6 Jan 2018
A nugget from Winston Churchill is that all wisdom is not
new wisdom, and this insight ought to be applied to the discussion over the sex
education issue in Ontario
What makes the new (2015) program superior to the old
program? The alleged superiority lies in the new program including
sexting, online stalking, abuse, and other new issues in the curriculum.
In short, issues that have nothing to do with biology, you know - actual education
about sex.
I have seen enough of social statistics gathering and
augments put forward in support of some social theory or other not to believe
any of it. The real reason the new curriculum is endorsed in the quarters
that it is, is because the new curriculum teaches an ethic of sentimentality,
with its associated hierarchy of victimhood.
Reliant ultimately on the relativity of truth, sentimentality provides no rational basis for itself and its
choices; and it presents ethical rights and wrongs in a dogmatic, arbitrary,
and chop-logic fashion. Being judgmental is one of the worst things one
can be – except that the rule itself is judgmental to the extreme.
Making ethical choices on the basis of a rational rule if fine so long as that
rule is esteemed as entirely subjective and is not applied objectively to the
choices of others. (Except for applying the rule against being judgement
– which is the only objective moral rule.) Hence, the ethics of Christianity
are condemned as judgmental, and immoral because of that. The
Nichomachean Ethics of Aristotle are rejected as the “subjective truth” of a
dead white man, though fine for you if you are into that stuff.
An ethic of sentimentality is a form of Hedonism, which
philosophy is self-contradictory. It supports, for example,
transgenderism and homosexuality as totally acceptable life choices though
objectively and scientifically they are wrong. Scientifically? What?
Evolutionary biology teaches that the purpose of sex is
reproduction, and reproduction is impossible if the sex is homosexual.
Transgenderism involves the denial of some pretty obvious physical
reality. That’s why they are wrong scientifically – and wrong ethically.
The social conservatives have the better of the argument in
this case, and Premier Ford is absolutely justified in siding with his
supporters in this matter.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment