More and more often the State intervenes in internal familiar life under the mission of „child's welfare“. Thereby the positive term „child's welfare“ is turned into the exact opposite and misused for political aims.[continue reading]
License: Creative Commons License: Attribution CC BY
05.09.2018 | www.kla.tv/12978
Under the broadcast format „Look over the Fence“ today we'll introduce you in part to an article of the Swiss commission „Youth and Family,“ which was broadcast in the magazine under the same name on May 11th 2017. The article shows step by step, how the term „child's welfare“ was increasingly reversed to mean the opposite and misused for political aims. Whenever „help“ is needed to achieve a breakthrough in ethically, morally and medically highly controversial issues for example adoption rights for homosexuals, perverse forms of sex education in school or curtailing the educational rights of the parents, this positive sounding term „child's welfare“ comes into play. „Child's welfare“ a politically misused term Authorities intervene in internal family affairs more and more often and tougher, under the guise of „child welfare“. This lets the government claim functions which belong in the family. In the political discourse certain terms have achieved an almost untouchable status and may not be questioned. This is also the case with the term „child's welfare“. Taking a closer look though, it becomes obvious that often things are understood under this term, which are not in the interest of children. Killed in self-interest? When pre-implantation diagnostic (PID)was debated in the Swiss Parliament, a (liberal-minded) National Parliament member said that in the interest of „child's welfare“ the introduction of PID is even necessary (Explanation: examination of an embryo created through artificial insemination prior to insertion) This way severe genetic diseases could be prevented, which is in the interest of the child. In fact, this is claiming that it is better to eliminate a handicapped embryo than give birth to a disabled child. Killing so-to-speak for self-interest – so the monstrous logic. Child's welfare „thanks to“ same-sex parents? The „child's welfare“ argument was also put forward concerning adoption rights for homosexuals. If the partner's biological children are not allowed to be adopted, it seems this would be a great discrimination of the child (inheritance law, insurance etc.) It would comply with the child's welfare better to have two same sex parents instead of only one parent. That the child could have a natural right, not to have two fathers, respectively two mothers was opportunistically suppressed in this adult perspective on children's welfare. (“to adjust randomly for the sake of self-interest”) Early sexualization as child's welfare A perversion (in the explanation box: “Reversal into the abnormal”) of the child's welfare can also be found in early sexualization. In May 2015 an „alliance for sexual education“ was launched. 60 Swiss organizations belong to this alliance. The aim is to promote the “WHO-Standards for Sexual Education in Europe”. Based on the assertion that “a child is a sexual being” they want to promote early sexualization. It is put forward that children have a “right to information”, whereby “the focus should be on sexuality as a positive human potential and a source of satisfaction and enjoyment” (S.22)With the “Right to information” compulsory sex education becomes legitimate as of Kindergarten. Early sexualization and pedophilia The case of Jürg Jegge casts high waves. (In the 1970s and 80s Jürg Jegge as teacher and instructor abused some of his students under the pretext of giving them therapy.) Less known is that today's State financed “sex education of diversity” shows a similar approach to those efforts to legalize pedophilia in the 1970s. In both cases the child is declared a “sexual being”, which should be specifically “encouraged” in intimate matters. By adults, of course. More and more often parents report about teaching in the early primary school grades about erogenous zones or “condom training” for second and third grade pupils. In the 5th and 6th grades children were told how to stimulate themselves and about positions, anal and oral sex. This supposedly promotes freedom of sexual development and therefore it is good for child's welfare […] Values conveyed by the State instead of by the parents State authorities have meanwhile produced catalogs, regulating in detail the “rights of the child”. Sometimes this is massively interfering in areas, which actually are the responsibility of the parents. And this touches the core of the problem. […] Careful with the term “child's welfare” As we already mentioned at the start, the term “child's welfare” is in the meantime so positively charged, that it is hardly ever questioned. […] This development is dangerous. Where the harmless sounding term “child's welfare” appears, it is necessary to first of all take a closer look, what is concretely meant by this and what is behind it. Celsa Brunner
from von af./rg.