The Ultimate April Fool – An Open Letter to Nicola Sturgeon

 

26075970742_5f82939f98_k


 

Dear First Minister,

I am writing to you as the moderator of the Free Church of Scotland and want to assure you of our prayers for you and your government. I also write in a personal capacity as a supporter of both you and the SNP. It’s no secret that you have long been the recipient of my vote. So please take this as a letter from a well-wisher not a detractor.

I am greatly concerned to read of your remarks on Thursday evening at the LGBTI Parliamentary Leaders debate (I note with interest that this seems to be the only special interest lobbying group that gets its own debate) and I would ask you to reconsider some of what you are proposing.

At one level of course much of what you said most reasonable people would agree with. Equality, anti-bullying, promoting children’s health, tolerance, respect, human rights, good citizenship, healthy relationships, inclusion and a modern fairer, Scotland; is the motherhood and apple pie of todays Scottish politics.   But the trouble comes when we try to put some meaning and substance to these buzzwords.

The first thing to note is that this is not primarily about ‘equality’ in education, but rather the advancement of a particular teaching about sexuality and gender. In one sense it is the easy option for you (and other political leaders) to promise more LGBT ‘equality’. It doesn’t cost you a great deal to spend yet more millions of our money on the 1% of the population who are LGBT. Whilst it looks good to get a headline in the media saying ‘government promises more gay rights’, I suspect the vast majority of Scots are far more concerned that this is a diversion from wider issues. The real issue in equality is the growing gap between rich and poor in education and how that can be bridged. That is by far the greater need and dare I suggest that that is the key issue the new Scottish government needs to address. As another politician once said, the mantra is ‘education, education, education’.

The problem with the approach advocated by The Equality Network (a government funded lobby group) and others, is that it is limited to one very narrow area of life and one very narrow philosophy.   You may regard it as a given that the redefinition of marriage to allow SSM was the best thing for society, but can we request that you don’t demonise those of us who disagree with that point of view as being homophobic supporters of inequality!   Likewise what I say to you just now is not because of some deep-rooted transphobia or some kind of backward religious doctrine.   I believe that you are being conned into accepting a philosophy and doctrine about gender that will have the opposite effect of what you intend.
kez conference

Although the philosophy is narrow, its application is clearly not, as exemplified by Kezia Dugdale in her remarks last night. She wants LGBT issues to be taught not just in social education but also in every subject – in English, History, and Maths etc. This is nothing more than total indoctrination and as all the speakers said, they want teachers to be re-educated (indoctrinated) so that they can indoctrinate our children. Can you imagine the fuss that would be created if we suggested that Christianity should be taught in and through every subject in school? Why are you prepared to allow, fund and encourage this for the 1% of the population who profess to be LGBT and leave out the 50% who profess to be Christian? Are some more ‘equal’ than others?

We believe that what is proposed could actually be harmful to many children, and will not promote children’s health and well being and will not produce the utopia envisaged.  The trouble is not with transgender or those who suffer from gender dysphoria. We would encourage the government to provide support and the right kind of help for those who struggle with gender identity disorder. It is a serious problem and people do need help. The problem is that you seem to have accepted the whole philosophy of gender fluidity.   Is it now the policy of the SNP that there are no longer two genders, male and female, but many genders? And that people can choose to switch between as many of them as they wish? Is transgender now no longer trans between two genders, but trans multi-genders?

We do not believe that this will lead to the Brave New World envisaged by the proponents of the multi gender doctrine.  It is destructive of humanity and will cause chaos in our society.    Your statement seems to indicate that you now accept the unproven and somewhat bizarre notion that even children get to choose their own gender and sexuality.   We believe that if this policy is accepted and acted upon, it will result in confusion and brokenness amongst our children rather than fulfilled potential.  It is a policy that will bring untold disaster and harm upon Scotland’s children.  This is nothing less than state sponsored indoctrination of the weakest and most vulnerable members of our society.  To tell children that they can choose their own gender is a recipe for misuse and abuse. Teaching children they can choose their own gender is itself a form of child abuse.

We are also concerned that there will not be equality for those who do not agree with the new morality that children can choose their own gender or that such choosing should be encouraged.  Your statement that “the very fact that we are still having debates like this at election time just underlines that there is still much that we need to do” is very concerning. Firstly having watched the ‘debate’ last night, I simply observe, where was the debate? All of the political leaders were falling over yourselves to boast how much each of you was meeting the LGBT agenda. There was no dissent, no questioning, no debate.   No one dares challenge the narrative of the LGBT activists.

 

patrick_holyroodYour words suggest that you think that even having such a debate should not be permitted in a modern ‘progressive’ Scotland.  These words were echoed by Patrick Harvie who wants anyone who disagrees with his agenda to be bracketed along with racists.  Can I simply ask that we be allowed to have a debate? It seems to me that you and the political elites in Scotland are seeking to close down any debate. There is no rational, no reasoning, no looking at evidence. Like your ‘debate’ last night it is just emotion, virtue signalling and demonising anyone who dares to question. If you doubt that let me show you the hate mail and abuse I have received even from last night. We need to discuss and think about the kind of changes we are imposing upon our society.   To you and your fellow party leaders it is obvious that you are right. But can you allow for the possibility that you might be wrong and that everything is not as black and white as you seem to think?

We too want ‘tolerance, respect and inclusion’, but we ask that that is extended to those of us who don’t automatically accept the latest change in the moral zeitgeist handed down to us from the Equality Network and others who consider themselves in the vanguard of the new moral enlightenment. Are we allowed to differ? And can I ask that if you really want a debate that you don’t just debate with those who already agree with you, but actually take time to debate with those who disagree? Would you be willing to debate myself and others?

There is also a major contradiction between your policy on gender balance in politics and boardrooms and your new ‘gender fluid’ policy. You intend to allow transgender people, who switch from the gender recorded at birth, to change their birth certificates without having to seek approval from a tribunal of lawyers and doctors. What happens if someone feels that their political career is being hampered because they are the wrong gender?   If all they have to do is fill out a form and announce that they are another gender then what is to stop someone deciding to change gender if they think it will enable them to further their careers and job prospects?  I’m sure you are aware that there has been a major clash between some in the radical feminist community, such as Germaine Greer, and those who support Transgender, precisely because of this problem.  The bottom line is that if you accept the gender fluid philosophy it drives a cart and horse through your gender quotas policy.   By the way if you strictly apply the quota system in order to enable ‘fairness’ and due proportionate representation (that the number of say party leaders who are female reflects the proportion of the population) do you think that should apply in other areas?  Should only 1% of MSPs be gay?  Ruth-250x300I note with interest that two thirds of the party leaders in Scotland are gay.  Personally that doesn’t bother me, sexuality should no more be a factor in electing a politician than gender, but it does bother me if that is then used to push a gay rights agenda which overrides the rights of others and becomes the predominant moral issue in politics, media and education.  And it also shows how selective politicians who advocate quotas are – do you not think by your logic that you should be pushing for a majority of leaders to reflect the majority of the population?

 

For me the most disturbing part of your speech is the statement that “Enabling young people to make informed choices about their gender and sexual identity is about supporting them to be themselves so that they might fulfil their potential.”   This was echoed by Willie Rennie who stated that people need ‘education’ to ‘remove the archaic system that we have just now’ and the people should have the right to choose their own gender for themselves.

I believe in this statement you are out of touch with the vast majority of people in Scotland. We do not believe that we choose our gender, or that we are assigned it at birth, as though a doctor is picking gender for us. Gender, like skin colour is something that we are born with. This week I became a granddad.  My granddaughter was not ‘assigned’ gender at birth, as though she were being given a name. She IS a girl. She is not one of several genders that she can get to pick and choose as she pleases later on, according to some societal construct or government edict. To teach that girl when she is five years old that she has the ability to choose whether she will be a boy or girl or one of the other 26 genders on Facebook, is to create a world of confusion, distortion and insanity.   I believe you have made an enormous mistake by buying into this confused policy, just because you have been told it is the ‘progressive’ and caring thing to do.

You may be fortunate in that I suspect most senior politicians, educators and journalists won’t take on the LGBT lobby over this issue (it’s more than their job is worth or the emotional hate they will receive) and therefore no-one will challenge you at the elite level. But if you ask the ordinary people of Scotland about ‘gender fluidity’ I suspect you will find that most people regard it as nonsense.  As parents we already have enough problems bringing up our children without the State creating this kind of confusion.

key_Willie_Rennie

Willie Rennie asked a key question “for those who find this difficult. if nobody is restricting your freedom, why should you restrict anybody else’s freedom?” Of course nobody answered or thought about that on the panel. The fact is that your government constantly restricts people’s freedom – the smoking ban for example.   You want to restrict the number of any specific gender who are on company boards. You do so because you believe, rightly, that some restrictions are for the good of the wider public.   The other problem with Willie Rennie’s statement is that he and all of the political elites are proposing restricting the freedom of those who want their children to grow up in a community where they are given clear teaching about gender and sexuality.

First Minister, we have moved in a very short space of time from sexuality being perceived as something we are born with, to now being perceived as something fluid which we can choose. We have moved from marriage being a life long covenant between a man and a woman, to being a civil contract between any two people who ‘love one another’. We have moved from having fixed genders to letting children choose their own gender. Now we are moving from gender being male and female to gender fluidity. When will it stop? Unless someone has the courage to say, ‘stop this nonsense, enough!’ we will find that our political, media and social elites will have led us down a path that inevitably leads to destruction. It may be that you and others genuinely believe that you are progressing us to the secular Nirvana we keep hearing about. But what if you are wrong? What if, in hubris, our rulers are sowing the seeds of our destruction as a nation and people?

Today is April the 1st. Reading that the Scottish government intends to add a ‘third’ (why not 4th, 5th, 5,000th?) gender would make me wonder if this is an elaborate April Fool. Sadly this is not an April Fool, although it is one of the most foolish things that any politician has ever proposed. Do you seriously think government dictate can re-make humanity?

This is a very important issue. For me it is so important that if your policy announced tonight is something that is to be mandatory upon all SNP MSP’s you will lose my vote and I suspect I will not be the only one. Can I ask you to reconsider and to think again before introducing such a destructive and harmful policy?

Yours respectfully,

David A Robertson

Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland.

The follow up to this letter and the response can be read here – Scotland’s Babylon – Who is going to Speak for Scotland’s Children?


42 thoughts on “The Ultimate April Fool – An Open Letter to Nicola Sturgeon

  1. Thank you – superbly written and argued. Courageous indeed in these politically correct times.
    Deserves wide exposure to help sharpen the pitiful Scottish election campaign.
    As you suggest, it has appeared to be nothing more than a virtue signalling competition so far.
    No one has dared mention immigration, terrorism, Islamization … even Ruth Davidson just managed to raise the Named Person issue in the second debate, and no more.
    Democracy and Christianity in Scotland are indeed in deep trouble.
    Can you *really* still find it in your heart and head to vote for the SNP?

  2. Thank you David Robertson for your courage and honesty for speaking up for the vast majority of the Scottish people. Sadly there is a weakness among many of our leading politicians to speak out on such matters for fear of their careers being harmed. And this is in an age where ‘progressive’ Scotland is supposed to be more equal and tolerant. It definitely is not.

  3. Once again David shows himself to be a strong church leader, not afraid to stick his head above the parapet and speak out!

  4. When I saw this policy being mentioned on twitter posts about the debate my immediate thought was how is David going to moan about it. And lo, it came to pass.

    One of the problems, for me anyway, is you cant seem to disentangle is the fact that you (and I know genuinely) are against bullying and discrimination but cannot seem to be able to tell us how this can be done without going into schools and saying being LGBT is ok. When teaching against racisim and sexism there is no process of saying its bad to bully black people even if X says that being black is not ok. You need to tell us how you want children to be taught that bullying LGBT people is bad even if God says they are not good people. We know that racist and sexist language is wrong but language that is homophobic is common in schools – being called gay is an insult on more than one level. Being gay is still very hard. There is, despite your obvious distaste on the matter, no homosexual nirvana in Scotland. People are still attacked for their sexual preferences. Often violently.

    You are right that equality is the advancement of a particular teaching. As you, people pass a lot of ideas and thoughts on from one generation to the next and it takes certain education processes to challenge and change this inter-generational education. Otherwise it can take legal action to change things. It took the Supreme Court of the US to change evangelical christian university Bob Jones thinking on interracial relationships. Equality is best achieved in the classroom. And putting equality in quote marks is fairly telling about what you think of the equality agenda as a whole.

    I am confused about the idea of LGBT maths (just as I was about Christian maths or Humanist maths). LGBT in history should feature, as should Christianity and other religions. Some of the greatest poems and literature have been inspired by Christianity and should feature in English. The exact same can be said about LGBT. You have still not shown how, provided evidence for, a curriculum that contains topics is indoctrination. Oh, and teachers being trained on how to deal with LGBT issues is not indoctrination. See the stuff about bullying above.

    It is pleasing to see how your language on transgender and gender dysphoria has changed from a year ago when there was a lot of carelessness and absolutes being used when talking about the topic.

    It is clear that gender fluidity is something that is now your target. I cannot see how it can lead to child abuse. It is, fundamentally, about choosing who we are. Whilst a persons sex refers mainly to biology and is a configuration of chromosomes, hormones, gonads (ovaries, testicles), reproductive units (sperm, egg), and internal and external anatomy. And while sex is often talked about as if the only two options are male and female, this two-sex system is inadequate for understanding the sex characteristics of all people. Gender is more about your personal sense of who you are (e.g., man, woman, transgender, etc). Gender primarily refers to qualities that are masculine or feminine or neither or both. Just as sex is often talked about as male/female, gender is often thought about as being a man or woman. However, this binary gender system is inadequate for understanding the gender of all humans, especially across cultures. Many societies are now expanding their use of gender terms. Gender terms are dynamic and some terms are more often used or preferred in some communities. Biblically there may only be two genders but the world has moved on from that (and in places like some native American tribes, had three genders before Europe arrived).

    I do admit that you are in a hard position which clearly frustrates you. You have a set of beliefs and if you voice them then you find yourself open to accusations of homophobia. The problem is that your beliefs are for you and your fellow believers to share among yourselves. And of course, proclaim that this is what you believe to anyone who listens. As I keep telling you, the problems start (and the accusations become closer to being real) is when you seek to extent those beliefs over others, regardless if they agree with you or not.

    You want a debate about the LGBT agenda but what is it you would debate? The existence of LGBT people? Their rights? The need for children to be educated not use abusive language, the history of LGBT, the science of LGBT etc? What evidence would you use? What rational or reasoning would you put forward that denying LGBT their rights and training teachers on how to support LGBT young people is indoctrination?

    You state that “We need to discuss and think about the kind of changes we are imposing upon our society” and I wonder what it is you would not have happen. What changes are being imposed on your church? What changes affect you as David A Robertson in your daily life. What restrictions are being placed upon you (which what an imposition does). Why not ask to discuss and think about the kind of freedoms were are granting sections of society? Or does one persons freedom result in an imposition on you?

    Where is the evidence that the party leaders are wrong?

    You say that you want ‘tolerance, respect and inclusion’ as well but don’t set your definitions for those terms. It is clear these things mean different things to different people. What do you mean by them?

    You ask that you be allowed to differ. Again I point out not a single person is trying to force a change in how you think and what you believe. Disagreeing with you, deciding that the voice of a religious person is no stronger or more relevant than an atheist is not stopping you being allowed to differ in opinion. Unless you mean being allowed to differ and have that difference be the accepted policy instead. Unless you mean religious privilege being used to give your views greater weight than others. In which case, no.

    Saying someone might change gender for reasons like political or career reasons is a spectacular insult to those who do want to change for personal identity reasons. This goes back to your previous example of Andy Murray changing gender to win more tennis titles. It shows a total lack of respect and undermines the request to be treated fairly and not be called a bigot.

    Your quota comments show, again, either a stunning desire to insult people or tremendous ignorance. Quotas are not about establishing a mirror image of society in political parties. They are about addressing the difficulties experienced by those who do not share the privilege you and I have of being white, male and educated in a society that has, for a very long time, valued only those things. You are currently moderator of one part of society that still very much values two those things in its leadership. I can understand your dislike of quotas on that basis.

    You said “I believe in this statement you are out of touch with the vast majority of people in Scotland.” when Nicola Sturgeon stated that young people should be enabled to make their own choices about their gender and sexual identity. I actually think the majority of people in Scotland don’t really care one way or the other. They may see it as nonsense as it is something that doesn’t affect them. On one hand you complain that all this was for the 1% of Scots for whom this matters (as if that was a reason not to do it) but on the other you fear that this will fundamentally change everything about all Scottish children. It cannot be both. For the vast majority of children, this will have no impact at all. For a few, however, it can be an important validation of why they feel different to how you want them to feel.

    Congrats on becoming a Granddad. Gender is a social construct. Sex is not. Her sex is female. The gender that you and everyone else will use is girl. And that is fine as she is not old enough to say otherwise. And she will, statistically speaking, go through life with that sex and gender unchanged. However, other babies born this week will differ from that statistical norm. How do you want them treated by society? How do you want schools, universities, workplaces and society tell them to ignore what and how they feel. What dark places do you want them sent to?

    I have told you before that LGBT and gender differences are recorded throughout history. This is not a modern LGBT elite campaign against the Christian elite. Our history on LGBT and gender differences has been far from humane. Why do you argue against positive changes being made now? You actually think that you have enough problems bringing up children now that this will cause more problems? What about those children and parents who have had problems precisely because they don’t fit the gender descriptions of your biblical norm. I want a society that can address those concerns as well.

    Just because something exists does not mean it is being taught, just because an choice exists does not mean that it is being forced on people who don’t need to make that choice, just because some people are against that choice for them does not mean that the choice is not available to other people.

    You say that the political elites are “proposing restricting the freedom of those [Christian Elites] who want their children to grow up in a community where they are given clear teaching about gender and sexuality”. I think what you meant there is a particular version of Christian Teaching about gender and sexuality. I though that was what family and church was for. I got more religion in school in v early 1980s and Scout movement to 1994 than I did at home (stopped going to Sunday school after asking endless questions about the size of the Ark and dad really wanting a long lie on Sunday). As you know, it didn’t take. Religion is a family and community matter. Education is a state matter.

    Government cannot remake humanity. That is silly. Government can reflect society and the humanity within it. The bible did not make humanity. The bible reflects the humanity of the people who wrote it. That is why societies that existed before and far away from the bible have different perspectives on things like LGBT. It is a human thing. An evolved thing.

    You have not provided evidence of how this is a destructive path Scotland is now on. Treating humans as human beings is not a destructive act. I just wish more people understood that.

    1. Too much to deal with in one go. But one or two quick points.

      1) You don’t have to agree with something in order to prevent bullying about that thing.
      2) Yes – people are attacked for their sexual preferences – including those who choose to remain virgins and hold to a biblical view of marriage.
      3) ‘equality’ is in inverted commas because I don’t believe that the secular humanist version of equality is equality at all. A bit like you can have equal schools as long as they fit our agenda!
      4) Yes – I want a debate about sexuality and what we teach our young people. Should paedophilia be recognised as a sexuality? Should children be taught that abortion is right? and many other things. It says a great deal about your version of equality that you think there is nothing to debate!
      5) Re gender fluidity – how many genders are there?
      6) Do we get to choose who we are?
      7) Why do you have the right to proclaim your beliefs to society, but Christians don’t? Is this the humanist version of ‘equality’ again?
      8) Where is the evidence that the party leaders are right? That they have even thought about this? That they really believe it?
      9) ‘there is not a single person trying to change how I think?’ – That is a statement beyond naive! That is what the re-education of teachers and others is all about.
      10) It is also hopelessly naive to say that noone would want to change for political or job reasons. How do you know that?
      11) You support quotas in order to deal with discrimination. Good – I look forward to quotas for Christians in political parties, boards etc. Or again maybe we are talking about the humanist version of ‘equality’?
      12) Gender is a social construct. Who says?
      13) If someone feels they are a cat trapped in a human body – what do you think society should do with them? Should we be specist?
      14) I don’t think these are positive changes.
      15) Education is a state matter. Religion is a family and community matter. Who says? Why do you impose this value on everyone?
      16) Government does not reflect society. I wish to some degree that it did. Government is about the rulers controlling the ruled.
      17) Treating human beings as human beings is not a destructive act. Treating them as less than human is. That I’m afraid is what humanism does. Despite its best intentions.

      As or the destructive path – we will see….time will tell…

    2. Douglas.

      To understand the response to your point in the first sentence of your 2nd paragraph you have to understand Christianity.

      Please look up the first half of Romans 7 v 18 and then read the whole Chapter. Rev James Philip called Romans the manifesto of the Christian faith.

      Christians believe that our nature is sinful – whatever our sexual orientation. This is the great offense that Christianity gives to the modern western secular mindset. Christians are being asked to accept that one kind of sexual orientation is not sinful. But we follow a gospel where we are required to seek forgiveness from the sin that is in our very nature (whether pride, selfishness or whatever other flaws you can imagine that seem to come instinctively from us.

      As an aside i suffered homophobic bullying at school that scarred me for many years. The irony was that I was not gay or homosexual in orientation at all (but everyone in the school was told loudly and mockingly that i was…). I also suffered physical sexual harassment at school from another boy. The two points may be related.

      What is the solution to these problems? From me, forgiveness. For them? Repentance if they were to go for that. Forgiveness from me regardless.

      Btw, none of those who I recall bullying me were professing Christians.

      Not judging others and forgiveness is part of Christianity. We have all fallen short of the Glory of God. We have no need to bully each other and nor should we. To suggest that Christianity involves bullying is to suggest a weakness with your argument.

      Douglas.

  5. Unfortunately if we believe in democracy we have no real choice, it would seem, given the way the entire political spectrum has fallen under the spell of the LGBA-Z* brigade. Even the ‘conservatives’ seem to be falling over themselves to shove this sort of thing through. Witness Ruth Davidson’s limelight-seeking behaviour. Witness David Cameron pushing through the messing up of marriage though it was not a campaign issue. If the high and mighty self-righteous politicos have no room for reasoned debate like this I think we can expect high-handed behaviour simply to fuel a reactionary rush by the disenfranchised into equally intolerant ideologies like violent Islam. What real Christianity offers is a bigger, more realistic and more loving picture of what makes us human than the crazy man-made ideologies of either LGBT*-ism or Islamism.

  6. Yes, and if gender is negotiable, is it not possible that we can choose whether we are Humans, aardvarks or zebras?

  7. David,

    I wholeheartedly applaud your letter which certainly applies to the identical issue happening in Australia at this time, both in Federal politics and State, especially in the education systems. Thank you for your words which I would like to share, with your permission.

  8. My thoughts exactly, Rev David Robertson. However, I fear that many Christians in our country may have joined on the “progressive” bandwagon on these issues and many more do not care enough. They need motivation from their church leaders so that they can stand up and make a difference.

  9. As everyone should know, schools have education per se as their fourth priority after safeguarding, inclusion and assessment. It may appear that a step is being taken – by celebrating the demands and meeting the perceived needs of a tiny, though real, constituency – to improve inclusion for those few. Maybes aye, maybes naw; but it is thoroughly hubristic to think that the desired inclusion can be meaningfully advanced by ‘education’ – yes! let’s call it ‘indoctrination’ – without incurring a safeguarding deficit. Let’s call that ‘putting children at risk.’

    Thank you, David.

    Yours,
    John/.

  10. God bless you and thankyou for speaking out, Dr Robertson. It seems to me that we, as a society, have the choice of attending to truth either sooner – which would be wise – or later as we suffer the consequences even more than we, or rather our children, are doing now.

  11. So, our one nation-state parliament is once again abusing its powers, as with the stupid Named Person legislation. “Sexual fluidity” … what a construct, and how are our teachers meant to interpret this? If they step out of line on protocols now being embedded in teaching guidance, they’ll soon know. May 5th gives us all an opportunity to protest … but what’s the alternative? All church leaders of all denominations, now need to follow Rev Robertson’s lead.

  12. At last, a religious leader who has the courage to speak the truth, a true John The Baptist. If your head ends up on a platter, I wonder which of the Herods will accept responsibility for it. I hope and pray that all religious leaders unite against this madness. As Bishop Robert Barron says, tolerance has been replaced by celebration so its either celebrate or be branded a bigot. Dictatorship? Communism?
    God bless you David; I will pray for you when I am at mass this morning.

    Communism?

  13. Hmmm.. an interesting read and as has been noted well written. However I believe your interpretation of education in Scotland is flawed. Teachers are not interested in pushing one agenda. In fact teachers go out of their way to make sure that all viewpoints are heard – including religious views.

    1. That is true of many teachers but not all. I have plenty examples of the opposite. Indoctrination is pervasive…even scarier when people don’t realise that that is what it is.

      1. I agree.
        Social conditioning is prevalent in many areas of society today and most are oblivious to it. What astounds me is that the younger generation are more PC than their parents and have a vociferous disregard for anyone who disagrees with the propaganda they have been taught. This indoctrination begins at the universities and teacher training facilities where the present generation are being conditioned to ‘teach’ the next and the remaining free thinking teachers will soon be eclipsed by those who have swallowed the rhetoric or latest popular agenda propagated by these institutions.

        For example: –
        In my lifetime the theory of evolution has became a fact despite no new scientific evidence being offered to support this new stance (now widely taught in our schools where we were once taught to remember your creator in the days of your youth)
        Marriage has been redefined after nearly 6000yrs (replaced by a sinful perversion of what God instituted).
        Man made global warming has become a fact (religion) despite there being no real evidence to support this theory, but a few scientists (bankrolled by those who benefit most from this propaganda) have signed up to it. (Jesus not only created the world but sustains it by the word of his power)
        Corporal punishment has been outlawed and indeed smacking your own children will soon result in prosecution. The lunatics now rule the asylum and teachers are no longer respected or permitted to exercise authority or discipline in the classroom. (Spare the rod, spoil the child)
        Children know their rights before they have learned how to read and write. (Children, obey your parents and your days will be long on the earth)
        The headmaster of the school (in Scotland) is about to become the ‘named person’ for every child in the school with authority to overrule parents despite the recent protests by the first minister that parents can opt out. (Train your child in the way he should go and when he is grown he shall not depart from it)

        The system is completely broken and no amount of legislation will fix it. This hasn’t happened overnight but I fear that the PC movement has gained so much momentum now that it will be very difficult if not impossible to stop.
        Perhaps this is in part due to the fact that ‘Christians’ have also been secularised and are less inclined to speak out partly because they are afraid of being misunderstood but also due to the fact that many of them don’t know their Bibles and are deceived themselves so consequently are not equipped to effectively refute those who would oppose the truth.

        There will no doubt be folks who disagree with what I’ve said and that’s good (as I hope to provoke serious consideration) but not if it is just the blindly accepted/popular view even if it has been repeatedly taught or perceived to be widely accepted.

    2. We know that it is all too easy to criticize teachers, yet we have not heard of one who has presented Islam as primarily a POLITICAL ideology (which it undoubtedly is to non-Muslims), rather than just a personal religious matter. Neither have we heard a teacher accurately describe the true nature of the man whom Muslims must follow as an ideal. Islam is not remotely equivalent to other “optional” religions, and no amount of political correctness or sanitization will change the facts which students deserve to learn in full.

  14. Sorry to depart from the consensus here.

    The political philosophy of the ‘new left’ in the United Kingdom has been quite clear for anyone wishing to look, for three decades at least. To view a position that is hostile to the traditional Christian view as somehow ‘narrow’, is completely wrong.

    ‘The problem with the approach advocated by The Equality Network (a government funded lobby group) and others, is that it is limited to one very narrow area of life and one very narrow philosophy.’

    That’s wrong. The LGBT agenda is only one part, but an important part, of a much wider political and social philosophy that is ‘different’ to the worldview held by orthodox or traditional Christians.

    The stance on abortion, from the overwhelming majority of left-wing parliamentarians in every western democracy should have been a very obvious wake up call. However, it was ignored by people who wanted to identify themselves as ‘on the side of the poor’.

    In reality, the old left ideas of economic socialism impoverish people. By clinging to that philosophy some on the left have ignored the reality behind what looks superficially like new developments. In reality what is emerging now has been baking in the oven for a long time.

  15. Excellent response David to a ludicrous development by our increasingly ludicrous and easily influenced politicians who increasingly jump on a band wagon before thinking the subject through.
    Thank you for putting into words what many of us think, and thank you for challenging politicians on our behalf
    Dave

  16. With regards to knowing plenty of teachers. I beg to differ David. You know of some you have focussed on instead of looking at those who are excellent practioners and share their good practice. I am sure the GTCS would have something to say to those teachers who were indoctirinating. It would concern me if they were.

    1. Maureen. What do you beg to differ about? I know plenty teachers who do indoctrinate and plenty who try not to. Your faith in the GTCS is remarkable. I can give you numerous examples if you like….for example when the Dalai Lama came to Dundee the Caird Hall was packed with teachers taking their pupils. I know several children who have been taught Buddhist meditation in school and others who have been openly mocked for believing the bible. Indoctrination occurs in many shapes and sizes.

  17. Thank you so much David for speaking up with such clarity on these issues and I too believe your measured thoughts are representative of many Scottish people today. It takes a brave person to challenge the “emperor’s new clothes” mentality and obsession with the whole subject and to exhort the government to spend more time and tax payers’ money on far more vital issues in our Nation.

  18. The Dalai Lama? Teachers taking the opportunity to take children to see and hear one of the greatest religious leaders of our time is Indoctrination? Before they even went along they would have looked at human rights, global citizenship and I am sure would be following it in classes afterwards where they would critically evaluate the life and works of the Dalai Lama. Teaching meditation? the only thing I have seen in classes, both primary and secondary is relaxation techniques. You cannot teach meditation in a classroom setting. As for the GTCS they maintain professional standards and I know have stuck teachers off for failing to maintain good standards. It would be good to hear of some good practice in schools and classes. I am sure you must have heard of some? You could then share that good practice. The broadening of minds not the narrowing of thought is only one of the aims of education.

    1. Such a naive view. I was there. It was not just going to see the Dalai Lama. It was a dreadful meeting. He spoke such waffle….and he even called one teenage girl ‘fat’ – to the horror of many in the room – of course none of that was reported! They critically evaluated the works of the Dalai Lama – dream on! And yes I had a parent bring me a sheet last week for their five year old which was teaching meditation! Would that we were teaching the broadening of minds. Most schools I go into their minds are firmly closed by the social engineering and indoctrination they are receiving. The last class I spoke to 19 out of 20 said they were atheist – and they hadn’t a clue. As for indoctrination have a look at this for what I mean – https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda

  19. Thank you, Mr Robertson, from a ‘Traditional’ Catholic for this excellently written letter which tackles perfectly the foolishness and true agenda of this movement (although I cannot agree with your political support for the SNP, but that’s another matter ;-)) May God bless you – I only wish more Christian leaders (and anyone else!) would have the courage to stand up and speak out on these matters. As you say, completely out of touch with reality and commonsense.

  20. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36010664 A shocking story included in this piece in the news today, about a girl who decided as a teenager to have a mastectomy. Now she is not so sure anymore.

    Dear David,

    The irony of this current situation, is that while Christians are attacked for being behind the times, many Christian families have raised their children with an especially positive and advanced view of gender equality (sadly the ones that don’t, appear to get it very badly wrong).

    I was raised in a conservative Christian family but led to believe that in following Christ, anything was possible for me as a girl: it was serving Jesus that would decide my future, not what the world imposed on me because of my gender. We even have a verse that says in Christ there is ‘neither male nor female’ – which obviously has to be read in context, but it touches on the radical nature of the Christian faith.

    I have tried to raise my little boy to appreciate beauty in objects and the world around him (including flowers, pink and babies). It is only now that he has started school that he is being forced to take on the gender stereotypes that are so firmly laid on to him by the other boys in his class. I don’t think that all of these stereotypes are instinctively male – they have been placed on the boys and girls by their main carers. This leads me to believe that while many Scots would support gay marriage, there is a large chunk who would not be happy about their children or teens being counselled at a young age to be open to determining their own gender. But will they listen to or support a Christian lobby they perceive as out of touch, or at worst, a crowd of bigots?

    My other concern is that if I try to raise my son in an open-minded way towards gender identity (that within the boundaries of his sex, he can embrace and understand both the male and female nature of God in the same way that Christ did), the prospect of gender fluidity (the government’s version) being taught in schools, will further polarise the attitudes of children and parents frightened by the prospect of being different – so that if my son expresses himself in a progressive way regarding gender, he might be labelled by the other kids, counselled and have the prevailing alternative view, whatever it is at the time, presented as ‘an option’ to his young mind. This might push open-minded parents like myself into the position of falling back on to the old gender stereotypes, as a way of protecting our kids in the playground, and making them the same as all the other kids. I can feel it happening already. Madness and sadness.

    Kind regards.

  21. In light of some of all the above, & The Scottish Christian Party only being represented in some areas… Who do we vote for???!!! I’m looking down the ballot page list of ‘choice’ of candidate …. There is not one whom represents the views or concerns David has highlighted …. I am entitled to vote, but I would be voting for something that undermines my freedom & beliefs. I feel that I’m bound & gagged.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s