Clashes between Pro-LGBT rights campaigners and Pro-Muslim rights demonstrators bring about an interesting phenomenon, two legally protected classes are at war with each other. The battleground – a primary school in Birmingham.
We posted an article yesterday about the outrage of local Muslims who demonstrated outside a primary school that taught young children about the LGBTQ community, about the differences in modern-day families.
For example, a family can have two Daddy’s or two Mommy’s, perhaps even a Daddy who wants to be a Mommy or a Mommy who wants to be a Daddy or a Daddy who wants to become pregnant and give birth to another child.
Some parents encourage children to become gender dysphoric by giving the child the choice of its preferred gender, for example, a boy becoming a girl and a girl becoming a boy. The “gender neutrality” debate continues, we will touch on that and other subjects in the near future.
It is fair to say that the world of LGTBQ is incredibly complex, even for those who associate themselves with the community itself. For example, the LBTGQ is an acronym for Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Gay and Queer; however, as time goes on the numbers of letters added to the acronym keep growing.
LGTBQ is in and of itself no longer relevant for the “progressive far-left.”
Peter Tatchell, a human rights campaigner and a left-wing member of the Green Party, has carried out more work than most for the LGBTQ community; even he is astounded at the complexities of a relatively new acronym, superseding the old.
LGTBQ is now no longer relevant; the new all-inclusive alphabet soup is – LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA. This metamorphised acronym has included ‘intersex’, ‘asexual’, ‘gender-non-conforming’, ‘questioning’, ‘pansexual’, ‘ally’ or ‘allied’, ‘straight’, ‘leather’ and ‘fetish’ – there are so many letters it becomes “confusing.”
The ever-growing acronym becomes too much even for people like Peter Tatchell, as he refers to it as “incomprehensible” and “a confusing and alienating mess”.
If this is the current state and the direction of the “far-left-intersectional whatever” community then is it surprising to see Muslim parents who hold conservative religious beliefs oppose the teaching of LGTBQ progressive inclusivity to their children?
Should these things be taught to primary school children when adults can’t even get it right?
Where does this absurdity actually stop?
Let’s take New York City as an example, its a bastion of “progressivism” and it is governed by Democrats who are members of the Democratic Party (the equivalent of the Labour Party over here).
Person of Transgender Experience
Not only does New York City recognise all these different “genders” but they also have a list of “acceptable pronouns”, it is now ILLEGAL for employers to call a person something other than their preferred pronoun, which supposedly best relates to their “gender identity”.
Parents whos children are being taught about the LGTBQ community raise legitimate concerns, although some of those concerns are not always expressed in a balanced or nuanced way, probably because this is an emotive topic that triggers all sorts of emotions from both sides of the argument. Teaching little boys it’s ok to be a little girl and teaching little girls it’s ok to be a little boy is, in and of itself – CONFUSING!
Almost as confusing as the new acronym.
Is it surprising that some parents oppose that kind of teaching to young children?
Children at a young age are very impressionable, their cognitive faculties are not developed, and won’t be developed until much later in life. For parents, whether they be Muslim, Catholic, Protestant or whatever creed or denomination you want to cite, for them to raise issues about how their children are taught “acceptance” of the LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA community is a valid one, even if not expressed in the best of ways.
When it comes to sexuality, gender, and differences in family types, should the school be teaching that to young primary school children? Should parents have a choice, an option or at least a say in what and how this topic is discussed?
Should schools push a far-left LGBTQ programme that can confuse children, make them question their own sexuality and gender at a young and impressionable age where a lack of cognitive maturity could potentially cause gender dysphoria in young children?
Pushing this agenda through a guise of tolerance and acceptance, and to do that with primary school age children is a social experiment set up for failure. Just consider the fact that adults suffering from gender dysphoria have a suicide rate of almost 50%.
Do schools really want to confuse young impressionable primary school children, which can lead them to question their identity, their sexuality, their gender and potentially lead them to gender dysphoria?
It’s a complicated subject matter, but, as is always the case, the far-left always end up going too far, it’s like a hungry snake eating its own tail. All those far-left pro-Islamist groups, let’s say “Gays For Palestine” as an example, will now have to deal with the reality of two protected groups, Muslims and the LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA community butting heads.
If that is the case, and as the video above of Ajmal Mansroor seems to suggest, the Muslim side of the equation could well become “militant”, then the LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA community will see precisely how Islamic tolerance works for them.
Of course, the final irony in all of this is that these programmes, these curricular and legal mandates for acceptance and tolerance, actually breed division, segregation and intolerance, the exact opposite of what was set out to be achieved.