New sex education programme all about gender ideology

 

The new Social Personal and Health Education (SPHE) programme for Junior Cycle pupils (aged 12-15) has been approved by the Minister for Education. It incorporates Relationships and Sexuality Education, but incredibly, the new curriculum specification never mentions pregnancy or babies, and ‘men’ and ‘women’ are treated as almost alien terms.

Instead, the curriculum heavily emphasises topics such as ‘gender’ and ‘sexuality,’ which raises questions about its underlying ideological agenda. This is an extremely ideologically loaded programme.

A simple analysis of the language and the concepts used in the official documents shows the priorities of the Department of Education and of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA).

In the 28-page document, the word ‘birth’ appears only once and not in relation to pregnancy, which is a natural consequence of sex. No, the word “birth” occurs only in the definition of gender identity, with the bizarre expression “sex registered at birth”.

The NCCA document says: “Gender identity: a person’s felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex registered at birth.”

It seems to suggest that the sex of a newborn is noticed and registered not according to science, in an objective manner, but by some arbitrary or curious cultural practice.

It also says: “when children are born, their sex is largely decided or ‘assigned’ on the basis of their external genitalia, which generally – but not always – reflects their internal hormonal and chromosomal make-up.” These cases exist but are extremely rare.  Why do young students need to be told about rare anomalies rather than what normally happens?

While in the 2016 version of the same document, “gender” appeared only 5 times, in the updated Curriculum Specification it is used 19 times – a huge increase – while there is no mention of “woman” or “girl” at all. “Boys and girls” also seems to be a politically incorrect expression nowadays, maybe not sufficiently inclusive of all other identities, and it is avoided by the Department of Education.

The word “female” is used only three times by the NCCA, two of which appear in the definition of ‘gender’: “Gender: Refers to the social and cultural factors influencing what it means to be male and female, i.e. the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women. It is important to distinguish gender from ‘sex’ which refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that are defined as being male and female.”

This is also the only occurrence of the word “women” in the whole document.

It is pretty obvious that the updated SPHE course focuses not much on sex, i.e. the differences between being a boy or a girl according to science, but on the ideological notions of gender identity and gender expression. These are the priorities of the Department of Education and of the NCCA.

Instead of sex education, the new course should be renamed as “gender ideology education”.

Extend assisted suicide to the poor, argue Canadian ethicists

 

Assisted suicide should be made available to the poor, the homeless and the disabled, two ethicists from the University of Toronto have argued, and a large number of Canadians agree with them. Once again, we see how quickly assisted suicide and euthanasia can become normalised in a country and be seen as an acceptable way out of a difficult life.

The philosophers, whose article appears in an academic journal, maintain that those who live in ‘unjust social circumstances’ should not be prevented from accessing what is euphemistically termed ‘Medical Aid in Dying’ (MAiD).

Poverty, disability, or homelessness can cause despair. There already have been cases in Canada of people asking for MAiD because they could not afford a house compatible with their medical condition. Experts are concerned by the growing number of prisoners asking for assisted suicide.

One argument against allowing such people access to assisted suicide is that their decision is not really autonomous because of the pressure created by their situations. Nonetheless, the two ethicists reject the idea that “the autonomy of people choosing death in the context of injustice is necessarily reduced”. They believe that decisions taken in desperate and oppressive circumstances have to be respected anyway.

The central requirement for access to euthanasia in the Canadian legislation is “having enduring and intolerable physical or psychological suffering”. It is irrelevant whether suffering is determined by social circumstances rather than medical reasons, the philosophers maintain in their article.

They acknowledge that “it is not feasible to expect medical professionals to assess the extent to which the person in their care has had their options restricted because of oppression.” But they don’t find this a good reason to reject the call for expanding the grounds to access MAiD.

Social conditions could improve but until this happens, they say, it is better for the poor and the disabled to be able to choose to die. They call their approach “harm reduction”.

“In the case of the availability of MAiD in Canada to people who not only might but have explicitly said they would choose differently if they had access to the options they preferred, we argue that the least harmful way forward is to allow MAiD to be available.”

Not allowing poor people to request assisted suicide would cause them more harm, is the bizarre conclusion of these highly educated ethicists. Refusing options amounts to perpetuating suffering.

Assisted suicide and euthanasia were initially introduced in Canada in 2016 on medical grounds for incurable illnesses when death was foreseeable, but soon the grounds were expanded by court decisions or updates in the legislation.

Pro-life activists’ predictions of a slippery slope are becoming a stark reality, unfolding at an unexpectedly accelerated pace. Safeguards are constantly eliminated or relaxed.

A recent survey showed that large numbers of Canadians believe that the grounds for access to MAID should include inability to receive medical treatment (51pc), disability (50pc), mental illness (43pc), homelessness (28pc), and even poverty (27pc). Support for these reasons is higher among young Canadians.

So, we can see that the opinions of the two ethicists are shared by a substantial portion of the Canadian population.

If death is the solution to suffering, there is no reason why it should not be offered to everyone. And if suffering is caused by social injustice and lack of alternatives, these philosophers will tell us that the right to kill oneself should extend to everyone, including the poor and the disabled. Lack of hope does not undermine autonomy, they say.

This is where the assisted death legislation is leading Canada and it should serve as a cautionary example for Ireland and for all other countries considering similar laws.

---

Photo by John Moeses Bauan on Unsplash

Marriage in Ireland still declining despite a bumper 2022

 

The number of marriages that took place in 2022 saw a significant increase on 2021, but this was mainly due to the postponement of weddings during the Covid pandemic. Overall, the marriage rate in Ireland remains low compared with a few decades ago.

In all, 23,173 marriages were registered last year, according to the Central Statistics Office (CSO).

This is the highest number in Ireland’s history and represents a 14pc increase compared with 2019, the last full year before the pandemic. The marriage rate per thousand adults was 4.4 last year while it was 4.1 in 2019.

What will the rate be next year when all the postponed weddings have already taken place? It is very likely to drop back down again.

In 2012, the rate was 4.5 per 1,000 adults, and in the 1970s, it was 6 or even 7 per thousand.

Today, the marriage rate is around the EU average, and the EU average is at near historic lows.

It is also worth noting that data about divorces for 2022 are not yet available, but there has been a consistent increase in divorce applications in the past four years.

In terms of the type of ceremonies chosen by the couple, last year the most popular form of celebration for opposite-sex spouses was a Catholic ceremony (42pc), followed by a civil ceremony at 26pc.

While the percentage of civil ceremonies hasn’t changed much in the last ten years, from 28pc to 26pc, Catholic ceremonies have seen a sharp decline: in 2012 they were 65pc of marriages.

In 2022, ceremonies conducted by a religious celebrant accounted for 64pc of all marriages, including same-sex unions. Besides the traditional churches, couples have more options nowadays. Only 1.6pc of weddings were celebrated by the three main Protestant denominations combined (Church of Ireland, Methodists, Presbyterians).

Many will be surprised that the Spiritualist Union of Ireland, which is counted among the religious celebrants by the CSO, performed almost 10pc of ceremonies.

9.3pc of couples opted for a Humanistic ceremony, which is considered non-religious.

In 2022, 618 same-sex marriages were celebrated, representing the 2.7pc of the total. This percentage continues to decline.

People are getting married at an older age. In 2022 the average age of grooms was 37.4. Ten years ago the average was 34.7. The average age of brides was 35.4 last year, compared to 32.6 in 2012.

Covid had a detrimental impact on the marriage rates. While the number of marriages registered last year has seen a temporary increase, this rise was mainly due to the weddings postponed during the Covid pandemic. Marriage in Ireland is still declining.

Abortion law review has pro-life medics in its sights

 

The official review of Ireland’s abortion law, published last week, was exactly as bad as pro-life campaigners feared it would be. Its only aim is to make it even easier to access abortion. It shows no visible concern for the unborn child and no visible wish that abortion should be rare, which is what the Government said it intended at the time of the abortion referendum.

The review recommends fully decriminalising abortion, targeting pro-life doctors and nurses, getting rid of the three-day waiting period, and allowing abortion in cases of a ‘fatal foetal abnormality’ even when the baby is likely to live more than 28 days beyond birth.

The review, commissioned by the Department of Health, also confirmed that some babies are born alive after an abortion and left to die.

Here are some the worst recommendations:

–          Decriminalisation of abortion.

Currently, abortions performed outside the limits of the law are considered a criminal offence. The review wants a full decriminalisation. Even Simon Harris, when he was the Minister for Health, thought that decriminalisation “would present a risk to the lives and health of women and that it would protect women who were forced into seeking an abortion, or where there was a dominant personality or sexual abuse.” The review disregards this thinking, even though it comes from a pro-choice perspective.

–          Cracking down on pro-life doctors and nurses.

The review says the health system should “positively discriminate in favour of persons willing to provide termination of pregnancy services” during the recruitment process of doctors. In other words, do not employ pro-life medics. Conscientious objectors are always presented in negative terms in the review.

In addition, it recommends so-called “values clarification” workshops in order to persuade pro-life doctors and nurses to become pro-choice.

It praises the HSE for already running these workshops which aim at “enabling participants to reflect on their values and thoughts about termination of pregnancy services by looking at their own beliefs and attitudes from the [point of view] of women seeking the service.”

Over time, the effect of these measures would be to sharply reduce, if not eliminate completely, the pro-life presence in Irish maternity wards.

–          Removal of the mandatory three-waiting period between the first visit to the doctor and an abortion

Waiting periods are a common feature in abortion legislation in other countries. In Italy, for instance, it is seven days; six days in Belgium. It allows women to reflect on their decision. According to HSE data, 17% of Irish women who made an initial appointment with a doctor with a view to ending their pregnancy did not return, indicating they went ahead with their pregnancies. The review ignored official data and used instead figures collected by a pro-choice group that underestimated the number of women who changed their mind.

–          Expansion of the current limits for abortion in cases of disabilities

Currently, an abortion can be requested at any moment of the pregnancy when the baby has a medical condition that might lead to its death within 28 days of birth. The review acknowledges that there is no universal list of such conditions and recommends a relaxation of the current restrictions. It also acknowledges that “fatal foetal anomaly” is not a medical term, something that the pro-life side continuously stressed during the referendum campaign.

–          Expanding the range of professionals who can provide abortions

Nurse or midwifes should be able to offer abortions, according to the review, in order to increase the number of providers and improve its geographical distribution. Currently, 11 of 19 maternity hospitals or units, and 422 GPs or clinics (around 10pc of the total) offer abortions.

–          Starve pro-life hospitals of funding 

The review recommends the diversion of funding from maternity hospitals not-providing abortions to ones that do so.

The review also recommends the development of specific guidelines to deal with babies who are born alive after an abortion. It says that “foeticide [killing the baby while still in the womb] will prevent parents and labour ward staff from facing the agony of neonatal distress and pain”. No concern is shown for the baby.

The review fails to address important issues such as the cases of misdiagnoses that have led to the aborting of healthy babies, the lack of abortion pill reversal treatment for women who have changed their minds after taking the first of the two abortion pills, the lack of mandatory counselling during the three-day waiting period.

This document says nothing about reducing the number of abortions, even though the Government promised abortion would be rare. The entire aim is to make it easier to access abortions which would only increase the rate. According to Health Minister, Stephen Donnelly, around 8,500 abortions took place last year.