The countries of the former Eastern block are witnessing a significant increase in the number of self-proclaimed liberal democratic parties that aim to achieve progress comparable to the most developed Western countries. The overly ambitious objective of these parties is to instill so-called Euro-Atlantic values into the education systems of their countries so that the young people could shape their destinies in a free and democratic society. This article will review some of the most alarming issues currently affecting the children and students in the liberal western countries. We will examine whether this new education model that adamantly dismisses Christian values as obsolete and outdated is really as scientifically well-grounded as claimed. Additionally, we will explore the consequences of this model for society and future generations.
This new education model adamantly dismisses Christian values as obsolete and outdated
According to the LGBT community, the educational curricula currently used by most countries are predominantly based on gender segregation and impose burdensome heteronormative expectations and sexist roles upon men and women. That is why adoption of new school curricula is believed to be necessary to address problems related to sexual identity and homophobia. This could be achieved by introducing various textbooks and methodologies for children and young adults to enable them to challenge the “outdated” stereotypes with modern educational techniques.
The standards of sex education adopted by the World Health Organization in Europe indicate that in order to understand their gender identity, 0–4 year-old children ought to be instructed about masturbation and the pleasure they can experience when touching their bodies. Children aged 4 to 6 should be informed about early childhood masturbation, same-sex relationships, diverse concepts of family, and taught to respect various norms of sexuality. As children reach the age 6–9, they need to be educated in various methods of conception, and taught about friendship and love between people of the same sex. When they are 9–12 years old, it is necessary to provide them with information about various gender identities, biological gender, and related concepts.1
However, the systemic research conducted in the countries that had implemented the so-called Comprehensive Sexuality Education teaching methodology revealed that this strategy was not effective for public health. This conclusion was supported by more than a hundred contemporary research papers that had studied the curricula in various countries to assess the effectiveness of sex education. They prove that this strategy is not successful and that it has many negative consequences, such as increased sexual activity, a greater number of sexual partners, early pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, etc.2
The Comprehensive Sexuality Education curricula are based on the so-called “gender theory” developed by the philosophers of the LGBT movement and on the human sexuality research conducted by Alfred Kinsey in the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University. Let us examine what is happening in the Western world as a result of the implementation of these educational programs, which were intentionally designed to challenge Christian values and moral norms in shaping the younger generation!
The origin and scientific significance of gender theory
Since the outset of the Age of Enlightenment (late seventeenth century), the Western World has been influenced by atheistically-inclined humanism. Later (starting from the mid-twentieth century), it was also impacted by radical feminism. Essentially, for more than 300 years, Christian moral values have been subjected to deconstruction, resulting in an inability to differentiate between “good” and “evil” or to distinguish “healthy” and “normal” from “sick and perverted.” To avoid being accused of slander and exaggeration regarding the current happenings in the “brave new world” that we, the peoples of the former socialist bloc, have been dreaming about for so long, let us examine what these authors are saying in their publications, as this may reveal possible developments in these countries.
For more than 300 years, Christian moral values in the Western World have been subjected to deconstruction
In The Global Sexual Revolution, German sociologist Gabriele Kuby charts the evolution of extreme feminism as it morphs into so-called gender ideology, which while preserving “pink” traits, eventually degenerates into totalitarianism and dictatorship. Her description of the process is provided below.
“They (radical feminists) declared that they would achieve even greater equality for women.
Their struggle was against the traditional norms of marriage, family, children, and gender roles, aiming to fully deregulate sexuality. They sought to transform society by challenging Christian norms, breaking down the distinctions between male and female identities, and questioning the concept of ‘mandatory heterosexuality.’
According to Judith Butler, a prominent gender theorist, the idea of ‘biological gender’ is a constructed norm enforced over time, rather than a fixed state of being. Gender is seen as a fluid performance shaped by societal norms. This challenges the notion of innate male and female essences.
Butler is known for her work on ‘queer theory,’ which challenges the binary understanding of sexuality. The term ‘queer’ is used to encompass all non-straight identities, aiming to eliminate the distinction between heterosexuality and homosexuality. This is part of a broader movement to dismantle traditional values and laws, with the goal of achieving absolute freedom from natural and moral constraints.
The push for this type of freedom has led to the deconstruction of binary sexuality, changes in social norms, and the fight for legal equality for homosexual partnerships. Those who oppose these changes risk social ostracism, discrimination, and even criminalization. Any attempt to uphold traditional views on marriage and sexuality may result in being labeled as a social outcast or facing professional repercussions. “Criminalization through anti-discrimination laws and new punishable offences such as “homophobia” and “hate speech” is already a reality in some countries and is being promoted globally. Do those who consider themselves firmly on the side of good—who today so courageously battle the state terror of a bygone century—have the will to oppose the increasing curtailment of freedom in our own time? The dividing line between standing for freedom and relinquishing freedom is a willingness to pay the price today for not swimming with the sharks. Back in 1992, when the socialist system collapsed and the West unveiled its true face, professor Henry Bower said, ‘At present, the scientific, and to a greater extent, the popular science community is increasingly turning away from scientific methods in order to conform to the liberal ideology as the only decisive way of ‘scientifically’ interpreting the world around us.’
The scientific community is increasingly turning away from scientific methods in order to conform to the liberal ideology. The number of examples of this continues to grow! Viktor Lysov’s ‘The Rhetoric of the LGBT Movement in Light of Scientific Facts’ alone references several hundred contemporary research papers where the authors are either influenced by subjective preferences or maintain political correctness with respect to the LGBT ideology. In one of the chapters, Viktor Lysov quotes the following wonderful thought of Austin Ruse: ‘The reputation of real science has been stolen by its evil twin, a fake science that’s really just an ideology and a narrative. That ideology is simply masquerading in the credibility that rightfully belongs to real science.’ Considering space limitations, let us review just one example to illustrate the severity of the situation. In late 2018, The New York Times published an article where three scientists, James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian, demonstrated how ideology had overridden common sense in the realm of social sciences.
Each of the articles posited a radically skeptical theory criticizing a certain ‘social construct’ (e.g. gender roles). The articles were flamboyantly absurd and intentionally infused with humor to raise doubts about the seriousness of the research. From a scientific standpoint, the articles did not stand up to scrutiny, as the posited theories were not supported by the numbers provided, and the authors sometimes referenced non-existent or fictitious sources. For example, one of the articles recommended that men be trained as dogs. The other suggested that white students listen to lectures while sitting in chains on the floor as a punishment for the fact that their ancestors were slave-owners. The third article touted extreme obesity as the free choice of a healthy person. The fourth article posited that masturbating while fantasizing about a real woman is an act of sexual violence against the woman. The article entitled ‘Dog Park’ stated that the researchers have felt the genitals of nearly ten thousand dogs when they questioned the owners about the sexual orientation of their pets. In ‘The Breast,’ the authors genuinely wondered what heterosexual men could find attractive in women. One of the articles about feminism, ‘Our Struggle is My Struggle,’ was actually a slightly modified chapter from Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf.’ At least seven of the twenty submitted articles were reviewed by leading scientists and accepted for publication. We say ‘at least seven’ because seven more articles were under review when the scientists had to stop their experiment and reveal their identities. James Lindsay recorded a video where he tried to justify their actions and explain their position.
‘We believe that gender issues, racial identity, and sexual orientation must definitely be researched,’ he stated. ‘However, it is important to research them objectively, without preconceptions. The problem is in the way they are researched nowadays.’ ‘The existing culture mandates that only certain types of conclusions are deemed acceptable.” The fight against social inequality, where white skin color and masculinity are often associated with problems, takes precedence over pursuing the objective truth, as explained by the individuals involved in the experiment. Despite potential repercussions, they believe that exposing biased research influencing education, mass media, politics, and culture is more concerning than facing personal consequences. The article addresses the challenges Christian parents may face due to the implementation of Comprehensive Sexuality Education programs, which prioritize promiscuity and aim to change societal norms related to sex and gender. This education is based on the idea of rights, promoting abortion, promiscuity, and LGBT identity. The program advocates for children’s sexual autonomy and emphasizes the freedom to choose sex change, challenging traditional societal norms regarding sexuality and gender. The roots of this movement can be traced back to fraudulent research by Dr. Alfred Kinsey, influencing the sexual revolution of the 1960s and continuing to shape modern attitudes towards sexuality.
Source link