August 4th 2012


  Buy Issue 2881
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

SYRIA: Christians' plight lost under mountain of propaganda

EDITORIAL: Melbourne voters send message to ALP and Greens

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Labor leadership a poisoned chalice

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Coalition divided over local government referendum

SCHOOLS: Same-sex marriage and the school curriculum

BANKING: Financial risk, both a blessing and a curse

FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Leadership transition to determine future of China

POPULATION: Causes of Spain's demographic suicide

CULTURE AND CIVILISATION: Culture, philosophy and modernity: a mordant reflection

UNITED KINGDOM: Britain's political correctness lunacy

LETTERS

CINEMA: Caped crusader's righteous anger against anarchy

BOOK REVIEW IPCC's fraudulent climate science exposed

BOOK REVIEW New perspectives on World War II

Books promotion page

survey link

FONT SIZE:

SCHOOLS:
Same-sex marriage and the school curriculum


by Kevin Reed

News Weekly, August 4, 2012

As a retired educator who worked in curriculum development, I believe that changes to Australia’s Marriage Act to allow same-sex marriage will lead to changes in the school curriculum which will not be acceptable to many people.

Significant changes in society usually result in changes in the school curriculum. For example, the introduction of computers into society led to the extensive use of computers in schools.

The feminist movement, a huge societal change, also saw changes in the curriculum. Stories and class discussions about family life could no longer always depict “mum” staying at home and “dad” going to work. Both “mum” and “dad” had to be seen as having careers, and sharing in home-making responsibilities.

There were language changes too. The impersonal pronouns “he” and “man” were banned from usage in stories, essays and in every-day conversation. “He” was often replaced with “they” and “man” with “people” — both non-sexist terms.

With feminism, changes were also made to subject availability. Girls were offered, and encouraged to take, subjects such as woodwork, that had previously been the forte of boys. And boys too were offered a wider range of subjects, some of which, like cooking, had not previously been offered to them.

These changes to the curriculum were accepted because society generally saw them as moves in the right direction.

If the proposed changes to the Marriage Act are passed in the federal parliament, homosexual marriage will be placed on an equal footing with heterosexual marriage. Homosexuality and the homosexual lifestyle will be seen as normal and the school curriculum will have to change to cater for this.

Stories and discussions about family life will have to include same-sex couples, many of whom would be without children whilst others would be caring for children.

There will be language changes too. To use the words “wife”, “mother”, “husband” or “father” would be seen as both “monosexist” — an offence that assumes that there is only one type of family — and “heterosexist” — an offence that assumes that this one type of family consists of heterosexual parents.

Thus the use of the word “partner” will be mandatory instead of “husband” and “wife”, and the word “parent” will replace “mother” and “father”, in stories, essay-writing and everyday language.

Currently, health and physical education courses include sexuality education. These courses will have to change too. According to the Victorian Government Schools Reference Guide, the goal of sexuality education in Victorian schools is “to build on [the students’] knowledge, skills and behaviours, thus enabling young people to make responsible and safe choices”.

If changes, which see same-sex attraction and homosexual activity as normal, are made to the Marriage Act, then other changes to the curriculum will logically follow. Children will be taught about opposite-sex and same-sex relationships, as well as “safe sex” practices for both types of couples. These changes will occur initially in the Victorian health and physical education curriculum and, subsequently, in the National Curriculum which is currently being developed by the federal Labor government.

Unlike changes made to the curriculum as a result of the changes in society owing to the use of computers and the advent of feminism, many in the community will not be happy with the above curriculum inclusions which would follow changes to the Marriage Act. Children may not be allowed to opt out of such programs at their parents’ request. Such requests would be seen as homophobic or heterosexist, or both.

Catholic and other denominational schools have consistently followed the belief that marriage between man and woman is the natural and normal way for society to reproduce itself and that, generally, children are happier if they are raised with their siblings by their biological parents in their family home.

Generally, churches also recognise there are instances of same-sex attraction, and teach that such people, like everyone else, should be loved as “neighbours” and certainly should not be discriminated against. Generally, most churches also teach that same-sex attracted people should be celibate, just as they teach that unmarried opposite-sex attracted people should be celibate.

In light of these teachings, many denominational schools will oppose those changes to the curriculum, which would regard homosexual activity as normal, taking place in their schools.

This situation raises two questions. First, will such schools be able to ignore those parts of the changes to the curriculum which normalise behaviour that is contrary to their teachings?

And, second, what will be the consequences of so doing if these schools are required to adopt and teach the amended curriculum? In particular, would there be problems with government funding if these schools ignored those required changes to the curriculum which normalised homosexual behaviour?

There is no doubt that changing the Marriage Act will result in far more significant changes to society than same-sex couples saying “I do” in front of a marriage celebrant.

Kevin Reed is a retired former senior lecturer in education at Victoria’s Deakin University.




























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Cardinal rebuts commission's 'Get Pell' campaign

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

U.S. AFFAIRS First Brexit, now Trump: it's the economy, stupid!

INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENT Wikileaks reveals U.S, funding behind anti-coal campaign

COVER STORY QUT discrimination case exposes Human Rights Commission failings

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump Whitehouse



News and views from around the world

Frequently asked questions about section 18C (Simon Breheny)

Chilean legislators kill explicit sex-ed program (LifeSite News)

France to ban people with Down syndrome from smiling (The Huffington Post)

Child abuse and family structure: What is the evidence telling us (Family First NZ)

Woolworths beats ACCC supplier mistreatment case (Eli Greenblat)

Australia set to ride the quantum computing wave (Science in Public)

Weatherill warns states could introduce carbon prices (Rosie Lewis)

Green-left legerdemain doesn't make religion relevant (Fr James Grant)

Mass murderer Castro dies unpunished (Augusto Zimmermann)

The rise of political correctness (Angelo Codevilla)



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm