School kids to rethink Captain Cook claims

This is an attack on a straw man.  Kids have always been told that Cook discovered the EAST COAST of Australia.  He mapped it

Primary school students are being encouraged to “suggest another, more accurate description of Captain­ Cook’’ after weighing up whether the British explorer was the “discoverer of Australia’’.

Year 4 students are asked to consider the implications of the word “discoverer’’ in relation to the presence of Aboriginal people in Australia before the arrival of Europeans and consider other ­explorers who reached Australia before James Cook, such as Willem Janszoon, Dirk Hartog, William Dampier and Abel Tasman.

The teaching resource, developed by the State Library of NSW, is designed to introduce children to the concepts of contested history and multiple interpretations of history. It also asks whether they consider as accurate a 1934 inscription on a plaque recognising the parish of Cooks River. It describes Cook as the “discoverer of Australia’’.

“If the information is not accur­ate, why was it written on the plaque in 1934? Suggest another, more accurate description of Captain­ Cook,’’ it says.

A NSW Education Standards Authority spokesman said teachers and schools could choose to use the resource or other resources in class. “The appropriateness of any resources is a matter for ­individual schools and teachers to determine,’’ the spokesman said.

Asked to comment on whether he believed Cook discovered ­Australia or whether it was an ­inaccurate description, NSW Education Minister Rob Stokes said: “Of course Captain Cook did not discover Australia.

“There were people living in Australia for thousands­ of years before Cook first visited.

“As far as we know. the first ­Englishman to visit Australia was William Dampier.

“Captain Cook was an incredible explorer and naval officer. He was the first ­Englishman in recorde­d history to visit Australia’s east coast. I learned all this in a NSW public school.’’

The chief executive of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, Robert Randall, said the national curric­ulum, “which offers a balanced view of historical events, was endorse­d by every education minister­ across Australia”.

“The curriculum provides stud­ents with the opportunity to ­explore a great variety of topics, including stories of the First Fleet, the reasons for the journey, the people who travelled to Australia, and their experiences upon ­arrival,” he said. “In the same area of the curriculum, students can learn about Australia’s first peoples and their experiences before, during and after the arrival of Europeans. This is the right balance.

“It is important to remember that the Australian curriculum does not specify how content must be taught.

“Schools and teachers have the flexibility to make decisions about how they teach the curriculum. They are the best-placed to do so in their classrooms.’’

SOURCE





Anti same-sex marriage campaign airs: ‘School told my son he could wear a dress’

THE first television advertisement for a ‘say no to same-sex marriage’ campaign has aired on Australian television.

The advertisement from the Coalition for Marriage — the key organisation behind the ‘No’ campaign — features Australian mothers who speak out as part of a series aimed at highlighting what they claim are issues that could arise from the proposed legislation.

Cella White, the first Australian woman who appears in the advertisement, tells viewers that her son’s school told him “he could wear a dress next year if he felt like it”. A second woman then stares down the barrel of the camera and claims that “when same-sex marriage passes as law overseas this type of program become (sic) widespread and compulsory”.

The comments are followed by a black screen with text: “In countries with gay marriage, parents have lost their rights to choose”, it reads.

A third woman expresses concern that “kids in Year 7 are being asked to role play being (in) a same-sex relationship”.

The advertisement ends with the caption: “We have a choice. You can say no.”

It prompted a mixed reaction on social media with some users calling it an outrage and others expressing their support.

Australian Labor Party and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten told Fairfax Media the ad was “offensive and hurtful to LGBTI Australians and their families”.

“This is exactly what was predicted when Malcolm Turnbull decided to waste $122 million on a postal survey. He gave the green light to this rubbish,” Mr Shorten said.

Equality Campaign executive director Tiernan Brady told news.com.au the “ad is disgraceful in its dishonesty”.

“The people behind this ad know that the Australian people are for allowing all Australians the right to marry so they want to desperately pretend this simple straightforward question is about something else,” Mr Brady said.

“As they try to divide Australians will continue to campaign to unite all Australians.”

Coalition for Marriage spokeswoman Sophie York said in a statement that “radical LGBTIQ sex and gender education programs” had started to become mandatory for primary schools in Canada and the UK.

“Every day across the country, on social media, in coffee shops, in mothers’ groups and at barbecues, hundreds of thousands of parents are speaking to each other about the impacts of radical LGBTIQ sex and gender education programs,” Ms York said.

“Millions of Australians are now concerned about the consequences of changing the Marriage Act.

“Australian parents have a right to know how a change in the marriage law will affect what their kids are taught at school. The education departments won’t tell them. Those lobbying for change won’t tell them.”

The advertisement will run on all of the main commercial networks and pay-TV stations and is also supported by the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL).

“Changing the marriage law will have consequences for what is taught in our kids classrooms,” the ACL wrote in an online post.

“Changing the marriage law to allow same-sex couples to marry will mean taking gender our of our laws.

“If same-sex marriage becomes law, parents will not have a leg to stand on if they don’t want their kids taught radical sex education, and gender ideologies.”

Earlier, the head of Australia’s Anglican Church said he won’t be advising its members on how to vote in the same-sex marriage postal survey, but will himself be voting no.

Archbishop Philip Freier has written an open letter urging all Anglicans to “exercise their democratic right” and engage in the debate in a sensitive way.

“Anglicans, like other Australians, have a wide range of opinions on same-sex marriage, supporting or opposing it for a variety of reasons in accordance with their conscience and their understanding of the principles and issues,” he wrote.

“I do not presume to advise others how they should vote, though I myself intend to vote no.” Although the survey was not binding the parliament would find it hard to ignore the will of a majority of Australians, Archbishop Freier said.

Meanwhile, polling commissioned by same-sex marriage advocates found two-thirds of Catholic Australians say they’ll vote yes — broadly in line with polling for the wider community. The proportions were similar for Australians from other religions, the Newgate Research poll found.

Meanwhile, a group of conservative Australians who support same-sex marriage has launched a campaign to convince voters to say ‘yes’ in the upcoming postal survey. The campaign features quotes from Liberal and Nationals party elders — including federal cabinet ministers Christopher Pyne and Kelly O’Dwyer, Tasmanian Premier Will Hodgman, and former Victorian premier Jeff Kennett — as well as voters and party members.

“There is a very strong case for same-sex marriage within the liberal and conservative traditions embodied by the Liberal party,” spokesman Luke Barnes said.

That was reflected in support among party members and politicians as well as growing support within the Nationals.

SOURCE





Cory Bernardi warns Liberal Party in danger as it neglects conservative base

Cory Bernardi has warned that the Liberal Party is on the way to oblivion unless it listens to its supporter base. Senator Bernardi, who in February defected from government benches to set up a rival conservative movement, issued the blunt assessment of the party’s fortunes at a Sydney fundraiser tonight.

He was addressing a function held by the Roseville branch of the Liberal Party, with the title “Is the party over?”.

“If the party’s not over, it’s well on its way,” he said.

Senator Bernardi said it was “about time” politicians levelled with the voting public.

The “Evening with Cory Bernardi­” was an ­initiative of the Northern Sydney Conservative Forum, which invited former Labor leader Mark Latham to a fundraiser at the same venue in February.

It was organised by Libera­l branch president George Szabo and his committee, but was “rebrande­d” as the Northern Sydney Conservative Forum.

After being introduced by Mr Szabo, Senator Bernardi said of his host: “It seems we have a new agent provocateur.

“I thought I was the bad boy of the Liberal Party.”

Opening up about his objective as head of a new movement, Senator Bernardi said: “We’re positioning ourselves as a safe space for conservatives.”

He said the aim was not to oust the coalition government, but to merely remind it not to take conservatives for granted.
Senator Cory Bernardi is addressing the Roseville Liberals
Senator Cory Bernardi is addressing the Roseville Liberals

Senator Bernardi also took at aim at “career politicians”.

“Politics has become a vehicle (for people) to pursue their own ambitions,” he said. “Rather than the ambitions of the country.”

The Roseville Liberal Party branch promoted the evening with Senat­or Bernardi as a chance to listen to “the ultimate outsider” on “just where the political landscape is heading at the moment”.

Earlier this year, Mr Abbott’s former­ chief of staff and now Sky News presenter Peta Credlin spoke to a packed Roseville branch event about why Liberals should shun “identity politics”.

SOURCE





Lawyers demand apology over endorsement of gay marriage

The dean of law at Sydney’s Notre Dame University and a coalition of barristers and academics have joined the revolt over the endorsement of same-sex marriage by the legal profession’s peak associations in NSW.

Professor Michael Quinlan, who heads the university’s law school in Sydney, is the most senior of 11 legal academics and lawyers who have issued a joint statement denouncing the NSW Law Society and the state’s Bar ­Association for endorsing same-sex marriage “laws” before draft legislation has been made public and without consulting members.

Their statement calls for both organisations to apologise and ­immediately withdraw the ­endorsement.

It contained errors of law and had left the misleading impression that all lawyers in NSW support gay marriage, the statement says.

“Had there been consultation with members, and had the members supported the issuance of such a document, improvements in the language and content could have been made to ensure the joint release accurately states the law,” their statement says.

The Law Society is under growing pressure for endorsing gay marriage in a joint press release with the Bar Association and the NSW branch of the Australian Medical Association.

Sydney solicitor Robin Speed, who is president of the Rule of Law Institute, has given Law Society president Pauline Wright until 4pm next Friday to dissociate the ­organisation from the joint press release or face the prospect of legal action.

Mr Speed believes the Law ­Society has given the false and misleading impression that gay marriage is favoured by all 29,000 solicitors in NSW.

An organisation of Catholic lawyers, the St Thomas More ­Society, says solicitors have complained of being intimidated at their workplaces for publicly criticising the endorsement of same-sex marriage by the professional associations and law firms.

The statement by Professor Quinlan and the other signatories says the three professional bodies made an error when their joint press release suggested the definition of marriage in Australia may be discriminatory under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“This is simply not correct,” the statement says.

“Some may believe that the joint release, given its authors, is a correct statement of the law but it is not, as the Senate committee ­report which looked into this question found.

“The claims made in the joint press release suggest a version of the international jurisprudence on same-sex marriage that is difficult to justify on any view of the current law.

“There is simply no international covenant that confers a right to same-sex marriage.’’

Professor Quinlan and the other signatories issued the statement in their personal capacities under the auspices of the Wilberforce Foundation, an organisation devoted to protecting common law values, rights and freedoms.

“Before making a statement on such an issue, the Law Society or NSW and the Bar Association of NSW ought to have consulted with their members or, at least the statement ought to indicate that bit has been prepared without consultation with members,” their statement says.

The Law Society’s Ms Wright said the society regularly makes resolutions through its council on a range of important legal policy issues.

“I recognise there will be divergent and strong views within the profession on any of these matters,” Ms Wright said. “But the overwhelming majority of responses received from the profession following the release of the joint statement have been supportive.

“We welcome the contribution of the Wilberforce Foundation to this important issue just as we ­always welcome and consider open debate on all policy matters.’’

The Bar Association has earlier stated its policy on gay marriage has been in place for several years.

The signatories to the Wilberforce Foundation’s statement ­include Notre Dame associate dean of law in Sydney Keith Thompson, Sydney barrister ­Michael McAuley, Adelaide barrister Christopher Brohier, Neil Foster of Newcastle University’s law school, Brisbane barrister Simon Fisher and Perth academic Augusto Zimmermann from the West Australian Law Reform Commission.

SOURCE

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here