think I've worked out where the gender theory misrepresentation comes from (and hence the red-herring, strawman fallacies around that misrepresentation -

Some people are proposing that

(i) because gender is fluid for a small proportion of the population - those that have gender dysphoria and want to be change their gender;
(ii) because some people are homosexual (gay or lesbian);
(iii)because some people are bisexual;
(iv) some people are intersex and decision have to be made about how they may want to represented (traditionally a decision parents made, but now a decision that many are advocating involves the intersex child), and
(v) there is a desire to educate the rest of the population about these scenarios ...

there is a false assertion that there is a 'radical agenda' to make all or more people gender fluid or sexually fluid.

That false assertion is nonsense. It ignores that fact that people have greater autonomy in making personal decisions with information and awareness and as we move away from the institutions of the past.

'Safe Scools' has nothing to do with safety or bullying. It is by perverts, for perverts. It is anti-family. It is anti-social. It is the product of the disgusting mindset of a few very disgusting people, aided by disgusting politicians.

This article is an extreme justification of a program that has to be modified for obvious reasons. As has now been widely discussed, but somehow the would-be member for Deakin managed not to get the memo, the safe schools program went far beyond any anti-bullying or pro-sexual choice mandate. The original program had sexually explicit content which it thrust in the face of all students, without parent consultation, and demanded the whole curriculum - already crowded with socially correct subjects - be subverted to its needs.

Almost anyone but activist-extremists can see the problem, and they have - the real surprise has been the depth of vitriol from those who support the program, in the face of evident, widespread community disquiet over it. The would-be member of Deakin should go back and consult more with his community.

I see that he has a chance at election. If he does get in, I hope his parliamentary performance is better than this.

'Advocating for tolerance and inclusion is one of the fundamental requirements of an elected member. '

Tolerance for the left includes every perversion known to man and the devil. The only thing they don't tolerate is anything Christian. Why not have a program to teach kids its fine to have sex with dogs? The so called safe sex program is nothing more than bringing confusion to young minds. Leave them alone.

If you are gay,it's not something that can be taught or acquired after birth! Or bullied or bashed out or in! And given the worst offenders can be abysmally ignorant parents, shouldn't be left up to them?

And given this program was initiated and funded in its entirety during the Abbott reign, without all the current (diabolically disingenuous)furore, what has changed?

I know, the once deposed coalition Leader Malcolm (return bill) Turnbull has been returned to his former position! And the worst possible reason for politicising a program already rolled out and funded!
Rhrosty.

When are these people going to stop playing the suicide card and the self harm card?

It seems that if you want to dramatise your situation this is the way to go now days. Kids get bullied. Kids have always been bullied. Almost every kid has been bullied at some time in their lives.

What is it about kids with sexual issues that makes them want to harm themselves and kill themselves?

Anyone who thinks that killing yourself is a reasonable response to being bullied has some very serious problems of perspective. Suicide can never be a reasonable response to bullying – all it shows is that these kids are totally out of touch with reality. It shows what a poor system of values they have and this reflects on their parents and teachers who want to push this agenda.

When it is brought up as an argument against bullying all it does is expose the real issues these kids have with trying to determine what is important. Bullying is not pleasant but no one ever died from it so how could anyone think that being dead is better than being bullied? Where are their instincts to survive? How can bullying make life so miserable that there is absolutely nothing worth living for? Where is their sense of wonder, delight and joy? Their whole life is about not being bullied but no one’s life is that bad.

Their problem is not that they are bullied but that they cannot get things to make sense. When people tell them that their sexuality is ‘who they are’ then they are helping to confuse them. Sexuality is not who anyone is. It is just a part of life and so is bullying. When these ‘educators’ overemphasise sexuality they are trying to convince themselves rather than their students of its importance.