10-year-old girl suspended for asking to be exempted from LGBT school lesson

Kaysey

LONDON, July 1, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — A 10-year-old who was suspended from school for a week after asking her teacher permission to be excused from participating in a “Pride Month” LGBT lesson has gone on the record to explain the real dangers of the invasion of LGBT ideology in her school.

“Before anybody knew what LGBT meant, everybody knew what gender they were,” explained Kaysey, who, along with her classmate, Farrell, was suspended from the Heavers Farmer Primary School, located in Croydon, South London.

“But now people are confused,” continued the precocious 10-year-old, “and they’re saying that they’re bisexual and trans because they’re confused.”

“Before this happened, they were completely confident of who they were but now they’re not,” she added.

“It’s really affecting other kids,” explained Kaysey, “because now they’re losing confidence in [them]selves and looking at [them]selves and asking, ‘Why am I this person? Why can’t I be someone else?’”

“Before all this happened, people knew who they were,” said Kaysey. “School children are now facing the choice of what gender they are by the age of four.”

Teacher reported to school authorities

Susan Papas, the head of Heavers Farmer Primary School, Croydon, South London, who banned the children from the school for five days for alleged anti-LGBT comments, has been reported to the local authorities for what amounts to an unlawful act.

Christian Concern, an advocacy group seeking to restore the United Kingdom to the Christian faith, recounts the incident that led to the two students’ suspension:

On June 20, Farrell, sitting next to his friend Kaysey in class, asked his year 5 class teacher, “Sir, please may I not take part in this lesson?” when the teacher handed out LGBT material for colouring. The teacher refused permission saying that the LGBT lesson was part of the curriculum.

After class, the form teacher is said to have accused Farrell of using “homophobic language” for allegedly saying, “LGBT sucks and LGBT’s dumb,” which the child denies.

Farrell, who was sitting with female pupil Kasey says he is a Christian and told a “visitor teacher” he did not “accept LGBT” because of his religion.

The teacher asked the two children, “Do you want them to die?” “We said no,” Farrell replied. If, however, they went back to their countries, they would be punished for being gay, Farrell told the teacher.

The teacher asked Farrell where he was from. Farrell said he was of “African Jamaican” heritage, and because there “everybody is Christian and Catholic, so they don’t accept LGBT.”

Later, Ms Papas shouted at the two children in front of the class, according to Kaysey. “How dare you? You are a disappointment to the school,” Papas told the two children outside the classroom.

Papas then put the children in different rooms and asked Kasey [sic]: “How dare you say that you want to kill LGBT people?” Kasey [sic] replied: “I didn’t say kill.” Papas then shouted at her and said, “Yes, you did, and don’t lie.”

Kaysey, a pentecostal Christian, says she was kept in detention for five hours from 10am to 3pm.

Kaysey’s and Farrell’s version of the story, which differs widely from what their teacher and the head of their school alleged, has been corroborated by their classmates.

Court banned me from teaching son basic rules for boys’ – father of 7yo slated for transition

Jeff Younger

Jeff Younger, who is locked in a court battle with his ex-wife over whether their son should undergo transition to a girl, says a court order bans him from discussing things like religion or the need to be respectful to girls.

Jeff and his former spouse Anne Georgulas are trying to resolve a parental dispute over their son, James. Anne insists that James identifies as a girl, calls him Luna, and envisions hormone therapy and eventually sex-change surgery in the future. Jeff rejects the idea and says his son is perfectly comfortable being a boy in his presence. The pair are fighting a legal battle, with a court temporarily ordering Jeff not to impose a male identity on the child.

The order forbids Jeff from calling his son James in front of anyone who knows him as a girl, and this significantly limits what they can do together, he told RT’s Sophie Shevardnadze.

“Basically I can’t go to a school. I keep him away from any friends he might have at school that know him as a girl, and at my home he’s known as James and I use male pronouns. What I’m prohibited from doing right now is trying to convince him that he’s actually a boy,” he said.

The court’s ruling means that Jeff, who is a religious Orthodox Christian, has to be careful when discussing his faith with his son, he said. He is also cautious about teaching James how to behave decently, so that his words cannot be interpreted as imposing a male gender identity.

“I’m even a little trepidatious about reading the Book of Genesis as we go through our Bible readings after Pascha,” he said. “So, I’ve had a lot of trouble communicating with him on religious issues and on basic things that you’d have to teach boys, issues around self-control: how they should deal with women, older women, being respectful to females of their peer group.”

It’s very difficult for me to figure out how to do this without violating that order.

Jeff said James was misdiagnosed with gender dysphoria and simply wants the approval of both his parents.

“The court asked us to take them to social services and let the boys express their preferences,” Jeff said. “And what James said was: he wants to be a girl at his mom’s home and a boy at his dad’s home. He basically wants both his parents to love him.”

Watch the full video here

UK supreme court backs bakery that refused to make gay marriage cake

A Belfast bakery run by evangelical Christians was not obliged to make a cake emblazoned with the message “support gay marriage”, the supreme court has ruled, overturning a £500 damages award imposed on it.

The unanimous decision by the UK’s highest court was greeted as a victory for free speech but condemned by gay rights groups and the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland as a backward step in combating discrimination.

Ashers had refused to produce the cake, featuring the Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie, in 2014 for Gareth Lee, who supports the campaign to legalise same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland. He wanted to take it to a private function marking International Day Against Homophobia.

The judgment, delivered after the supreme court’s first hearing in Northern Ireland in May, reverses earlier decisions in Belfast county court and a court of appeal ruling that the company discriminated against Lee, who is gay, on the grounds of sexual orientation.

The five justices on the supreme court – Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Hodge and Lady Black – found the bakery did not refuse to fulfil Lee’s order because of his sexual orientation and therefore there was no discrimination on those grounds. The business relationship between Lee and Ashers did not involve people being refused jobs or services because of their religious faith, the judges added.

“It is deeply humiliating, and an affront to human dignity, to deny someone a service because of that person’s race, gender, disability, sexual orientation or any of the other protected personal characteristics,” Hale said in the judgment.

“But that is not what happened in this case and it does the project of equal treatment no favours to seek to extend it beyond its proper scope.”

Ashers bakery owners Daniel and Amy McArthur outside the supreme court after the ruling.

Ashers bakery owners Daniel and Amy McArthur outside the supreme court after the ruling. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA
Freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the European convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold”, Hale added. “This court has held that nobody should be forced to have or express a political opinion in which he does not believe,” she said.

“The bakers could not refuse to supply their goods to Mr Lee because he was a gay man or supported gay marriage, but that is quite different from obliging them to supply a cake iced with a message with which they profoundly disagreed.”

The case has aroused international interest. The US supreme court reached a similar conclusion in another bakery case in June, when it ruled in favour of a Colorado baker who had refused to produce a wedding cake for a gay couple in 2012.

After the ruling, Lee said: “I’m very confused about what this actually means. We need certainty when you go to a business. I’m concerned that this has implications for myself and for every single person.”

The original decision to turn down his order had left him feeling like a “second-class citizen”, he said.

Lee said he would be considering his options, which could involve appealing to the European court of human rights in Strasbourg.

Daniel McArthur, whose family runs Ashers, said outside the supreme court: “I want to start by thanking God. He has been with us for the last four years. We are delighted with the ruling. We always knew we had done nothing wrong in turning down the order. We are very grateful to the judges.

“We did not turn down this order because of the person who made it, but because of the message itself.”

Michael Wardlow, the head of the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, said it had spent £250,000 supporting Lee’s appeal. It will now have to pay costs.

He said: “We are very disappointed. This judgment leaves a lack of clarity in equality law. Our understanding of certainty of the law has been overturned. The supreme court seems to see this as something that should be done on a case-by-case basis.”

The Rainbow Project, Northern Ireland’s largest support organisation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, expressed its disappointment at the ruling.

The Ashers ruling is an historic and seminal judgement. This has been a long journey for everyone involved in the case. I commend Amy & Daniel McArthur for their grace and perseverance. This now provides clarity for people of all faiths and none.

John O’Doherty, the project’s director, said: “Ashers agreed to make the cake. They entered into a contractual agreement to make this cake and then changed their mind.

“We believe this is direct discrimination for which there can be no justification. We will, however, take time to study this judgment by the supreme court to understand fully its implications for the rights of LGBT people to access goods, facilities and services without discrimination.”

A spokesperson for the gay rights organisation Stonewall said: “This is a backward step for equality which needs to be urgently addressed. The decision that Ashers bakery were not discriminatory in the so-called ‘gay cake’ row is very concerning for anyone who cares about equality.”

But the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, said: “This verdict is a victory for freedom of expression. As well as meaning that Ashers cannot be legally forced to aid the promotion of same-sex marriage, it also means that gay bakers cannot be compelled by law to decorate cakes with anti-gay marriage slogans.

“Although I profoundly disagree with Ashers’ opposition to marriage equality, in a free society neither they nor anyone else should be forced to facilitate a political idea that they oppose. The ruling does not permit anyone to discriminate against LGBT people. Such discrimination rightly remains unlawful.”

Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK or Ireland where same-sex marriage is outlawed. The Democratic Unionist party leader, Arlene Foster, said the judgment was “historic and seminal”.

Ashers Bakery

Ashers

The Ashers Bakery in Northern Ireland, Belfast is a family owned business Run by Daniel and Amy McArthur.
In 2014 a customer requested them to bake a cake with a gay slogan supporting same sex marriage on it.

The owners (Christians) refused to do it on the basis that it conflicted with their religious beliefs that marriage is between a man and a woman. As ⁷a result the gay customer, Gareth Lee, pursued the McArthurs through the courts via the Equalities Commission for Northern Ireland.

Initially after a long and convoluted legal battle that seemed weighted in Lee’s favour on the 10th of October 2018 with the assistance of the Christian Institute the Ashers Baking Co. won its case at the Supreme Court. On the grounds that an individual should not be forced to write something that contravened their religious beliefs.

Christian Bed & Breakfast

Hazelmary and Peter Bull

Cornwall B&B owners Hazelmary and Peter Bull refused to let civil partners Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall stay in a double room at their facility in Cornwall in 2008. They offered them two single rooms but not a double.
As Christians. They regard any sex outside marriage as a “sin”.
They denied discriminating against Mr Hall and Mr Preddy, from Bristol.
They said their decision was founded on a “religiously-informed judgment of conscience”.
The Supreme Court ruled against them at a hearing in London.

In 2011 a judge at Bristol County Court concluded that the Bulls had acted unlawfully and ordered them to pay a total of £3,600 damages to the gay couple.

The following year the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the Bulls following a hearing in London. The couple had asked the Supreme Court to overrule the Court of Appeal but the Supreme court refused.

Mrs Bull said: “We are deeply disappointed and saddened by the outcome.’

Lillian Ladelle

Lillian Ladele

The late Lillian Ladele worked as a registrar for marriages, births, and deaths for the London Borough of Islington.
Following the introduction of the Civil Partnership Act 2004, Islington designated all of its existing registrars as civil partnership registrars as well as marriage registrars. Ladele objected to being required to officiate due to her Christian beliefs.
When her Employer disciplined and threatened to dismiss her she claimed unlawfully discriminatory treatment stating that she should not be required to perform civil partnerships, because of her religious beliefs.
As a result Ladele made an application to the Employment Tribunal, complaining of direct and indirect discrimination on grounds of religious beliefs and harassment.

The Employment Tribunal held that she had been directly and indirectly discriminated against, as well as harassed. .
The Employment Tribunal held that she had been directly and indirectly discriminated against as well as harassed. The Employment Appeals Tribunal reversed it’s decision. Unfortunately Ms Ladele died some weeks after this.