Is Scottish Catholic Education Service Embedding The LGBT+ World-View?

Editor writes…

Reflecting on our forthcoming Education Seminar (23 May), and given that Barbara Coupar, the Director of the Scottish Catholic Education Service (SCES) has ignored my emailed invitation to her to participate in said seminar, I decided to take a look at some of the resources on the SCES website which are used in Catholic schools.  As a retired secondary school /sixth form teacher, I am particularly interested in the materials used with the older students, so I ambled along to the SCES website and clicked on the Religious Education section. However, they require login details to access those lessons so, as a follower of the old maxim if at first you don’t succeed, give up, I moved on to visit the section headed Equality & Inclusion Learning and Teaching, and clicked on resources for Levels Three, Four and Senior Phase – see sidebar on right of the SCES page: click here

I had technical problems with the Word documents at Level Three – they just wouldn’t open.  However, I did see the video “The Story of Human Rights” which was very lively.  Only two “hero” figures stand out in the film – 6th century Cyrus the Great, who freed the slaves in Babylon, thus bringing civilisation to the region and, of course, Mahatma Gandhi. If there were any notable Catholics, missionaries and saints, doing good in the world at any point in history, they didn’t make it into The Story of Human Rights” video shown in Catholic schools in Scotland. 

Levels Four and Senior Phase concentrate on driving home the importance of the  Equality Act, 2010, with time divided more or less equally between the Equality Act 2010 and the Stonewall Riots – credited with sparking the fight for LGBT+ rights.  At the top of the list of resources for Level Four, however, we find a video in which pupils are presented with two dolls, one white, one black, and  asked (by white interviewers) to point to the “bad” doll and the “ugly” doll and the “good” doll and the “pretty” doll.  In the majority of cases, children pointed to the white dolls as being the good/pretty etc and to the black doll as being the bad/ugly. This “research” is used to point to rampant racism – it will be interesting to see if our bloggers agree…

Take some time to research the SCES materials yourself and then share your thoughts. Should parents be concerned about these materials? And is SCES guilty of embedding the LGBT+ worldview, indoctrinating young people with the philosophy of “gay rights”? 

30 responses

  1. I think the dolls video is designed deliberately to make children point to the white dolls for all the positive answers – if kids are asked by white people which of the two dolls is best, they’re hardly going to answer the black doll. What a way to conduct research. It’s ridiculous. At the very least there should have been a black interviewer there and the questioning divided equally between the black and white interviewers. It’s getting to the stage where if you’re white, you’re automatically going to be racist against blacks but not if you’re black – you won’t be labelled racist against whites. It’s really dreadful and if this goes on it will only sow more and more division among races in the UK and America where this also happens. The video is American, I think, in fact.

    I’ve not had time to study the rest of the SCES materials but I plan to do so. I can’t see what the Equality Act has to do with teaching in Catholic schools – are pupils being taught to go along with the Abortion Act? I’m more inclined to answer the headline question, “yes” – SCES IS embedding the LGBT worldview in Catholic schools but I’ll check more thoroughly before giving my final opinion. That’s definitely my impression so far because the emphasis is on the Equality Act and the Stonewall riots/LGBT rights.

    • Lily,

      I do agree about the dolls video and racism. I thought it was terrible, and the one child who said “neither one” should have been questioned more deeply – she had something to teach but that would have defeated the purpose of the so-called “research” being done which seems to have been to label all white people as racists, as you say. It’s not unusual now to hear TV commentators speak about “white supremacy” as if we all think we’re superior to people of colour, which is a blatant lie. Schools should be focusing on teaching children to be kind to everyone. That should be done without using words like “bad” and “ugly” as if one race is one and another race is another.

      • I am also appalled at that dolls video. It’s shocking to see those little black children saying over and over that the white doll is the good, the pretty one etc. It’s a deliberate attempt to make the children feel like victims. Shame on the so called professionals who are conducting those interviews. They are not doing research at all but perpetuating the myth that all white people think they’re superior. SCES is doing a disservice to education by using such a phoney research project.

  2. I tried to look at the early years in inclusion and equality but the power points wouldn’t open for me. I did see the “Apology” poster but that doesn’t tell us anything.

    Just looking at the aims etc and the headlines of the content which I can’t open, I’m guessing it’s all very surface stuff about being nice and kind to everyone. There is a video on there about the Good Samaritan, a cartoon video which is fine, I’m guessing there’s nothing very much about God apart from that video, and no mention of trying to become a saint using some of the child saints already canonised. In other words, there’s nothing specifically Catholic that I can see. Yet, everyone agrees that it is the early years which are crucial – what children learn then will affect them for the rest of their lives, so if all they’re learning is to be a nice person and kind, that’s hugely reducing the purpose of a Catholic school, IMHO. They’d learn that in any school.

  3. I completely agree about the dolls video – there’s a PC agenda at work here, for definite.

    I took a look at the Second Level materials and the list of names being promoted speaks for itself:

    Download
    Stephen Hawking

    Download
    Rosa Parks

    Download
    Richard Branson

    Download
    Nelson Mandela

    Download
    Malala Yousafzai

    Download
    Barack Obama

    What about St Martin de Porres, patron saint of people of mixed race? His Feastday is November 3
    Patron: of Mixed Race, Barbers, Public Health Workers, Innkeepers Death: 1639
    Beatified: in 1837 by Pope Gregory XVI
    Canonized: in 1962 by Pope John XXIII

    So, Martin is a young saint made a saint in our times, a boy born of a black mother and white father who was a terrible role model, as it happens, he left the family out of being ashamed of his black wife once he started to be successful at his work, but Martin understood this was not right, and he became a saint. He taught young people in his care that God loves everyone no matter their colour. Isn’t this saint the obvious one to use in teaching young people that racism is wrong?

    Kids in Catholic schools are being denied their heritage. I can’t think why any parent would send their children to them to be indoctrinated with politically correct thinking.

    • Nicky,

      I pulled up just one of those names – Obama – and it was only a photo of him. He will go down in history as one of the worst of the American Presidents – this article gives a lot of information about his corrupt behaviour in office.
      https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/12-reasons-obama-greatest-president-ever-rebuttal/

      Presumably, his photo is used in Catholic schools because he is black and became the first ever USA President of colour. That seems to be the litmus test now. White bad, black good – not matter what the reality is in individual cases. Not whether the person is doing good or doing bad, just the colour of their skin. It’s ridiculous. Surely children should be getting educated to NOT judge people by their colour?

      • Margaret Mary,

        Couldn’t agree more with what you have written. If they want to deliberately use non-whites as examples, why not choose ones of good standing? I mean, Mandela?? The man is a self-confessed terrorist. He plead guilty at his trial to more than 30 acts of terror. Could you imagine the reaction if they had used, say, Martin McGuinness instead? Ludicrous. When does this madness end because I’m sick to the back teeth of it.

    • I only read there up to The Obama Men . Anyone who thinks that the 2 of Them were any good for anything ,and I mean anything. They need their heads examined. The Obamas were . False Names . False Marriage. False Children and False Faces. Probably the worst 2 People ever to occupy The White House.
      President Trump never had the White House Exorcised for nothing when these Despots left it.

  4. I am a teacher and I am scared to comment on this blog because of possible repercussions.

    What they present as Catholic Social Teaching is not anything to do with the Social Kingship of Christ. It’s Modernist garbage.

    I would have to be honest and say the resources do not conform to Catholic Moral Teaching and are, in fact, the TIE recommendations dressed up. I wrote to The authorities told them that the GOVERNMENT is breaking law by violating the terms of the 1918 Education Act, the bishops are complicit in this by dancing to the tune of the TIE Campaign.

    I was called into my HT’s office and told, “Thank you for being the RE coordinator but someone else will now take over”! Coincidence?

    • Catholic Teacher,

      Your final paragraph is interesting (to say the least) but be assured that you are not alone in worrying about possible censure from your employers for the crime of speaking the truth about what is going on in Catholic education. I would say there are now enough examples to make the authorities think twice about any discrimination against concerned teachers who take on the role of “whistleblower”, so worry not.

  5. I’ve not had the chance to check out the SCES resources but what I’ve read here is already cause for concern.

    It’s obvious that promoting the Equality Act of 2010 and implanting the narrative that homosexuals were victims prior to the Stonehouse Riots, is going to result in pupils who think the Church’s teaching is outdated and discriminatory.

    Are these so-called Catholic educationalists stupid? Can’t they see that – or do they see it, fine, but want to indoctrinate young people with the LGBT message and actually turn them into dissenters against Catholic moral teaching? I’m afraid that’s what it looks like, unless they really are stupid people.

    • Fidelis,

      I’d say they know exactly what they are doing…and they’re doing it in such a way as to cover their intentions with a thick cloud of smoke, so that those being indoctrinated don’t realize it.

      And, they have the blessing of their bishops, largely. Correction: homosexual bishops.

  6. I’ve looked a many of the SCES resources and I can’t find anything that is suitable, with the exception of the cartoon video on the Good Samaritan.

    I’m glad I don’t have children in school or I’d be removing them – yesterday. So called Catholic schools are a joke. Kudos to the home-schoolers. They saw it before the rest of us.

  7. Speaking of homosexual bishops, I came across this quote today from St. Peter Damian:

    “For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?”

    • RCA Victor,

      Strange you should mention St Peter Damian – my last thought on closing down my computer last night was “Have any of these so-called Catholic educators (or the bishops) actually heard of St Peter Damian, let alone read his hard-hitting (to put it mildly) commentary on homosexual activity?”

      Great minds think alike, as they say. Or is it “fools seldom differ”? 😀

  8. I have not had the chance to look at the SCES Equality material comprehensively, or in any depth.

    However, one thing which has struck me was the thought: if you showed someone the material – without revealing the identity of the educational body responsible for it – would it be obvious to them that the material was from a Catholic Education Service?

    I think the sad answer to that can only be “no”. (Right enough, given it doesn’t mention Catholicism at all might be a strong clue it is indeed modern Catholic material – haha!).

    The material is entirely secular in nature – look at the list of names referred to by Nicky above. Sure it contains some admirable names (as well as some very ropey ones) but – typically – not a single Catholic Saint, Pope, Doctor of the Church etc.

    Our young people will be left to conclude that the faith has never produced anyone of note.

    Some of the other material I have seen strongly promotes the legend of the “Stonewall Riots”, an LGBT propaganda vehicle. I say “legend” because I think the details of this alleged event are somewhat vague, to say the least. Some sources claim there were several days of serious public disorder. Yet I have never seen any Police / news footage of this.

    That is very strange compared to other mid-late 20th Century examples of public disorder which are well documented by video camera. Eg – the Northern Irish “troubles”, the UK Miners Strike, The UK Brixton Race Riots, Student Vietnam Protests in the US etc.

    I very much think the Stonewall events have been substantially inflated – remember, everything related with the LGBT movement is founded on lies.

    Anyway, the material will no doubt cause young people to sympathise with and lionise the LGBT world – which is hardly a responsible outcome for Catholic schools. Yes people should be taught tolerance and respect, but also Catholic teaching in its entirety on this and all matters.

    Such material – let us be honest, “propaganda” – coupled with the complete absence of Catholic teaching will not produce good results, rare parental interventions notwithstanding.

    How perverse too that the SCES material does not broach the previous suffering of Catholics themselves – long the most reviled and persecuted minority in post-reformation Britain. I don’t recall any “gay” persons being put to death at Glasgow Cross, for example, like St John Ogilvie. Right enough, as we know, St John is an embarrassment to the Bishops of today.

    I understand SCES is looking for feedback on its material and I will certainly contribute to that.

    My impression of SCES is of well meaning people, but people who are more state employees than they are Catholics. (I don’t know if SCES itself is publicly funded, likely not, but its staff have all had long public sector careers and, I am sure, wouldn’t get anywhere near a SCES post if they had ever done anything other than “toe the line” in the state education sector.)

    I think SCES can be coy, seemingly they like to say they “do not contradict Church teaching” – but then that in itself is of little use if Church teaching is largely absent from the agenda, which is what we seem to see with the material discussed here. (And indeed is my own experience of Catholic schools, decades ago).

    • I’m afraid it’s more dangerous than being “secular”. There’s a worksheet that gives a scenario of a pupil changing gender. It then asks pupils to describe how the school would be going against Catholic Social Teaching if they refused to use the child’s “new name”. That’s wicked!

      • Catholic Teacher,

        I couldn’t agree more. It really is totally wicked to actually teach false doctrine to young people. There’s a punishment for that set aside especially – didn’t Christ say it would be better for those who lead young people astray who believe in him, to have a millstone put round their neck and drowned in the depth of the sea. Maybe the SCES people should spend a bit of time thinking about that.

      • Catholic Teacher,

        Thanks fore that feedback – it is outrageous!

        What “stage” of the material is this worksheet part of? I would certainly gives SCES a piece of my mind over it.

        Can it be downloaded from the SCES website?

  9. Can anyone name me ONE organisation of ANY description which isn’t embedding the LGBT+ world view these days? Satan is really pulling out all the stops at the moment. Our Lady of Good Success, pray for us.

    • Westminster Fly,

      That’s a perfect point. LGBT+ beliefs and thinking is embedded everywhere, in every TV programme, news etc. They are running the country.

  10. I even saw a huge banner hung across a busy main street where I live a little while back, saying that the Rugby Football Union supports LGBT+ or words to that effect. I suspect if you ask the average male who attends rugby matches, he wouldn’t actually be an LGBT+ supporter, or a few might say they are in order to appear politically correct, or not want to get into trouble with the thought police.
    I even saw some LGBT promotion in a local supermarket a while back as well. And I recall a friend was shocked to see that her bank had rainbow symbols everywhere, and when she complained about it, was told that she was the only one who had complained. Everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. Look at TV adverts. Whatever product is being advertised, many of them are now showing obvious same-sex couples using the product. The youngsters don’t stand a chance.

  11. Westminster Fly,

    I also complained to my bank when I saw that they were supporting Gay Pride but the person who took a note of my complaint didn’t say anything, she seemed bored and said she would pass on my comments. The problem is, there’s no point switching banks because they’re all the same, they are “partnered” with the LGBT+ groups and seem to think it’s necessary to advertise the fact.

  12. In response to Westminster Fly’s and Margaret Mary’s experiences, the USA has a “Pride Month” – June – during which the displays such as you mention appear everywhere, including banks and supermarkets. We stupid Americans like to dedicate months to specific causes – e.g. we are now nearing the end of “Black History Month,” the real purpose of which is to deepen white guilt and create more warring social subsets who each claim their own special variety of “victimization.”

    Classic cultural Marxism at work.

    • RCA Victor, WF, MM,

      Not to be outdone in banking experiences, I, too lodged a complaint at my local bank when I noticed the rainbow symbol spread across the cash machine last year, (or was it the previous year … days increasingly merge into the previous day, I’m finding in my older age…)

      Anyway, I was appalled to read the very proud notice on the cash machine that the Bank was / is proud to support “Pride” – I might as well have said nothing because I had a similar response to MM, except that the young woman who took a note of my objections had to use both hands to restore her jaw to its rightful place in between her astonished ears.

      I think we are definitely a minority now; most people say nothing, whether for fear of the Through/Hate Police or through indifference, I know not which.

      • I suspect it’s because most of us are overwhelmed by the sheer scale of it. If you complained about every instance of LGBT promotion that you encounter, you’d never, ever stop complaining.

  13. Re Above Scottish Education and RSE …….please watch …….and do write in to The Education Minister vital we speak up thank you

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: