Welcome to the Wynne Legecy in Ontario

Ash74 · February 24, 2015

Not until at least grade 3. I wonder if they are using the draft sex education curriculum written during the time that admitted child pornographer Dr. Levin was deputy minister of education and Premier Two Moms Ms. Wynne was the minister of education.

Welcome.....

Yes I have seen all that and it is just another day at Queens park.

Irony with the pedophile helping do this. Denying it of course but what else is new.

Michael Hardner · February 24, 2015

Not until at least grade 3. I wonder if they are using the draft sex education curriculum written during the time that admitted child pornographer Dr. Levin was deputy minister of education and Premier Two Moms Ms. Wynne was the minister of education.

There's a separate thread on that topic.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/18/levin-not-involved-in-new-sex-ed-curriculum-sandals

Also, the Sun reports that Levin was not involved.

AngusThermopyle · February 24, 2015

There's a separate thread on that topic.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/18/levin-not-involved-in-new-sex-ed-curriculum-sandals

Also, the Sun reports that Levin was not involved.

What I read in the Sun was that Sandals said Levin was not directly involved, not that he was not involved. There's a big difference in reality between not involved and not directly involved. Not directly involved indicates involvement at some level.

AngusThermopyle · February 24, 2015

Wynne's popular vote was about the same.

She won fair and square. I never disagreed with that.I do not agree with her politics or the way her and Dalton ran it before her.

I think the Ontario Liberals have improved health care. I can only imagine the number of screw ups that were swept under the rug but I have seen a vast improvement.

But every year we get hit with another sign of incompetence, bribing or scandal that just makes me shake my head and wonder what will be the next punch in the throat

Here is where you and I disagree. Personally I don't consider Ornge, cutting formerly covered procedures, hospital closures, E-coli deaths, Chemo Gate and many other instances of mis management to be improving the system.

Sorry, I meant C-Difficile rather than E-Coli, don't know where that came from.

Edited February 24, 2015 by AngusThermopyle

CommunityOrganizer · February 24, 2015

Does anyone here other than Michael Hardner seriously believe that Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation did not at the very least set - either explicitly or implicitly - the general focus and tone that governed the redraft of the sex education curriculum? And if they did not set the requisite focus and tone on such a politically sensitive and socially significant matter as this so obviously is, what in the devil were they doing in their highly paid and privileged positions?

guyser · February 24, 2015

Does anyone here other than Michael Hardner seriously believe that Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation did not at the very least set - either explicitly or implicitly - the general focus and tone that governed the redraft of the sex education curriculum?

Yes .

PIK · February 24, 2015

He had his hands in it, but liberals will never admit to that. The gay agenda is being pushed here, unfortunately a sick man got involved.

CommunityOrganizer · February 24, 2015

Guyser2 ... Thank you for your brilliant reply. It certainly convinces me of the rightness of your argument, albeit that it was a bit long winded for my taste. Keep up these cogent and credible contributions to this board. We're depending on you.

Keepitsimple · February 24, 2015

Does anyone here other than Michael Hardner seriously believe that Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation did not at the very least set - either explicitly or implicitly - the general focus and tone that governed the redraft of the sex education curriculum? And if they did not set the requisite focus and tone on such a politically sensitive and socially significant matter as this so obviously is, what in the devil were they doing in their highly paid and privileged positions?

Yes....count me in as well.

guyser · February 24, 2015

Guyser2 ... Thank you for your brilliant reply.

You're welcome! Anytime .Sometimes brevity is the best.

It certainly convinces me of the rightness of your argument, albeit that it was a bit long winded for my taste. Keep up these cogent and credible contributions to this board. We're depending on you.

Any post that starts with, and keeps up the dumb canard of....

...Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation ...

...gets exactly what was dished out.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Guyser2

CommunityOrganizer · February 24, 2015

- To suggest that the middle level bureaucrats and consultants who worked on the nuts (no pun intended) and bolts of the new sex education curriculum paid no attention to the well known professional, political, policy and personal preferences and prejudices of the two people running the department is not a credible argument to anyone who has ever toiled in the middle or senior levels of public bureaucracies. Ambitious careerists trying to climb the greasy pole to their next promotion generally know what the top brass wants to hear and make sure they get to hear it. Mavericks tend to lose out in promotion competitions and eventually leave in frustration. This way the top echelons of the department can control the policy process even in those areas where they decline to stick their necks out on paper. Given the peccadillos of both the minister and deputy, it simply belies belief that the obvious and early attention to gay behaviour and normality and its supposed moral equivalency with heterosexuality was not at least implicitly influenced from the top. To believe otherwise is to believe, for example, that the same emphasis would have occurred with Mike Harris and John Snoblen (sic) running education in Ontario.

Edited February 24, 2015 by CommunityOrganizer

WIP · February 24, 2015

Does anyone here other than Michael Hardner seriously believe that Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation did not at the very least set - either explicitly or implicitly - the general focus and tone that governed the redraft of the sex education curriculum? And if they did not set the requisite focus and tone on such a politically sensitive and socially significant matter as this so obviously is, what in the devil were they doing in their highly paid and privileged positions?

Thanks for stopping by! I think we already know that there are bible-thumping fundagelicals in this Province....not very many...and certainly not enough to make the Premier's sexual orientation relevant to political debate...but, it's nice to have at least one around, so we know what the Christian Right is thinking.

Let's keep our kids in the dark about sex and sexual issues, just like they are in the U.S. Bible Belt...where they lead the way in teen pregnancies and STD rates!

Michael Hardner · February 24, 2015

Does anyone here other than Michael Hardner seriously believe that Dr. Levin as deputy minister of education and with his intense and illegal fascination with child pornography and sexual behaviour and Kathleen Wynne as minister of education with her gay sexual orientation did not at the very least set - either explicitly or implicitly - the general focus and tone that governed the redraft of the sex education curriculum?

That sentence.... my god...

And if they did not set the requisite focus and tone on such a politically sensitive and socially significant matter as this so obviously is, what in the devil were they doing in their highly paid and privileged positions?

Who cares if it's politically sensitive ? That's a political question, not one of governance.

Also - I already explained there's another thread on this - please reply there thanks.

Michael Hardner · February 24, 2015

Ok... here is the aforementioned thread:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24297-sex-education-in-ontario/page-4#entry1034143

I'm going to quote any posts on the topic over there, thanks...

Bob Macadoo · February 24, 2015

Anyone notice since Cap'n Canada's "breakdown".....a whole bunch of similar minded cohorts just happen to join? Don't worry our underappreciated facilitator/moderator already caught that for action.

Ash74 · February 25, 2015

Anyone notice since Cap'n Canada's "breakdown".....a whole bunch of similar minded cohorts just happen to join? Don't worry our underappreciated facilitator/moderator already caught that for action.

I have noticed a few new people pop up since our local "Sybil" had their moment.........

WIP · February 26, 2015

Does Admin keep track of IP addresses? That is the usual way multiheaded hydras are prevented from using multiple ID's, or coming back after being banned.

Ash74 · February 27, 2015

Does Admin keep track of IP addresses? That is the usual way multiheaded hydras are prevented from using multiple ID's, or coming back after being banned.

Not alot they can do.

It is after all a free forum and must have free speech. I may suspect that it is just one individual playing games but I could not prove it.

They may suspect but do not know for sure. Some people are bound to play games and if that's how they get their kicks so be it. Not going to lose any sleep over it.

But knowing for sure he was just playing a character would make me feel better than the off chance he really is a teacher. Oh the poor kids

guyser · February 27, 2015

Not alot they can do.

Yes there is. They can satisfy themselves that the muckraker has two accounts......

It is after all a free forum and must have free speech.

...and then boot them off.

You do NOT have free speech here. You can be censored at whim for any reason they want.

Michael Hardner · February 27, 2015

Please - no more off-topic posts on the veracity of some poster's identity, thanks.

WIP · February 27, 2015

Not alot they can do.

It is after all a free forum and must have free speech. I may suspect that it is just one individual playing games but I could not prove it.

They may suspect but do not know for sure. Some people are bound to play games and if that's how they get their kicks so be it. Not going to lose any sleep over it.

But knowing for sure he was just playing a character would make me feel better than the off chance he really is a teacher. Oh the poor kids

In a way, it may be entertaining to have someone with two, three or more personalities arguing against each other online.

WIP · February 27, 2015

- To suggest that the middle level bureaucrats and consultants who worked on the nuts (no pun intended) and bolts of the new sex education curriculum paid no attention to the well known professional, political, policy and personal preferences and prejudices of the two people running the department is not a credible argument to anyone who has ever toiled in the middle or senior levels of public bureaucracies.

Besides personal attacks on the Premier for nothing other than her sexual orientation, and this Dr. Levin (whom I'll admit I know nothing about), what are your objections to revising a curriculum on sexual education? Specifically, what in the new proposals is it that you find offensive and have some better proposal?

I have to ask this because I listened to the CBC Radio show The Current, do a segment on this topic, and the conservative advocates opposed to the new curriculum. All I heard was the usual droning canard that it's up to the parents to teach their children these things. Which translates in English as: I want my child to be totally ignorant about sex and remain a virgin until their wedding night. In other words, people who do not live in the real world!

Children learn all sorts of new and bizarre things, and they are NOT going to tell their parents about it! That's the first problem here. If children are getting their sexual education from porn and pop media, there needs to be some venue where they can be exposed to balanced information on the risks and older children who are likely to be already experimenting sexually, need to know how to protect themselves. And the other problem is that children are beginning puberty at earlier ages today, for a variety of reasons, most notably because of rising body fat content etc.

So, if changing the curriculum is bad, let's see what's wrong with it, and what better proposals are offered by critics. The "let the parents decide" mantra, tells me that conservatives would rather children not be taught anything about sex, or about their bodies, and end up with the high STD and teen pregnancy rates that are found in U.S. states that have the most restrictions on sex education and availability of birth control.

Ash74 · February 27, 2015

Besides personal attacks on the Premier for nothing other than her sexual orientation, and this Dr. Levin (whom I'll admit I know nothing about), what are your objections to revising a curriculum on sexual education? Specifically, what in the new proposals is it that you find offensive and have some better proposal?

I have to ask this because I listened to the CBC Radio show The Current, do a segment on this topic, and the conservative advocates opposed to the new curriculum. All I heard was the usual droning canard that it's up to the parents to teach their children these things. Which translates in English as: I want my child to be totally ignorant about sex and remain a virgin until their wedding night. In other words, people who do not live in the real world!

Children learn all sorts of new and bizarre things, and they are NOT going to tell their parents about it! That's the first problem here. If children are getting their sexual education from porn and pop media, there needs to be some venue where they can be exposed to balanced information on the risks and older children who are likely to be already experimenting sexually, need to know how to protect themselves. And the other problem is that children are beginning puberty at earlier ages today, for a variety of reasons, most notably because of rising body fat content etc.

So, if changing the curriculum is bad, let's see what's wrong with it, and what better proposals are offered by critics. The "let the parents decide" mantra, tells me that conservatives would rather children not be taught anything about sex, or about their bodies, and end up with the high STD and teen pregnancy rates that are found in U.S. states that have the most restrictions on sex education and availability of birth control.

I can't say I have an issue with the new curriculum. It is a changing world and proving that a broken clock is right twice a day Socialist is right that kids are having sex younger and younger.

That being said parents should have a right to pull their children out of the class if they so chose and at the end of the day this whole thing is just to change the topic from the Sudbury bi-election.

That little stunt the government pulled with the war on science because one member of the party ha a different belief was more than a little tacky but it did scream a Deb Matthews stunt.

CommunityOrganizer · February 27, 2015

WIP ... You can google Dr. Levin who was the big cheese in the education department, the DM, when Wynne was the minister and you will find that he has already pleaded guilty to several of the charges against him and that he at the very least as the DM set the focus and tone for the previous sex education curriculum review which was so opposed by the general public so close to an election that the Lieberals withdrew it and no mention of any new sex education curriculum was made when they with monopoly public sector union support managed to inveigle the voters to re-elect them in 2014.

- I would argue firstly that in fact it IS up to the parents - not to big brother government and/or to monopoly public sector lefty union grifters aka teachers - to teach (hopefully in large part through example) their own children about sex and moral values and social mores and related things.

- However, you make a good point about the pervasive influence these days of the internet and the media generally in influencing kids on social matters and behaviour including in the realm of sex.

- Accordingly, I am not opposed to updating the sex education curriculum in Ontario as long as serious efforts are made to ensure that updates in such a highly intimate matter are made with real consultation with and consensus from real Ontario parents across the province not just friends of Kathleen and Levin from the inner city of Toronto.

- Now, had this really been done, I have no doubt whatsoever that the new curriculum would not be the same as the one just introduced in outline form. Rather, the new curriculum would 1/ introduce some of the sexual behavioural topics and practices in the later years of the elementary school curriculum and 2/ be at least a bit more muted and less strident about homosexual and transgender and bisexual and questioning (?) and transitional and other fringe (i.e. less than 5%) sexual orientations and behaviours.

- Of course this is anathema to the CBC and the really cool and smart (i.e. left wing) people in downtown Toronto and it was not introduced as part of the Liberal election platform last year because it is more than likely that most people across the province would have opposed the curriculum now being introduced.

- Look, where you stand depends in significant part on where you sit because where you sit largely determines what you see. If, for example, you are gay like Wynne is and into young male pornography and sex like Levin is or was and if you live in the hip and trendy part of the province in downtown Toronto (such as in Cabbagetown or The Annex or the Church Street area as I used to in the latter two locations) then you assume that "the love that dare not speak its name" which has now become "the love that won't shut the F up" is completely normal practice. And if you are influencing the drafting of a curriculum covering sex education your perspective will prevail. But it is not the perspective of the majority of Ontarian adults across the province and so it should not be used to teach said Ontarians' kids in an area that heretofore was their domain not the government's province.

- So yes I'm OK with a revised sex education curriculum but this one would do with some significant tweaking to reflect the views of the majority of adult Ontarians (i.e. the majority of parents).

- As to your other comment about the high STD and teen pregnancy rates in the US being mainly related to the lack of proper sex education down there, if you drill down on the stats you will immediately see that the primary correlations are three related ones - the first is racial (blacks), the second is no father figure in the family, and the third is poverty in that order (i.e. the majority of poor people have dignity and live accordingly). No matter how much sex education the schools may provide, some 3/4 of black children will continue to be born out of wedlock so long as the family unit continues to disintegrate.

Big Guy · February 28, 2015

This new curriculum will be implemented by all the school boards. There will be a few appeals and probably some outrage from special interest groups. By the time of the next election in Ontario (2018), this will be a non issue and certainly not one that either party wants to resurrect.