claimed that Norway labeled the kids as having been abused by “having been told about sin and hell,” and then it turns out to have been physical abuse including shaking the baby like a dishrag.
From your own linked source. And I’m supposed to trust your judgment on the rest of it?
If you want to defeat junk and help the kids you should not be acting as you are.
Check for logs, dude, check for logs.

TomD
TomD
Sunday, July 24, AD 2016 10:53pm

“…and then it turns out to have been physical abuse including shaking the baby like a dishrag. From your own linked source”

MY linked source (http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/18/read-about-norway-stealing-these-kids-then-tout-democratic-socialism/) says “Medical examinations on the children had revealed no signs of injury—including an x-ray exonerating the parents from charges of shaking the baby”. It’s there, read it.

Foxfier
Admin
Monday, July 25, AD 2016 8:06am

Which is totally relevant to the original reason they were taken. Because government officials can see through time.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top