One way to identify radical ideologists is that they all seek to influence one group in particular: children. Through shady means and shallow façades, the LGBTI lobby is constantly seeking to indoctrinate our children, thereby paving the way to bend the future adults of Australia to their will.
However, they recently suffered a major setback, when education ministers in NSW and Tasmania announced that they would be putting and end to the Safe Schools program in their respective states. While this is without a doubt a cause for celebration, we still have a lot of work to do to keep our children safe from their schools.
As Miranda Devine analyses, Safe Schools is only one of the dangerous programs that expose our children to radical ideologies:
It was obvious that a program about sexual and gender diversity was never about bullying, only about ideological brainwashing with its roots in a sick Freudian-Marxist philosophy popular with German Green revolutionaries of the 1960s.
But don’t celebrate yet, because the ideology that underpins Safe Schools is a many-headed hydra that is like the monster of Greek mythology: when each head is cut off it is replaced by two others.
For instance already in schools is Building Respectful Relationships, a supposedly anti-domestic violence program which also attempts to change social norms about sex and “gender”. It has role-playing exercises for Year 9 girls to imagine themselves as older teenagers who are promiscuous, bisexual or lesbian.
There is the NSW Teachers Federation Gender and Identity kit which has been delivered to schools, requiring teachers to stamp out “heterosexism” and “heteronormative” language and eradicate “gendered” pronouns.
Then there is the national Start Early program, rolled out at childcare centres and kindergartens last year in which, toddlers are taught about sexuality, cross-dressing, and gender fluidity.
In one online learning module on the NSW Department of Education website is a video about how to manage fathers of preschoolers who don’t want their little boys wearing dresses.
The programs Devine outlines show that just because a small victory has been won in NSW and Tasmania, we must never be complacent. Other programs, based on the same or similar ideology to Safe Schools, still pose a threat to our children’s wellbeing. Falling into this category is the ‘Fightback’ program – a tempered title for a radical feminist program.
The Australian reports that in Victoria – the same state whose education minister refuses to scrap their low attended Safe Schools program – teachers are being encouraged to push feminist ideals on students to combat “everyday sexism”. In one activity, students are invited to respond to questions while assuming the identity of an indigenous transgender male.
As with Safe Schools, the Fightback program is a drain on education resources, and a transparent indoctrination campaign:
Centre for Independent Studies senior research fellow Jeremy Sammut said it was worrying schools were becoming places of “political re-education in post- structural identity politics”, ultimately undermining the Australian egalitarian tradition. “To not treat people as individuals, but to treat them as numbers of a victim group is quite socially destructive,” he said.
Liberal education spokesman Nick Wakeling attacked the Labor government for deploying “insidious political ideologies” in schools at the cost of education basics: “What young boys need are the skills for lifelong learning that leads to meaningful employment, not ... judgment and social stigmatisation.”
By pushing these radical ideologies on our children, our politicised education system is encroaching aggressively on the rights of parents. As Devine brilliantly outlines, these movements are offshoots of one ultimate campaign: to destroy the family.
Dressed up in misleading language such as “safe” , “respect”, and “wellbeing”, these programs have their ideological foundations deep in sexualised, anti-family ideology of the last century.
The godfather of this sexualisation of education is Wilhelm Reich, an Austrian psychiatrist and pupil of Sigmund Freud, whose 1933 book The Mass Psychology of Fascism argued that the rise of authoritarianism could be tied to the “suppression of the natural sexuality of the child.”
He said the “authoritarian society” could only be destroyed when the “authoritarian family” was dissolved in the context of a sexual revolution...
Every victory over these dangerous programs is worth celebrating. However, we are not safe yet. As long as these programs exist, we must continue to fight, in order to protect our country, but most especially our children from being radicalised at the cost of their wellbeing.
The first way to destroy the family is to destroy the foundation on which it rests – marriage. All these indoctrination programs stem from destroying the one man, one woman definition of marriage. With the traditional definition of marriage, male and female are equally important; both genders are respected and celebrated, creating an environment where children are raised learning from both a mother and father.
The family is the building block of society which has supported and sustained our society for millennia. If they succeed, these insidious programs that seek to destroy family will ultimately destroy us.