Homosexuals Anonymous

Offering Guidance, Fellowship & Care

Blog

Sex Ed Programs in Germany

Posted on April 18, 2014 at 4:10 PM

By Robert Gollwitzer (April 18th 2014)

 

Germany is just one of many countries where you find heated discussions about the nature and need for sex-education programs in school or even kindergarten. Disagreements exist on the question of when the children should learn what and where.

Beginning with the “Sexual Education Atlas”, a book used in school back in 1969 in the newly instituted lesson “sexual education” there were differences between more liberal (Lutheran) circles who were in favor of state-organized sex-education and more conservative (Catholic) ones that opposed it. The problem: You cannot just take your kids out of school during the sex education lessons. If you do, you will get financial penalties. If you continue to do so, you might even go to jail for it. However, there were always parents who tried to get the permission to spare their kids those lessons – due to religious reasons. In 2004 the administrative court of Hamburg decided it is illegal if Muslim children abstain from sex education during biology classes. The judges hold the view that this is not against religious freedom nor against the right of the parents to educate their children. They also said that telling those children the facts would not go against ideological neutrality. In addition to that, so they stated, the State has the duty to prevent the development of “parallel societies”. If you agree on setting the kids free due to religious reasons, this would confirm a state of “being different”, the judges also stated. Muslim organizations even agreed on that.

There were similar verdicts by the Federal Constitutional Court and other constitutional courts in various European states. Finally the European Court of Justice for Human Rights declared in 2011 that school children may not abstain from state-organized sexual education.

One of the problems with that so-called “neutrality” is that it is far away from being neutral. For example if the subject of “homosexuality” is dealt with, it is not uncommon that both teachers and children get their information from gay sources and/or organizations. The existence of ex-gay organizations is usually not even mentioned nor are they ever invited in public schools.

One of the concerns of parents regarding the sex education programs in schools is the premature sexualization of their children. On the other side you have the need for sex education. But how? And who should be in charge of that?

In Baden-Württemberg, one of Germany’s states, there will now be a teaching program on homosexuality, bi-sexuality, trans- and inter-sexuality, even though not binding yet. Even though the government only called that “guiding principles”, the reactions were harsh. One teacher started an online petition against that kind of curriculum “under the ideology of the rainbow”. So far more than 192000 people signed it. In reaction to that two opposing petition were done with 221000 signatures.

You might also sum up that conflict as the age-old conflict between family and state. Which right weighs more: The right of the parents to educate their children – including sex education – or the right of the state expressed in compulsory school attendance.

Then you have the fear of the parents and of the school authorities on the way and the age in which the children are confronted with sex – in other words: an early sexualization fueled by internet and other sort of porn. The school is supposed to be a safe haven against that.

Finally, there is something that rolls over society like nothing else at the moment: Gender Mainstreaming – which does not simply guarantee the individual  and equal rights of men and women (there are other ways to do that), but dissolves the traditional gender roles (the physical and unchangeable sex) into “gender” (a term influenced by personal preferences, society, worldview and politics – and can thus be changed. You can be whatever you want to be – no matter how you were born).

Back in 1968 the idea was that the state should only take over when the parents failed in their sex education duties. The problem here: Who says they failed and according to which criteria? In the following years there were a number of court cases which rejected the view that sex education has nothing to do in schools. Today, Germany is said to have one of the best sex education programs in Europe. Does it really?

The state forces its legal rights on parents if they don’t obey. In September 2013 a Baptist family went up to the European Court of Justice for their children because they felt that naughty things were being addressed in public sex education. The father even accepted a 40-day coercive detention.

You also have parents that tend to delegate the sex education to the schools so they don’t have to deal with it anymore.

Concerns regarding lessons that deal with gender mainstreaming and “homosexuality” (“will our kids become gay then?”) are being brushed aside as utter nonsense. I don’t think so. First, a basic understanding on what a man and woman is all about, a solid definition of those terms, their roles duties in family, society, church, job and politics is crucial for the kids’ adult life. People with a confused understanding of their own identity can and will cause a lot of trouble (especially men). Now what about that statement that these early and detailed confrontations with subjects like “homosexuality”, bisexuality, trans- and intersexuality (which are far away from being neutral, as I already said) might “turn our kids gay”? Gay groups are quick to bring up the argument that don’t “make” somebody gay who is not already like that and nobody comes out in school as being “gay” just because of those lessons. Well, that is a little simplistic – from both sides. The sexual development of children in school is not finished yet. They are still insecure, they have questions and are growing and maturing in their sexual roles. Of course, you can’t just “turn” them “gay” like that. But if you continue to rub under their noses how natural and wonderful a gay life is, some might and will most likely want to know more about it. They might be tempted to “go for it” and try it out – with major consequences for their future lives. I had been in the gay scene for many years myself – and I am absolutely sure that if the parents and the authorities in charge knew about what’s really going on there (which is not exactly that polished version of being “gay” that you usually get to hear in public), they would stop asking gay groups for information right now – and most likely stop those programs altogether. Just one of many aspects: If this kind of life were so “normal” and “natural” and “beautiful”, how come that tiny percentage of the population has such an incredibly high rate among sexually transmitted diseases? That is not being portrayed in the plush world of “Will & Grace” Also the sexual acts that are seen as “normal” in the gay scene are way beyond what you might even imagine. Do you really want to confront your children with the normalcy of that at an early age? Without even giving them a chance to hear the other side – like ex-gay organizations? Where is the neutrality in that?

Nice-sounding terms like “sexual diversity” that are celebrated as good are neither neutral nor do they portray the facts accurately. Yes, there is a sexual diversity, but it is not like it doesn’t matter which way you go – all is good and fine. Each way has its consequences. Plus if you open that door where do you close it? What about pedophiles and zoophiles? Gays would cry out in rage hearing that I guess, but does not logic lead some to the option of opening that “diversity” for other groups too? Yes, you can’t compare them, but based on what would you close the door?

In 2013 the European Parliament rejected a “package to improve sexual health” – on initiative of the conservatives. As consequence there is still no duty for the member states to implement sexual education in schools. A couple of months ago the highest court in Croatia forbade sex education in school. According to the judges of this new member country of the European Union it violates the parents’ basic right of educating their children.

One of the arguments for the need for sex education in schools that gay activists sometimes bring up is the high number of suicides of kids with same-sex attractions who suffer from “homophobia”. This argument sounds good at first (who would object to that?), but is not so good at a second look. First, the factors that contribute to a suicide are many and what exactly lead to it is not always easy to say. Moreover you cannot blame somebody or something for it as a consequence. To use those suicides as a political argument is morally and scientifically inacceptable. There is no one cause for a suicide so tracing it back to “homophobia” is more than simplistic. Besides many people with same-sex attractions also suffer from mental disorders, so it is extremely hard to tell what finally lead them to commit such a tragic act. Yes, school kids need to learn about how to respect, tolerate and love other people. What you cannot do in there is put them in groups and say these people need extra tolerance.

What usually goes along with programs in school that include gay groups is that the kids are not only told to respect other people’s rights, but also that “being gay” is “normal”. This does not go together with the so-called “neutrality” of those lessons. School children are being indoctrinated at an early age to accept a world view they might have not accepted had you confronted them as mature persons.

Sadly though LGBT activists that not so long ago demanded freedom and tolerance to say and do whatever they want for themselves now are not so “tolerant” when it comes to worldviews opposing their own: Several manifestations of concerned Christian parents in Baden-Württemberg against their sex ed curriculum were seriously attacked by left wing activists in March 2014. Parents were shocked both by the hatred of those activists and by the passivity of the local police. Looks like tolerance and freedom go only one way.

Why is that pro-gay education so dangerous? Why not just leave it as is?

Aside from the points already mentioned above there are some other issues to keep in mind.

Changes in society usually come in a political or legal way – for instance through new laws. Laws, however, can be overturned. The changes that go way deeper are the cultural changes – the changes in what people believe in. Changes in their value system. Those changes cannot be overturned so easily.

Such changes we are dealing with when it comes to “homosexuality” (even though that also includes political changes).

Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill wrote in 1987 in an article of a Guide magazine entitled “The Overhauling of Straight America”:

“The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion… You can forget trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if you only can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.” (Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” Guide magazine, 1987, Mass Resistance website, www.article8.=rg/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm)

A little later in the same article they go into details:

“Any campaign to accomplish that turnaround should do six things: 1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible; 2. Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers; 3. Give protectors a just cause; 4. Make gays look good; 5. Make the victimizers look bad; 6. Solicit funds.” (Kirk and Pill)

Why make them look like victims? Because then political and society leaders will see the need for new laws and policies – political change. Example: Non-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation.

As to the “make gays look good” part: That works to perfection: Gays are nice people like you and me and those who are against embracing a gay lifestyle are the evil ones. The modern media seems to be completely on the side of gay activists. Needless to mention that only a certain type of gays is being portrayed there- with full purpose as it looks. Real gays as you find them in the gay scene are certainly not helpful if you want to follow that policy.

As to the funding – well, let’s just say gay activists did their job.

So let’s focus now on “talking about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible”:

Again a quote from Kirk and Phill:

“The principle behind this advice is simple: Almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances.”

In other words and with two of its best examples: Through popular media and in school. I don’t think there is much need to go deeper into popular media – just turn on your TV and you’ll see for yourself.

How about schools then? The subject of “homosexuality” has made huge progress in schools- from being completely ignored to being completely normal – and mandatory.

It is safe to say we are at war right now – and it looks pretty good for gay activists. They have made major progress with conservatives having largely underestimated the need to oppose or even address that tendency. Sometimes the parents don’t even know what their children are exposed to in school. You find even projects like “Diversity Days” celebrating the normalcy of sexual orientations and acts other than heterosexuality as sustained by traditional Christian values. If you take your kids out of school during those lessons and events, you might face criminal charges.

The other strategy –portraying “homosexuals” as victims works just well too – both in the media and in the schools. One of the argument that gay activists use in schools is that “research proves” something. Example: 30 percent of teenage suicides are committed by gays (see remarks above on that). People tend to believe that without verifying its background. Just present statistics and trust that people will not bother finding out if they are even true or scientifically done –and if so, what they actually say – and what they don’t say.

Facts that you can verify: The emotional, physical, spiritual, emotional and sociological consequences of a gay life. What the gay activists teach our children – directly or via curricula they helped pushing through – is a society where everything changes so nothing really matters anymore.

If we let it happen that traditional Christian family values are being eliminated and replaced by – nothing, by an agenda where (almost) anything and everything goes, this will have huge and long-term consequences for society as a whole. A society where moral relativism reigns has no future and cannot survive as such. We owe our kids more than that. We owe them a solid education that helps them find their role in a society that honors God in everything. The Christian God that our forefathers used to fight and die for. The Christian faith that laid the foundation for Western societies.

If we want the best for our children, we need to act.

Now.

 

 

Sources:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexualkunde (April 18th 2014, 1:27 p.m.)

http://www.lehrer-online.de/homosexualitaet.php?sid=68790679635231580239775937593200 (April 18th 2014, 1:33 p.m.)

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article123981298/Sexualkunde-die-Grenzen-der-Aufklaerung.html (April 18th 2014, 2:20 p.m.)

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article124308090/192-000-Stimmen-gegen-neuen-Sexualkunde-Unterricht.html (April 18th 2014, 2:26 p.m.)

http://www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=20618 (April 18th 2014, 4:59 p.m.)

http://www.intoleranceagainstchristians.eu/case/christian-demonstrations-violently-attacked-by-left-wing-radicals-in-baden-wuerttemberg-and-cologne.html (April 18th 2014, 5:05 p.m.)

Mike Haley in Dallas, J. and Heche, N. (2010) The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality. A Biblical And Compassionate Response to Same-Sex Attraction. Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers

 

Categories: Schools


Comments are disabled.