During the municipal and provincial election campaigns, I heard some groups repeat three simple messages: “No NDP. No drugs. No SOGI.” These slogans were easy to remember. But now that the elections are over, we need to look carefully at what those promises would mean in practice.

I want to reflect on the two promises of removal—drugs and SOGI—in separate posts. Here, I want to focus on SOGI: sexual orientation and gender identity.

What exactly does “removing SOGI” mean? Removing particular teaching resources? Replacing district policies? Ending specific support for LGBTQ+ students? These are different actions with different consequences. An election slogan does not give us enough information to judge them.

A provincial government has considerable power to change education policies and seek changes to legislation. We should not assume that the existing framework will always remain. But having the power to remove something does not answer whether doing so will improve our schools.

Winning an election brings responsibility for the whole community, including people who did not support the winning party. LGBTQ+ students and families remain part of that community. Their needs and dignity do not disappear when a government changes.

As a parent, an Anglican priest and a community advocate, I want every child to learn without fear of humiliation, exclusion or harassment. That includes LGBTQ+ students, children from religious families, and young people still trying to understand themselves. Public schools must make room for all of them.

Parents also deserve to be heard. Questions about age-appropriate teaching, classroom materials and communication with families should receive clear and respectful answers. Asking questions does not automatically make someone hateful. At the same time, disagreement about sexuality or gender does not justify denying anyone respect or equal treatment.

During my door-knocking campaign, I spoke with people whose beliefs differed from mine. Those conversations strengthened my belief that we need more opportunities to listen, explain and find common ground. Simple slogans can bring people together around opposition, but governing requires us to work through the difficult details.

If SOGI is to be replaced with a general anti-bullying approach, what will that replacement actually provide? Will staff be equipped to recognize and address harassment directed at a child because they are gay or transgender, or because they have two mothers or two fathers? Will these students and families still see themselves respectfully represented in school life? Will children know that they can ask for help and be taken seriously?

Saying “we will protect everyone” is a commitment that must be demonstrated in practice. Different children face different forms of prejudice. Protecting everyone requires us to recognize those differences and respond to them.

My Christian faith calls me to respect the dignity of every person and to love my neighbour. That responsibility includes neighbours whose experiences I may not fully understand. It calls me to listen and to consider how my choices affect their lives.

I am open to discussing how policies and teaching resources can be improved. I want meaningful parental involvement, clear communication and schools where every child belongs. I will assess any proposed replacement by whether it strengthens those commitments.

The election is over. Now those who promised “No SOGI” need to explain what comes next—and how it will make life better and safer for the children affected.

Every child deserves more than a slogan.

在市選和省選期間，我聽到一些團體反覆提出三句簡單的口號：「不要新民主黨、不要毒品、不要 SOGI。」這些口號很容易記住。但選舉過後，我們需要認真看看：這些承諾落實起來，究竟意味著甚麼？

關於「不要毒品」和「不要 SOGI」這兩項主張，我想分別撰文反思。這一篇先談 SOGI，也就是性傾向與性別認同。

「取消 SOGI」究竟是甚麼意思？撤走某些教材？取代教育局的政策？還是終止對 LGBTQ+ 學生的特定支援？這些是不同的行動，也會帶來不同的後果。單憑一句競選口號，我們無法作出充分的判斷。

省政府有相當大的權力改變教育政策，也可以推動修法。我們不能假設現有的制度永遠不會改變。然而，有權取消一項政策，並不代表取消之後，學校就會變得更好。

贏得選舉，也就承擔了服務整個社會的責任，包括那些沒有支持執政黨的人。LGBTQ+ 學生和家庭仍然是社會的一分子。他們的需要和尊嚴，不會因為政府更替而消失。

作為家長、聖公會牧師和社區倡議者，我希望每個孩子都能安心學習，不必害怕受到羞辱、排斥或騷擾。這包括 LGBTQ+ 學生、來自有宗教信仰家庭的孩子，以及仍在認識自己的年輕人。公立學校必須讓他們都能找到自己的位置。

家長的聲音也應該受到重視。對於教學是否適齡、課堂使用甚麼教材，以及學校如何與家庭溝通，家長都應得到清楚而尊重的回應。提出疑問，不代表一個人就懷有仇恨。同時，對性傾向或性別議題持有不同看法，也不能成為拒絕尊重他人或平等對待他人的理由。

在競選期間逐戶敲門拜訪時，我與不少信念和我不同的居民交談。這些對話讓我更相信，我們需要更多聆聽、解說和尋找共同點的機會。簡單的口號可以讓人因共同反對某件事而聚集起來，但真正治理社會，就必須認真處理那些複雜的細節。

如果要用一般的反欺凌措施取代 SOGI，新的做法究竟能提供甚麼？當孩子因為是同性戀者、跨性別者，或因為有兩位媽媽、兩位爸爸而受到騷擾時，教職員是否具備辨識和處理問題的能力？這些學生和家庭，是否仍能在校園生活和教材中看見自己的家庭與經驗受到尊重？孩子是否知道，他們可以求助，而且會有人認真聆聽和跟進？

「我們會保護所有人」是一項必須以行動實踐的承諾。不同的孩子面對不同形式的偏見。要保護每一個人，就需要看見這些差異，並作出適切的回應。

我的基督信仰呼召我尊重每一個人的尊嚴，並且愛我的鄰舍。這也包括那些生命經驗未必是我能完全理解的人。這份信仰要求我聆聽，也要求我思考：我的選擇，會怎樣影響他們的生活？

我願意討論如何改善政策和教材。我期望家長能有實質的參與、家校之間有清楚的溝通，也期望每個孩子都能在學校找到歸屬感。我會以這些標準，判斷任何替代方案是否值得支持。

選舉已經結束。那些承諾「不要 SOGI」的人，現在需要說清楚：接下來是甚麼？新的做法，又會如何讓受影響的孩子生活得更好、更安全？

每一個孩子，都值得得到比一句口號更多的承擔。