It all depends on what they teach. I doubt they will teach everything to a 5 year old, just that guys and girls be different.

I have actually seen some of the materials that are being provided to schools for (at the moment) 6 year olds and I suppose they'll be using that soon for 5 year olds.

These include a comic called "Growing with Nisha and Joe" in which the centerfold piece contains two diagrams of a naked boy and a naked girl, with which the students have to match the correct labels to the correct body parts.

Also there is a CH4 documentary called "Living and Growing" in which the children are told which "body parts may bring you pleasure if touched like this" and cartoon characters play out certain acts- I'll leave that to your imagination.

What will also become compulsory as Sajid mentioned is being taught about same-sex relationships and other non-heterosexual relationships, so one of the materials used for this is a book called "And Tango Makes Three", which is about two gay penguins who can't have a baby so a third one helps out. This is apparently to try and tackle bullying that children face, i.e. children who have two same-sex parents or who are inclined that way themselves.
Then theres also material from the Family Planning Associations which is pretty graphic!

I really think there is nothing stopping them from teaching a 5 year old everything...I think most people are outraged because of the number "5" but in many schools kids aged 7, 8 and 9 are being taught this already.
This particular account doesn't actually tell us what age the children were but its a pretty vivid explanation of the method used to teach SRE - http://sreislamic.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/email_sre_teacher/
I would say this SRE whether its optional or compulsory IS a bad thing, because of the way it is taught, it contradicts CORE values in Islam but it will also have NO impact on the real problem. Yes it may help solve teenage pregnancy but its not going to stop teenage/underage sex and promiscuity, and may even work to increase incest/pedophilia which really scares me!
I feel for the teachers too, they have to reduce themselves to a filthy way of talking, to a street level for kids to understand them. For both sides its degrading.

I think once it becomes compulsory parents really wont be able to do anything, as parents in London have now realized after being taken to court cuz they removed their kids from a compulsory WEEK of SRE.

It is the role of the local Masjids to come in at this point, I know that in one particular school in London the local masjid and parents they put together a different SRE in line with Islam and as the majority of pupils were Muslim the school was more than happy to allow this to be taught by the Imam.
I think that is important if parents, esp. Muslim parents are unhappy with their kids being taught that homosexuality is normal or that this is the number to text for a morning after pill, then we need to come together and propose an alternative as not every child will be able to go an Islamic school.
As for parents being uncomfortable...It is a duty from Allah swt to teach our kids about this topic, but it must be in line with Islam, under the framework of Nikah or the fiqh of prayer/fasting etc. This doesnt mean teach them what will happen the night before their wedding day. Parents really ought to strive to teach their kids in the correct way before someone tells them in an incorrect way. This way even if the kids are later told by their friends or teachers, they will already have the correct understanding of the topic.
There really is no time to play the blame game, InshaAllah this is the time to work hard for a solution.

why did the parents get taken to court? Parents can teach their kids at home, privately or in a different institution which caters for their needs can't they?

I agree with you from what you say about the proposed material, it will contradict many Islamic teachings, and from what you have stated it seems far too graphic and informative for a child as young as 5. Key word child...do they even exist these days?. Children should be children. These days they are sexualised too early in the media, and now it seems even by schools.

Another related issue, I think there is a problem with schools and clinics giving out contraceptives, they are encouraging young ppl to have sex. I think it is the duty of schools to educate teenagers about contraception, pregnancy, and sex in general, to a certain extent. But I think they go wrong when they dish out contraception. That is not their duty. There are free clinics and surgeries where they can get that. But if these kids are under 16 these institutions are committing a crime aren't they? Shouldn't they be teachings the kids about relationships, and about how sex should be part of an adult relationship, rather than just something done under peer pressure for "fun"?

I think there is a correlation between dishing out free contraception and increased teenage pregnancy rates. Sounds ironic but these teenagers prob didn't bother using them, or didn't know how to use them. If you hear case stories you will hear the same message. When i was a teenager there was 1 young girl pregnant during GCSE's. Nowadays i'm sure there are a lot more.

Another related issue, I think there is a problem with schools and clinics giving out contraceptives, they are encouraging young ppl to have sex.

In an ideal world - a world of no sin, I would agree with you. In this one, I disagree.

People will always play with fire, and giving them safety tools may mean they play with it a little more, but overall there should be less "harm". In my theory anyway.

PS I am NOT suggesting that the current education ways are the best. They are not.

The school was having a LGBT week (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) where the kids would spend the whole week outside of normal lessons, learning about the importance of these topics.
Parents only found out 2 weeks before this and tried to speak to the Headteacher, a meeting was called for in which the Head did not appear but got the staff to tell parents they basically had no choice and they were being difficult and prejudiced.
The parents went ahead and removed their kids from school that week, they later found out from the local newspapers they were being taken to court! Lol what a way to go about it...

There is an article that covers the issue but Im not going to post it as its not descriptive nor accurate; I found this out from one of the school governors for that school. SRE was already compulsory in this school...if SRE is made compulsory in all schools then this is the future that awaits parents, either u like it or lump it.

Exactly, its hugley paradoxical in that they say its illegal to have sex under 16 yet they are advertising where to get condoms from and arranging services for young girls to text for a Morning After Pill. To the extent that GPs are in no position to argue and have to keep 'patient confidentialty' from the parents of the kids having abortions/sex.

Its a smokescreen, as long as the teengar doesnt get pregnant, doesnt become a drain on the benefits system, continues using contraceptives and benefitting the economy, is "free" and isnt encroaching on anybody else's "freedom" then hey its all good. :doubt:.
SubhanAllah if an alternative was used by the schooling system I think it would not only protect Muslim kids but it would hugely benefit non-muslim children.

InshaAllah they will provide it if they wake up now that all this is happening...Its either teach your kids about these issues, or allow someone else to come in and do it 4 u and that someone else isnt always going to do it in a way thats best.

Personally I would rather my kids or little cousins/siblings have NONE, than what is taught at schools. It may just be knowledge but once that Haya is gone, its gone. In some schools it doesnt just stop there, the kids are in mixed changing rooms, do P.E. together so its constantly agitating that desire within them and the desire to act it out now that they know how to.

Teenagers are curious about sex coz everything is sexualized, from a car to a chocolate bar so the Govt should really tackle the root of this curiosity, not filter money into preventing the outcomes. Same thing with contraception, it hasnt actually stopped teenage pregnancies nor STD's (chlamydia has risen 500% in 5 years for boys.)

Is there really a "need" for it when so many youngsters don't use it? :?

How about teachers actually showing some consideration for religious views?
And how about Imams and children actually taking a more active role in sex ed., might be embarassing but it's the only way.

Salam

Some schools show blue movies as part of "Sex Education" lessons for small children.

These sex education films are very explicit and show
everything. I mean they show everything.

Teachers want to make sure that children understand exactly what is going on.

For the first time chidren have no idea what
men do to women. So these films leave nothing to imagination.

I think most people find it digusting for teachers in schools to show
dirty movies to children.

I think majority of parents would be horrified if they ever sat down in
classes during school lessons in which their children are
made to sit down and watch filthy blue movies.

Telling a child under 10 about carnal desires is just outrageous.

Religous Catholics, Jews and Muslims do not like their
sons and daughters to see naked pictures and dirty acts in films.

Who would like to see his daughter aged 8 to watch a
sex film in which they show a completely naked a man and a
fully naked woman enaged in passionate affair.

Be honest and tell us.

Omrow

A lot of the stuff here - especially Omrow's post - seems to be scare mongering?

The parents need to know the facts - and as far as I was aware such lessons were never compulsory and parents had a right to remove their kids from them When did that change?

Does anybody know how the sex ed curriculum is drawn up and whether teachers can raise objections and force a review?

I agree with Ed (makes a change )

I was learning about sex in primary school from my school-friends. They had no idea what they were talking about, of course, but that only makes it worse! The current emphasis on sex education is a response to the thousands of kids who are messing up their lives. It is for the country as a whole, not just for Muslim students.

The issues should be dealt with sensitively, accurately and unexplicity; if they aren't then the issues should be raised with the individual schools/teachers on a case-by-case basis.

What is the problem learning about gay/transexual/transgender people? They are a sizeable minority in Britain, just because Islam disagress with their life-style (or even 'more-so because Islam disgarees with their lifestyle), it doesn't mean that they should preted that people liek that DON'T EXIST! Especially because they are far-less likely to come into contact with people like that until they are older, and if they aren't tolerant of differances at that age, then it could cause far greater problems.

Even IF teenage-pregnancy/STDs etc is far less of a problem with Muslims than non-Muslim (or at least with Muslims from practising families), that doesn't mean they should be able to 'opt-out' if they attend state-schools. They CAN do that by A) paying for a private school or leaving Britain.

Does that sound like something the BNP would say? Yikes!

Omrow wrote:

For the first time chidren have no idea what
men do to women. So these films leave nothing to imagination.

Don't you mean what men and women do to each other?

I'm sure they don't show children rape videos.

Re: original blog.

Not to sound coarse, but i do think that Muslims, in general, tend to shy away from the subject of Sex...

It's such a taboo thing that it leaves most young people confused.

I think that there should perhaps be a little less pretending homosexuality and sex before marriage doesn't exist and a little more educating on it in a perhaps more understanding way.

i.e less 'Sex is dirty, you're filthy and impure if you partake in such a disgusting icky practice'

and more reasons why things are wrong.

i DON'T however think it's a good thing about the SexEd in schools to kids so young, it's not so much the education as it is what seems to me to be ENCOURAGING this stuff....

At LEAST before, teenagers, even the ones who did it, mostly knew they were doing wrong, but ideas exposed to us so young stay with us and influence us as we get older...

And i don't REALLY get the point. Do statistics show that there is an increase in the percentage of pregnant five year olds?

Religious views aside a child of 5 doesn't need to know about sex. A child of five may be mature enough to ask questions like mummy where do babies come from. But that doesn't mean he/she needs to be given a explicit lesson on sex. I bet that child would be stunned if such information was given out. The information should be age specific and sensitive. The proposed material seems too explicit for kids this young. There is a huge difference between 5 and 12. If the subject were introduced from the age of 10/11 that would be more appropriate depending on what is taught. Regardless of religious and/or other views parents should have a right to know what will be taught and a right to remove their children out of these classes if they wish.

I would like to remind you guys a child of 5 is in reception class that means he/she has just come out of nursery. Are you telling me you'd be pleased with a child who has just left nappies, and prob still wears one at night learning about sex explicitly? I'd remove my child fast.

Hajjar wrote:

Religious views aside a child of 5 doesn't need to know about sex. A child of five may be mature enough to ask questions like mummy where do babies come from. But that doesn't mean he/she needs to be given a explicit lesson on sex. I bet that child would be stunned if such information was given out. The information should be age specific and sensitive. The proposed material seems too explicit for kids this young. There is a huge difference between 5 and 12. If the subject were introduced from the age of 10/11 that would be more appropriate depending on what is taught. Regardless of religious and/or other views parents should have a right to know what will be taught and a right to remove their children out of these classes if they wish.

I would like to remind you guys a child of 5 is in reception class that means he/she has just come out of nursery. Are you telling me you'd be pleased with a child who has just left nappies, and prob still wears one at night learning about sex explicitly? I'd remove my child fast.

Yep, but does that happen? Where is the evidence that 5 year olds ARE given explicit lessons on sex?

The question is: is this due to insufficient Sex Ed or too much?

[IMG]http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/8440/failownedpregnancyfail.jpg[/IMG]

I guess its all about when the need to have kids kicks in... but its not something I really understand.

Why would anyone want to have kids knowing full well, that the chances they will turn out good/perfect is minute to zero?

No matter what you do, chances are you're gonna screw up and the kid will be scoring narcotics from the local drug peddler. or supplying them...

You wrote:

I guess its all about when the need to have kids kicks in... but its not something I really understand.

Why would anyone want to have kids knowing full well, that the chances they will turn out good/perfect is minute to zero?

No matter what you do, chances are you're gonna screw up and the kid will be scoring narcotics from the local drug peddler. or supplying them...

(Only) good bit in Star Wars II:

"You don't want to offer me deathsticks,"
"I don't want to offer you deathsticks,"
"You want to go home and consider your decisions in life,"
"I want to go home and consider my decisions in life,"

If only parenting was that easy! Hey, maybe it IS afterall, people just haven't realised the power of the Force.

If only it was that easy. but the reality is if you try to control their excursions in some way, chances they will find a way around it and do worse.

And there is a life time of worry for parents too.

First when the kids are young - they cannot take care of themselves, so loads of worry. And then when they are older, they are old enough to not follow the path laid out to them, to falter etc. Which is "allowed", but I doubt any parent enjoys is when their offspring stumbles and falls.

Salam

MakeMeRawr_6TeenF wrote:

Omrow wrote:

For the first time chidren have no idea what
men do to women. So these films leave nothing to imagination.

Don't you mean what men and women do to each other?

What do you mean what do I mean.

Oh I see.

Thank God you have not seen any film that our Home Secretary watches with our tax money.

I have not either. But SKYNEWS was saying that
she was caught renting double x and triple x editions.
Her husband asked her to get only the single x director's cut
versions, but apprently Jacqui Smith thought that she would treat him before the G20.

I have no idea what all that means - some strange mysterious x letters -
but she was red faced and rushed home blushed.

Omrow

reply to yaqub:

see what muslimsister wrote, she is a teacher right? She has said she has seen material that will be used.

against the imposition of statutory SRE

Hajjar wrote:

reply to yaqub:

see what muslimsister wrote, she is a teacher right? She has said she has seen material that will be used.

Where did Muslim Sister write?

ROCHDALE'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST SRE FOR 5 YEAR OLD CHILDREN

We in Rochdale are running a campaign againbst the introduction of SRE for 5 yer old children.

Please check out our designed activities and press coverage on our campaign below

CAMPAIGN SITE
http://majedsblog.wordpress.com/category/sre-campaign/

PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION ON
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/SRE_campaign/

JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=66131912100&ref=nf

Omrow wrote:

Salam

MakeMeRawr_6TeenF wrote:

Omrow wrote:

For the first time chidren have no idea what
men do to women. So these films leave nothing to imagination.

Don't you mean what men and women do to each other?

What do you mean what do I mean.

Oh I see.

Thank God you have not seen any film that our Home Secretary watches with our tax money.

I have not either. But SKYNEWS was saying that
she was caught renting double x and triple x editions.
Her husband asked her to get only the single x director's cut
versions, but apprently Jacqui Smith thought that she would treat him before the G20.

I have no idea what all that means - some strange mysterious x letters -
but she was red faced and rushed home blushed.

Omrow

I can't believe I'm defending her, but she didn't know, her husband was doing it behind her back as far as I know.

The Lamp wrote:

I can't believe I'm defending her, but she didn't know, her husband was doing it behind her back as far as I know.

Sure about that? I would think that she would know what is on HER expenses bill.

Not if he used it without her permission.

With a wife like Smith why on earth would anyone watch fake flesh.

He must be into walls.

We call them headbangers.

Anyway, Dick Timney has apologised for being interested
in synthetic stuff rather than the real thing.