LGBT Ideology

Written by Andy

The ‘Western’ media have a tendency to present any resolutions against LGBT ideology as an offensive against homosexual or transsexual people or persons suffering from sexual identity disorders. The reality is that they are a reaction to the influence of LGBT propaganda. It is the propaganda that the public dislikes, not the persons. We can have situations where a city or government refuses to work with companies that refuse to promote LGBT attitudes. Under this pressure from unelected entities, governments can grant access to LGBT activists at every school, where they can also promise to implement sexual education according to the ‘Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe‘ (published in 2010 by the World Health Organisation). Those standards advocate the encouragement for children to masturbate as early as in nursery schools, and promote, throughout the course of a child’s education, abortion and all types of sexualities and sexual identities.

It is thus necessary to set in place resolutions against LGBT ideology and adopt the Charter of the Rights of the Family. We need to declare ourselves free of propaganda commonly known as: “LGBT idology”.

Michelle A comments:

We salute you bishop, homosexual and Islamic ideology are used by satan to destroy the West and our Christian heritage.

Pedro comments:

God Bless Poland! Very brave Bishop! There were catastrophic consequences with this LGPT-ideology in Finland. R epeating a lie does not become true – never.

There now exists full sets of teaching materials to assist: “Overcoming Homophobia in the classroom through curriculum strategies.” and thus the promotion of homosexuallity. This one set of strategies puts more emphasis on same sex attraction than it does on attraction to the opposite sex. You can read it here.

British Caroline Farrow, an anti-LGBT+ activist, got herself banned from entering the USA. She had collected a phenomenal half a million signatures requesting The Walt Disney Company “to stop the LGBT propaganda and gender indoctrination at Disney.”

“LGBT activists continue to pressure Disney to use its influence over millions of children to indoctrinate and encourage them to accept gender ideology,” the petition reads. “And as a result, the family-friendly Disney franchise is becoming a hollow shell of what we have come to love for generations. Now, Disney’s wholesome entertainment is being replaced with LGBT-inclusive events and cartoon characters meant to warp the minds of innocent children.”

Disney is planning to run ‘pride’ events. They support LGBT and pride. They have sold rainbow and ‘Believe in Love’ merchandise at times around their unofficial ‘Gay Days’ events.

The LGBT community is not entirely homogeneous. One group wants to dissacioate from the ‘Trans’ group and eliminate the T from LGBT.

…we feel their ideology is not only completely different from that promoted by the LGB community (LGB is about sexual orientation, trans is about gender identity), but is ultimately regressive and actually hostile to the goals of women and gay men.

The LGB component of LGBT makes these allegations:

  • The vilification and harassment of women and gay/lesbian individuals who openly express disagreement with the trans ideology; a simple disagreement over an issue can result in responses that range from insults (“transphobic bigot”) to threats of physical harm (often, in the case of women, rape) and even death; the harassment by the transgender community of prominent individuals ranging from iconic gay rights activist/drag queen RuPaul and legendary feminist Germaine Greer has been particularly loathsome.
  • The infringement of the rights of individuals, particularly women, to perform normal everyday activities in traditional safe spaces based on sex; this is most pernicious in the case of men claiming to be transgender demanding access to bathrooms, locker rooms, women’s shelters and other such spaces reserved for women.
  • The appropriation and re-writing of gay and lesbian history and culture, most notably attempting to re-cast the majority gay white men who participated in the Stonewall riots as transgender, specifically casting as “transgender” men who adopted feminine attire but still identified as men (they called themselves transvestites, which is not the same as the modern transgender identity); particularly frustrating was the fact that media outlets such as The Advocate, Out and Huff Post Gay Voices, who should have been the first to point out the fallacy of this notion, actually went along with the lie.
  • Most troubling, by persuading parents and health professionals to diagnose children as young as four as transgender, despite considerable research that shows that more than 90 percent of children who express “gender dysphoria” at a young age grow out of it by adolescence and, in most cases, grow up to be well-adjusted gay men and women; ideologically, it runs counter to traditional LGB and feminist philosophy – whereas feminists and gay men/women advocate for expanding and re-defining gender concepts, the trans movement is regressive, insisting upon re-asserting and codifying classic gender concepts of what is masculine and what is feminine.

Please note that we are not advocating intolerance or prejudice against the transgender community: we recognize and respect the right of adults to determine their own path in life, including transitioning to the opposite gender if they so wish. However, that cannot occur by infringing upon the rights of women, gay men and children.

At the very least, a discussion must be opened up to these issues, which for too long are being suppressed and censored – they are genuine concerns that need to be aired. In the end, we feel that the transgender ideology is not compatible with the rights of women, gay men and children and ask that the organizations and media outlets mentioned above disassociate themselves from the transgender movement and return to representing their base support of gay men and lesbians.

European institutions are now forcing gender ideology dwon the throats of EU states with the help of the ‘Convention on Domestic Violence’.

The most extremist committees of the European Parliament – Civil Liberties (LIBE) and women’s rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) joined forces on Tuesday for a public hearing funded by the European Commission and the Council of the Union, with the aim of advancing ‘gender’ ideology and to force Member States to adopt the Istanbul Convention, maculated by it.

The hearing on the entry into force in the EU states of the Istanbul Convention on Violence Against Women aims to contribute to an interim report on the two Commissions as joint authors, with Anna Corazza Bildt and Christine Revault d’Allonnes Bonnefoy as co-rapporteurs, but unfortunately had exclusive speakers who all supported the inclusion in the Convention of the dangerous ‘gender’ theories, which will make it a mandatory definition in all Union states for the first time. No effort was put into place by the organizers to address the presence among the speakers of a civic group that opposes gender ideology.

The hearing follows a debate in parliament’s plenary last week. During this time, “gender” activists received strong support from both the European Commission and the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, provided by Slovakia. Speaking on behalf of the Commission, Vera Jourova, Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality informed how the Commission saw “progress in joining the European Union to the Istanbul Convention.”

Ms Jourova said it ‘constantly encourages Member States to ratify the document throughout the European Union, and the Member States can rely, as aid in this process, on available European programmes and funds’. In other words, in addition to harassing states to sign this dangerous document the Commission also offers them bribes in the form of funds for projects “friendly” to gender theory. It also makes it clear that the Commission saw this procedure as an opportunity to continue funding NGOs promoting this radical agenda: “Money will go to organisations – NGOs – working on the ground and can also contribute very significant impact to the success of this campaign. To add something more about money, in 2016 alone the European Union spent EUR 24.5 million to support 62 humanitarian projects to combat gender-based violence.”

Translated from

Translated from

Here is another grass roots stand against Gender Ideology:

A large number of parents in Birmingham have demanded Parkfield School stop “proselytising” LGBT ideology in their children’s school under the pretext of “inclusion”. Hundreds of parents protested outside the inner-city school—with a ~98% Muslim student body—this morning, and the “Parkfield Parents’ Community Group” issued the statement below, along with a petition signed by over 400 parents.

The parents emphasise that, contrary to its being invoked in order to promote LGBT beliefs and lifestyles, equality legislation is in fact supposed to protect the “beliefs and philosophical convictions” of those that disagree with such beliefs and practices as well, including Muslims. This is a positive step towards empowerment of more Muslim parents to know and demand their rights in the face of bullying and pressure from campaign groups using every lever of state power—now including the structurally racist discourse of “counter-terrorism”—to impose one people’s set of social and ideological constructs over all others, rather than agreeing to disagree amicably on such issues.

Here is the Parkfield Parents’ Community Group ‘Position Statement’:

No to Proselytising and discrimination – Abolish ‘No outsiders’ program in Parkfield school

  • Parkfield School is situated in Alum Rock, Birmingham and 98%+ of its pupil population is of the Islamic faith background.
  • The ‘No Outsiders in our school’ program falsely claims to rely on legislation (Equality Act 2010) in justifying the promotion of homosexuality. Children are expected to affirm, verbally and in writing, that “being gay is OK”. We would say: ‘some people choose to be gay and in our multicultural society, we will accept them as they are because it is for them to make that choice’. The former is clearly an imposition of belief, which undermines the faith, beliefs and values espoused by the parents and community that the school serves.
  • The school is promoting Mr Moffat’s personal beliefs and convictions about the universal acceptability of homosexuality as being normal and morally correct. The sense of mission is clear from Mr Moffat: ‘I specifically wanted to work in a school where there was a strong probability that I would face challenges to my LGBT equality work, so that I could learn from mistakes made in the past and find a way to get it right.’[1] This is where the parents draw a line, between accepting that some people will have a different lifestyle and belief system to them, to being asked to affirm that this lifestyle/belief system is something which they should positively agree with and that it should be promoted as an option for their children. We don’t ask non-Muslims to affirm that Islam is the truth, similarly, we do not want people who practice homosexuality to tell our children to affirm that their beliefs and lifestyle choices are correct. This is proselytising.
  • We have no objection to the promotion of respectful treatment of all people and the protected characteristics (Equality Act 2010) – this is not what the ‘no outsiders’ program is focussed on. In any case, this does not necessitate positive promotion of homosexuality and its affirmation as being acceptable by pupils. Just as sexual orientation is a protected characteristic, RELIGION IS ALSO A PROTECTED CHARACTERISTIC. People whose religious convictions are that practising homosexuality is morally wrong and sinful should not be forced to affirm that it is not. They should simply be asked to be accepting of that “person” not his/her “actions.”
  • According to the ‘No outsiders’ program, how should a child who expresses surprise or disagreement with the moral correctness of homosexuality be dealt with? We get some insight into this from the writings of Mr Moffat, who narrates an incidence from Parkfield school stating, “There was one audible gasp from a child in year 6 but otherwise there was no reaction at all, which was quite nice because it demonstrated, to the shocked child that he was alone in his reaction; his homophobia made him an outsider.” (No outsiders in our school – page 44). The irony is pretty obvious since 98% of children are from a Muslim background, who will not consider such practices as being acceptable, they are the outsiders! The intimidatory and scornful tone towards the child who expressed disapproval speaks for itself. This approach is based on the false premise that if you don’t believe homosexuality to be morally right, then you must be homophobic. That is as false as saying if you don’t believe in Islam you must be Islamophobic.
  • No effective consultation with parents has been conducted in this regard by the school. We believe our children are too young to be taught about relationships in this manner (age 4 – 10), which over-sexualises and confuses children in taking away their innocence. This sexualisation of children is also a safeguarding issue as it prematurely exposes children to ideas they cannot fully comprehend and risks making them vulnerable to manipulative influences. One 4-year-old Parkfield child came home and said that her teacher had said “We can be a boy or a girl” and “wear boy’s clothes or girl’s clothes”. Another one told her mother that she learnt “boys can marry boys and girls can marry girls.”
  • A mother’s testimony :”My 10 year old daughter came home one day and asked “Mum is it true if I want to be a boy it’s OK? Mr Moffat said that it is fine because you may be a boy trapped in a girl’s body.” Mr. Moffat said to the whole class “it is OK to be gay in all religions,” and explained that “he was gay and a Christian, and that they could be gay or lesbian and be Muslim.” We find it astonishing that Mr Moffat in his zealous quest to convert children to his personal beliefs and practices, has resorted to interpreting and distorting Islamic teachings to mislead Muslim children. This is completely unacceptable to us as parents and a betrayal of trust that we placed in the school.”
  • We do not endorse any kind of homophobia or transphobia or discrimination. This is against our values and the law. We respect people’s personal choice and believe they have a right to do what they choose, without fear of discrimination. This must not be imposed surreptitiously on others via persuasive or coercive means.
  • The policy of the school is disproportionate, morally unacceptable and violates the democratic rights of parents to have children educated in consistency with their own beliefs and philosophical convictions.
  • We want the school to be open and honest and to resolve this issue as quick as possible in a positive manner. We want the ‘No Outsiders’ programme abolished from our school and replaced with a programme that teaches the Equality Act in an age-appropriate and culturally sensitive manner; a programme that teaches children that they need to behave respectfully towards all people and to not discriminate against anyone. However, this must be done in a way that does not infringe on their beliefs as being “wrong or unacceptable” or an expectation that the elimination of homophobia necessitates changing the fundamental beliefs of the child. The Equality Act is not about stipulating what beliefs one should have but about behaviour which is respectful of all people as human beings, regardless of who they are, and to ensure that no one is discriminated against.
  • We do not endorse any kind of homophobia or transphobia or discrimination. This is against our values and the law. We respect people’s personal choice and believe they have a right to do what they choose, without fear of discrimination.
  • We are alarmed at Mr Moffat’s (and the school’s) references to “a worrying rise in the radicalisation of young people,” in the context of this programme, which begins with 4-yearolds! It would appear that Mr Moffat believes that his programme is some kind of deradicalisation tool; where children who believe or express the view that such behaviour is wrong according to their faith, are deemed ‘radicalised’ because they are ‘homophobic’, thus the justification and necessity to alter their beliefs in order to deradicalise them.
  • Contrary to claims by the school that it has the support of ‘most’ of the parents in implementing the ‘No outsiders’ programme, a 400-parent petition opposing the programme has been submitted to the School Trustees. The school is considering this at the moment.

The petition wording is as follows:

As parents, we are deeply concerned that our children in Parkfield Primary School, from the age of 4 upwards, are being taught Relationship and Sex Education in a manner that is inappropriate and potentially harmful for the children’s wellbeing. The content is not age appropriate for children and is oversexualised, destroying their innocence. Views and behaviours (LGBT in particular) are being promoted aggressively (beyond legal requirements) in an inappropriate manner that undermines our rights as parents to educate and raise our children in such matters. We do not send our children to school to be indoctrinated, nor for our family values to be deliberately subverted and undermined. What the school is doing goes beyond the demands of promotion of respectful treatment of all people and the elimination of discrimination.

We the undersigned parents demand that this teaching is stopped immediately and a full, transparent consultation is carried out, involving parents, in respect of the teaching programme being implemented across the whole school. All material should be made available for parents to examine. The parental aspirations for the education of their children must be respected and appropriately reflected in the school.

The following quotes from Mr Moffat’s book: “No outsiders in our school” should be read in parallel with the above Statement:

Introduction to the book: “What we now need to be teaching is that homophobia once existed but we don’t have it in our school today, and that to be a person who is gay or lesbian or transgender or bi-sexual is normal, acceptable and OK. Children need to be learning that they may identify or may not identify as LGBT as they grow up, and that whoever they grow into as an adult is also perfectly normal and acceptable.” (No outsiders in our school – page 2) (italics added, this is a promotion of a homosexual lifestyle).

“However, at the same time, we have a perceived worrying rise in the radicalisation of young people and there is currently little clear guidance on how schools can meet the needs of children who are hearing different messages outside the school walls to the messages of equality that they hear inside.” (No outsiders in our school – page 3).

In school regarding “…the presence of ideas we do not want to hear. How can we ensure that these ideas are not the accepted norm on the playground? We can’t be simply telling children that their beliefs are wrong or unacceptable; We have to be delivering a curriculum that enables children to understand the benefits that exist in a society where diversity and difference are celebrated. Furthermore, we need our children to want to be part of that society, and we have to sell it to them; that desire may not come naturally by itself.” (No outsiders in our school – page 3).

About the author


Leave a Comment