LifeSiteNews.com

Analysis: False Gospel of ‘Equity’ Lures Ontario Catholic School Boards

LifeSiteNews.com
LifeSiteNews.com

TORONTO, Ontario, June 29, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Many parents are raising serious concerns about what they see as the ready willingness of far too many Catholic School Boards across Ontario to get into bed with the heavy-handed, often dangerous ideologies of the Ministry of Education’s “Equity and Inclusivity” initiatives.

One of the first major waves of these initiatives was seen in the Ministry of Education’s recent attempt to introduce a controversial new “Health and Physical Education” curriculum into grades K-8, by September 2010.  This curriculum was drawn up from the recommendations of the ministry’s “strategy” document, also known as PP119, in which all school boards, including Catholic, would be mandated to present a plan to implement the “Equity and Inclusivity” doctrine.  It was only after a backlash from many sectors that Premier Dalton McGuinty decided to shelve the problematic document that was supported by a myriad of homosexual lobby groups.

Despite opposition from parents, Church and other religious leaders across Ontario, some Catholic school boards were ready to accept “carte blanche” the equity "health" curriculum.  Linda Staudt, a superintendant for the Windsor/Essex Catholic District School Board, was said to have "praised the contents of the proposed curriculum," according to the Windsor Star.  Staudt stated that "the entire document really does an excellent job in promoting healthy, active living ... the family life component is just part of it."  Amazing comments coming from a superintendant of Catholic education: the family life component encouraged the normality of masturbation and anal sex, and put the homosexualist lifestyle at par with traditional marriage. 

Interestingly, Staudt was joined by two trustees of her board in attending the ministry’s Equity Symposium in Toronto this month.  No doubt she will be formative in establishing the final “equity” policy for the board, the draft for which they are currently requesting feedback.

What many parents are not aware of is that even though the “Health” curriculum was pulled, the “Equity and Inclusivity Initiatives” for all three school boards are going ahead full throttle.  Boards are expected to bring completion to their draft policies by September of 2010.  This policy is to be accountable, transparent and must meet the politically correct ethos of “equity and inclusivity” as envisioned by the former Minister of Education, Kathleen Wynne, who is openly homosexual and who piloted the whole “Equity” initiative.

Recently, the Ministry of Education, through the Ontario Education Services Corporation, invited representatives from every school board across Ontario to attend a symposium in Toronto on June 17, 2010.  This symposium was stacked with representatives from the controversial Ontario Human Rights Commission, the O.E.S.C. and other groups that support the homosexualist manifesto.  
          
The ministry held workshops with charismatic guest speakers such as Chris D’Souza, to “educate” and “help” boards enforce their plan.  Among other stipulations, the plan requires boards to recognize sexual orientation as grounds for non-discrimination, “regardless of their moral traditions and religious principles on the subject,” as explained in recent LSN articles.

Translation: The Ontario Government under Dalton McGuinty, Leona Dombrowsky, the current Minister of Education, and Chris D’Souza’s aggressive homosexualist lobby advocates from AMENO and Harmony know what’s best for Ontario families and our children!  If you have a problem with your “heterosexist” and “homophobic” views, using the vernacular of the “Equity” revolutionaries, they will be more than happy to “unlearn” you - a nifty t-shirt slogan often seen on D’Souza, during his hundreds of seminars and workshops presented to school boards, Catholic included, across Ontario.  “Even homophobia needs to be addressed, regardless of what Catholics believe about the sexual orientation,” said D’Souza, the chair of both the Equity Summit Group and the Antiracist Multicultural Education Network of Ontario, according to Niagarathisweek.com.

D’Souza, the former Equity and Diversity Officer of the Dufferin-Peel Catholic School Board, energetically sells McGuinty’s golden equity calf, piggy-backing the controversial pro-homosexualist doctrine on the important issues of anti-bullying and anti-racism within the schools.  Anyone, teacher, student or parent, who speaks out against this multi-faceted sex agenda or the Ministry of Education’s “strategy” is immediately tarred with the images of racists and bigots, and shut down with smear tactics all too familiar in the anti-life abortion movement.  Once you start to peel away at the thin veneer of politically correct ethics, you begin to behold a much more sinister truth behind the homosexualist Trojan horse, slowly working its way into our children’s classrooms.

At the Ottawa Catholic School Board’s website, occdsb.on.ca, there is a link under the tab Equity and Inclusivity Education Strategy, that sources one of D’Souza’s Power Point Presentations.  In it, he states that every educator has a “moral obligation to engage in politically correct and inclusive language in every conversation you are part of.”  He then lists the potential realms of marginalization that we are all called to build special rights for, in our Catholic, French and public school boards, and every aspect of society.  Those “marginalized” people include but are not limited to “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transexual, Transgendered, Two-Spirited, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual and Ally.” 

Given D’Souza’s clear acceptance of very un-Catholic positions on human sexuality, (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, art. 2331-2400), one might ask why so many Catholic School Board leaders are bringing him in to form the minds and consciences of students and staff. Are the Gospel values of the dignity of every human person and the practice of authentic social justice, as taught in Scripture, social encyclicals and the writings of the saints, not enough?  Are we to replace the glorious deposit of Faith, built on the shoulders of giants with the shallow ethos of equity?

D’Souza states, as quoted in Niagarathisweek.com that “the Jesus Christ I follow is one where every child feels welcomed.”  The real question that parents should be asking Chris D’Souza, and indeed the Senior Administrators and Trustees of their school boards, especially Catholic, is whether or not we are to welcome and promote all ideologies in the classroom.  Is there such a thing as absolute inclusion or equity?  Or are we to decide what should be included based upon whether it is grounded in truth, goodness, natural law and the common good of all people involved? 

The Catholic School system’s response to this question ought to be crystal clear!  It is not what Jesus Christ Chris D’Souza follows that should be our concern, but rather the true Jesus of the Gospels who both loves the sinner and hates the sin; the Lord who told Mary, the adulteress, that she was forgiven but to go and sin no more.  It is that same Christ who said to "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:15).  Though D’Souza has a lot of good messages in his presentations, it the hidden leaven within that ultimately spoils the whole loaf in the bread of life of the Catholic Separate School System.

Today’s homosexualist movement that is being sold wholesale by mega media networks and lauded by countless celebrities, is not at all about tolerance or to simply “live and let live.” This movement is completely intolerant, inequitable and un-inclusive of any person or institution that does not put on the pink shirt of homosexualist pride and welcome this counter-Christian indoctrination with open arms. This movement is an aggressive, radical propagandist machine, decades in the making, that is forcing its agenda into the sanctity of everyone’s home, into the youngest of children’s classrooms and now even into your Church, Synagogue and Mosque. 

Make no mistake, this is a culture war, and the hearts and minds of our children are at the very center of the battlefield. 

Red alert! Only 3 days left.

Support pro-life news. Help us reach our critical spring fundraising goal by April 1!


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Newsbusters Staff

,

Disney ABC embraces X-rated anti-Christian bigot Dan Savage in new prime time show

Newsbusters Staff
By

March 30, 2015 (NewsBusters.org) -- Media Research Center (MRC) and Family Research Council (FRC) are launching a joint national campaign to educate the public about a Disney ABC sitcom pilot based on the life of bigoted activist Dan Savage. MRC and FRC contacted Ben Sherwood, president of Disney/ABC Television Group, more than two weeks ago urging him to put a stop to this atrocity but received no response. [Read the full letter]

A perusal of Dan Savage’s work reveals a career built on advocating violence — even murder — and spewing hatred against people of faith. Savage has spared no one with whom he disagrees from his vitriolic hate speech. Despite his extremism, vulgarity, and unabashed encouragement of dangerous sexual practices, Disney ABC is moving forward with this show, disgustingly titled “Family of the Year.”

Media Research Center President Brent Bozell reacts:

“Disney ABC’s decision to effectively advance Dan Savage’s calls for violence against conservatives and his extremist attacks against people of faith, particularly evangelicals and Catholics, is appalling and outrageous. If hate speech were a crime, this man would be charged with a felony. Disney ABC giving Dan Savage a platform for his anti-religious bigotry is mind-boggling and their silence is deafening.

“By creating a pilot based on the life of this hatemonger and bringing him on as a producer, Disney ABC is sending a signal that they endorse Dan Savage’s wish that a man be murdered. He has stated, ‘Carl Romanelli should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope.’ ABC knows this. We told them explicitly.

“If the production of ‘Family of the Year’ is allowed to continue, not just Christians but all people of goodwill can only surmise that the company Walt Disney created is endorsing violence.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins reacts:

“Does ABC really want to produce a pilot show based on a vile bully like Dan Savage?  Do Dan Savage’s over-the top-obscenity, intimidation of teenagers and even violent rhetoric reflect the values of Disney?  Partnering with Dan Savage and endorsing his x-rated message will be abandoning the wholesome values that have attracted millions of families to Walt Disney.”

Dan Savage has made numerous comments about conservatives, evangelicals, and Catholics that offend basic standards of decency. They include:

  • Proclaiming that he sometimes thinks about “f****ing the shit out of” Senator Rick Santorum

  • Calling for Christians at a high school conference to “ignore the bull**** in the Bible”

  • Saying that “the only thing that stands between my d*** and Brad Pitt’s mouth is a piece of paper” when expressing his feelings on Pope Benedict’s opposition to gay marriage

  • Promoting marital infidelity

  • Saying “Carl Romanelli should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope.”

  • Telling Bill Maher that he wished Republicans “were all f***ing dead”

  • Telling Dr. Ben Carson to “suck my d***. Name the time and place and I’ll bring my d*** and a camera crew and you can s*** me off and win the argument.”

Reprinted with permission from Newsbusters

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Jacqueline Harvey

Ending the end-of-life impasse: Texas is poised to ban doctor-imposed death by starvation

Jacqueline Harvey
By Jacqueline Harvey

AUSTIN, Texas, March 30, 2015 (TexasInsider.org)  After five consecutive sessions of bitter battles over end-of-life bills, the Texas Legislature is finally poised to pass the first reform to the Texas Advance Directives Act (TADA) in 12 years. An issue that created uncanny adversaries out of natural allies, and equally odd bedfellows, has finally found common ground in H.B. 3074 by State Rep. Drew Springer.  

H.B. 3074 simply prohibits doctor-imposed euthanasia by starvation and dehydration.

Since H.B. 3074 includes only those provisions and language that all major organizations are on record as having deemed acceptable in previous legislative sessions, there is finally hope of ending the end-of-life impasse in the Texas Capitol.

Many would be surprised to learn that Texas law allows physicians to forcibly remove a feeding tube against the will of the patient and their family. In fact, there is a greater legal penalty for failing to feed or water an animal than for a hospital to deny a human being food and water through a tube.

This is because there is no penalty whatsoever for a healthcare provider who wishes to deny artificially-administered nutrition and hydration (AANH). According to Texas Health and Safety Code, “every living dumb creature” is legally entitled access to suitable food and water.

Denying an animal food and water, like in this January case in San Antonio, is punishable by civil fines up to $10,000 and criminal penalties up to two years in jail per offense. Yet Texas law allows health care providers to forcibly deny food and water from human beings – what they would not be able to legally do to their housecat. And healthcare providers are immune from civil and criminal penalties for denial of food and water to human beings as long as they follow the current statutory process which is sorely lacking in safeguards.

Therefore, while it is surprising that Texas has the only state law that explicitly mentions food and water delivered artificially for the purpose of completely permitting its forced denial (the other six states mention AANH explicitly for the opposite purpose, to limit or prohibit its refusal), it is not at all surprising that the issue of protecting a patient’s right to food and water is perhaps the one point of consensus across all major stakeholders.

H.B. 3074 is the first TADA reform bill to include only this provision that is agreed upon across all major players in previous legislative sessions.

There are irreconcilable ideological differences between two major right-to-life organizations that should supposedly be like-minded: Texas Alliance for Life and Texas Right to Life. Each faction (along with their respective allies) have previously sponsored broad and ambitious bills to either preserve but reform the current law (Texas Alliance for Life’s position) or overturn it altogether as Texas Right to Life aims to do.

Prior to H.B. 3074, bills filed by major advocacy organizations have often included AANH, but also a host of other provisions that were so contentious and unacceptable to other organizations that each bill ultimately died, and this mutually-agreed-upon and vital reform always died along with it.

2011 & 2013 Legislative Sessions present prime example

This 2011 media report shows the clear consensus on need for legislation to simply address the need to protect patients’ rights to food and water:

“Hughes [bill sponsor for Texas Right to Life] has widespread support for one of his bill’s goals: making food and water a necessary part of treatment and not something that can be discontinued, unless providing it would harm the patient.”

Nonetheless, in 2013, both organizations and their allies filed complicated, contentious opposing bills, both of which would have protected a patient’s right to food and water but each bill also included provisions the rival group saw as contrary to their goals. Both bills were ultimately defeated and neither group was able to achieve protections for patients at risk of forced starvation and dehydration – a mutual goal that could have been met through a third, narrow bill like H.B. 3074.

H.B. 3074 finally focuses on what unites the organizations involved rather than what divides them, since these differences have resulted in a 12 year standoff with no progress whatsoever.

H.B. 3074 is progress that is pre-negotiated and pre-approved.

It is not a fertile springboard for negotiations on an area of mutual agreement. Rather it is the culmination of years of previous negotiations on bills that all came too late, either due to the complexnature of rival bills, the controversy involved, or even both.

On the contrary, H.B. 3074 is not just simply an area of agreement; moreover, it is has already been negotiated. It should not be stymied by disagreements on language, since Texas Alliance for Life and Texas Right to Life (along with their allies) were able to agree on language in 2007 with C.S.S.B. 439. C.S.S.B. 439 reads that, unlike the status quo that places no legal conditions on when food and water may be withdrawn, it would be permitted for those in a terminal condition if,

“reasonable medical evidence indicates the provision of artificial nutrition and hydration may hasten the patient’s death or seriously exacerbate other major medical problems and the risk of serious medical pain or discomfort that cannot be alleviated based on reasonable medical judgment outweighs the benefit of continued artificial nutrition and hydration.”

This language is strikingly similar to H.B. 3074 which states, “except that artificially administered nutrition and hydration must be provided unless, based on reasonable medical judgment, providingartificially administered nutrition and hydration would:

  1. Hasten the patient’s death;
  2. Seriously exacerbate other major medical problems not outweighed by the benefit of the provision of the treatment;
  3. Result in substantial irremediable physical pain, suffering, or discomfort not outweighed by the benefit of the provision of the treatment;
  4. Be medically ineffective; or
  5. Be contrary to the patient’s clearly stated desire not to receive artificially administered nutrition or hydration.”

With minimal exceptions (the explicit mention of the word terminal, the issue of medical effectiveness and the patient’s right to refuse), the language is virtually identical, and in 2007 Texas Right to Life affirmed this language as clarifying that “ANH can only be withdrawn if the risk of providing ANH is greater than the benefit of continuing it.”

Texas Right to Life would support the language in H.B. 3074 that already has Texas Alliance for Life’s endorsement. Any reconciliation on the minor differences in language would therefore be minimal and could be made by either side, but ultimately, both sides and their allies would gain a huge victory – the first victory in 12 years on this vital issue.

It seems that the Texas Advance Directive Act, even among its sympathizers, has something for everyone to oppose.

The passage of H.B. 3074 and the legal restoration of rights to feeding tubes for Texas patients will not begin to satisfy critics of the Texas Advance Directives Act who desire much greater changes to the law and will assuredly continue to pursue them. H.B. 3074 in no way marks the end for healthcare reform, but perhaps a shift from the belief that anything short of sweeping changes is an endorsement of the status quo.

Rather, we can look at H.B. 3074 as breaking a barrier and indicating larger changes are possible.

And if nothing else, by passing H.B. 3074 introduced by State Rep. Drew Springer, we afford human beings in Texas the same legal access to food and water that we give to our horses. What is cruel to do to an animal remains legal to do to humans in Texas if organizations continue to insist on the whole of their agenda rather than agreeing to smaller bills like H.B. 3074.

The question is, can twelve years of bad blood and bickering be set aside for even this most noble of causes?

Reprinted from TexasInsider.org with the author's permission. 

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Only 3 Days Left!
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry

Only 3 Days Left!

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

I can’t believe how quickly our annual Spring campaign has flown by. Now,with only 3 days remaining, we still have $96,000 left to raise to meet our absolute minimum goal.

That’s why I must challenge you to stop everything, right now, and make a donation of whatever amount you can afford to support the pro-life and pro-family investigative reporting of LifeSite!

I simply cannot overemphasize how important your donation, no matter how large or small, is to the continued existence of LifeSite. 

For 17 years, we have relied almost exclusively on the donations of our growing army of everyday readers like you: readers who are tired of the anti-life and anti-family bias of the mainstream media, and who are looking for a different kind of news agency.

We at LifeSite have always striven to be that news agency, and your ever-faithful support has encouraged us to forge ahead fearlessly in this mission to promote the Culture of Life through investigative news reporting.

You will find our donation page is incredibly simple and easy to use. Making your donation will take less than two minutes, and then you can get back to the pressing duties scheduled for your day. But those two minutes means the world to us!

If you have not had the opportunity to see the video message from the Benham Brothers to all of our readers, I encourage you to do so (click here to view).

The Benham Brothers are only one of many, many pro-life and family leaders, media personalities, politicians, and activists around the world who rely on LifeSite on a daily basis!

Since our humble beginnings in the late 90s, LifeSite has gone from a small non-profit to an international force in the battle for life and family, read by over 5 million people every month

This is thanks only to the leaders, activists, and ordinary readers just like you who have recognized the importance truth plays in turning the tides of the Culture.

I want to thank the many readers who helped bring us within striking distance of our minimum goal with their donations over the weekend. 

But though we have made great strides in the past few days, we still need many more donations if we are going to have any hope of making it all the way by April 1st.

In these final, anxious days of our quarterly campaigns, I am always tempted to give in to fear, imagining what will happen if we don’t reach our goal.

In these moments, however, I instead turn to prayer, remembering that God in his providence has never yet let us down. With His help we have always been given precisely what we need to carry on!

You can also donate by phone or mail. We would love to hear from you!

Thank you so much for your support. 

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook