No rejection of homosexuality in identity statements at schools

Statements from the past

The House adopted a motion calling for an end to parental statements rejecting homosexuality. In a letter answering parliamentary questions and presenting an inventory of identity statements, Slob says that these statements do not contain a rejection of homosexuality. A few years ago, such statements did exist, and some could still be found online.

“No school in the Netherlands may condemn or reject pupils on the basis of their sexual orientation,” Slob writes to the House. “Not in an identity statement, not in their admissions policy and not in their school culture. Moreover, under education legislation, schools have a duty of care to provide a socially safe school environment. This cannot be the case if pupils are rejected on the basis of their sexual orientation.” He remains in discussions with the umbrella organisations about how citizenship education is being shaped.

Difference of opinion

“The debate about the Citizenship Education Act was, of course, completely overshadowed by the issue of the identity statements,” says Jan-Willem de Leeuw, a board member of Coöperatie ZWN (which unites eight Reformed schools in the southwestern Netherlands). The way these identity statements were discussed in the House pained him. “Of course, there is a difference of opinion regarding homosexual practice between a large number of parties and the Reformed schools (many Reformed schools distinguish between homosexual orientation and ‘practising’ homosexuality, ed.). But we attach great importance to a safe school environment for all pupils, including homosexual pupils,” De Leeuw emphasises. Research reports confirm this, incidentally. “We come out as the category of safest schools.”

School, church and family

The reasoning is: if parents sign identity statements rejecting homosexuality, children are not safe at school. De Leeuw understands this, but reasons exactly the other way around: “When school, church and family share the same convictions, that actually means a safe situation for a child. We give children a firm foundation. At the same time, we say: From that foundation, you are fully part of this society. You need to know what is going on in this society and how you yourself view it.”

Education by the parents

It should be noted, De Leeuw says, that a broad society contains a diverse range of convictions. This is also reflected in the differences in beliefs between schools. “It is not the school administrators who impose their will on the parents or children; rather, the parents want their children to attend a school with these specific convictions. Many political parties act as if education belongs to the state, or to society as a whole. We believe that education belongs to the parents.”

“The framing that these identity statements would lead either to an unsafe environment or to segregation is an image being imposed on us,” De Leeuw continues. Segregation also takes place at other schools; these identity statements do not contribute to it. “I realise that we may be postponing the confrontation with society. But our pupils will simply enter society; they will later work in construction, in offices, do volunteer work… And they will then be able to view that society from a sense of self-awareness that the school, family and church have given them.”

Care for your neighbour

Did things go wrong in the past? Perhaps, De Leeuw says, ten or twenty years ago there was insufficient safety for homosexual pupils at Reformed schools and also at many other schools. “If such children did not feel welcome at our schools or were treated improperly, we regret that. But today, pupils at Reformed schools can safely come out. One of the most important aspects of being a Christian is caring for your neighbour, whoever that neighbour may be.”