There are no stranger bedfellows than the intersectional adherents of progressivism and the conservative adherents of Islamism. For several months, a British city has been the battleground for a vicious clash between diverse secular values and restrictive religious dogma, which lead to a recent High Court order banning people from siege protests outside Anderton Park Primary School once their efforts devolved into a harassment campaign.
The Birmingham City Council won the injunction after a movement of mostly Islamist activists demanded “LGBTQ-inclusive” lessons and material be removed from the school curriculum. Protestors could face charges if found within proximity of the school and reigniting the movement known for its reported verbal abuse and physical intimidation. Ironically, protestors defend their own bigotry under a disingenuous guise that their critics are merely “islamophobic”, as seen in the exchange between the movement leader Shakeel Afsar and Birmingham’s current MP Jess Phillips.
Andrew Moffat, an award-winning teacher for his work on equality education, claims he’s been threatened and targeted by Muslim parents across multiple primary schools for “No Outsiders”, his relatively new education programme which seeks to educate children on the existence of “different” individuals in our world and mitigate hatred on this basis. It’s a basic bitch guide to protected characteristics which are all legislated under Britain’s Equality Act of 2010. Under its Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED or simply “Equality Duty”), promotion of any characteristic is conditioned under the law, not simple mentioning.
According to the BBC, who investigated the programme’s contents, “schools have a duty under the act to teach children ‘British values’ as a way of reducing radicalisation and bullying” against these characteristics, from religion to relationships. The books used in the programme are by no means sexual in nature, using stories about dogs that don’t fit in with the pact, how a boy wants to dress up as a mermaid and two male penguins who decide to raise a baby chick together (based on a true story from a New York zoo) to promote the values of equality and highlighting differences. Parents argue they can pick and choose which equalities can be promoted over others.
“All animals are equal,” once proclaimed Napoleon, the pig dictator of Orwell’s classic Animal Farm, “but some animals are more equal than others.” This mentality, of course, is nonsensical hypocrisy. To be equal means to be exactly the same. There can be no more or less equal. You are either equal or unequal. In this case, under the guise of religious equality, protestors are placing their religion as hegemonic over the teaching of other Britons who should be equally protected. Their case relies on obfuscating their true arguments against tolerance while trying to eat the cake of tolerance too.
“Parents feel that at a primary school age a child is not at an age to understand such complex relationships such as LGBT, or even some heterosexual relationships, or even about Islam or religion and stuff,” Afsar explained on This Morning. “Parents feel that in primary school we should be teaching our children about humanity, respect for humanity. Parents at the school shouldn’t feel like it’s over-promoting one narrative and not the other. We should try and make it transparent. What the parents have been made to look like we’re some homophobic people and we have no intolerance towards differences when we have co-existed with this community.”
Clearly, co-existence only goes so far. It’s the same hypocritical songs of all hetero-normative religions, ranging from the passive don’t ask, don’t tell tolerance through ignorance or the pursuit of intolerance itself (where the former always enables the latter). In a report from Sky News, protestors proved this with varying comments saying “homosexuality is a heinous, horrible thing”, that it’s “not acceptable for us lot”, that the programme is ”brainwashing children that it’s okay to be gay”, that it places a “positive spin” on the notion “it’s okay to Muslim and gay,” which lead to intolerant cheers of “shame, shame, shame” against Moffat’s promotion of tolerance.
Damian Hinds, the tory’s secretary of education, has slammed the protests as ‘unacceptable’, stating: “I support and trust head teachers to make decisions in the interests of their pupils — parents should share their views and concerns, and schools should listen. However, what is taught and how is ultimately a decision for schools. A consultation does not mean parents have a veto on curriculum content. There is no reason why teaching children about the society that we live in and the different types of loving, healthy relationships that exist cannot be done in a way that respects everyone.”
Unless the reason is an ideological “submission”, which is the literal definition of “Islam”. The headteacher, Sarah Hewitt-Clarkson, even revealed that “the vast majority of protesters are not parents”, including Afsar himself, which leaves the motivation of the protestors completely suspect. According to Sky, she believes the Islamist activists are “spoiling a child’s education, risking unauthorised absence fines, having unauthorised absence on a child’s records, creating division between school and families where there wasn’t any before all because it’s important for children to know and understand that some people have two mummies? It is quite unbelievable,” she concludes.
Disbelief won’t make the fanatics at the gates disappear. The injunction, currently being contested in court, remains only a temporary block to the intolerance. In writing this account, I’ve become gravely disappointed with the so-called “moderate Muslims” we hear so much about, which largely comprise this pervasive group with signs reading “we’re not homophobes”. In the wake of terrorist attacks, the media presents an image of how there’s a silent majority willing to stand for a progressive society in the fight against hatred.
This golden rule only reaches the bare minimum in agreeing we shouldn’t be blown up into bits and pieces, not the positive liberties of protected classes of which they view themselves superior. Progressives make strawman jokes of moderate whores who find themselves lead to untenable compromises allowing tolerance for the intolerant. Popular memes about of when one side says “universal healthcare” and another says “gas the jews”, the moderates somehow believe we there can be some compromise within the marketplace of ideas.
It can be a false picture of the pathetic “white moderates”, who MLK rightfully condemned as “the stumbling block in the stride toward freedom” in his letter from Birmingham Jail, but it’s not so untrue of the moderate Muslim, which polls after polls show remain noticeably homophobic. They’re caught between the sinful framing of homosexuality dictated by the text and the homophobic social label the belief entails, who like the white moderate “prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice”, but can’t even give the lip service to say “I agree with you in the goal you seek,” instead diverting to “I can’t agree with [either] your methods of direct action [or your goals],” just don’t call me homophobic.
To be a “moderate Muslim” in this case, where freedom from your equal man’s very existence is the only means to “co-exist”, is to perpetuate the status quo of hatred shared between the conservative Christian, Jew, Mormon and secular or religious reactionary while wearing the mask of an ally. All men are created equal, but not all positions command equal respect. There should be progressive empathy for why these flawed conclusions are reached, whether it’s a socio-economic trend or an individual failing based on one’s education, but to deny the flaw is to accept hierarchical hatred. No soft bigotry of low expectations which capitulates to this flaw is progressive. You are either equal or unequal, and the choice must be made.
Note: For further context on the failures of “modern muslims” and universal cases of anti-LGBTQ rights international, I would highly suggest Kraut’s videos which I found helpful both here and here, as well as a recent livestream he conducted with Vaush which may be uploaded in the coming weeks.
Thanks for reading! This article was originally published for TrigTent.com, a bipartisan media platform for political and social commentary, truly diverse viewpoints and facts that don’t kowtow to political correctness.
For updates, feel free to follow @atheist_cvnt on his various social media pages on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or Gab. You can also contact through firstname.lastname@example.org for personal or business reasons.
Stay honest and radical. Cheers, darlings. 💋