Tuesday, 18 September 2018
Fifty years ago, if a communist pervert had proposed that our nation's children be forced to listen to sexually deviant propaganda, they would probably have been strung up. Today, this disgusting garbage is called the Safe Schools program, and its leading exponents hold comfortable government funded positions.
However, the fact is schools have never been less safe and the main risk to children is the so-called Safe Schools program. Let us be very clear: this program is not about bullying or any of the other nonsense that is claimed to try to justify it. When the schools that we trust to look after our children force them at a pre-sexual age to discuss sexual concepts about which they have no understanding, and even, disgustingly, engage in homosexual role-playing, this is simply institutionalised child abuse. It is also a gross betrayal of childhood innocence. What is most incredible is that state governments would allow this despicable material to be taught in schools.
It is perhaps no surprise that the left-wing radicals and deviants would propose this, but what is truly shocking is that supposedly mainstream politicians would promote it. There is no greater proof of the moral bankruptcy and political depravity confronting our nation. The real issue here is of course nothing to do with sexual preference. First, prepubescent children should not have any sexual dimension to their lives and should not have any kind of sexual preference at all. Secondly, even when they do sexually mature in their mid to late teens, their sexuality should be a personal, private matter and certainly not something for left-wing social engineers to meddle with.
The real agenda behind the so-called Safe Schools is not about bullying or even sexual preference but about trying to subvert the concept of gender identity and, through it, society more broadly. In the primary school child abuse reader, The Gender Fairy, innocent children as young as five are exposed to radical transgender theory and the blatantly false claim that no-one can tell you whether you are male or female. Well, I can tell you whether you're male or female. If you have two X chromosomes, you're female, and, if you have an X and a Y chromosome, you're male. Whomever you identify with—whether, as a boy, you put on a dress and totter around in high heels or whether, as a girl, you dress up in a man's suit and tie—it makes no difference. Even if you start having bits chopped off, you are actually only deluding yourself. You are and remain until the day you die either male or female, as God made you.
The ridiculous lie that gender is variable or fluid would be laughable if its intent were not so sinister. Since the First International, Marxists have been trying to claim that environment is the sole determinant of human difference. Through Gramsci, the Marxists saw revolution in cultural rather than economic terms and took this concept to a whole new level. According to Gramsci, a Marxist state could be achieved by cultural revolution. This could be achieved if the policies of state, the education system, institutional behaviour and even popular entertainment attacked the cultural values of the old order and promoted the leftist values of the new. These ideas, which coalesced into what became known as critical theory and became widely taught at universities by left-wing intellectuals in the sixties, formed the ideological springboard of the leftist radicals of the anti-Vietnam war movement, who fanned out across the country in the seventies, white-anting the bureaucracy and political parties. In critical theory, ethnic and religious minorities, radical feminists, sexual deviants, Third World immigrants and antisocial criminals could take the place of the proletariat to create a post-communist revolution, deconstructing traditional values and promoting anything that undermined traditional morality, family, capitalism, nationalism, patriotism, tradition or sexual normality. Gramsci's tactics included disguising degeneracy as liberation and tyranny as compassion, so that decadence and criminality could be defended as freedom and free speech could be eliminated by appeal of not offending. From this it is easy to see that the so-called Safe Schools and gender fluidity garbage being peddled— (Time expired)