section28 (offtopic)

[Tiggles]

I like the title of this email - re:peel section 28, says it all really.

Ed Blackmore wrote:
> I'm interested how teachers intend to promote homosexuality anyway.

That's very much the crux of the objection - the wording. It is based on
the offensive assumption that a homosexual teacher wants to actively
promote homosexuality, something which as you say is quite ludicrous.
Rather, it has to outlaw the "promotion" of homosexuality because it
would be politically incorrect to outlaw the "mentioning" of
homosexuality. The intent underlying this clause is however precisely to
outlaw the mentioning of homosexuality in the personal and social
education parts of the curriculum. If you're not allowed to "promote"
homosexuality then the implication is that you are allowed to "promote",
or are even encouraged to promote, heterosexuality. Is that really what
they mean? The lack of logic and balance in the wording of the clause
points quite clearly towards its prejudicial intent. And attempting to
limit a teacher's freedom to talk about homosexuality is like limiting a
teacher's ability to mention, say, Poland, or the fact that people ride
bikes. 

> Saying all this I also support fieldsports (inc. fox hunting) so I
> really can't see us agreeing on anything.

Oh yeah? Well I boil small children in oil! So ner!

Dakpad