Are Scottish Catholic Schools Grooming Children For Sexual Deviance?

Are Scottish Catholic Schools Grooming Children For Sexual Deviance?

Catholic Truth blogger, Summa, from Australia writes: 

You must fight this. This plague is already in Australia.It is akin to grooming youth for sexual deviance:

A spokeswoman for the Catholic Church in Scotland said: “The Church is working with the Catholic Head Teacher associations to ensure that all teachers have adequate knowledge, understanding and training and feel confident in addressing all aspects of relationships education, including LGBTI+ matters, in an appropriate and sensitive way.”  Read entire report here at Herald Scotland 


Archbishop Tartaglia President, Scottish Catholic Education Service - the buck stops here...
Archbishop Tartaglia
President, Scottish Catholic Education Service –  the buck stops here…


The Scottish Hierarchy continues to keep a disgraceful silence on the undermining-through-to-destruction of traditional marriage and sexual morality  – always taking their lead from the enemy; secular society and, specifically, the homosexual lobby, whose list of deviant behaviour is ever growing.  There’s a push now for the normalisation of “transgenderism” and goodness knows what else will be added to the list once that’s firmly in place (and they’re almost there, with few questioning the idea that a man may become a woman and vice versa)  – bestiality? Why not? 

Children and young people are, therefore, as Summa says, effectively being groomed for sexual deviance, with the full and knowing complicity of the useful idiots currently running the Education Service of the Catholic Church in Scotland – and their episcopal bosses. Click here to see who’s who….

Nobody but nobody will convince me that these self-styled education “experts” and the Bishops do not know perfectly well that “addressing LGBTI+ matters in an appropriate and sensitive way” means condoning sexually deviant behaviour and accepting its normalisation – and imposition – by those guilty of this grave sin, which Christians have always believed, is a sin “crying to Heaven for vengeance.”  Or perhaps you disagree? Let’s hear it…  

Comments (113)

  • Therese

    Signed. Thanks for the link, Editor.

    July 26, 2016 at 12:55 pm
  • editor

    I have just received the following email from an RE teacher in Glasgow:

    I am deeply concerned at the latest development’s in the sphere of LGBTI matters specifically in relation towards is impact towards the nature of Catholic Education under the spurious secularist ridden terms of tolerance, respect etc and of the Scottish hierarchy’s capitulation towards these issues in the face of culturally aggressive secularists and moral relativists. Catholic schools are confessional environments that teach defend and promote a very specific view of mankind as created in God’s image and likeness human anthropology, relationships, marriage etc. are taught in the context of that belief and understanding and re-affirmed by our blessed saviour himself.

    Catholic schools teach the beauty meaning and dignity of all human beings but within the understanding of God’s divine laws and revelation. It is not for individuals within the hierarchy or the CEC/ CHAS environment to collaborate with elements of society who openly and aggressively reject this to use laws under the guise of acceptance etc. to impose on my children cultures and lifestyles which are in direct violation of the natural law and divine positive law. As a teacher of RE and a parent I will not promote or permit my children to be exposed to a dysfunctional pedagogical rationale which does violence to the nature and integrity of our faith and the spiritual and moral formation of my/our children.

    Please print my name and address and I will gladly – from my role in education – keep CT fully informed of such matters and subsequent developments. END.

    I’ve decided not to publish the name of this teacher yet – I said we would consider that in time for the September newsletter.

    Allow me to say this, though. I am aware of the need for prudence, when a parent has responsibility to feed, clothe and house his/her offspring.

    However, I’m also aware – and I speak from experience – that when we are forced into a situation where we must depend almost wholly on Divine Providence, God keeps His word of rewarding, one hundred-fold, those who put Him first.

    Enough from me for now – discuss!

    July 26, 2016 at 2:58 pm
    • Josephine

      Thank the Lord there is at least one teacher willing to stand up and be counted on this issue. There are plenty in the “prudence” tent. It’s refreshing to see a teacher who is also a parent willing to speak up. God bless him!

      July 26, 2016 at 4:58 pm
  • Therese

    However, I’m also aware – and I speak from experience – that when we are forced into a situation where we must depend almost wholly on Divine Providence, God keeps His word of rewarding, one hundred-fold, those who put Him first.

    I too can vouch for this.

    July 26, 2016 at 4:02 pm
    • Josephine


      I agree. There is no way God would not come to the help of any teacher who gets persecuted over taking a stand against this evil, not when it’s a sin crying to heaven for vengeance.

      July 26, 2016 at 5:00 pm
  • Catriona

    I do agree that God will not be outdone in generosity, but I also think it might be pointless for one teacher to make a stand like this. I’d say that’s asking for trouble and that he/she may be dismissed for gross professional misconduct.

    July 26, 2016 at 5:44 pm
    • Josephine


      I understand where you are coming from. I have been wondering where all the teachers are who I know read this blog – why wont they even comment anonymously? It doesn’t augur well for the teacher who emailed editor.

      In that case you may be right about this poor teacher being hung out to dry if he or she speaks out, without other colleagues doing the same, there is every chance he/she may lose their job, but surely someone has to make a stand?

      July 26, 2016 at 7:37 pm
      • crofterlady

        Now hold on guys, are you telling me that ALL Catholic teachers are NOT up in arms about this “capitulation of the Scottish hierarchy” and are thus exposing the lambs, never mind the sheep, to the secularist wolves?

        July 26, 2016 at 8:11 pm
      • editor


        Yip. We’re telling you precisely that. Most Catholic teachers are nervous about standing up to be counted on the LGBT front. I’m reliably informed that the LGBT lobby has a firm grip on Catholic schools with most senior management going along to get along if not, in fact, fully in agreement with that evil agenda – and many of them ARE in agreement with it. Shock horror.

        These teachers and senior management need to reflect speedily and deeply on the Gospel warning about what will happen to those who cause one of Christ’s “little ones” to sin. Better that a millstone be placed around that person’s neck and they be drowned in the depth of the sea – to quote Our Lord’s own words.

        Shudder. Better, methinks, to have to go cap in hand to the mortgage company to reschedule the payments. Yes? No?

        Because, then, those same teachers and senior management can reflect, with confidence, on that other profoundly pleasing Scriptural passage: “Those who instruct many in virtue, shall shine like bright stars for all eternity.” (Daniel 12:3)

        July 26, 2016 at 10:45 pm
      • Petrus

        I am stunned at the Scottish bishops’ approach to this. Surely they should be promoting Catholic teaching at all times and insisting that only Catholic teaching is taught in Catholic schools?

        It’s shocking that teachers feel they cannot speak out about this for fear of retaliation. I work in the non-denominational sector and I find that staff are very respectful when I speak about Catholic teaching. In fact, they always say that that’s what they expect from a Catholic. They can’t understand why Catholic teachers would face retaliation for speaking out.

        As always, the buck stops with the bishops. The key question now is – what is the point of having a Catholic sector ?

        July 27, 2016 at 2:31 pm
      • Helen

        Exactly the same thought crossed my mind: What IS the point of having a Catholic sector? Catholic schools have a good academic reputation but so what if the Faith is being neglected?
        My aunt sent all her children to the non-denominational sector to save their Faith from being plundered. Like Petrus, she found that sector very respectful of their beliefs and never, ever tried to denigrate them in any way. They are all practicing Catholic adults now, more than we can say for most children who leave Catholic schools!

        July 27, 2016 at 4:43 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    I too have duly signed the petition. With the imposition of an ill thought out Named Person scheme, says to me that children are seen as mere property of the State, who sees no need for the parents to raise their own children.

    It is morally reprehensible that the State will in fact, be the abusers of children – determined to teach everything about sexually deviant behaviour, an easy lesson on how to destroy innocence.

    July 26, 2016 at 11:13 pm
  • RCA Victor

    I signed the petition (though I’m surprised it allowed an American to sign).

    July 27, 2016 at 2:54 am
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      Once we’re out of the EU, all that will change and we’ll be much more fussy about who is permitted to sign our petitions, that sort of thing 😀

      Thanks everyone for signing – I think it’s really important. Not that petitions really make that much difference but if you have one, better to get lots of signatures. As I said about the Conference recently, it sends the powers that be a signal. So, if you’ve not signed yet, I urge you so to do.

      July 27, 2016 at 8:23 am
  • editor

    Tomorrow, Thursday, 28th July, the Supreme Court in London hands down its judgment on the Named Person Scheme.

    It is being live-streamed so we can watch it here – begins at 9.45.a.m.

    For the direct link – click here

    July 27, 2016 at 10:46 pm
  • editor

    I couldn’t hear the ruling in the Supreme Court, due to problems with my browser, but it’s a victory according to this report published minutes after the judgment was handed down.

    No wonder Mzzzzzz Sturgeon is anxious to get out of the UK. That would completely scupper her dictatorial ambitions.

    July 28, 2016 at 10:00 am
    • Laura

      That’s fantastic news! I’m delighted! One in the eye for Nicola Sturgeon.

      More importantly, it’s a relief to parents who have been worried sick about this intrusive law.

      The Government can improve the legislation with 40 odd days, but at least the worst parts will be gone. Deo gratias!

      July 28, 2016 at 10:57 am
  • Margaret Mary

    It is great news but I see from that BBC report that John Swinney says the SNP Government will still be implementing the NP scheme nationally as soon as possible.

    It seems to be only the information data sharing that is declared unlawful – does that mean a state official can still be appointed? I don’t think the report is very clear on that.

    July 28, 2016 at 11:00 am
    • Lily

      Margaret Mary,

      I think they have got to start from scratch. This statement is from the NO2NP scheme campaign itself:

      Victory! Supreme Court strikes down Named Person scheme
      Judges at the UK Supreme Court have declared the Scottish Government’s ‘state snooper’ Named Person scheme to be illegal.

      The controversial legislation has been condemned for breaching the human rights of families.

      It is the first time the Supreme Court has prevented a major piece of legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament from coming into force.

      Unanimous decision
      In a historic verdict, five of the UK’s most senior judges, including two Scots, unanimously overturned decisions by the courts in Edinburgh on the legality of the Named Person provisions of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014

      The judges branded the law “defective” for breaching the article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees everyone’s “right to a private and family life”.

      They declared Holyrood had exceeded its powers by making a law which allowed public bodies to share sensitive private information about children and parents without consent.

      The judges stated:

      “The sharing of personal data between relevant public authorities is central to the role of the named person … the operation of the information sharing provisions will result in interferences with the rights protected by article 8 of the ECHR” (Para. 78). Because of the lack of safeguards “the overriding of confidentiality is likely often to be disproportionate” (Para. 100).

      They concluded:
      “…the information sharing provisions of Part 4 of the Act are not within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament” (Para. 106).

      “…since the defective provisions are not within the legislative competence of the Parliament, they cannot be brought into force.” (Para. 109)

      Privacy protected
      We’re delighted with the decision. It proves that the concerns we all had about this scheme were properly founded. It was intrusive, incomprehensible and illegal.

      The judges state quite clearly that the information sharing provisions of the Act are incompatible with the rights of children, young persons and parents under article 8 of the ECHR because they are not in accordance with the law.

      The Scottish Government has been blocked from implementing this scheme on August 31. It must scrap its plan for state snoopers with intrusive data sharing powers. It has to go back to the legislative drawing board if it wants to try again.

      But they would have to come up with a much more limited scheme that actually respects the rights of children and parents. The Big Brother scheme is history.

      This is wonderful news for mums, dads and children all across Scotland who no longer have to worry about this unjustified invasion of their private lives. The court has sided with ordinary families and put the Scottish Government back in its place.

      The judgment emphasises the importance of article 8 and, in a withering verdict on the Government flagship legislation, said:

      “The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get to the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world. Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way.” (Para. 73)

      They also quoted from a US Supreme Court judgement which states:
      “The child is not the mere creature of the state” (para. 73).

      The decision by the judges is a devastating critique of this fatally flawed scheme. It is holed below the water line. Let us hope it sinks without trace.

      The Government needs to have the humility to admit defeat and ditch the scheme forever.

      NO2NP will still be on the alert to make sure this judgment is complied with.

      Kind regards,
      The NO2NP Team

      July 28, 2016 at 11:04 am
      • editor


        WOW! I’ve highlighted the following extracts from the NO2NP campaign statement, and it is gold-dust…

        “The Big Brother scheme is history.

        This is wonderful news for mums, dads and children all across Scotland who no longer have to worry about this unjustified invasion of their private lives. The court has sided with ordinary families and put the Scottish Government back in its place.

        The judgment emphasises the importance of article 8 and, in a withering verdict on the Government flagship legislation, said:

        “The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get to the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world. Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way.” (Para. 73)

        They also quoted from a US Supreme Court judgement which states:
        “The child is not the mere creature of the state” (para. 73).

        As I said at the beginning of this comment – WOW!

        It’s a bit of a stretch, however, to suggest that “The (Scottish) Government needs to have the humility to admit defeat and ditch the scheme forever…”

        There writes Walter Mitty!

        July 28, 2016 at 11:36 am
      • Petrus


        Gold dust indeed. I’ve been fighting it out on Scottish Primary Teachers Facebook group. It’s amazing how ignorant teachers are – they seem to have no issues with the NP! It’s very worrying.

        July 28, 2016 at 6:09 pm
      • editor


        I’m just amazed that not one of the TV news reports today has quoted the judgment reference to totalitarian regimes. Did any of the teachers in the Facebook group comment on that?

        July 28, 2016 at 6:27 pm
      • Petrus

        No they ignored it. But I posted it over and over again! They can’t believe that I oppose the SNP never mind the NP.

        July 28, 2016 at 6:37 pm
      • editor


        So much for the critical thinking skills of those teachers. Their thinking is about as independent as a semi-detached bungalow. Please feel free to quote me!

        July 28, 2016 at 7:07 pm
    • editor


      You are right about poor parents who have been worried sick about this NP scheme. A relief beyond belief, now to see the Supreme Court in London rule that it is illegal. Brilliant!

      July 28, 2016 at 11:37 am
    • editor


      John Swinney’s immediate, prideful response, is just what I would expect from him and the SNP Government.

      If you recall, I went to see my MSP at his surgery on this matter, representing some parents too afraid to put their heads above the parapet for fear of being branded troublemakers. He replied to me by email later, and arrogantly included two links to Government web-pages that he patronisingly hoped would “clarify” matters for me. I left that email un-answered until this morning. I replied about ten minutes after reading the ruling from the Supreme Court, with all the usual blethering thanks for having seen me at his surgery and for his reply with the links to “clarify” matters for me, adding that, however, I think the Supreme Court ruling just handed down would clarify matters for him and his Government, that the legislation, as it now stands, is unlawful.

      I then laughed all the way to the kitchen to pour a celebratory glass of water. Well… we ARE living at a time of austerity 😀

      July 28, 2016 at 11:42 am
  • gabriel syme

    What fantastic news about the court ruling. Our prayers have been answered.

    Its quite remarkable that the judgement makes reference to totalitarian regimes and this kind of language rips the veil from the arrogant SNP.

    Amazingly, I was celebrating the judgement in work and most colleagues confessed they “didn’t know much about it”. This is despite the great efforts made by the NO2NP campaign and all the publicity. It just shows how some people drift through life in a wee bubble, only concerned with coronation street and football.

    Nicola Sturgeon has no children and, of the other political leaders in Holyrood, 3 are homosexuals. I think this collective lack of experience of children and families is undoubtedly why this state snooper scheme came so close to being implemented. There was no firm opposition to it from with the parliament, which was a disgrace given the opposition among the public.

    The SNP Government is a failure. Its flagship policy – independence – was rejected by the public and much of its legislation ends up embroiled in the courts, wasting taxpayers money, before being ultimately blocked.

    In addition to this, their “minimum alcohol pricing” scheme was blocked by courts also (I called this latter scheme the “punish enjoyment” scheme, as it would make it more costly for people to enjoy a few beers, or glass of wine, at the end of the working week).

    It seems the SNP government understands its role as being to interfere in our daily lives and tell us our business. They should butt out and just get on with fixing the roads!

    July 28, 2016 at 12:50 pm
    • Josephine

      Gabriel Syme,

      “The SNP government should butt out and just get on with fixing the roads!”

      LOL! I do agree.

      I was watching the BBC news just now and even the news reporters are spouting rubbish about this, making out that the majority are in favour of the NP scheme “in principle”. Not one mention on the news of the “totalitarian regimes” point made in the ruling, which is very serious indeed.

      If we didn’t see and hear it for ourselves online, we really wouldn’t know the half of it. They report a load of unimportant stuff – like the two items on the UK wide news, one about Beatrix Potter books and the next one about some theme park going to a heritage group, or something (I lost interest!) when I would have preferred more details about the NP scheme ruling.

      The media really do treat the people of the UK like idiots.

      July 28, 2016 at 1:44 pm
      • RCA Victor


        What did the BBC say about the Beatrix Potter books? Did they mention that her husband founded the (socialist) Fabian Society?

        July 28, 2016 at 9:34 pm
      • Josephine

        RCA Victor,

        It was just a silly report about the popularity of the books but then saying that they dealt with themes like death and how children respond well to that sort of thing. I googled and found this on the BBC site

        My point was that a whole chunk of the news was taken up with these trivial stories and the important news of the day, like the NP scheme ruling, was glossed over. It really is insulting.

        You would think that the Judges saying that the Scottish Government is showing totalitarian tendencies would get a mention, but no. Beatrix Potter and a Disney theme park were more important – LOL!

        July 28, 2016 at 9:42 pm
      • RCA Victor


        Very predictable! I’m sure the silence is just temporary, to give them time to develop a party line about the NP ruling which will disguise and misrepresent the whole thing.

        Speaking of B. Potter and her socialist husband, I always thought it interesting that the “Peter Rabbit” books seemed to promote a fear of farmers – that is, the natural enemies of socialists and the banksters who are behind them.

        July 28, 2016 at 10:46 pm
    • Frankier


      The minimum alcohol pricing only affects those at the lower end of the payscales, e.g., Catholic Truth bloggers and “buckie” drinkers.

      It won`t cost wee Angela, sorry, Nicola, one thin dime more for her G&Ts.

      July 28, 2016 at 4:32 pm
  • gabriel syme

    One thought I have seen raised in newspaper online comments sections is:

    This ruling will likely generate a host of additional court cases for the SNP Government, because this illegal scheme had already been imposed on people in various parts of the country for trial purposes.

    As it has now been determined that these people have had their human rights breached, I daresay the SNP will be fielding a few compensation claims in the near future!

    July 28, 2016 at 2:36 pm
  • editor

    Gabriel Syme,

    I wish someone would take up that idea and sue the tartan socks off the Scottish Government!

    If it weren’t for the fact that I’m just about at death’s door (long story, don’t ask!) I’d to out and buy a lottery ticket with a view to suing them myself!

    July 28, 2016 at 4:45 pm
  • RCA Victor

    A very revealing interview of Randy Engel, by John Vennari, on the duplicitous introduction of sex education into Catholic schools, and on the scandalous, anti-Catholic treatment of it in AL:

    According to this article, the very idea of sex education in school, esp. in Catholic schools, is the first step on the downward path to sexual deviance. In fact, claims Randy Engel, the prelates/clergy who promoted this in the USA Church were all homosexuals! Starting with the infamous Cardinal Bernardin….

    July 28, 2016 at 6:34 pm
    • Josephine

      RCA Victor,

      That is really shocking to think that the sex education in Catholic schools was actually mandated at the Council. I didn’t know that. It’s getting worse and worse. That’s a very informative interview indeed. I will need to re-read it to take it all in.

      July 28, 2016 at 9:28 pm
  • Therese

    I heard on the radio today that police in Scotland have discovered on the internet over thirty million obscene images of children being sexually abused, and part of the advice from one Scottish policewoman was “more sex education for children in schools”. You really, really couldn’t make it up.

    July 29, 2016 at 9:05 pm
    • editor


      That was the first item on the TV news tonight as well – incredible. And to suggest more sex-education as a means of ending the sexual abuse of children is nothing but crass stupidity.

      The old saying: “The blind leading the blind” has all but lost its meaning – everyone in any kind of leadership position, whether in the Church, education, politics or law, seems to as thick as mince.

      Don’t get me wrong, I love mince, but you’ll get my drift…

      July 29, 2016 at 11:12 pm
  • editor

    See the short video below for a report on the climb-down from the Scottish Government – I meant to post it yesterday but didn’t have a second. The other reports on this Christian Institute video are also very interesting indeed – so interesting that they didn’t make the mainstream news media ….


    August 7, 2016 at 8:26 am
    • Margaret Mary

      That’s great news, especially the quote from the Supreme Court ruling which say the Government cannot be permitted to presume a child is at risk just because the parents do not want anything to do with the Named Person. That’s a fantastic quote. The SNP is really humiliated now.

      August 7, 2016 at 2:18 pm
    • Petrus

      That’s an excellent video. The whole scheme needs to be binned as it is unraveling day by day.

      August 8, 2016 at 8:46 am
    • Nicky

      A really excellent video. I can see this Named Person Scheme being kicked into the long grass eventually, and the sooner the better. Red faces all round in the SNP!

      August 8, 2016 at 8:54 am
  • actionbaby

    This blind attitude towards the safety of children, relying on their ignorance towards sex and sexuality, is ignorant and baseless in itself. If young people aren’t taught about sex in a way which is honest and comes from safe discussion in classrooms, then they will learn about it from the internet, from conversations with people who they don’t know and from pornography. Curiosity about sex is an inherent human thing, restricting knowledge is aimless and creates people’s sexual frustration and latter abuse in the first place.

    Take a genuine look at your own sexuality and sexual history.

    August 24, 2016 at 11:44 pm
    • editor

      “…blind attitude”? With news reports of children abusing other children and even websites dedicated to the problem, I can’t see that sexualising children from an early age has helped “towards the safety of children”. Quite the reverse.

      As for teaching it to prevent other sources, such as pornography, from giving them information – well, the answer to that is to put an end to the current obsession with sex in society. Give it a rest and we’ll all benefit, children included.

      To argue that “curiosity about sex is an inherent human thing” is a tad off the mark. The fact is that young children through to puberty, left to themselves without the obsessive coverage of sexual matters in adverts and on TV etc, do not take any interest in the subject. Some years ago, I heard a very interesting talk on this subject and the speaker used a term coined by psychologists to describe this stage of development in the young, but it escapes my memory at the moment. One thing which has stuck in my memory, however, is her warning that there is a link between early sex education and violence in young women, because, she argued, to force explicit sex talk and/or images on a tender young mind, causes disturbance to the young mind.

      So, it’s not about “restricting knowledge” but about allowing a child to develop naturally and leaving any conversations about delicate personal matters to parents. They love their children; State officials don’t. Their only interest in this context is to prevent births, and we can see where that has led – depending on immigration to populate the land. Well, not their only interest; they also want control of children’s minds and to sexualise them in order to change behaviour, and undermine the rights of parents to raise their children in the way they, the parents (not the State) see fit.

      As for your closing statement – what does that mean? Please explain.

      August 25, 2016 at 9:24 am
      • actionbaby

        I undersatnd and you make good points, yet, it both in personal experience and the knowledge of the widespread nature of this issue that this is based, having not had parents willing to talk to me about sex in any way it was left to the very hesitant attitude of my schools teaching, my peers (mainly from religious families but very sexually explicit in the many many jokes made about “your mum” etc) and pornography (from age 14) to teach me and therein I learned things which I believe indeed stopped me from a natural progression, sexual interests which were not my own. But I cannot help thinking that to try and end the deeply, deeply embedded culture of sexualisation that grips our society is desirable (to help children to be safe, and not to be so obsessed and/or afraid of sex) but impossible with the growing influence of technology on all of our lives and the inevitable liberalisation of more people in this country and others, which I cannot see as a bad thing in that it does encourage an attitude of fellowship with all people at least in the circles I live in. Frankly I find your attitude towards the LGBT community hurtful as I and many friends live in that ‘agenda’ as you call it. I believe that this is a generation that has in many respects turned its back on the values of religion, as you probably know. It is only my message that in the world of many and not of few sex is not going to just go away. I understand that the UK will likely never adopt such a secular attitude as the Netherlands have towards sexual education, but in a time where the innocence of children really is taken away by the adult world in respects different to the ways it has always been (slavery, corporal punishment, verbal abuse – things that you can’t be ‘educated’ about) surely an education is the way forward,

        As for my last statement, apologies, it was late at night, I think I was loosely thinking about how sexuality is a psychologically deep rooted thing, non-logical and full of thoughts and fantasy, and that in every person our experiences differ, it was an offer to think about that I guess.

        August 25, 2016 at 9:54 am
      • Spiritus

        Period of time from age 3 up to puberty is “latent phase” (think that is the correct term). You are correct in saying that children at that stage of development, left alone, will lose interest in the opposite sex and prefer to associate with their own sex and channel their energy into things like hobbies or sports. Children do not need to know about things which are of an adult nature.

        August 25, 2016 at 4:44 pm
      • editor


        What a star! That’s exactly it – the latency period. And I’ve witnessed it in operation, a few years ago, when a young mother I was visiting in hospital after the birth of her second child,was showing off her newborn baby in hospital and her toddler son was sitting up on the bed beside her. The mother pointed to her tummy and said “look, you’ve got a little brother now, see mummy’s tummy is small again cos that’s where the baby was…”

        The toddler totally ignored her, and she repeated it a couple of times, then shrugged her shoulders, as the toddler stretched over to pull a teddy closer up towards himself and then looked around the visitors, having obviously not taken in a word. I was cringing, dying to say “He doesn’t have a clue, leave him be, he doesn’t want to know.”

        Later I told the mother about the latency period and she was astonished, but glad to know, rather than damage her child’s innocent mind.

        So, many thanks for that, Spiritus.

        August 25, 2016 at 5:52 pm
    • Athanasius


      There speaks the voice of true ignorance, the voice of the godless Freud and his like.

      Does it never occur to people like you that to speak of sex to young people is to activate the imagination and encourage experiment? Why would you want to rob children of their childhood nnocence? The world does not, contrary to what you believe, revolve around sex. There are so many more lofty and meaningful apsects to life. It’s the people who talk sex to children, however intellectual they try to make it sound, who are the ones who should come under scrutiny, not those who seek to protect their childhood innocence.

      And by the way, the world managed perfectly well to deal with sex and sexuality for thousands of years before the sexual revolution of the 60s. What you advocate in truth is not new at all, it is merely a return to the hedonistic pagan cultures of the past. Take a good look around you and see the deterioration in human behaviour since the liberals took control and exiled God from society. Cultural suicide is what you preach.

      Study history and you’ll discover that a common feature of all the great empires of the pagan world was an obsession with sex which marked the death throes of their culture. Sex apart from God and His Commandments is not freedom, it’s licence and it ultimately destroys individuals and nations.

      No, let’s not pollute young minds with sex under the pretext of education. Let us rather protect childhood innocence and happiness for as long as we can. God knows, they’ll grow up and learn about the world soon enough. It’s our duty to ensure that a happy childhood together with sound supernatural preparation of soul will equip them sufficiently for adulthood. It worked very well for two thousand years up to 1960!

      Remember the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: “Woe to those who scandalise one of these little ones of mine. It would be better that a millstone be hanged around his neck and he be cast into the deepest river.” That divine warning stands for all the child “sex educators” of today who have ruined youth.

      August 25, 2016 at 9:55 am
      • actionbaby

        The innocence of children has never been protected by society truly. Children have been enslaved, beaten and verbally abused throughout the eden of pure youth you speak of. I believe that being afraid of sex leads to severe, real world complications, and that the biological urges of sex are there whether or not we speak of them. We are addressing this issue clearly from different beliefs, I do not believe in the worldwide salvation of man that reportedly happened two thousand years ago.

        I am also inclined to believe that 1960 was not really the beginning of sexual experimentation outside of marriage and heterosexual adult relations.

        August 25, 2016 at 10:26 am
      • Margaret Mary

        Action Baby,

        The 1960s is when breaking down the sacred-ness of sex began in earnest in our society. Just because bad things happened before was no reason to make them legal and treat them like something desirable. Just because children were badly treated in the past, doesn’t mean we should continue to do so via sex education which is not making anybody happier except the sexologists who are raking in the money.

        Sex is not for “experimentation” but for procreation. The two have been separated and now we have disease and misery as a result.

        August 25, 2016 at 11:57 am
      • actionbaby

        As another human on this earth I respect your opinion, but I would honestly ask how it is you expect anyone on the other side of this argument to react without dismissing your opinions as driven by the fear of a force that they do not believe in.

        August 25, 2016 at 12:27 pm
      • editor


        Firstly, nobody has to “respect” anyone else’s opinion, mine included. That is one of these statements that is routinely held today and all due to a lack of understanding of objective truth. If something is objectively true, then I can have all the opinions to the contrary in the world, but it won’t make a blind bit of difference to the truth. Hence, for the sexologists to try to separate procreation and marriage from sexual intimacy, doesn’t change the objective truth that, once that is the norm (as in our society) we have emotional turmoil, instability in human relationships, a breakdown in marriage and family life – in short, social disaster.

        Secondly, the problem with beginning from a false premise, is that one then reaches a false conclusion.

        The simple fact is that, despite the atheistic propaganda holding sway at this moment in time, we are NOT free to reject God and if it’s evidence you are looking for, check out the First Commandment.

        Of course the answer to that will be “but if I don’t accept the existence of God, I obviously don’t accept the Commandments.”

        And in that word “accept” lies the problem. You don’t have that choice, not morally, nobody does. God has given us intelligence and freedom so that we will choose Him.
        He has revealed Himself to us, albeit not via scientific experiments – and nobody talks more about God than atheists so Christ, God the Son, wasn’t kidding when He gave them the solution to their restlessness of spirit: “Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in Me.”

        We embrace belief in God – not decide to wait until we’re satisfied, in our limited human intelligence, that He exists. He exists all right and once you embrace that faith, you will soon come to see that it’s not fear of God that drives us (except a healthy fear, as we have of many other good things) but the love of God. Once we love God, everything else in our lives is properly ordered to the good.

        Notice that, at all the major catastrophes in our world, whether terrorist attacks or natural disasters, we hear of the need to pray for the victims and their families, and so on. There were no any atheists within shouting distance of a TV crew or microphone in any of the recent horrors, whether Nice, Paris, or, currently, at the earthquake site in Italy.

        Finally, having said all of that, it is perfectly possible to come to the same view about children, sexualisation etc as expressed on this blog, without sharing our Faith. Plenty of people of no religious faith at all, lament the shocking statistics on STDs and the sexual exploitation of children, all of which has its beginnings in school sex education.

        I’m expecting a visitor shortly, so have to disappear for a bit and I’m not sure this post is as clear as it could be, so please excuse me for rushing this comment. Will see if I can be clearer when I re-appear later.

        God bless!

        August 25, 2016 at 1:24 pm
      • actionbaby

        Respect is a matter of understanding, I respect that this is your opinion, I will take it into account when forming my response. Ergo, I intended to make it clear that I understood that this comment was earnest.

        The world that you speak of, of ideal marriage, between a man and a woman, has gone. Social disaster and tragedy has been around us forever, there has never been a time when children haven’t been exploited.

        There are many matters here.

        August 25, 2016 at 4:20 pm
      • Athanasius


        If you do not want to be driven by a force you do not believe in then be driven by the force of medical evidence supporting the horrendous results when society casts all moral restraint aside in the name of freedom.

        Homosexual activity, for example, now commonly encouraged in young people at a confused age, has the most dreadful medical consequences for those who indulge in it. That information is largely suppressed by the pro sex-ed brigade today.

        Likewise, condom use is strongly suspected of causing cancer in various areas of the nether regions. It is also known not to guarantee safety from pregnancy, sexual disease or HIV due to natural imperfections in the product. The continued growth and spread of sexual disease is testament to the failure of this method of contraception.

        The pill is largely suspected of causing both thrumbosis and breast cancer in those who use it.

        So you see, even from a medical point of view there is every reason not to encourage the present programme of sexualising children, which in turn just encourages them to experiment at a young age.

        The Christian ethos is the only valid one, which is to advocate abstinence until marriage and then to stay married to one person for life (marriage of course being naturally between a man and a woman). Society operated perfectly well on this moral platform for nearly 2000 years up to 1960.

        Human beings cannot cast aside the laws of God and nature and expect not to have serious consequences. The moral law is there for our own good. Cast it aside and you end up with the dignity of human beings being reduced to base sex. It is a vastly over blown subject today, as though it were the be all and end all of human existence. It’s actually quite frightening to think that humanity has come to fixate on its basest instincts, lost to its greater dignity above the animal kingdom. They can’t even sell a bar of chocolate on TV these days without sexualising the advert. How very tragic!

        August 25, 2016 at 4:13 pm
      • actionbaby

        I do not mean to seem rude, however I think I am myself too wrapped up currently to be having a convoluted debate about many aspects of the faith and non faith of people and the prevalence of sex (which I do believe is overblown, overused by advertising and holding back society in several ways, but for precisely the opposite reasons as yourself). I hope you can forgive those who you believe have damned this world, myself, my friends and family included.

        August 25, 2016 at 4:33 pm
      • Athanasius


        This is not about apportioning blame to anyone. It is about trying to encourage people to see the utter blindness that has descended on society in recent decades since the rejection of the Christian order, when true freedom was replaced with licence.

        August 25, 2016 at 4:42 pm
      • editor


        Please do not think we are condemning you.. You have been good enough to come onto our blog to comment and to listen to our responses, which I consider you to have done with exquisite courtesy and, I believe, in genuine good faith.

        It is very encouraging indeed to learn that you agree – to a point at least – with our assessment of the sexualisation of our society, which is, in fact, a direct result of the rejection of God by so many in our society. They want to believe in the politically correct dogmas about life, which involves all sorts of unnatural and unhealthy behaviours and attitudes, because, as G.K. Chesterton, famous English writer and convert to the Catholic religion once said: “When people reject God, it’s not that they believe in nothing; they will believe in anything.”

        Pray, AB. Ask Our Lady to take you to her Son. You’ll be surprised at the results.

        August 26, 2016 at 12:48 am
      • Athanasius


        “We are addressing this issue clearly from different beliefs, I do not believe in the worldwide salvation of man that reportedly happened two thousand years ago.”

        That’s why you have not the understanding of human nature and the wisdom to see that what you propose is a return to the pre-Christian pagan cultures. We have now more or less returned there and the evidence of youth corruption is everywhere to see for those who wish to look objectively.

        You are a product of the times, I’m afraid, lost to all sense of the weakness of human beings and their dependence upon the grace of God.

        August 25, 2016 at 2:26 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: