Reverend reported to anti-terror unit Prevent for telling pupils in a sermon they're allowed to disagree with LGBT teaching

If we really want them to think critically and be emboldened to disagree, they might disagree about the things we don't like. That is, I thnk, at the root of all of this.

Kids are taught that critical thinking is thinking and criticising what has gone before - dissectingit, disagreing with it. Take Grea Thunberg as an example. She has a good point, many of them, and should be a great role model for other young teens explaoring their wider environment.

Instead something happened and she/her 'side' became attached to being right and dismissed alternative perspectives. And it all became polarised and not a tad entrenched. Truths became hardened, many people cling to one piece of data and refuse to allow any other data in - so there can be no proper critical thinking!

I think many conspiracy theorists have the same issue.

I know that the OP here has presented us with an example of extreme prejudice - and it is not the Christian one. Sadly the speaker has obscured the message. Some react to the man, his faith, clothing, and not his message. He did after all iinvite his audience to diasgree with his own beliefs too!

But his message, of tolerance even in disagreement, isn't what TRAs want, nor what many of the younger generation are used to being encouraged to do. These days there seems to be a need to pick a side, and to defend it to the death!

Nobody who starts off thinking that this man was radicalising kids will ever have the kind of self awakening that makes for fully rounded adults!

It's not just the trans stuff that has largely become something that people can't talk about without being considered bigots by people who consider themselves progressives. I think this is the main reason the T attached itself to the LGB - because that had come to be the main social response to controversies or disagreements around homosexuality, and how to think about it either in the abstract or in terms of policy.

The Christian (and lots of other groups too) view of sexuality overall is pretty different than the modern approach, but it's historically been common and it's still the view of the Catholic and Orthodox churches which make up a the majority of Christians worldwide.

It should be possible to engage with people with different views rationally and respectfully.

And for kids at school - if we want to teach them they can disagree with the public consensus, or what is trendy, that is going to apply to everything. If we really want them to think critically and be emboldened to disagree, they might disagree about the things we don't like.

This is what has caused problems with Muslim parents in some schools. They, understandably, don't really like sending their kids to a state run school supposedly a pretty secular one, that pushes a view on their kids that isn't secular but instead represents a clear set of values, just not one based on religion. Because secular is not really the same as non-religious in that sense.

People need to decide what kind of society they actually want.

“Barnes wrongly informed staff that gender identity is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, and therefore must be legally recognised as a statutory requirement at the school”.

Why is there never any comeback for these lobby groups who repeatedly lie about the law?

This particular one has been deleted sharpish from at least one other thread today, I think I noticed.

And we’re supposed to believe that it’s not at all cult like?

Is this another of the pron-bots that were all over the place during the weekend?

It's just so depressing. We are teaching kids that being capable of critical thinking is some kind of crime, is cruel and hurtful and needs to be stopped.

And all under the guise of being the nicest of nice!

from Times,

(extract)
Randall claims that during her course “Barnes wrongly informed staff that gender identity is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, and therefore must be legally recognised as a statutory requirement at the school”.

Randall said that he raised concerns and was assured by the head teacher that he would be consulted over whether the school would implement a wider policy. He claims that without consultation an “LGBT inclusive curriculum [was] implemented, even for the nursery provision at the school”. (continues)

current thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4236668-britain-s-youngest-trans-child

It's reported in the Times today. Same story, may be interesting to see the comments later

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/school-reported-chaplain-to-terror-watchdog-after-sermon-on-sexuality-pdt3hj5tb?shareToken=923879bc0644a84bb259f4a054d48f88

from article in OP
"Dr Randall’s sermon, delivered in the school chapel on June 21, 2019, was prompted, he says, by concerns from pupils about an organisation called Educate & Celebrate, run by Dr Elly Barnes, which was invited to ‘embed gender, gender identity and sexual orientation into the fabric’ of the school. "

Dr Ellie Barnes
-the only advice I give is don't send a letter home or have a parents evening-

streamja.com/akjV9

He's clearly a bigot: he said "remember that religious belief is just as protected in law as sexual orientation", having pointed out earlier that "some ... will happily lie about gender identity being a legally protected characteristic (which it isn’t)" (the process of transitioning from one gender to another is what is protected in law).

Or maybe it's just that he unforgiveably knows what the law actually says, which is not actually bigoted of him at all.

Nothing wrong with that sermon in my opinion - it’s refreshing actually. God knows children need some balancing viewpoints.
Just another example of freedom of speech being too much for lefty people to bear these days.

We truly live under humane fascism.

And I only say humane because getting fired is not quite the same as being killed, tortured, or sent to a labor camp. But otherwise, it is quite clear that dissenting opinions are not tolerated.

The Secular Society is campaigning to get religion out of schools (a view I sympathized with) but now the spreading of fundamentalist dogma is coming from LBGT activists who have free rein and are given the same status as holy men and prophets

^This. A zillion times

Either you allow everyone to come and express their views and foster tolerance, or you keep all ideologies out, remain truly secular and stick to maths, geography, etc. It's madness

I feel for Reverend Randal. These intimidating guerrilla tactics are appalling.

I wonder whether parents who pay hefty fees for their children to attend (and board!) at this school are aware of what's going on?

‘The CofE explicitly states that its members hold a range of views on the issue of sexuality and marriage, and that its clergy are allowed to argue for any position within that spectrum.’

Well exactly. So why would he start trying to represent the views of every Christian everywhere rather than the view of Christian tradition he believes in as a priest?

It is ironic that he mentions No Outsiders as that was also developed as a Prevent strategy!

I had the same thought Justawoman. That bit of his sermon about gay marriage law really set my teeth on edge and doesn’t reflect the reality in the CofE where views at all levels are very diverse. Lots of vicars tweet on LGBT issues for example. But I did like what he said about respecting the person even when you disagree with the views, and that people have more in common than divides them. I can imagine boarding schools are pressure cooker environments but reporting him to Prevent is cloud cuckoo land stuff and sounds like harassment. The whole story is just weird and puts the school in a bad light. Can any teachers here tell us if they have ever had to go to another training session where they have to learn chants? That doesn’t sound like encouraging empathy and engaging problem-solving processes, more like drilling a squadron.

The CofE explicitly states that its members hold a range of views on the issue of sexuality and marriage, and that its clergy are allowed to argue for any position within that spectrum.

‘I agree with what ppl have said, that he has failed to note that the opinion on gay marriage is not held by all Christians or all c of e members.’

It isn’t a democracy though; it is a denomination and an established church. He isn’t there to represent all Christians or make up church teaching based on what members of the congregation believe.

I agree that I read the bit about gay marriage and sex before marriage with a slight cringe, but it is a view held by some for religious purposes and it should be allowed to be said.

The measure and call for tolerance of all views was loud and clear, though. In contrast with the description of the training received by staff (rainbow badges for right-thinking, anyone? Chanting?), it was far more open and accepting of different views.

It certainly wasn't extremist.

I was thinking back to my last school's no-platform policy which was referred to in a complaint by a vegan parent when the milk marketing board came to do a talk. I just read the wording again - and the part that jumps out is where it says something on the line of: 'no speaker should be permitted to promote one particular political ideology'. I think the LGBTQ+ programme at this school would fall foul of that. The balance of views was being upheld by just this one man - however you may disagree with some of what he expressed.

What do we want schools to be like? Do we want to engage in critical thinking and plurality of thought? I know I want that for my children.
It is just plain dangerous to have 'right-think' on a subject that is controversial and where there are legitimate alternative views.

I hope this man is vindicated and hasn't suffered too much emotionally about this horrible situation. Imagine being reported to Prevent?!