"Social Justice" Course - Don't Censor It, Drop It!

A BC school board apparently thought they could improve the provincially approved course in "social justice" by removing all references to perverse behavior. They probably thought they could make something decent out of it this way; something that would actually be beneficial for grade 12 students. They failed in every way possible.

Obviously, such initiative angered the homosexual lobby, which hints that a legal action is possible unless the school board backs down. (The course was brought as result of an agreement which gave homosexual activists the right to force "gay-friendly" curriculum on BC schools.) But even if there was no threat of a law suit - such action would be at the very least pointless.

Let's take a closer look at the course. It's a provincially recommended course and it's named "social justice". What do you think is in there? What kind of "social justice" could a strictly secular humanist provincial ministry of education preach to students? Do you think there would be anything in it about personal responsibility to the family, to the community and to the nation? You wish! Here's what Edward Michael George have found in the course curriculum:

... Identify and describe specific practices of solving conflict and promoting social justice, including ... coups [and] revolutions ...

... Identify a range of ways in which social injustice is manifested (e.g. ... reduced self-worth) ...

... Demonstrate an understanding of the role of language in oppression (e.g. non-gender inclusive language, use of euphemism) ...

More >>>

So that's what their "social justice" is all about. Thou shalt never use euphemisms or such gender-exclusive words as wife or husband. Thou shalt never tell a failing student that he's failing, never hint an underqualified job applicant that he's not qualified for the job, as you'll be committing a mortal sin of reducing one's self-worth. And if one of those language-oppressed people, whose self-worth have been continuously reduced by the oppressive middle-class white men, chooses to go on a killing spree - thou shalt be compassionate, for it's not them but "social injustice" that is to blame...

In the end of the course, the student must be able to: "Demonstrate an understanding of the need to undertake informed action while at the same time not necessarily waiting until having "all the information."" Being able to take informed action without having all the information - isn't that genius? And really, why would the students need "all the information" if our intellectual secular humanist folks from the ministry of education have already done the thinking for them? Just follow the standard cliche: Terrorists are good, soldiers are bad. Feminists are heroes, men are pigs. A serial killer deserves compassion, but an unborn baby deserves to die. It's simple, isn't it?

So what did the school try to achieve by removing just one twisted notion from the course but leaving all others intact? What kind of middle ground were they seeking? Didn't they realize that there's no way something sensible could ever be made out of that course? Instead of trying to censor a useless course, the Abbotsford school board should have dropped it altogether. That would free up some manpower and classroom space for teaching our children math and science, classic arts and literature - so they could have the information to make informed decisions on their own...