From 12 September, Australians will be asked to vote on whether to change the marriage act to allow same-sex marriage. The Australian Chinese community has always been a practical one – and many of us have often not taken much interest in this topic before now. However, many Chinese parents are becoming aware that legalising same-sex marriage goes hand in hand with the notorious “Safe Schools” program.
The vast majority of the Australian Chinese community is resolutely opposed to the government using taxpayers’ money to push radical sexual and gender ideologies to school children, under the pretense of anti-bullying, without parents’ consent. If the law is changed to allow two people of the same sex to marry, the inappropriate teaching content from programs like “Safe Schools” will become compulsory in schools, and parents voicing concerns over this issue will be silenced.
This is not fear mongering; the logic is actually very simple to understand. When the definition of marriage is changed to disregard gender in the law, it is saying that gender has no meaning in marriage. It follows, therefore, that schools would teach content suggesting there is no difference between same-sex, opposite-sex and transgender relationships. As we have seen with “Safe Schools” in Victoria, LGBTI content would not be confined to health and sexual education, but embedded throughout the curriculum. Preschool children’s storybooks would also include LGBTI content (for example, two princes falling in love and getting married).
If faith-based schools refuse to teach programs like Safe Schools in the future, there is a likelihood they would lose government funding. This has become a reality in UK where same-sex marriage has already been legalised. Vishnitz Girls School, a private Jewish school, faces closure because it refuses to teach same-sex and transgender content.
Canada legalised same-sex marriage in 2005. This year, Ontario has passed a law that allows the government the right to remove children from parents who do not agree with the LGBTI agenda.
Ontario parent Steve Tourloukis did not wish his child to participate in LGBTI education, and sought court assistance when the school refused to give him advanced notice of when these programs would occur or let him withdraw his child from them. He lost the case, with the court ruling that he must allow his child to attend and there is no obligation for schools to notify parents.
Here in Australia, the Victorian government, a strong advocate of the LGBTI movement, has already released a guideline stating that if students and their parents cannot agree on the student’s gender identity, the school can consider the child to be a mature minor and help them undergo gender transitioning without parents’ consent.
Those of us who support traditional marriage need to use our vote wisely to stop programs like “Safe Schools” becoming mandated in every school in Australia. Vote “No” to redefining marriage, gender and family – and ask many others to do the same. For the sake of our children’s future and for our freedoms, we must not remain silent!