Allowing perverts to teach your kids is child abuse. Few things are more perverted than instilling confusion, and this is being done with malice aforethought, in kids about the essential differences between men and women.
They Want Your Kids
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
Just another attack on reality by Satanists who, like their master, will not serve. The good news, besides the fact that truth wins in the end, is that more and more people are seeing this for what it really is. The battle lines are being drawn. Thank God.
I would get in big trouble if my grandkids had to go to that school. Godless idolatrous immoral sexual perverts!
They have no respect for our children’s civil rights. They have no respect for themselves. They have no respect for God.
Amen to all here. And Mary, I would say the loss of respect for God leads to the other two failures you mentioned. I would guess that you agree.
It’s fascinating how of all the heresies that the Church has stamped out (or tried to stamp out) throughout its history, it never quite finished off Gnosticism.
“Person-first” language to avoid “gender” as a means to “inclusive” language is philosophically vacuous, and is likely thus for that reason embraced. To be sure, “person” as an individual substance of a rational nature could not refer to sexual differentiation if speaking of persons which do not have sexual differentiation as constituitive of their substance (such as angels). But human beings as a body-soul composite do, and thus it is nonsensical to say “a person who produces sperm” as if that isn’t a male, which is a word that, among other things, describes a person (or other non-person organism for that matter) which produces sperm.
One doesn’t even have to take an overtly philosophical approach; humans do not reproduce aesexually, and thus “male” and “female” are scientific descriptions not of “gender” (a grammatical term) but of differentiation in terms of sexual reproduction. I suppose you could use different terms, but those terms couldn’t avoid describing sexual differentiation. “Person,” on the other hand, is a purely philosophical term that is being force-fit to avoid scientific descriptions. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Following the Science(TM).
Granted, most moderns have abandoned any philosophical grounding of personhood, and thus the entire argument couldn’t even be an argument as they cannot even define terms nor provide a description of personhood that isn’t either circular, ad hoc or interminably vague. That’s why this sort of worldview cannot be compromised with nor reasoned with but must be defeated.
One thing we’ve learned in the last three years is that there are a lot of sickos employed as schoolteachers and a lot of fad chasers protecting and encouraging them. That aside, human biology is not an appropriate subject for children of 10. If our schools were run by serious people, they’d see to it that their charges had mastered arithmetic, elementary algebra, English grammar, and the fundamentals of American history, geography, and civics ‘ere they attempted specialized classes in academic subjects like biology or foreign languages. Even if we tracked students assiduously, extended the school year to 240 days, and refused to hire silly bints as elementary schoolteachers (and administrators!), only a modest minority at age 10 would have sufficient mastery to devote themselves to liberal education (English literature, algebra & geometry, history & geography, natural sciences, and foreign languages). It’s another piece of evidence toward Marva Collins’ thesis that schools do what they do because teachers find doing what they should be doing to be a bore.
Notice how the letter does not give parents the options to opt out their children from the classes. A sneaky little exclusion which is becoming more common with schools whereas they are not required to obtain permission from parents.
I’m sure by law (someone enlighten us), parents have the option to pull their children out of class if a topic which is being taught somehow is contrary to the parents beliefs or wishes for their child. I remember “back in the day” the non-Catholics at my school could opt out of religious studies class. Parents need to demand their rights restored, as their child’s first educators, back from the institutions. That’s how you bring these instructions to their kneels. They serve us!
[…] Francis Follows the Way of Mainline Protestant Denominations – David Griffey at Daffey. . . They Want Your Kids – Donald R. McClary, J.D., at The American Catholic Here’s What Happens to the Bible […]
*knees
It’s another piece of evidence toward Marva Collins’ thesis that schools do what they do because teachers find doing what they should be doing to be a bore.
I agree here. It can be said of many professions besides teachers.
schools do what they do because teachers find doing what they should be doing to be a bore.
This was not true when teachers did what they did out of love for children and no other reason, including careerism or (especially) activism.
“That aside, human biology is not an appropriate subject for children of 10.”
I must disagree with that appraisal. I have heard of girls who began puberty at age 8; most girls begin around 10 or 11. Most boys follow within a few years, by 11 or 12. Teaching how the body will begin to adjust itself to prepare for adulthood strikes me as a legitimate matter. Parents may readily emphasize what they wish from there. It’s when schools begin teaching “safe” sex and pushing this gender-neutral or gender-fluid nonsense that problems develop.
“That aside, human biology is not an appropriate subject for children of 10.”
I must disagree with that appraisal. I have heard of girls who began puberty at age 8; most girls begin around 10 or 11. Most boys follow within a few years, by 11 or 12. Teaching how the body will begin to adjust itself to prepare for adulthood strikes me as a legitimate matter. Parents may readily emphasize what they wish from there. It’s when schools begin teaching “safe” sex and pushing this gender-neutral or gender-fluid nonsense that problems develop.
Median age at menarche is 12. My mother got along just fine in that department with counsel from her mother.
This was not true when teachers did what they did out of love for children and no other reason, including careerism or (especially) activism.
We don’t need teachers who love children. We need teachers who know how to explain things, who know how to keep order, and who have a sense of fiduciary duty. If they’re fond of their charges, that’s gravy.
Teaching how the body will begin to adjust itself to prepare for adulthood strikes me as a legitimate matter.
… for the parents to teach
At this point parents should be the ones teaching literally everything. Even if you think that you are unqualified to teach math or science or English or whatever, I guarantee that you will still do a better job than the average elementary school teacher or high school teacher.
It makes the question of sex ed in schools moot, since kids shouldn’t be in schools to begin with.
Quite a bit of learning about puberty for females was through Girl Scout movies attended with our mothers. As it was an all female audience there was nothing embarrassing about it.
Which brings me to a gripe… coed gym classes and coed classes on human reproduction. This happened at my son’s Catholic HS.
“My mother got along just fine in that department with counsel from her mother.”
Methinks your mother grew up before society…lost it’s head. Women had much more worthy expectations for themselves. I’ve met far too many women over the past 30 years who have no business teaching anyone about puberty, never mind their own daughters. Far too much concern about their “rights”. Granted, much of that rubbish comes from attitudes professed by public schools.
If you want your kids or grand-kids to maintain a semblance of moral character or expectation, best home-school.
Even so, better for some kids to learn basic things about biology from school than wind up half petrified when they experience ..changes. Some things I’ve heard from parents have been more toxic than what schools have pushed.