Kathleen Wynne’s sex-ed curriculum is back in the news. Since the legislature resumed on July
16, Ontario Opposition Leader Andrea Horwath has mentioned my name just about every day
in question period, always connected to the PC government’s plans regarding the repeal of the
Wynne sex-ed, and always with the same colourful description of me: “radical extremist.”
As near as I can tell, Ms. Horwath has resorted to name-calling either because she is against
practicing members of faith from voicing their opinions, which would be a dangerous area for
her to tread, or because I believe parents should have a bigger voice in how schools teach
sensitive topics to their children.
Neither are “radical” nor “extreme” and Ms. Horwath should drop her act of enlightened
arrogance and stick to the topic rather than bully and smear those who voice a differing
For the last few years, I have led an ongoing campaign against the Wynne sex-ed agenda. That
campaign’s goal is to persuade the government of Ontario to respect the parents – to “repeal
and replace” Kathleen Wynne’s bigoted, culturally insensitive, and anti-parent sex-ed
curriculum – a curriculum that is the centrepiece of the most radical and extreme attempt at
social engineering in Ontario’s history.
Wynne’s social engineering agenda started off as an “update” to the Health and Physical
Education Curriculum, an update which Premier Ford rightly points out was imposed on Ontario
parents without proper consultation. Wynne’s “update” was met with ferocious and vocal
opposition from tens of thousands of Ontario parents, including many outdoor protests in the
cold winter of 2015, when the update was first announced.
Why were parents so outraged? Many found the explicit nature of the content objectionable,
especially for younger children. Others found that certain topics had the effect of sexualizing
children. These were the first and immediate concerns.
As more information has become available, parents are now confronted by the “on-trend” junk
science that goes by the name of “gender identity theory”. This unscientific nonsense –
basically, Kathleen Wynne social studies – includes the following falsehoods: that there are six
“genders” (although I think we’re up to 112 internationally now); that “gender” is somehow
divorced from one’s sexuality or biology; and that the total elimination of traditional “male”
and “female” identities is somehow both a possible and desirable outcome.
This last point has even led to totalitarian efforts to discourage or suppress of the use of terms such as “boy” and “girl”. Another outrage was Bill 28, a Wynne-era law that eliminated the words “mother” and
“father” from the birth registration process.
The most dangerous initiative flowing from Wynne’s “gender theory,” however, came with Bill
89, a new law passed only last year which, among other things, allows the government to seize
children from their homes when the parents are not supportive in seeking out medical
treatment for their child to switch sexes. In the short year since Bill 89 passed, I have already
heard of cases where children have been removed from the custody of parents who were
resisting the “sex change” of their child.
Underlying all of this extreme, left-wing, anti-family social engineering is the smug, nanny-state
attitude of the education “experts”. They are so very confident about how smart they are and
how stupid and unenlightened are the rest of us. They are so certain that they know what is
best for Ontario families and children: better than the parents, and especially better than
immigrant parents from less enlightened places like, say, Asia, or Africa, or eastern Europe. So
much for the left-liberal ideals of tolerance and multiculturalism!
Ms. Horwath, it should be noted, was, and remains, an enthusiastic supporter of this left-wing,
Wynne-sponsored, anti-family agenda.
Am I a “radical extremist” because I believe parents should assert their rights as the first and
primary educators of their children, a right enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human
Rights? Am I a “radical extremist” for insisting that parents be provided sufficient and advance
notice as to when such sex-ed classes are taught so that they might then be able to exercise
their option to remove their children from a particular class?
In today’s politically correct climate, perhaps I am “radical” for wanting to protect children and
defend parental rights. Maybe I am “radical” to maintain that parents have a better
appreciation for what each of their individual children can deal with and at what age than the
so-called experts in downtown Toronto.
Perhaps it is radical to insist that words like “mother”and “father” and “boy” and “girl” still have a place in Ontario society and ought not to be banned or forcibly suppressed by the “Big Brother” or “Big Person” nanny state.
Are such views now radical? I suppose so! But the extremists have clearly revealed themselves:
Kathleen Wynne and Andrea Horwath and today’s NDP.
They are the extremists who insist that they know what is best for your children; that their ideas of sexual morality are superior and more enlightened than yours; and that if your child attends a publicly funded school, then you ought not even be notified of what your child will be taught, and when, and you will not be able to remove your child from that class.
Now that Wynne’s party has been reduced to a miserable seven seats in the Legislature, the
mantle of defending her anti-parent, culturally insensitive and mandatory experiment in social
engineering has passed to Ms. Horwath and her NDP. Perhaps Ms. Horwath has the same
electoral death wish that afflicted the Wynne Liberals. So be it! When it comes to the sex-ed
curriculum and the left-wing, anti-family agenda, I am happy to name the enemy here: it is the
now the Horwath/ NDP sex-ed agenda.