VIII.  The Corren Creed

VIII.1 The Corren Creed includes two essential beliefs:

a) Homosexual inclinations, conduct and lifestyles are normal, healthy and morally acceptable, equivalent in every respect to natural heterosexual attractions and relationships.
b) Homosexual inclinations cannot be resisted or changed, and it is wrong even to attempt to do so.

VIII.2 From these dogmatic statements,¹ the Correns derive a basic moral obligation: to “respect,” “honour,” “celebrate,” and “promote” the sexual “diversity” represented by lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and transgendered activity and lifestyles. The Correns declare that those who reject their Creed and its moral baggage are “homophobic” and “heterosexist:” as Making Space, Giving Voice implies, ignorant and hurtful,² unenlightened,³  intolerant,⁴ uncaring, unwelcoming,⁵ unfair,⁶ disrespectful and bigoted.⁷

VIII.3 Were the Correns content with name-calling and evangelization to convert people to their beliefs and their moral imperatives, it is unlikely that they would meet with any more difficulty - or success - than someone founding a new political party or religion. However, the Correns have a more ambitious agenda. Drawing on judgements of superior and appellate courts,⁸ they intend to force their Creed and its moral baggage upon all public school students from Kindergarten to Grade 12, even if their parents object.⁹

IX.  “The full range of gender identity and sexual orientation”

IX.1 However, the Corren Agreement¹⁰ is not just about homosexuality. The Correns are on record as seeking the introduction of "non-heterosexual realities" into the curriculum from Kindergarten to Grade 12.¹¹

IX.2 “Non-heterosexual realities” include much more than just same-sex relationships. Thus, the Ministry of Education promised the Correns that it would revise curriculum to reflect "inclusion and respect for diversity with respect to sexual orientation,” not just homosexuality. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Ministry of Education has directed that all state school curriculum will reflect “the full range of gender identity and sexual orientation,”¹² not just homosexuality.  Pursuant to the Agreement, the Ministry of Education has directed that all state school curriculum will reflect “the full range of gender identity and sexual orientation.”¹³

IX.3 “Sexual orientation” does not refer only to same-sex attraction, even though that is how it is commonly understood. The Glossary in Making Space, Giving Voice offers the following definition:

sexual orientation: refers to a person’s feelings of sexual or romantic attraction. There are many labels that individuals use to describe their sexual orientation, including, but not limited to, “lesbian,” “gay,” “bisexual,” “heterosexual,” “homosexual,” “straight,” and “two-spirit.” Concepts of and terminology for sexual orientation vary from culture to culture and have evolved over time.¹⁴

IX.4 Note the qualifying phrase, “including, but not limited to.” Something more is added in another Glossary entry:

LGBT: an acronym for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered. As a collective term, LGBT is also used to avoid specific sexual orientation labels, and to recognize that issues of harassment and discrimination are common to all sexual minorities. The acronym also sometimes appears as LGBTQ, with the Q standing for either “queer”or “questioning.”¹⁵

IX.5 “Transgendered” thus joins the list of possible “orientations” and “sexual minorities.” The Glossary is not exhaustive,¹⁶ so it does not offer a definition of “transgendered,” nor indicate, more exactly, what the Ministry of Education means by “the full range of gender identity and sexual orientation.” One can get a sense of the possibilities from Wikipedia, a popular on-line reference.

IX.6 In December, 2006, Wikipedia’s entry for “sexual orientation” included references to asexuality, monosexuality, autosexuality, pansexuality, homoflexibility, heteroflexibility, BDSM (various combinations of bondage, discipline, domination, submission and sado-masochism), fetishism, prostitution, polyamory, and zoophilia.¹⁷ Almost a year later, the revised entry featured a table about “Sexual Identities” that includes terms grouped as follows:

Gender (male · female · androgyny · boi · cisgender · genderqueer · intersex · pangender · third gender · transgender · transman · transwoman · transsexualism),

Sexual Orientations (bisexuality · heterosexuality · homosexuality · pansexuality · asexuality);

Third Genders (fa'afafine · fakaleiti · hijra · kathoey · khanith · mukhannathun · muxe · sworn virgin · two-spirit);

Other: (butch and femme · polyamory · swinging · queer · womyn · top / bottom)¹⁸

IX.7 Another table on the same page (the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) series”) listed, in addition, banjee, bi-curious, gay-for-pay, prison sexuality, bisexual chic, bisexual erasure, transvestism, cross-dressing, transsexual sexuality, drag king, drag queen and sex reassignment therapy.

IX.8 Under the sub-heading, “Sexual orientation and gender identity,” the article introduced one of the current problems in the field:

Is a transwoman who is attracted to other women a lesbian? What about her female partner? The majority of transgender people today would describe this relationship as lesbian, but scientists (especially in the past) have tended to characterise it as heterosexual, interpreting the sex of the transwoman as male, and basing the definition of sexual orientation on chromosomal and anatomical sex rather than social gender. Others would interpret the sexual orientation differently depending on whether the transwoman is "pre-operative" or "post-operative". Difficulties in making these judgements can be seen, for example, in debates about whether female-attracted transmen are a part of the lesbian community.¹⁹

IX.9 No doubt such dilemmas could be seen as “social justice” issues. Whether it would be best to make space for them in the Grade 7 socials curriculum²⁰ or give voice to the issue in a Grade 9 or 10 drama class²¹ is entirely up to the teacher. Certainly, nothing in Making Space, Giving Voice precludes this, nor does it provide any principled reason not to introduce Kindergarten to Grade 12 students to any of Wikipedia’s potpourri of “identities” and “orientations.”

IX.10 In any case, the key point to remember is that, as a matter of Ministry of Education policy, every reference to homosexuality in Making Space, Giving Voice should be understood to include every other kind of “orientation” or “identity” claimed by any “sexual minority.” This is quite in keeping with the emphasis on “diversity” in the document.

X.  Setting the stage

Normality assumed
X.1 Much of the heavy lifting needed to establish a pro-homosexual school curriculum was done during the 1980's and 1990's during what Philip Jenkins calls “an authentic social revolution,” a radical change “enormously helped by the attitudes of the news and entertainment media.”²² By the opening of the 21st century, Jenkins observes, it was opposition to homosexual conduct and lifestyles that was seen as “a grave social problem,”²³ at least by homosexual activists, dominant social elites and the commentariat.

X.2 Following the trends, and in accordance with its private agreement with the Correns, the Ministry of Education decided to solve this “grave social problem” by directing that curriculum will include only “positive” portrayals of individuals or groups “across the full range of gender identity and sexual orientation.”²⁴ The directive prohibits criticism, not only of homosexual conduct or lifestyles, but of the much broader range of “orientations” and behaviour noted above. The Ministry’s fiat exempts same-sex attractions and relationships (and other “non-heterosexual realities”) from the kind of principled critical analysis applied to other kinds of sexual urges and conduct, like adultery or fornication.

X.3 The classroom environment and curriculum are controlled by the assumption that homosexual conduct (and, by extension, every other kind of non-heterosexual conduct) is normal and morally acceptable, while there is not even a hint at the possibility that a rational contrary view might exist. Thus, the goal of Making Space, Giving Voice is not to openly convince students that they should accept the Corren Creed, but to overcome obstacles or resistance to it.

X.4 The assumption of normality makes it unnecessary to make frequent explicit reference to homosexuality, which would, in any case, be insufficiently “inclusive” of other “orientations.” LGBT appears only in the Glossary, probably because its frequent appearance elsewhere would make the wider implications of Making Space, Giving Voice too obvious. Apart from Glossary entries, direct reference to homosexuality occurs only with reference to the family (establishing the normality of same-sex ‘marriage’)²⁵ or victimhood (Canada’s badge of entitlement²⁶): name-calling,²⁷ adolescent suicide²⁸ or persecution.²⁹

X.5 The preferred, all-encompassing term, “sexual orientation,”most often appears in diversity lists (such as “culture, ancestry, language, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, gender identity, socioeconomic background, mental ability”),³⁰ frequently juxtaposed to “religious beliefs.”³¹ This is a subtle form of justification by association, suggesting that sexual inclinations and gender identity are no different than ancestry or language, and even equivalent to the practice of religion.

Time constraints
X.6 It has been noted that it is highly unlikely that time constraints and existing curriculum demands would allow an adequate exploration of complex social justice issues or instruction in comparative ethics (See Section III and IV). However, an adequate treatment of social justice or ethics is not the goal. Since the primary objective of Making Space, Giving Voice is to make it appear that it is ridiculous to reject homosexual inclinations or conduct on the basis of moral or ethical standards, it makes perfectly good sense to thrust a series of ethical questions upon students who have little or no acquaintance with philosophical reasoning (apart from what passes for it in popular culture) in circumstances that make adequate reflection and discourse impossible.

Fragmentation
X.7 Rather than directly challenging student beliefs (which could generate student resistance and attract unfavourable parental attention) teachers are advised that it may be better “to raise questions, instil awareness of alternatives, help students make connections, expand knowledge of situations and events, encourage reflection (including self-reflection), focus critical thinking on situations involving social justice, and reaffirm commitment to universal principles.”³²

X.8 In practice, this means asking a question in English class on Monday, mentioning an alternative “orientation” in Science on Tuesday, and connecting homosexual inclinations with culture during an art lesson on Friday. A Socials lesson the next week might expand somewhat on a human rights case involving sexual “orientation.” These threads, and others, could be brought together gradually over the course of the year. The accumulation of related ideas, shaped by teachers who subscribe to the Corren Creed and supported by the aura of establishment authority, can reach a critical mass sufficient to overturn or at least overwhelm opposing viewpoints among students, especially in elementary and middle schools. This can be especially effective if alternative views are suppressed.

X.9 An additional advantage offered by this strategy is that it is extremely difficult for students to recognize inconsistencies, faulty reasoning and false analogies when ideas and suggestions are presented over a period of time in different contexts.

XI.  Diversity

Diversity education
XI.1 Making Space, Giving Voice goes beyond encouraging classroom management that takes differences among students into account, recommending that teachers specifically respond to and address “diversity”³³ by providing provide “diversity education.”³⁴ This means direct, active teaching,³⁵ tailoring their instruction³⁶ and selecting resources³⁷ so as to integrate themes and topics of “diversity and social justice” into all subjects³⁸ - even mathematics.³⁹

XI.2 The diversity envisaged in Making Space, Giving Voice includes “visible and less visible” differences⁴⁰ in backgrounds,⁴¹ cultural diversity,⁴² racial and ethnic diversity,⁴³ and diversity in sex,⁴⁴ age,⁴⁵ mental and physical abilities⁴⁶ and family structures.⁴⁷ There is also pro forma recognition of the existence of different perspectives⁴⁸ and of different values and religious beliefs.⁴⁹ References to sexual orientation⁵⁰ almost always occur in conjunction with these other terms.

XI.3 “Diversity and social justice” is a phrase that is not limited to titles and page headings of Making Space, Giving Voice. It is repeated 46 times throughout the document, as many as five times on a single page,⁵¹ creating the false impression that there is an essential connection between diversity and social justice. There is not. Justice is owed equally to all people by virtue of what we have in common - our common humanity - not by virtue of our differences.

XI.4 To be sure, justice demands that differences be taken into account. Injustice occurs when insignificant or irrelevant differences, like skin colour, are used as grounds to deny or confer benefits. But injustice is also done when significant or relevant differences are ignored: when, for example, special recognition for excellence is denied or diminished in order to emphasize false notions of equality.

XI.5 These important distinctions are not made in Making Space, Giving Voice. Based on the false assumption that social justice and diversity are merely different sides of the same coin, it insists that diversity must be recognized, understood, supported and promoted,⁵² appreciated⁵³ and valued,⁵⁴ welcomed,⁵⁵ honoured⁵⁶ and respected.⁵⁷

Honouring diversity is based on the principle that, if these differences are acknowledged and utilized in a positive way, it is of benefit to the quality of our learning and working environments.⁵⁸

XI.6 The flaw in the principle to which this passage refers can be demonstrated by asking how one might acknowledge and utilize dishonesty, selfishness, arrogance, or insensitivity in positive ways so as to benefit learning and working environments. Moreover, it makes no sense to assert that diversity and social justice always go hand in hand, while insisting that diversity in power, wealth, income, ownership, etc. are examples or sources of injustice.⁵⁹

XI.7 Contrary to the impression left by Making Space, Giving Voice (an impression created by the mantra-like repetition of catch-phrases, and an almost religious reverence for diversity),⁶⁰ informed and caring citizens do not unconditionally celebrate diversity. Consider the “diversity” exemplified by a blue-eyed lying thief with syphilis and a brown-eyed honest man with cancer. An employer will discriminate between the honest and dishonest man in hiring, a photographer may choose one over the other because of his eye colour, and a doctor will care for both indifferently. In other words, discrimination is just in some circumstances, unjust in others.

XI.8 Critical thinkers distinguish among different kinds of diversity and respond in different ways; the notion of diversity itself is useless for determining what counts as a significant difference and what does not. Why, then, make it the keystone for education about social justice?

XII.  Identity politics

XII.1 There is more at work here that simply trying to encourage “a healthy respect and support for social diversity.”⁶¹ Making Space, Giving Voice uses an ideological concept of diversity to support “the development of students’ varied and personal identities”⁶² whose voices must “be recognized and heard if diversity and social justice are to be truly addressed within the classroom.”⁶³

Sense of self
XII.2 The prominence given to “identity” in Making Space, Giving Voice⁶⁴ is complemented by an emphasis on one’s “sense of self,”⁶⁵ the self to whom one must be true,⁶⁶ perhaps reflecting Polonius’ parting quayside advice to his son, Laertes. “Neither a borrower nor a lender be,” Polonius warns him, “for loan oft loses both itself and friend, and borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.”

This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.⁶⁷

XII.3 Similarly, Making Space, Giving Voice states that “telling the truth and being true to oneself is the most important thing of all.”⁶⁸

XII.4 The problem with this advice is that it presumes that telling the truth and being true to oneself are synonymous. It is practical counsel only for a son who is already a virtuous man, someone who can tell the truth, and, at the same time, be true to himself, because his character has been conformed to truth, so that “he is, as it were, the rule and measure of it.”⁶⁹ A Christian will recognize it as perfectly good advice for a perfectly good man, of whom there is only One: Jesus Christ. Only if we are true to Him - not to ourselves - will it follow that “we canst not then be false to any man.” A non-Christian ethicist would insist that an ethical person must be true to some universal standard, not merely to himself and his own interests.⁷⁰

XII.5 It was for this reason that Dante envisaged souls in a no-man’s-land just outside Hell, rejected by God and Satan alike:

They’re mingled with that caitiff angel-crew
Who against God rebelled not, nor to HimWere faithful, but to self alone were true;
Heaven cast them forth - their presence there would dim
The light; deep Hell rejects so base a herd,
Lest sin should boast itself because of them.⁷¹

XII.6 Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s convictions about the dignity of the human person are so strong that he describes each human being as “a centre of the Universe.” ⁷² He is convinced that tyranny can be confronted only by those who have “an individual point of view.”⁷³ Nonetheless, he did not esteem those whose “sense of self” made them the “most fertile of all informers” for the Soviet secret police.⁷⁴

XII.7 Such distinctions are lacking in Making Space, Giving Voice because notions of a “sense of self” and “self-esteem” are used to inculcate the belief that someone acting on homosexual inclinations is being “true to himself,” and that this is always admirable.

Identity
XII.8 The concept of identity is pressed into similar service. Primary school students are to consider “factors influencing identity” and “relationships and identity.”⁷⁵ There are references to Canadian⁷⁶ and cultural identity.⁷⁷ But the identity most often mentioned in Making Space, Giving Voice is “gender identity,”⁷⁸ which, according to the Glossary, “refers to the gender with which a person identifies (i.e., whether one perceives oneself to be a man, a woman, or describes oneself in some less conventional way.”

[Gender identity] can also be used to refer to the gender that other people attribute to the individual on the basis of what they know from gender role indications (eg., social behaviour, likes and interests, clothing, hair style). Gender identity may be affected by a variety of social structures, including the person’s ethnic group, employment status, religion and family.⁷⁹

XII.9 The reference to “less conventional” ways of describing gender identity is necessary because, as indicated by the entry in the popular reference source, Wikipedia, gender identity is related to terms like “transgender,” “trannsexual” and “genderqueer,” in addition to its associations with homosexual and bisexual lifestyles. These ultimately connect with a kaleidoscopic range of behaviours and alleged identities which most parents would not wish to see their children encouraged to celebrate in school diversity days (See IX.3 to IX.7).

XII.10 Making Space, Giving Voice does not mention Gender Identity Disorder (GID),⁸⁰ a condition described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Nor does it refer to the fact that activists want it removed from the Manual, because they do not believe that an ‘identity’ can be disordered, and some claim that the successful treatment of children diagnosed with the condition is a form of homosexual genocide.⁸¹

XII.11 The omission of any reference to GID and the attendant controversy makes it easier to convince teachers and students that all identity claims are equal. Thus, when Making Space, Giving Voice states that teachers must support “students’ varied and personal identities”and recognize “the importance of a positive sense of personal identity,”⁸² it is implied that all gender identity claims must be uncritically accepted, even if some may reflect transient confusion or symptoms of an underlying emotional or mental disorder.

XIII.  Religion, belief and culture

Religion and belief
XIII.1 Students are to be encouraged to respect “the rights of others to hold different ideas and beliefs,”⁸³ though the subject is not developed, and the increasingly contentious business of expressing or manifesting ideas and beliefs out of favour with the establishment is untouched.⁸⁴

XIII.2 Apart from a single reference to diverse religious beliefs in Grade 4-7 Social Studies lessons about the Roman Empire,⁸⁵ “religious belief” is mentioned only in ‘diversity lists,’⁸⁶ while the subject of religion is raised only three times, twice associated to ideologies like vegetarianism,⁸⁷ and once, with mythology, as a component in the “value systems” of various cultures.⁸⁸ Topics related to gender or homosexuality receive frequent attention in suggested lessons and resources, but the subject of religious belief does not appear even once as a possible topic in any of the resources recommended at any grade level.

XIII.3 This invites a reasonable inference that the anonymous authors of Making Space, Giving Voice are motivated by a bias against religion, and have thus structured the document to marginalize religious belief and privilege the Corren Creed. The inference is supported by the fact that religion has been erased from the story of eleven year old Asmahan Mansour, a Muslim girl ejected from a soccer tournament for wearing a hijab (head scarf ). Although Mansour herself wears a hijab for religious reasons,⁸⁹ Making Space, Giving Voice ascribes this to her culture, not her religion - which is not mentioned.⁹⁰

Culture
XIII.4 The Glossary in Making Space, Giving Voice defines culture as “a way of describing a group of people and their way of life (attitudes, behaviours, etc.), and generally understood to have broader applications than race or ethnic group.” In addition, it notes that culture is not fixed (corsets and bellbottoms are now out of fashion, for example) and that, even in a given culture, one will find contemporaneous variations in cultural expression.⁹¹

XIII.5 Culture is listed as one of the less visible forms of social diversity,⁹² though there are frequent references to visible manifestations of culture. Its associations with language, heritage, and community are acknowledged.⁹³ Special emphasis is placed on Aboriginal culture(s),⁹⁴ and cultural imperialism is recognized as a form of oppression.⁹⁵ Eurocentrism is identified as a common bias in North American culture;⁹⁶ no reference is made to Europhobia, a common bias in academic culture.

XIII.6 As expected, the emphasis is on diversity,⁹⁷ cultural identity⁹⁸ and pluralism.⁹⁹ Students are to “learn about and value a wide variety of cultures,”¹⁰⁰ for which they are to develop “empathy and understanding.”¹⁰¹ This may be accomplished by, for example, hearing or reading stories from other cultures, being exposed to their dance, drama, music, visual arts¹⁰²  and food,¹⁰³ and learning about the cultural significance of numbers.¹⁰⁴ Students are to be asked to consider how perceptions of culture may be influenced by the media,¹⁰⁵ and the relationship between culture and the environment, economy and technology.¹⁰⁶

XIII.7 Many of these topics are either part of the existing curriculum or can be incorporated into it with little difficulty. Making Space, Giving Voice would see such lessons used to teach “social justice.” So, for example, it states that students in Comparative Civilizations 12 (an elective) have “clear opportunities to make comparisons and reflect on social justice issues” by studying “belief systems, daily life, gender roles, and power and authority in relation to various civilizations” and evaluating “the components of value systems within and among cultures, including social/cultural consequences.”¹⁰⁷ Similarly, students in Social Studies 4-7 can be asked to reflect on the “views and practices of equity and equality in ancient cultures” and ”sexual orientation” and “roles of men and women” in the Roman Empire.¹⁰⁸

XIII.8 Diversity in BC Schools: A Framework (2004), refers to “school cultures.” This more specialized notion of culture is explained in the Glossary commentary:

Culture may also be based on individual characteristics other than ethnicity (e.g., deaf culture, gay culture, corporate culture, hip-hop culture).¹⁰⁹

XIII.9 Making Space, Giving Voice seeks to create school cultures “that will be properly inclusive and respectful of all students,” “that value and honour diversity” and “that promote understanding of others and respect for all.”¹¹⁰ These two assertions - that a homosexual lifestyle is a form of “culture,” and that all “cultures” must be valued and honoured - are intended to lead the reader to the conclusion that “gay culture” must be valued and honoured.

XIII.10 However, even if one accepts the premise that homosexual lifestyles can be said to form a “culture,” the conclusion that it must be valued does not follow because it is not true that all cultures, as the term is defined by the Glossary, must be valued and honoured, nor is it true that all aspects of a culture must be respected.

XIII.11 Culture, as the Glossary acknowledges, includes attitudes and behaviours. Attitudes and behaviours are not above criticism, as anyone familiar with complaints about corporate culture, hip-hop culture or police culture well knows.¹¹¹ The list of cultures provided by the Glossary could be extended to include recognition of drug culture and criminal culture. The examples illustrate the point that no culture is entitled to unconditional acceptance or respect, particularly when the word is given this extended meaning. Some, indeed, would be completely incompatible with the legitimate desire of Diversity in BC Schools: A Framework (2004) to ensure respect for all students.¹¹²

XIII.12 Finally, the Glossary’s claim that deaf, gay, corporate and hip-hop cultures are all based on “individual characteristics” makes sense only as a transparent attempt at justification by association. Deafness is an individual characteristic, but it is not remotely similar to having a taste for certain forms of music or dress. Nor can someone who is deaf choose whether or not to hear, what to hear, or when, while choices of whether or not to act, what to do and when are all choices available to anyone experiencing sexual urges of any kind.

XIV.  Ancestry, ethnicity, race, racism and “heterosexism”

Ancestry and ethnicity
XIV.1 Ancestry appears only in lists of examples of social diversity and is described as one of its “less visible” forms.¹¹³ Ethnicity is listed among visible kinds of diversity.¹¹⁴ It is identified as a characteristic that can contribute to racism if used as an excuse for unjust discrimination¹¹⁵ by claims of superiority of one group over others.¹¹⁶ Race, like ethnicity, is said to be a visible kind of difference,¹¹⁷ but is repeatedly equated to “sexual orientation.”¹¹⁸

XIV.2 Racism is defined as “a belief or set of assumptions about the superiority of one ethnic group, usually accompanied by prejudice against members of all other ethnic groups.”¹¹⁹ It is described as a form of inequity, cited as an example of intimidation and hurtful behaviour¹²⁰ and is explicitly equated to “homophobia”¹²¹ and “heterosexism.”¹²² The former is said to be “a fear, dislike or hatred of homosexuality or homosexuals,”¹²³ while the latter is defined by Making Space, Giving Voice as “the assumption that heterosexual orientation is better than other sexual orientations and therefore deserving of public acceptance and legal privilege.”¹²⁴

XIV.3 It is obvious that the goal of Making Space, Giving Voice is to convince students that if they or their parents raise religious, moral or philosophical objections to homosexual urges, conduct or lifestyles, they are acting just like racists and deserve to be treated like racists.¹²⁵

Homosexuality and race distinguished
XIV.4 The association of homosexuality with race is untenable for several reasons. First: being of a particular race is an inescapable aspect of one’s humanity. It would make no sense to say that one’s race can be resisted, but sexual urges (like the urge to have adulterous or homosexual sex) can be resisted. Further, one’s humanity is not determined by the presence of sexual urges. Were that the case, infants and pre-pubescent children would not be human, or not fully so.

XIV.5 Second: because race is a fixed characteristic that is genetically determined, it cannot be changed. In contrast, though same-sex attractions may well originate for reasons beyond the control of the person, they are not genetically determined. They can be changed or modified, though the extent to which this can be achieved depends upon the individual.¹²⁶

XIV.6 Third: race is not associated to any particular kind of behaviour, so being of one race or another can have no moral implications; one race cannot be said to be “better than” another, or more inclined to good or evil than any other. Sexual urges, on the other hand, are ordered to corresponding conduct, and conduct can be judged to be moral or immoral.

XIV.7 Fourth: the manifestation of race is inseparable from one’s existence. One cannot help being seen as Caucasian or Oriental. Sexual inclinations are not visible and remain unknown to others unless disclosed by the person experiencing them.

Principled objections to sexual conduct
XIV.8 Hurling accusations that criticism of homosexual inclinations and acts is a form of bigotry is a strategy calculated to exempt same-sex attractions and relationships from the kind of principled critical analysis applied to other kinds of sexual urges and conduct.

XIV.9 Sexual inclinations of any kind are associated to corresponding sexual acts, some of which are commonly held to be worse than others. People are not surprised to hear adultery described as immoral, whether or not they concur with the judgement. Sexual promiscuity is often frowned upon, even by those who don’t believe that it is immoral. Sex with children is forbidden by criminal law.

XIV.10 Such judgements clearly imply that some forms of sexual conduct can, indeed, be better than others. While there are differences of opinion about what kind of sexual activity is inadvisable, what is immoral, and what ought to be forbidden by law, no one demands that people must honour, respect and promote all forms of sexual conduct. More to the point here, no one claims that those who refuse to give in to such demands are bigots, and that those who openly express their views should be silenced and punished.

XIV.11 Further, a distinction must be made between the human person and human conduct. The human person is always entitled to respect, justice and love, but not all human conduct deserves respect, and it is neither just nor loving to pretend that it does. The distinction is demonstrated daily by parents who discipline their children, and by judges who sentence criminals to imprisonment.

XIV.12 Finally, when it is understood that certain kinds of human conduct are immoral or harmful, it is also understood that inclinations or urges to become involved in that conduct are undesirable and should be resisted, even if resistance is extremely difficult. No one questions the need for a paedophile to resist inclinations to sexually exploit children, no matter what the source of the inclinations might be, and no matter how strong the urge. No one doubts that an alcoholic or drug addict must overcome his desire for liquor or cocaine, even if that can only be accomplished gradually, over a period of years, and not without the experience of failure.

XIV.13 This is what the Catholic Church means by the assertion that same-sex attractions are intrinsically disordered and must be resisted. They incline one towards immoral conduct - conduct that is contrary to the true good and perfection of the human person.¹²⁷ In this respect, they do not differ from inclinations to arrogance, greed, deceit, or selfishness.

XV.  Tolerance, understanding, respect and acceptance

XV.1 Intolerance makes a single appearance in Making Space, Giving Voice as an unqualified evil,¹²⁸ but the concept of tolerance is entirely absent. The reason for this is that tolerance involves the judgement that something is wrong or otherwise undesirable, together with a willingness to put up with it for some greater good, or to avoid a greater evil. Tolerance is not good enough for activists like the Correns, implying, as it does, an adverse judgement of homosexuality or homosexual lifestyles. Reflecting their viewpoint, Making Space, Giving Voice strives to inculcate something beyond tolerance in students.

Understanding and respect
XV.2 With respect to the promotion and development of students’ understanding of a particular point,¹²⁹ Making Space, Giving Voice refers only to their comprehension or intellectual grasp of the topic and generally implies nothing about what response is expected from them.¹³⁰ However, when it refers to understanding other persons, it seems to use “understanding” as a synonym for empathy, sympathy, or compassion. At the least, the anonymous authors expect that understanding others will elicit those responses,¹³¹ and, perhaps, respect.¹³²

XV.3 Making Space, Giving Voice states that all people have a psychological need for respect, “regardless of the differences in their attributes, capacities, or backgrounds.”¹³³ It stresses the importance of developing and promoting respect for all persons,¹³⁴ and it encourages teachers to model respectful behaviour and speech¹³⁵ and maintain a respectful atmosphere in the classroom.¹³⁶ It would have students treat others respectfully,¹³⁷ communicate and debate respectfully,¹³⁸ and demonstrate respect for others during sports and games, regardless of skill level or ability.¹³⁹ It notes that being “respectful” is one of the expected attributes of BC high school graduates.¹⁴⁰

XV.4 All of this is consistent with Catholic teaching, but neglects the key distinction between the person and conduct. While Catholic teaching insists upon unconditional respect for the human person,¹⁴¹ this does not mean that one must respect all forms of human conduct. The classical formulation is the familiar advice, “Love the sinner, hate the sin,” what G.K. Chesterton called the “the complicated question of charity.”

Christianity came in here as before. It came in startlingly, with a sword, and clove one thing from another. It divided the crime from the criminal. The criminal we must forgive unto seventy times seven. The crime we must not forgive at all. . . We must be much more angry with theft than before, and yet much kinder to thieves than before.¹⁴²

XV.5 Moreover, this unqualified respect for the human person is to be distinguished from the conditional respect owed religious and non-religious beliefs or cultural traditions. Female circumcision is not tolerated or respected in Canada, for example, and an understanding of the tradition has not led to compassion for its practitioners, but to its criminal prohibition.¹⁴³ Hence, the anonymous authors’ silence about the distinction between person and conduct and their demand for unconditional respect for diversity¹⁴⁴ are not only contrary to Catholic teaching, but inconsistent with their purported interest in developing students’ capacity for critical thinking.¹⁴⁵

Acceptance
XV.6 The inconsistency arises because critical thinking on such points might make it more difficult to move students beyond respect for persons to acceptance of homosexual conduct and lifestyles. The same process was used in the CAPP personal development curriculum. CAPP advised teachers that it was not enough that students be evaluated according to their “willingness to respect other opinions, beliefs, values.”¹⁴⁶ Students were also required to demonstrate that they would accept them. An indication of what this meant was provided in teacher background material. “When someone describes a feeling,” CAPP stated, “the best thing the listener can do is accept that the person is feeling that way.”

Denial and judgement of the other’s feelings are signs that the person doesn’t really wish to know of them, let alone accept them. Denials do nothing to change the person’s feelings.¹⁴⁷

XV.7 The phrase, “let alone accept” is most revealing. It indicates that, in CAPP’s lexicon, “to accept” meant that the student must positively affirm the validity or goodness of the feeling or belief in question.¹⁴⁸

XV.8 Similarly, in Making Space, Giving Voice, acceptance means, at a minimum, gracious acknowledgement.¹⁴⁹ Most frequently, it means more: welcome, approval and validation.¹⁵⁰ Moreover, what is accepted is understood to be morally permissible.¹⁵¹ Thus, when the anonymous authors insist that “diverse viewpoints” should be “accepted,”¹⁵² and when they assert that it is wrong not to accept people “for who they are,”¹⁵³ they are, in effect, demanding that students abdicate their responsibility for critical ethical discernment.

XV.9 In fairness to the Correns, it should be noted that the Ministry of Education has long supported the notion that students should suspend their capacity for critical thinking with respect to moral issues. CAPP student were to be reminded “to be respectful of all families, their make up and their values and behavioural standards,” warned that “[j]udging values is not appropriate,”¹⁵⁴ admonished to respect other opinions and beliefs, ¹⁵⁵ cautioned to avoid “judging values,” and directed to discuss issues in a “non-judgemental” way.¹⁵⁶

XV.10 If students adopt an ethic of diversity or assume a posture of moral non-judgementalism, how can they be expected to respond to conflicts involving irreconcilable moral differences? CAPP offered one answer to this question; Making Space, Giving Voice offers another. It is instructive to consider both because taking the measure of the difference between the two indicates the direction being imparted to educational policy by the Corren Agreement.