>How about in this age they focus on one task that they are failing at now such as reading writing and math.

Reading, writing, and math are still all taught. Nobody is replacing these subjects.

History class is in danger, though, because people don't want children to learn history and would rather they learn lies such as "Black people in America were indentured servants" and "Native people and Pilgrims were friends who got along and the Pilgrims taught the Natives their good Christian ways peacefully".

​

>Why skip ahead to other concepts beyond understanding if they don’t have the basics to do so.
>
>Why skip to teach culture of any kind if they can’t read.

Are you suggesting that having BOOKS about other cultures is stopping children from being able to read?

​

>Why skip to teaching sexuality and anything related if I haven’t had a period yet and again have No deducing skills to be able to pick a decent human to share sexual acts with.

The book which was the subject of the bomb threat was not being taught. It was not the focus of any lessons, lectures, or homework. It simply existed in the school. It sat on a shelf in the school. A child who read that book would have to do so on their own time.

Neutrally acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist is not "teaching sexuality". Children in a school might have LGBT+ parents, neighbors, relatives, etc. Insisting that this topic is not allowed to be even mentioned, even in the most simple terms of "this exists," helps nobody.

​

>Do you think because this is a structure who by the way the white Christian brought here with them is the only structure.
>
>Do you think my culture had a classroom of village kids in it and one ndn lady taught them language in their teepee.

I'm not sure of what you are trying to accuse me of here.