From 5-8 years old, children are taught to define human rights, respect human rights, and express support for human rights.

Note that in topic 2.1 Values and Sexuality, children are not taught to express support for their personal values. They are only taught to “reflect” on them which leans towards questioning or challenging them.

What does “human rights” mean?

The UN ITGSE defines “human rights” on page 13 as “the right of every individual to education and to the highest attainable standard of health and well-being.

How this applies to sex ed is ambiguous until the content for 15-18 years old.

Here, “human rights” is used to promote LGBTQ-affirming policies and abortion.

The goal of teaching these “human rights” is to eventually train teenagers to become LGBTQ advocates pushing for political change when they graduate.

We see a contradiction. “Topic 2.1 Values and Sexuality” seems to accommodate children’s personal values. 

However, in this topic, children are expected to have an attitude that affirms “human rights” which includes same-sex unions, same-sex “parenting”, self-identification of gender regardless of biology and abortion.

But what are the incremental steps in CSE that would convince children to eventually undertake advocacy at 15 years old?

9-12-year-old children must recall “human rights” and identify national laws that are aligned with them. 

Children must also have the attitude of appreciating their “human rights”. 

CSE stresses a positive tone toward “human rights”, using words like “express support for”, “appreciate” and “reflect on the rights that they enjoy”.

On the other hand, in 2.1 Values and Sexuality, children are not taught to appreciate their parents’ values. They are only taught to reflect on them, and reflect on their consequences on other people’s “rights”.

What about the national laws that are not aligned with “human rights”? 

Teenagers aged 12-15 are taught the “human rights” that impact sexual and reproductive health.

They must also discuss how national laws impact these “rights”, and recognise violations of these “rights”. 

This shapes teenagers to disagree with national laws concerning LGBTQ ideology and eventually become advocates to push for political change.

Finally, after expressing support for “human rights”, comparing them with national laws and disagreeing with national laws, teenagers have sufficient context to become advocates.

School should not be treated as a platform for political lobbying, especially on complex and controversial issues. We are doing youths a disservice when they are taught simplistic views and forced to uncritically accept a pro-LGBTQ perspective.

Furthermore, parent-child relationships are precious and should not be undermined by political activists seeking extreme political and societal change. Parents should be involved, not quietly undermined via school, in matters where personal values are in question.