https://mobile.twitter.com/williamcacusso/status/1544267603681722370

William Cacusso

Follow @williamcacusso

Twitter logo

Jul 5 • 20 tweets • 7 min read

This has got to be one of the wildest stories out of Portugal:

2 years ago, two parents in small town of Famalicão became nationally famous after prohibiting their two boys from taking the class "Citizenship" arguing "conscientious objector".

You might ask why would they do this

Image

The class in question had two subjects which the parents objected:

1. Education for gender equality

2. Education for sexuality & health

(You can see where this is going)

The students in question are what you call class A students, both with highest possible grading average (5)

Image

Image

Image

The school, via the class council (the collegial pedagogical body that transits students at end of each year) passed them favourably for next year, citing they were both exemplary students. The class council is sovereign and cannot be hierarchically surpassed by the school board.

The school board decided to take the matters to the state and the minister of education, João Costa, issued an order to retroactively annul the class council decision. This meant both students were to go "back" two years and do every single class - again.

Image

It's important to add that the ministry of education had for years promoted a policy to reduce students from failing across the education system even when they had negative grades. (We know who this was made for). This was a very aggressive stand, taking into consideration…

The students were exemplary and the parents used a right protected by law and the constitution when they argued for "conscientious objector". Still the minister was unphased - the students were to go back.

After many open letters to several ministries and the president of the portuguese republic (to no avail) the parents decided to take the matter to court. This is when the news started to break out and it became a national story. The court gave them a favorably decision.

Image

The students were to pass the year and the minister had 10 days to contest. The secretary of state was called into parliament to answer for this "authoritarian order". If you think this is sounding too good, you are right. The minister will get his revenge.

The students passed the year and went back to normal class. By the end of the year, the school once again failed them (even though there was a court order against it). Well the same judge that issued the favorable order (Telma Silva) decided to go back and cancel the order.

Image

Image

The Public Ministry decided simultaneously to sue the parents and sent social security employees to "evaluate" the "household situation" of the minors. Nasty stuff. By this time the case was international and portuguese right leaning politicians were organising protests.

Image

The case was now very mediatic and someone inside the ministry of education issued another order to keep the students in the same grade and allow them to pass to next year. The parents thanked the courage of this individual and believe the matter to be resolved.

pt 1

>>16635067

Image

Image

They politely asked the "Comission for the protection of children and young people" and the Public Ministry to remove their court case or at least suspend it. They didn't. Fast forward to 2022.

The Public Ministry, the Ministry of education and the Comission for Protection of Children and Young people decided to take the matter to the "Family and Minor Court" for the REMOVAL of the children from their parents, citing:

Ministério Público quer que alunos proibidos de frequentar Cidadania fiquem à guarda da escola

O Ministério Público (MP) quer que os dois alunos de Vila Nova de Famalicão proibidos pelos pais de frequentarem a disciplina de Cidadania e Desenvolvimento sejam colocados à guarda …

https://24.sapo.pt/atualidade/artigos/ministerio-publico-quer-que-alunos-proibidos-de-frequentar-cidadania-fiquem-a-guarda-da-escola?utm_source=twitter_sharebutton&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social_sharebutton

1. The parents jeopardise the formation, education and development of their own children

2. The parents are putting their own children under danger of "psychic abuse"

3. The parents to not provide appropriate care or affection for the kids age

4. The parents subjugate them to parental behaviours that seriously affect their emotional balance

1. The parents attitude is emotional coercion

1. They are acting outside the law and deciding what their kids learn as if they are judges

2. THE MINOR CHILDREN HAVE JURIDICAL AUTONOMY (you can see where this is going yes)

1. The kids must be removed from the parents care and placed under guardianship of the school

You heard that right. The Minister, still embarrassed by the situation they put him through, is now going scorched earth, attempting to remove the children from the care of their parents. Because of gender equality classes. This is his face.

Image

This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever seen happen in my country, and anyone with kids should be having chills down his spine. If you can help me spread this, maybe it can reach international media again and put some pressure to the politicians and ministers involved.

@mentions

Adding this tweet from friend which shows the court and the ministry of education accepting a 15 year old gipsy girl request to leave school in the name of "tradition" because not every educational path must be the same.

Just nasty.

>>16602280 (pb)

Politicians are not responsible for patient care, adverse event reporting, or follow up. Physicians are.

Physicians were not mandated to give jabs, they chose to. Without properly consenting their patients to dangers and risks, without full awareness of the ingredients, and without any clinical trial data, including adverse events potentialities.

Doctors did that. Pharmacists and PA's did that. Politricksters cannot give medical advice, nor compel physicians to practice outside of their professional judgement. They chose that.

Nothing was ever mandatory. It was always a choice. Yes, under duress and coercion, but you could always choose. Keep the job or find another. Travel or do not. Do public events or do not. We all chose NOT.

The doctors who chose to go along to get along, chose that path. The politrickers are another animal.