Prejudice, not pride: London school targeted for its inclusive agenda

Prejudice, not pride: London school targeted for its inclusive agenda November 21, 2018

Heavers Farm school in South Norwood holds a series of events that encourage  pupils to be proud of themselves and their families, but this year’s ‘Proud to be Me’ unleashed fury among some Christian parents who claimed that it was a gay pride by stealth celebration.

One immediate reaction was a call for the resignation of  head teacher, Susan Papas, by an angry  parent called Ruth Anderson who felt that Papas had abused her role by planning the event and should step down.

We were given this whole story that it was all about having pride in yourself, but that’s ridiculous. There were rainbow flags around the school, and the kids were even told to wear bright colours. That’s not having pride in yourself, that is blatant support for LGBT.

Papas defended the event in a Guardian report:

Equality is a thread that goes through our curriculum. We’ve done projects on black history month, disability and women’s history. At the end of the year we decided to do something on anti-homophobia as part of Pride month, taking the idea that people and families can be different but everyone can be proud. There were some objections but they were outweighed by support.

Cue a despicable little evangelical outfit called Christian Concern, who seized on the event to trumpet its homophobia.

Image via YouTube

It quoted Andrea Williams, above, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, an associated organisation, as saying :

In another example of ‘totalitolerance’, those who preach tolerance and diversity the loudest do not appear to be interested in practising it … Education is always a partnership between the school and parents, but the school’s actions show disrespect, dismissiveness and hostility towards these parents.

A particular agenda is being forced onto children inside the school gates and parents are being given no means to ensure that their children are being taught in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs.

Christian Concern announced this week that it was “supporting” another homophobic parent, Izzy Montague, who was scheduled to discuss the school’s policy of inclusivity with the school’s governors.

It implored people to pray:

• That Izzy’s concerns would be listened to fairly and respectfully

• That the school would stop actively promoting LGBT ideology to pupils

• That the school would respect parents’ wishes to have their children opt out of lessons that undermine their religious or philosophical views

Montague, named as Izoduwa Adhedo in the Guardian, said:

After I complained about my young child being forced to take place in an event that goes against our Christian beliefs, the school’s attitude towards me changed completely. I know other parents who are afraid to speak up because of how the school has treated me.

It was like being bullied. They stopped treating me like any other parent but were antagonistic towards me. I believe that they retaliated against me by unreasonably excluding me from the premises, victimising my child and not taking my safeguarding concerns seriously.

I wasn’t even trying to stop the Pride event. I just wanted my child to receive an education, rather than indoctrination.

According to the school’s policy published on its website:

Issues such as bullying, racism, homophobia, sexism and prejudice are dealt with in lessons and assemblies. Classes visit places of worship that are important to different faiths.

Special celebration events are held and parents and visitors from different cultures, faiths or religions share their beliefs, customs, food and knowledge; all greatly enhancing learning within the schools.

H/T AgentCormac

"Christian morality is contemptuous of humanity."

Barmy Brexit Baptist castigates The Rocky ..."
"so, is Robin willing to pay $25,000 since she (and others?) are at fault and ..."

Oh Carroll, look where your prayers ..."
"If we cease to believe that our rights come from God, we cease to be ..."

Oh Carroll, look where your prayers ..."
"Its a funny thing about Christians they claim that they have the truth the others ..."

Christian racist shuts down Facebook page. ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Cozmo the Magician

    And you will know them by their love. PUUUUKE.

  • adhoc

    “I believe that they retaliated against me by unreasonably excluding me from the premises…”

    If they had her removed from the grounds, it was probably because her “complaining” was closer to a violent screaming than a conversation about school policies.

  • The Bofa on the Sofa

    Disclosure: for the past couple of weeks, I have been collecting headlines and links to the corresponding stories with examples of Christian hate and bigotry. What I am going to do when I get enough of them is to make a video for the song “They Will Know We are Christians by Our Love” with these images. Yes, I grabbed this one when I saw it. I need a few dozen more examples before I do it, but I’m getting there.

  • John Pieret

    The whole “we’re being silenced by the LGBTQ ideology” has become a widespread meme in the UK over the last few months and is, in part, the British equivalent of “help, we’re being persecuted for our Christian beliefs” we get here in the US’ Specifically, it is a common complaint of those opposed to a proposed law that would allow trans people to simply “declare” their gender for all official purposes, without the need for surgery or formal diagnosis, a system that has been in effect in the Republic of Ireland for a couple of years with no discernible problems.

    Another difference from the US is that this cry has been taken up by feminists who deny that trans women can ever be more than men pretending to be women and want them banned from “women’s safe spaces,” such as restrooms and locker rooms. Sometimes known as trans exclusionary radical feminists or TERFs, they generally don’t express religious opposition to trans people but claim persecution for their beliefs.

    It has been an ugly campaign with fistfights (or allegations of fistfights) breaking out between trans people and TERFs. Quite unlike how we expect Brits to be …

  • epeeist

    Ah yes, the wonderfully successful Christian Legal Centre.

    With so many failed cases one has to wonder where they get their money from.

  • John Pieret

    When you finish it, please drop it in the comment sections here, Dispatches, Friendly Atheist and, particularly, Roll to Disbelieve, where it will be especially appreciated.

  • Sophotroph

    What a picture-perfect example of somebody who really has no earthly idea that the only villain in the whole story is herself.

  • barriejohn

    A particular agenda is being forced onto children…

    I just wanted my child to receive an education, rather than indoctrination.

    And from the Guardian report:

    Roger Kiska of Christian Concern said: “It is inappropriate for children to be proselytised on this issue. The school has crossed a line.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/nov/20/christian-parent-legal-action-heavers-farm-school-pride-parade?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR2ul2Y27g9FiJky5_vHQAlpeGSkYe0WH3eq9Ypp9oBFKSM4892j7uLFvI8

    You really couldn’t make this up.

  • guerillasurgeon

    “totalitolerance”
    There we go again. Conservatives – great at inventing slogans, piss poor at everything else.

  • raymond metcalfe

    Every time I see a photo of the awful Andrea Williams I think she looks like some demented loon screaming the end is nigh.

  • Vanity Unfair

    “Totalitolerance” as opposed to “totalintolerance”.

  • Jim Jones

    Religion is all about who to hate.

  • Jim Jones

    “We all know that any emotional bias — irrespective of truth or falsity — can be implanted by suggestion in the emotions of the young, hence the inherited traditions of an orthodox community are absolutely without evidential value…. If religion were true, its followers would not try to bludgeon their young into an artificial conformity; but would merely insist on their unbending quest for truth, irrespective of artificial backgrounds or practical consequences. With such an honest and inflexible openness to evidence, they could not fail to receive any real truth which might be manifesting itself around them. The fact that religionists do not follow this honourable course, but cheat at their game by invoking juvenile quasi-hypnosis, is enough to destroy their pretensions in my eyes even if their absurdity were not manifest in every other direction.”

    ― H.P. Lovecraft

  • barriejohn

    Naturally; their gods were all tribal originally. I wonder what beliefs the Sentinelese have?

  • Jim Jones

    “Get off my island!”

  • Raging Bee

    Are this lot the same “Christian Concern” who are trying to get an entire indigenous population prosecuted for killing an uninvited illegal immigrant in self-defense?

  • barriejohn

    No – that’s an American organisation named International Christian Concern, based in Washington DC, and these folk are based in the UK, wherever their funding is obtained. However, I will post a link to that on the other thread, as the accusation is so outrageous!

  • Antonio Castillo-García

    It’s telling that they perceive acceptance, tolerance and respect for other people as totalitarian. They just can’t get over it, that the times where they controlled every single aspect of public and private life are over and less and less people buy into their BS.

  • Antonio Castillo-García

    A happy person is a beautyfull person, hence ..

  • I don’t see that children as young as four will have developed the skills of critical thinking needed for anybody to resist the promulgation, by authority figures, of the LGBT agenda. (Judging by many of the comments here, neither have many adults.)
    https://twitter.com/John_Allman/status/1014947086796840960

  • “If religion were true, its followers would not try to bludgeon their young into an artificial conformity”

    It’s better than bludgeoning other people’s 4 year-old children into an artificial conformity with controversial LGBT doctrines, or as some of us like to put it, “grooming” them.

  • “Religion is all about who to hate.”

    If true, then so, it appears, is this article, and most of the comments on it.

  • If a body of doctrine is so controversial that it has (amongst other things) led to (your words) “an ugly campaign with fistfights … breaking out between trans people and TERFs”, then why in God’s name would anybody think it appropriate for the state to indoctrinate four year-olds, the children of parents with one set of doctrines, in a diametrically opposed set of doctrines that contradict those believed and taught by the parents?

    The answer is obvious, that he who thinks that appropriate, believes one set of doctrines, and disbelieves another, and is able to rejoice that the political class is minded to make his beliefs its own, and to declare heretical and to suppress those of the dissident parents whom the state wishes to indoctrinate, targeting them young enough to bypass their still latent critical thinking abilities that might them shrug off what the teachers were saying, as “well gay”. That age-inappropriate indoctrination of children, in doctrines what not all the public believes, is precisely what people mean when they complain recently of “being silenced by ideology”. To some extent, people are actually being persecuted for their beliefs, at loggerheads with those of the state, in other contexts. In particular, people who express homophobic beliefs and values are sometimes arrested and even prosecuted.

    When the state uses its power to put between parents and children, as it does over LGBT doctrines which the state believes but which the parents don’t believe, and seeks to criminalise particular beliefs and moral values themselves, as is happening, then what better word is there for this treatment of the minorities concerned than “persecution”?

    https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/category/homophobic/

  • What sort of vicious, idle speculation is that?

  • Jim Jones

    There;s nothing controversial about being kind and showing tolerance.

    Unless you’re an asshole.

  • Jim Jones
  • Jim Jones

    The only “age-inappropriate indoctrination of children” is the indoctrination of religion by using lies to trick trusting children.

  • Raging Bee

    Same-sex couples don’t “groom” the kids they adopt, any more than opposite-sex couples. Take your bigoted lies somewhere else…like maybe Russia?

  • Raging Bee

    Please specify an “LGBT doctrine” that is “controversial.”

  • Raging Bee

    If a body of doctrine is so controversial that it has (amongst other things) led (in your words) to “an ugly campaign with fistfights … then why in God’s name would anybody think it appropriate for the state to indoctrinate four year-olds…?

    So all it takes is for one person to start a fight over something, and that automagically makes it “too controversial” to teach to kids?

  • Raging Bee

    That age-inappropriate indoctrination of children, in doctrines which not all the public believes, and the criminalisation of dissent, is precisely what people mean when they complain recently of “being silenced by ideology”.

    Yeah, a lot of white racists said the same thing when we started integrating our public schools.

  • No. That’s not at all what I said.

  • Hardly comparable.

  • “Trans people”
    “sexual orientation”
    “love is love”
    “two mummies”

  • That’s not what I said though, is it?

  • Your humorous posters and HMG’s LGBT Action Plan are not referring to the gay agenda in the same sense of this phrase. The satire therefore misses that particular target.

  • Raging Bee

    Those aren’t “doctrines,” dumbass, they’re just phrases that you seem to find offensive. Do you even know what the word “doctrine” means? Do you know what the words you quoted mean?

  • Raging Bee

    Then why are you using the same rhetoric in response?

  • Raging Bee

    If the satire had missed its target, you wouldn’t have responded as defensively as you just did. You screamed the usual bigoted bullshit about the “gay agenda,” and JJ made fun of your clueless misuse of that phrase.

  • Raging Bee

    Excuse me while I belabor the obvious: trans people exist; sexual orientation is a thing; “love is love” just means gay love isn’t all that different from straight love; yes, some kids really do have two mummies; and the London Underground is not a political movement. Those aren’t “doctrines,” they’re FACTS.

  • The word “doctrine” means something that is, can be or needs to be taught, learnt and perhaps believed. The fact that you call me “dumbass” like that, and ask me if I know what the phrases I used mean, assuming that the phrases actually have meaning, and that it is possible to have right and wrong beliefs as to what the phrases mean, and to be ignorant or knowledgable about the matters to which the phrases refer, illustrates what I claimed was the case: That each phrase stands for a body of doctrine, which you suspect me of not having learnt correctly and believed, making me a “dumbass” in your opinion.

    Certainly, those who would self-describe as “trans”, and those who would self-describe as “trans-exclusionary radical feminists”, have learnt, and teach, and believe, mutually contradictory doctrines in the area of LGBT doctrine that brings them into conflict; as one contributor pointed out earlier.

  • Raging Bee

    You used the word “grooming.” So yes, that is what you said, innit?

  • Raging Bee

    Some people question evolution too — that doesn’t make evolution a “doctrine.”

  • You have now adopted a didactic tone with me, that you are now trying to put me *right*, to *teach* me something that you are surprised I don’t find “obvious”, is because you believe and expound certain doctrines.

    Take the statement, “trans people exist”. What does that actually *mean*? Just answering that question, when it is posed by an enquirer, would necessarily become an exercise in the formulation and then the *teaching* of a doctrine of “trans people”.

    And so on.

    If something is taught, it is a doctrine. Recognising that at heart, culture wars over what certainly people call “LGBT”, are symptomatic of doctrinal differences about a range of morally-questioned behaviours, is the key to treating different groups with respect. Shouting that one’s own doctrines aren’t doctrines at all like those of the other fellow, but FACTS, is the sort of aggression that has provoked the protests now being witnessed in Birmingham, where six hundred (the majority) of chlldren were, on a certain day, removed by their (mainly Muslim) parents from a school that has now decided to stop teaching a certain LGBT-friendly syllabus called ironically “No Outsiders”, to which the parents objected.

  • Raging Bee

    If you really think that stating facts as facts is “didactic” and “aggression,” then you really need to start growing the fuck up before you try to influence education policy.

  • What is the analogy or point that you are trying to make, with your excursion off topic, bringing up that matter of “evolution”?

  • Raging Bee

    If you can’t understand where I’m going with that, maybe you should shut up and stop pretending you know what you’re talking about. I’ve been called many things, but “too subtle” is not one of them.

  • I didn’t use the word “grooming” about *couples*.

  • It is a matter of emotive conjugation. I educate. You teach. He indoctrinates.

    You merely state the fact that it’s OK to be gay. I contradict you by spouting the dogma that it’s better not to be gay. Your assumption that what you believe must be “true”, and that anybody who contradicts you is a liar, colours your language.

  • Raging Bee

    You equated honest education about LGBT with “grooming.” That’s just as dishonest, just as bigoted, and just as dead wrong.

  • I wrote, “I don’t see that children as young as four will have developed the skills of critical thinking needed for anybody to resist the promulgation, by authority figures, of the LGBT agenda. (Judging by many of the comments here, neither have many adults.)”

    I then linked to a satirical tweet of mine about the real, publshed LGBT agenda of HMG, explicitly entitled LGBT Action Plan, publlished by HMSO, because that is the LGBT agenda against which parents of British school children are rebelling at the moment.

    How on earth does that amount to my “screaming the usual bigoted bullshit about the ‘the gay agenda'”? Who else has “screamed” that particular piece of “bullshit”, in your experience, making it “usual”? The word “agenda” *means* “action plan” (it’s Latin), so the government’s “LGBT Action Plan” (which I bet you didn’t even open to read the first page) is, literally, an LGBT agenda. It’s not “bullshit” to mention that fact. The news story we’re commenting on is about that official LGBT agenda, which you can read for yourself here.
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/721367/GEO-LGBT-Action-Plan.pdf

    If you cannot refrain from drifing off topic, making things up, blatant straw man fallacies, ad hominem attacks against me as an individual, and disrespecting moral beliefs different from yours, why bother responding to me at all? Just in order to harass, if you can?

    I didn’t misuse the phrase “LGBT agenda”, cluelessly. I linked to a tweet that depicts the front cover of the precise LGBT agenda that I was referring to. I have *read* that LGBT agenda and commented on it formally, as part of a government consultation about it.

    There is a subagenda of that LGBT agenda now, specifically dealing with education. I have commented on that too. There are draft regulations before Parliament to further that LGBT agenda, which were to be debated on two previous occasions, but which were not fully debated and passed into law.

  • Raging Bee

    So what, specifically, is wrong about the “LGBT Action Plan?”

  • Do you think that it is *appropriate* for children to be proselytised on that issue?

  • Nobody is objecting to kindness and tolerance. British parents are objecting (even if they do not realise this) to the British government’s LGBT agenda, which is published here:
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/721367/GEO-LGBT-Action-Plan.pdf

  • Gerhard

    is’t called LGBTQ conversion therapy applied by the state

  • I don’t believe that I am using “the same rhetoric” as “white racists” used when you (Americans?) started “integrating” your “public schools”. I’d be surprised if you could provide, from history, an example of somebody expressing a racist idea, using words remarkably similar to mine, in the sentence, “That age-inappropriate indoctrination of children, in doctrines which not all the public believes, and the criminalisation of dissent, is precisely what people mean when they complain recently of ‘being silenced by ideology’.”

    However, if you could prove “the same rhetoric”, by citing an example a white racist using rhetoric like mine, your same rhetoric argument wouldn’t prove that the parents aggrieved that their little children were being educated at school pursuant to an official LGBT agenda to which the parents had never consented and from which the parents actually dissented, were comparable in any way with white racists.

    As part of the Grievance Studies Hoax
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k&feature=youtu.be
    a whole chapter of Mein Kampf was edited and submitted to an Intersectional Feminism journal, which accepted the hoax paper. But this does not prove, be means of the “same rhetoric” false argument you used, that Intersectional Feminism is similar to National Socialism.

  • I believe that that was a wicked thing to say.

  • What is?

  • Raging Bee

    It’s certainly appropriate to teach children that LGBT people exist, and that they’re people, not dangerous freaks, entitled to the same rights and degree of respect as the rest of us.

  • Gerhard
  • Gerhard

    this is pure gold. You made my day for sure 🙂

    https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/conceptual-penis-social-contruct-sokal-style-hoax-on-gender-studies/
    really got me to tears

  • What does the statement even mean, “LGBT people exist”? What would those words mean to a four year-old, who’d never been exposed to any LGBT doctrine at all, and who didn’t even know yet how babies were made? LGBT doctrine that you take for granted so much that you just think of all the propositions you believe and I don’t as “facts”.

    Have you ever had a conversation with a four year-old?

    How can you teach children that LGBT people exist, without teaching them all sorts of other things first that provide the context into which this additional axiom is asserted? What do you mean by saying that “trans people exist”? Do you mean by that the same as I mean by that, when I deny that this is true? What some people explain they mean when they say that “trans people exist”, is such that what I believe is that trans people, in that sense, don’t exist.

    I keep coming back to this. Trans activists and TERFs have, it is said, come to blows, being unable to resolve their ideological differences by polite discussion, as to whether so-called trans women are really men or really women for feminist purposes, or any other purposes for that matter. What sort of idiotic government would roll out a programme of teaching for four year-olds that taught the four year-olds the answer to the vexed question that has led to brawls between adults who are steeped in LGBT and gender-related doctrines, who self-identify with ideological labels like “TERF”?

  • I suggest you read it.

  • I am saying that “honest education about LGBT” isn’t possible. LGBT isn’t a normal school subject, like mathematics, biology, chemistry, English language, comparative reigion (or one particular rekigion in the case of faith schools), art, history or geography. Rather, LGBT is a minefield, about which there is no consensus. Sexualising very young children at all is age-inappropriate. That alone amounts to grooming, in a sense. Sexualising very young children with LGBT doctrines added into the mix, doctrines on which the adults in society are not in full agreement – e.g. the trans v TERF squabble – is wicked.

    If you know children, you’ll know that boys are attracted to each other and girls are attracted to each other, in the wild. In captivity, it is just about possible sometimes to get boys and girls to play together. Explain what same-sex attraction is to a four year-old, and he’ll more-or-less always tick that box.

    At puberty, boys become (we say) interested in girls. That is to admit that, before then, girls are rather boring creatures, whom it is no fun at all to play with, unless there are no boys around.

    In a sense, we are all born gay. Most of us manage to grow out of it though.

  • Raging Bee

    I keep coming back to this…

    Because it’s all you know or care about. The rest of us have a bigger picture to deal with. Do try to keep up.

  • Raging Bee

    I suggest you back up your accusations with some reference to something in the real world.

  • Raging Bee

    I am saying that “honest education about LGBT” isn’t possible.

    And you’ve been proven dead wrong. Just because YOU can’t do something, doesn’t mean no one else can do it either. That’s a very good reason for you to shut up and let wiser voices than yours be heard instead. You are dismissed.

  • Jim Jones

    You must hate the bible and biblical marriage with a passion.

  • Jim Jones

    Many of us develop empathy.

  • Jim Jones

    It’s more appropriate than telling them lies about sky fairies.

    People with different sexual orientations and aspects exist. Nonsense beings such as ‘gods’ do not.

  • I’ll take that as a “yes” then.

  • How have I been “proved dead wrong”?

  • Meaning what?

  • “You must hate the bible and biblical marriage with a passion.”

    Why do you say that?

    I approach the bible with mixed feelings.

    I don’t think I’ve ever used the phrase “biblical marriage”. I have, however, blogged mentioning marriage, and LGBT issues. Instead of speculating, or assuming that you know what I think and believe, why not expose yourself to some of the ideas I actually have expressed at length:

    Category Archives: Homophobic
    https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/category/homophobic/

    What’s in a name? There’s LOTS in a name!
    https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/2013/07/07/lots-in-a-name/

  • “I suggest you back up your accusations with some reference to something in the real world.”

    The only “accusation” I have made – and I think of it more as an observation than an accusation – is that HMG consulted almost exclusively with pro-LGBT groups and individuals, formulated an LGBT agenda that set out to please that demographic which affected school syllabuses, without consulting with parents and getting their agreement to the proposed changes in syllabuses in their chidren’s schools. Consequently, there are now protests against the manifestation in schools of the government’s officially-published LGBT agenda, which are spreading all over the country, so that even the BBC hasn’t managed to suppress the news of them.

    Surely that is an “accusation” of mine (if you insist on calling it that) that I don’t have to “back up” any more than I already have. This is all happening in my country today. Its on the news now, as I type this. Andrew Moffat and an Imam are billed to be in the studio. This British news story has nothing to do with the desegregation of schools in the USA. It is a British story that I have been following for weeks. Listen and learn.

  • What I said I kept coming back to, was: “I keep coming back to this. Trans activists and TERFs have, it is said, come to blows, being unable to resolve their ideological differences by polite discussion, as to whether so-called trans women are really men or really women for feminist purposes, or any other purposes for that matter.”

    I don’t think four year-olds need to be invited in school to join in the debate that has trans activists and TERFs at loggerheads. Nor should they be indoctrinated with the trans activists doctrine, which TERFs contradict.

    I think it’s you who is failing to take in “the bigger picture”.

  • Raging Bee

    So no specifics then. Got it.

  • Jim Jones

    Biblical marriage is one man and as many wives, concubines, and sex slaves (of either sex) as he can afford.

  • Jim Jones

    Unless you can take off your glasses of bigotry, sure.

  • Whatever THAT means . . .

    Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

  • Oh. Thanks for the info. So what?

    Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

  • That was pretty specific, I thought. The government and the school didn’t even try to sell their LGBT school syllabus to the parents of the children on whom they decided to impose that agenda. What, more “specific” than that did you want to know?
    Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2