Sex Education In Ontario

[Big Guy]

I have no problem with the teaching of the "plumbing" of the human body. Where the difficulty comes for me is the approach to gay marriage and gay families. This is where I believe that the concept of the separation of church and state has been breached.

There are many parents who, because of religious beliefs, do not believe that gay marriage is acceptable. There is yet no longitudinal data on the long term effects on children of gay parents. I have also run into too many teachers who have become self appointed psychiatrists and psychologists causing far more damage than assistance to a child.

Teachers are human. They will be asked questions when these issues come up. They will be put in a position to have to advise their students if something is right or wrong or proper or improper. I have seen too many teachers with some pretty weird ideas about sexuality, love human relationships. I would not trust them to maintain objectivity in their answers.

I expect that there will be parents who do not want their children taught about sexuality and gay issues by a third person. These issues can be discussed at the end of the school day and the parents should be allowed to remove their children from those classes for that time. The parents should have the right to decide at which time their child is mature enough to understand sexuality and how it is presented according to their religious beliefs.

For many of their formative years, for the young student, the person in front of that classroom can do no bad and has all of the answers. That functions well when that person deals with materials pertaining to school education. It does not function well when it infringes upon the role of the parent. I suggest that teachers stick to instructing about the plumbing and leave the feeling, faith and morality to the parent.

I have looked through the curriculum as identified by Mighty AC (thanks for the summary) and find it personally acceptable for my grandchildren, depending on who was covering that material. But that is my opinion based on my views. I respect that other parents with other views should also be accommodated.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Big Guy

[Michael Hardner]

The government is working hard to sexualize children that are 6 years of age.

Young children don't need to thinking about sex, having sex, sex acts, homosexuality, gender identity?, being encouraged to have homosexual relationships, etc.

Children that young need to be concerned with being children not about having sex etc. It's absurd and perverted.

The guy who helped write this stuff is a convicted pedophile. Is that the type of person we want guiding our children? It seems more like grooming than education.

The thing about public education is that everybody gets input. However, when your post is made up out of thin air, you show everybody that you have nothing real to add.

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

The Sun reports that Levin was not involved in the new curriculum.

[Michael Hardner]

Let kids be kids. This is nothing but the government saying the parents can not raise their kids without government help.And it is perverted IMO.

Do you have reasons ?

[socialist]

I agree with Michael. The is more and more responsibility on the government to teach kids. Parents just aren't getting the job done. The younger students are the better prepared they will be.

Here are the so-called controversial parts from the Grade 7 section. There is nothing controversial.

C1.3 explain the importance of having a shared understanding with a partner about the following: delaying sexual activity until they are older (e.g., choosing to abstain from any genital contact; choosing to abstain from having vaginal or anal intercourse; choosing to abstain from having oral-genital contact); the reasons for not engaging in sexual activity; the concept of consent and how consent is communicated; and, in general, the need to communicate clearly with each other when making decisions about sexual activity in the relationship.

Teacher prompt: “The term abstinence can mean different things to different people. People can also have different understandings of what is meant by having or not having sex. Be clear in your own mind about what you are comfortable or uncomfortable with. Being able to talk about this with a partner is an important part of sexual health. Having sex can be an enjoyable experience and can be an important part of a close relationship when you are older. But having sex has risks too, including physical risks like sexually transmitted infections – which are common and which can hurt you – and getting pregnant when you don’t want to. What are some of the emotional considerations to think about?” Student: “It’s best to wait until you are older to have sex because you need to be emotionally ready, which includes being able to talk with your partner about how you feel, being prepared to talk about and use protection against STIs or pregnancy, and being prepared to handle the emotional ups and downs of a relationship, including the ending of a relationship, which can hurt a lot. Personal values, family values, and religious beliefs can influence how you think about sexuality and sexual activity. A person should not have sex if their partner is not ready or has not given consent, if they are feeling pressured, if they are unsure, or if they are under the influence of drugs or alcohol.” C1.4 identify common sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and describe their symptoms Teacher prompt: “Common sexually transmitted infections include human papillomavirus (HPV), herpes, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and hepatitis B. Some have visible symptoms but most do not, so it’s hard to tell if you or someone else has an STI. All STIs can have a significant impact on your health. What are some symptoms of an STI? If an STI has no symptoms, how can you find out if you have it?” Student: “You can see some STIs, such as pubic lice or genital warts, and other STIs have symptoms such as redness or pain while urinating. Even if you don’t see or experience any symptoms, you should be tested by a doctor if you are sexually active. Depending on the STI, tests can be done by taking swabs from the cervix, vagina, or urethra or by taking urine or blood samples.” C1.5 identify ways of preventing STIs, including HIV, and/or unintended pregnancy, such as delaying first intercourse and other sexual activities until a person is older and using condoms consistently if and when a person becomes sexually active Teacher prompt: “Engaging in sexual activities like oral sex, vaginal intercourse, and anal intercourse means that you can be infected with an STI. If you do not have sex, you do not need to worry about getting an STI. (By the way, statistics show that young people who delay first intercourse are more likely to use protection when they choose to be sexually active.) If a person is thinking of having sex, what can they do to protect themselves?” Student: “They should go to a health clinic or see a nurse or doctor who can provide important information about protection. People who think they will be having sex sometime soon should keep a condom with them so they will have it when they need it. They should also talk with their partner about using a condom before they have sex, so both partners will know a condom will be used. If a partner says they do not want to use a condom, a person should say, ‘I will not have sex without a condom.’ If you do have sex, it is important that you use a condom every time, because condoms help to protect you against STIs, including HIV, and pregnancy.”

[socialist]

Here is the so-called controversial section in Grade 8. Again, nothing controversial about it.

C1.5 demonstrate an understanding of gender identity (e.g., male, female, two-spirited, transgender, transsexual, intersex), gender expression, and sexual orientation (e.g., heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual), and identify factors that can help individuals of all identities and orientations develop a positive self-concept [PS] Teacher prompt: “Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense or feeling of being male or female, which may or may not be the same as the person’s biological sex. It is different from and does not determine a person’s sexual orientation. Sexual orientation refers to a person’s sense of affection and sexual attraction for people of the same sex, the opposite sex, or both sexes. Gender expression refers to how you demonstrate your gender (based on traditional gender roles) through the ways you act, dress, and behave. Gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation are connected to the way you see yourself and to your interactions with others. Understanding and accepting your gender identity and your sexual orientation can have a strong impact on the development of your self-concept. A person’s self-concept can develop positively if the person understands and accepts their gender identity and sexual orientation and is accepted by family and community. It is harder to develop a positive self-concept, however, if the way a person feels or identifies does not meet perceived or real societal norms and expectations or is not what they want, or if they do not feel supported by their family, friends, school, or community. A person’s self-concept can be harmed if a person is questioning their gender identity or sexual orientation and does not have support in dealing with their feelings of uncertainty. What kind of support do people need to help them understand and accept their gender identity and sexual orientation?” Student: “Having role models that you can relate to – for example, people of similar ages or cultures – is important. So is having all gender identities and sexual orientations portrayed positively in the media, in literature, and in materials we use at school. Family, school, and community support are crucial. Additional help can come from trusted adults, community organizations, and school support groups such as gay-straight alliances.”

[socialist]

The thing about public education is that everybody gets input. However, when your post is made up out of thin air, you show everybody that you have nothing real to add.

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

The Sun reports that Levin was not involved in the new curriculum.

Actually it says that he was not directly involved. I'm not too sure why Sandals used the word, directly.

[Boges]

Liz Sandals has said that parents can remove children from this program if they don't want them taught.

[On Guard for Thee]

The government is working hard to sexualize children that are 6 years of age.

Young children don't need to thinking about sex, having sex, sex acts, homosexuality, gender identity?, being encouraged to have homosexual relationships, etc.

Children that young need to be concerned with being children not about having sex etc. It's absurd and perverted.

The guy who helped write this stuff is a convicted pedophile. Is that the type of person we want guiding our children? It seems more like grooming than education.

Also, to socialist. Home schooled children needn't be socially awkward at all. We have a lot of home schooling groups that run classes together depending on a parents different university degree and skill set strengths. Also home schooling groups plan, in addition to classes together, field trips, physical education and some even have sports teams that compete with each other. So it's not quite the solitary child being taught alone which is often portrayed by people who are against home schooling.

Since you have apparently read the docs. Id like to see where you reckon it encourages homosexuality. Young children are aware of their body parts and learning what all they do and how to refer to them is just the opposite of absurd or perverted. Those comments do however seem to fulfill those roles.

[Black Dog]

I dont disagree that an update is necessary. Its the age they want to start things that is a problem.

Id like to know what 6 year olds are heing sexualized and who is doing the sexualizing.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

It's like this. My child that I brought into this world. My child that I'm rasing and paying for. So ill decide when it would be best to teach them life lessons. Not some overpaid constantly whining teacher or government agent or politician.

So you're a homeschooler? Shocker.

Why is it crucial for a 6 or 9 year old to know about oral and anal sex? Or homosexuality?

Because at some point they won't be 6 or 9 years old anymore and will be in a world where they will encounter such things.

[Mighty AC]

I have no problem with the teaching of the "plumbing" of the human body. Where the difficulty comes for me is the approach to gay marriage and gay families. This is where I believe that the concept of the separation of church and state has been breached.

I don't see how a church/state barrier has been breached. Gay families exist, are legal, normal and acceptable. The idea that a subject should be avoided by public education because some religious views clash with reality doesn't make sense to me. There are millions of North Americans with creationist beliefs, would you call teaching evolution a breach of church/state separation?

There are many parents who, because of religious beliefs, do not believe that gay marriage is acceptable. There is yet no longitudinal data on the long term effects on children of gay parents. I have also run into too many teachers who have become self appointed psychiatrists and psychologists causing far more damage than assistance to a child.

Parents are free to seek private or home schooling if their views differ so greatly from main stream society. Though, a less severe approach would be for those parents simply talk to their kids about homosexuality and their views on it. I personally think that this similar to the cycle of racism and domestic abuse, but it is a parent's right.

It's true that some teachers are not qualified to give health advice to children; however, I expect that the average parent does a far worse job. I think most parents put off having conversations about sex, reproduction and healthy relationships far too long. They probably think their child isn't ready and that the delay is moral, unfortunately they are mistaken. I coach 7 to 9 year old boys and they are already forming (mostly incorrect) opinions about some fairly advanced relationship and sexual topics. Schools aren't sexualizing children, they already have questions and are talking about it with their peers. Opening the lines of communication on this subject and arming them with sound information early is, in my opinion, the healthy and responsible choice.

Children who receive comprehensive sex ed have lower STI and teen pregnancy rates. It has also been shown that sex ed programs do not increase the initiation rate or lower the age of initiation for sexual activity. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/component/content/article/450-effective-sex-education

Edited February 24, 2015 by Mighty AC

[Big Guy]

To Mighty AC - The state is there serve the people. The state does not have the right to communicate ideas that contradict the legitimate belief of the parent. There is a reason that the Education Act gives a parent of any religion or belief system the right to withdraw their child from that particular lesson. I suspect that many parents will use that provision to keep their children away from the states interpretation of morality and ethics - and that is the way it should be.

Most of the new curriculum causes little to no concern to religious parents. There are parts with which a parent may not agree and has the right to remove their child for that part of the class or that particular class. That is why I suggest that schools will present that curriculum at the end of the school day so parents may pick their children up early from school.

It appears that you have more confidence than I in the average elementary school teacher in their ability to objectively deal with sexual morals and values when they are asked by their students.

I have heard the argument that the school systems have to get involved in parenting more and more by default because the parent is not doing his/her job properly. I reject that excuse and also disagree that the teacher is in a better position to decide when a child is prepared and has achieved a level of maturity appropriate to subject matter based on values, morals, sexuality and reproduction.

I would suggest that if there is concern about the inability of a parent to parent responsibly then create classes that parents can take to upgrade their ability to deal with their children.

I also believe that it is a mistake for teachers to believe that they can do a better job of parenting than parents.

This argument is moot since this curriculum is going into place and parents have the ability to remove their children from any parts that they find offensive or against their personal beliefs.

I just hope that administrators make it convenient for those parents rather than to discourage them by creating timetabling hurdles.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Big Guy

[Black Dog]

To Mighty AC - The state is there serve the people. The state does not have the right to communicate ideas that contradict the legitimate belief of the parent. There is a reason that the Education Act gives a parent of any religion or belief system the right to withdraw their child from that particular lesson. I suspect that many parents will use that provision to keep their children away from the states interpretation of morality and ethics - and that is the way it should be.

So the state does, in fact, have the right to communicate ideas that contradict the beliefs of parents. A few kooks might object and pull their kids out, but more will benefit. Can't win 'em all.

It appears that you have more confidence than I in the average elementary school teacher in their ability to objectively deal with sexual morals and values when they are asked by their students.

You seem to have more confidence than warranted in the average parent's ability to do the same.

I also believe that it is a mistake for teachers to believe that they can do a better job of parenting than parents.

That's kind of implicit in the who "having teachers" thing, no?

[guyser]

Why is it crucial for a 6 or 9 year old to know about oral and anal sex? Or homosexuality?

Probably because the child of nine is aware they exist, is curious as to the whys and wherefors and they want to know. And as such , the parent for the most part sucks at teaching this, the schools will do so.

Win Win !

This new sex ed stinks of political correctness agenda. Parents have every right to pull thier children from class or even school entirely and home school them.

They sure do !

Hurray for uneducated mental midgets ! Oh sorry.....awkward young men and women .

[Big Guy]

To Black Dog - You appear to believe that teachers are better positioned than the average parent to "accurately" answer questions about values, sexuality et al. You also believe that people who hold beliefs that do not parallel that of current political correctness are "kooks". I do not agree.

I believe that family values supercede those of the state, family religion dictates family actions and the wishes of the parent for their children supercede anything coming from the state.

As an extension, I also bemoan the social architects who feel that they know what is better for us than we do.

I do not understand your last statement.

As to homeschooling, it is far more effective than public education - but few families are in a financial or educational position to take advantage of the process.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/is-home-schooling-a-better-option-than-public-school/article617266/

[guyser]

I believe that family values supercede those of the state, family religion dictates family actions and the wishes of the parent for their children supercede anything coming from the state.

They do.

Nothing supercedes the family's values , religion.

But then again, you are fine with teaching the kids about the planets and how life came to be on this place , all the while trotting the chillun' off to Sunday School.

But teaching them to respect thier bodies, repsect each other, to report sex abuse, not to send pics of their willies.....oh no!

[Black Dog]

To Black Dog - You appear to believe that teachers are better positioned than the average parent to "accurately" answer questions about values, sexuality et al.

Why not? We believe in general that teachers are better positioned than the average parent to answer questions about math, biology, science etc. Why not sexuality?

You also believe that people who hold beliefs that do not parallel that of current political correctness are "kooks". I do not agree.

I believe parents who would pull kids from class to stop them from learning information (be it sex, evolution or the heliocentric model of the solar system)for religious reasons are, ipso facto, kooks. If not them, then who?

I believe that family values supercede those of the state, family religion dictates family actions and the wishes of the parent for their children supercede anything coming from the state.

And for such kooks, there are accommodations. What's the issue?

As an extension, I also bemoan the social architects who feel that they know what is better for us than we do.

I do not understand your last statement.

If parents were better at teaching than teachers, we wouldn't need teachers.

As to homeschooling, it is far more effective than public education - but few families are in a financial or educational position to take advantage of the process.

Effective in terms of standardized test results perhaps. Will there be standardized sex ed tests?

Edited February 24, 2015 by Black Dog

[Big Guy]

My inability to cut and paste makes it very difficult to reply to parsed responses. Sorry.

[LemonPureLeaf]

Since you have apparently read the docs. Id like to see where you reckon it encourages homosexuality. Young children are aware of their body parts and learning what all they do and how to refer to them is just the opposite of absurd or perverted. Those comments do however seem to fulfill those roles.

Same sex marriage/homosexuality is referenced in the documents 35 times.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

So you're a homeschooler? Shocker.

Because at some point they won't be 6 or 9 years old anymore and will be in a world where they will encounter such things.

Parents have the right to decide for their children what moral lessons to give them and when. School boards have a mandate that are not to teach children moral or ethical lessons. This goes directly against that.

Probably because the child of nine is aware they exist, is curious as to the whys and wherefors and they want to know. And as such , the parent for the most part sucks at teaching this, the schools will do so.

Win Win !

They sure do !

Hurray for uneducated mental midgets ! Oh sorry.....awkward young men and women .

Teachers don't need to be teaching 9 year olds about oral and anal sex, it's far too young. We don't need the same sex agenda pushed onto our children at such a young age.

Again I urge all parents to look at homeschooling as an option. It's easy to do, any parent can do it, all that is required is that one must send a letter of intent to the school your child was previously enrolled at. That's it. No need to advise them of curriculum or anything like that nor can they dictate to you what you teach your child and when.

Either that or private schools are very good and cost around $15,000 a year for tuition.

Break free from the grip of the public system if you're able to. Your child will thank you.

[LemonPureLeaf]

all the while trotting the chillun' off to Sunday School.

I don't understand what the point is to make fun of people who choose to live a faithful life. Just because a family is faithful, that doesn't make them any less educated or successful or bright. Plus speaking is this manner really speaks more about you than it does about anyone else.

Look forward to seeing you on the boards some more.

[guyser]

Same sex marriage/homosexuality is referenced in the documents 35 times.

And ten tmes that when the kiddies are watching the TV.

And?

Parents have the right to decide for their children what moral lessons to give them and when.

Good thing this isnt about teaching morals.

Teachers don't need to be teaching 9 year olds about oral and anal sex, it's far too young. We don't need the same sex agenda pushed onto our children at such a young age.

Go ahead, bury your head in the sand.

Nine yr olds are learning this shit in the schoolyard and likely hearing the wrong info. Lets correct the mistakes.

Sam sex agenda? Wow....thought that thinking went out a while ago. Guess not.

Lemme guess.....they are recruiting the little kids into the gay life too?

Again I urge all parents to look at homeschooling as an option. It's easy to do, any parent can do it

Yea....about this.

Giant

Pile

of

Malarkey.

Any parent can do it? LOL !

all that is required is that one must send a letter of intent to the school your child was previously enrolled at. That's it. No need to advise them of curriculum or anything like that nor can they dictate to you what you teach your child and when.

Thats not 'it' as it were.

Every single year the letter must go on record at the school nearby. Want to test your child (only an idiot parent wouldnt) then off to that same school (but first a letter has to be sent in Sept adivising you want it) for the testing.

Demands can be made as to what is going on with respect to curriculum etc.

If they dont get any answers, action under the Education Act can commence

Either that or private schools are very good and cost around $15,000 a year for tuition.

Cheap-er private school you mean.

Break free from the grip of the public system if you're able to. Your child will thank you.

....with social issues , awkwardness , inability to fit in.....for the rest of their life ! Kind of like private schools for the many I saw. Pretty sad.

(some, not all since some home teachers are very good)

And maybe we should look at the fqact that plenty of home schoolers are not being tested since a parent, too dumb to teach, but smart enugh to know the kid would utterly fail any standardized testing.....keeps them away from such testing.

Smart? Oh yea...REAL smart.

[Black Dog]

Same sex marriage/homosexuality is referenced in the documents 35 times.

Yes because these are things that exist.

Parents have the right to decide for their children what moral lessons to give them and when. School boards have a mandate that are not to teach children moral or ethical lessons. This goes directly against that.

Better shitcan the whole Catholic system then.

Teachers don't need to be teaching 9 year olds about oral and anal sex, it's far too young.

Just out of curiosity: why is that too young?

We don't need the same sex agenda pushed onto our children at such a young age.

What is the same sex agenda?

[guyser]

I don't understand what the point is to make fun of people who choose to live a faithful life.

That because you missed the point of that exchange.

The issue was not to mock the religious aspect of Sunday school. The issue was that most parents are fine with school (which teaches Dinosaurs didnt walk with man, the Big Bang theory et al) all the while walking to Sunday School.

[PIK]

I wonder if former deputy minister of education will receive any jail time ,since in this country, judges are very soft on pedophiles. One of hios charges he is pleading quilty to was trying to talk a mother( undercover cop) into sexually assaulting her own daughter. It will be interesting.

[PIK]

Let them learn in the school yard like we did, I worry about the people that will be teaching it.

[On Guard for Thee]

Let them learn in the school yard like we did, I worry about the people that will be teaching it.

So you reckon there are people in the schoolyard who know all about these things, and who youd like to have teaching your kids. Brilliant!