Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

No Thanks, Public Schools. I Don’t Need You To Teach My Kids About Sex

December 11, 2014 by Matt Walsh

A reader sent me a message declaring quite excitedly that I’m ‘not gonna believe’ what’s happening at this public school in California. Apparently, Planned Parenthood has taken over sex-ed duties at a local high school and has begun teaching 13-year-olds that, among other things, they’re ready for sex so long as they think it will feel good. Planned Parenthood also has some informative tips on effective lubricants which they eagerly passed along to an unsuspecting collection of barely pubescent children.

In other words, that reader lied. I can totally believe this. Honestly, at this point I’m not sure there’s any public school related atrocity that would shock me. Send me something about kids being trained in ritualistic cannibalism, or being given reading materials from the Satanic Temple, and then maybe I’ll be surprised. (Wait, that second one is actually happening, and no, I’m still not surprised.)

Our government school system, like most every other institution in this country, has plunged into a state of intellectual and moral chaos, making it fertile ground for the depraved perverts at Planned Parenthood to spread their gospel. And before you accuse me of claiming that every person who works for Planned Parenthood is a depraved pervert, please understand that, yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.

Anyway, I’m not trying to downplay this latest bit of debauchery. It’s outrageous — even if it is routine — and it deserves attention. The whole thing is made all the more egregious by the fact that parents were not properly informed about the ‘lesson’ plan ahead of time. The school didn’t make it clear that the sex-ed class would be conducted by Planned Parenthood – a detail that may have been pertinent, considering Planned Parenthood is a business which makes hundreds of millions of dollars aborting babies. The conflict of interest here is staggeringly clear. Having this organization teach sex-ed is like bringing in spokesmen from McDonald’s to talk about proper nutrition. In both instances, the ‘teachers’ are financially invested in making sure the kids do anything but make healthy choices.

Sorry, that analogy is ridiculous. McDonald’s could never set foot inside an American public school. It would never be allowed. We wouldn’t want the kids to be scandalized by soda and french fries, especially when it might distract them from learning about anal sex and transgenderism.

Speaking of which, the school in California found some creative ways to instruct the students in warped leftwing gender theory. Just in time for the holidays, here’s the ‘genderbread person.’

This is science, folks. Pure science. Well, either science or progressive superstitions cloaked in absurd faux-complexities. I can imagine that many of the parents probably didn’t realize they had to preemptively sit their children down and say, ‘listen, ‘agender’ isn’t a thing, and if anyone tells you otherwise, they’re either on drugs or on the payroll at your school, or both.’

Another worksheet was supposed to help the children decide if they’re ready to get busy.

According to adults who’ve taken it upon themselves to entice children into having sex, any child is ready provided they want to and they can find someone else who wants to. Who could foresee any pitfalls to raising kids using this strategy?

‘Dad, can I –’ 

‘Stop right there, son. Whatever you want to do, do you want to do it?’

‘Yes.’

‘Well, that settles it then. You’re always ready to do anything as long as you want to do that thing!’

‘Wow, thanks Dad! So where are your car keys?’

The learning materials also explain how a boy should obtain consent from a girl. Specifically, he should ask important questions like, ‘can I take my pants off?’ and ‘do you want to go back to my place?’

These are 13-year-olds, remember. A bunch of 13-year-olds who can, it turns out, invite their booty calls back to ‘their place.’ I’m sure their parents won’t mind, unless their parents are sex-hating prudes. Indeed, as creepy progressive weirdos constantly insist, we parents just have to resign ourselves to the fact that all kids — all kids — will start having sex approximately three or four years before they’re able to get their ears pierced without permission from a legal guardian.

That’s the nature of a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you assert it as fact often enough and loudly enough, eventually it might become one. The question, then, is why do progressive want this to be a fact? And when I say want it, they really seem to want it. They want it in graphic detail. Take this sex conference for students in Oregon as an example. Kids as young as 11 were encouraged to ‘wear each other’s underwear,’ ‘watch porn together,’ ‘eat Pop Rocks while making out’ (this is just getting way too specific), and ‘masturbate while someone else is watching.’

That’s all pretty bad, but not as bad as the sex-ed presentation given to students at Pine Valley Middle School, which featured a poster of a man with a bloody face and a caption reading: ‘A real man loves his woman every day of the month.’

And this is relatively in line with another sex-ed curriculum, also in California, that taught students about the wonders of bondage and vibrators.

All of these examples happen to be from the West Coast, but this is not a regional problem. It’s inevitable that government sex education will take a sharp left turn into grotesque and lascivious places in any school, anywhere in the country. That’s because a discussion of sex will be unavoidably wrapped in the moral and philosophical beliefs of whoever is leading the discussion. It’s one thing to teach about the human anatomy, but once you veer into sexuality, you’ve entered a realm that is just as spiritual as it is scientific. Therefore, if the sex-ed course is run by hedonists, the children will be taught hedonism. There is no way around it.

And this is why sex-ed has no business in public schools at all. If you want your kid’s school to teach him about sex — homeschool him. Public school should be a place for pure academics, and nothing else. To be clear, I’m not advocating for ‘abstinence education’ here. I don’t want a government employee training my kid in how to avoid sex any more than I want her to train him in how to have it. Abstinence education, in my view, has to be grounded in something deeper than scare tactics and STD statistics. My convictions on abstinence before marriage have to do with not just my views about sex, but my views about marriage itself, and about love, and about loyalty, and about self-control, and about virtue, and about faith. Everything is wrapped up in everything, and if you try to teach abstinence using just the practical aspects (‘sex might cause AIDS!’) without any of the deeper, spiritual substance, you’ll end up with a lesson plan that’s equal parts superficial, paranoidm and unconvincing. Sex is just too big a topic. There’s too much there. It’s too important. The schools cannot handle it, either way, and they shouldn’t try.

So this is really very simple. How much sexual guidance and instruction should the government offer our kids? None. What percentage of your child’s government education should be comprised of sexual enlightenment? Zero percent. How many times in a given school day should teachers talk to their kids about lubricants? No more than three times. Actually, zero.

It’s the Great Compromise. Instead of arguing about what the schools should tell kids on the subject of sex, let’s contemplate the possibility that a collective, government-controlled, mass produced and disseminated curriculum about sex and intimacy isn’t necessarily the best way to handle such a profound and personal subject.

I’m not saying that we should put censor bars over the penis and the vagina in the anatomy textbooks (or in books of Renaissance art, for that matter). I’m also not saying that high school biology teachers should tell their students that a magical stork drops the baby off on Momma’s porch. And I’m not saying that students shouldn’t learn about the facts of human reproduction when the subject comes up in science class. What I am saying is that the schools ought to treat sex the same way most people think it ought to treat religion, and for the same reasons. The ‘keep religion out of schools’ folks will argue that schools should not endorse a particular religion, encourage kids to be religious or irreligious, ask kids about their personal religious practices, or attempt to influence those practices. In these ways, we should ‘keep religion out of schools,’ but if they’re reasonable they know that we can’t and shouldn’t keep the fact of religion out of schools.

You can’t very well give your students a comprehensive understanding of western history without discussing Christianity. You can’t provide a well rounded education about literature without introducing the Bible. You can’t teach about art and avoid da Vinci. You can’t talk about contemporary Middle Eastern conflicts without introducing Judaism and Islam. You can’t teach the history of Asia without Hinduism or Buddhism. Religion will inevitably be a part of many other subjects, but it shouldn’t be up to government school teachers to tell kids how to feel about religion or what to do with those feelings. That’s what parents and churches are for.

And it’s in that sense that I make my case for keeping sex out of schools. Anatomy will come up in anatomy classes, and reproduction will come up in science classes, and that’s where it should end. Tell about the fact of sex, but nothing else. It’s absolutely horrifying that so many people — actual parents with actual kids — think that public schools should tread further into the topic and teach kidshow to have sex, when to have it, and why they should or shouldn’t have it. Look, I try hard, I really try hard, not to judge parents or to criticize parenting styles different from my own. But I will judge someone who wants the Department of Education to help shape their child’s sexuality. I will judge that. God help me, I judge it.

‘Comprehensive sex education’ is a sham and a joke. It’s also more than just a little disturbing. If an adult in any other context came up to your child and tried to strike up a conversation about masturbation, oral sex, or dildos, you’d call the police. Imagine a grown man approaching your 12-year-old daughter on the playground and saying, ‘hey little girl, do you think you’re ready to have sex?’ Now imagine it happening inside the school, and explain why it’s suddenly less frightening.

Can anyone explain that?

Anyone?

I didn’t think so.

So if you can’t explain the distinction between a sex-ed teacher and a guy who should be on a registry somewhere, maybe we should just let parents handle this topic. Let them handle it because there are boundaries, and when a strange adult starts talking to children about self-pleasure, that boundary has been crossed, then crossed back over again, then carpet bombed into obliteration. And let parents handle it because, as we all pretend to agree, public schools aren’t in the moralizing business. Without a doubt, it is impossible to discuss sex without attaching a set of moral lessons to it.

This subject belongs to parents. It is their domain. ‘Yes, but many parents don’t talk to their kids about sex,’ I often hear it argued. That might be true. Still, public schools are not surrogate mothers. Lazy, selfish parents might want them to be, but that doesn’t change anything. There are facts about sex (‘this is a penis, this is a vagina, this is a uterus, etc’) and then there is subjective (and depraved) moralization about sexuality (‘you can choose your gender, you should have sex if you want to, masturbation is a good way to explore yourself, try making out with Pop Rocks in your mouth, etc’). There is a time for the former but definitely not for the latter. If you want to tell your son or daughter about those things — go ahead and tell them. If you’re too embarrassed to do it yourself, maybe that ought to be a sign of some sort.

However you choose to parent — and I really hope your parenting doesn’t involving telling your son he can be a girl if he wants, but that’s your prerogative in a free country — we should all agree that there is a distinction between a parent’s domain and the school’s, unless you homeschool. Indeed, maybe we’re all finding out that separating factual lessons from moral lessons is nearly impossible to do perfectly, which is yet another argument in favor of homeschooling. Maybe homeschooling is again the only real answer here. Be that as it may, as long as public schools exist, we must try to beat back its attempts to intrude on parental turf.

So while progressives take the Ten Commandments and the crucifixes out of the schools, I’ll come in right behind them and clean out the condoms and the genderbread drawings. And then we can meet in the parking lot and swap. I’ll take my religion home to my kids, and they can take their sexual permissiveness and confusion home to theirs.

Meanwhile, the schools can stick to the ABCs and 123s, and we’ll all be better for it.

original article: No Thanks, Public Schools. I Don’t Need You To Teach My Kids About Sex

abstinence, bias, children, culture, education, elitism, extremism, family, government, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, public policy, relativism, scandal, sex, tragedy

Filed under: abstinence, bias, children, culture, education, elitism, extremism, family, government, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, public policy, relativism, scandal, sex, tragedy

Parents Beware: Planned Parenthood Uses Classrooms “Abstinence” Programs as a Trap

June 18, 2014 by Rita Diller

Throughout the nation, we see parents being convinced that sex education in the schools is a given, and they are settling for what they see as the lesser of the evils presented. But the lesser of evils can never be accepted as a final solution. Parents must work to get all sex ed programs out of the schools. Here is the reason why.

plannedparenthood41Abstinence programs are being hijacked and used as traps by Planned Parenthood and other sex industry stakeholders. Programs that are not abstinence programs are pushed through as abstinence programs. Programs that started out as abstinence programs get hijacked and become, even if gradually, birth control and sex programs.

Even the best abstinence program, once it is out of the hands of those who created it, can be corrupted very quickly. The teacher’s bias will always determine, in the end, what the children are taught. There are a multitude of examples of this in the searchable archives of the Wednesday STOPP Report.

While it fights to discredit and knock all true abstinence education programs out of the marketplace, the Planned Parenthood network works at the same time to make sure that those programs receive little to no funding. It adds some references to abstinence in its own reprehensible programs and gets Title V abstinence education funding for them.

read full article: Parents Beware: Planned Parenthood Uses Classrooms “Abstinence” Programs as a Trap

abstinence, abuse, bias, christian, corruption, culture, education, government, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda

Filed under: abstinence, abuse, bias, christian, corruption, culture, education, government, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda

New York Program Pushes HIV Tests for 13-year-Olds and Sex-Ed for Elementary School

May 22, 2014 by Steve Ertelt

LifeNews recently ran an article about a former abortion business owner who is now pro-life. For six years Carol Everett operated four abortion clinics in Texas and, over the years, she has shared the secrets of the abortion industry.

Everett has talked at length about how the abortion industry uses sex ed to recruit young girls as clients who will ultimately have abortions when they become pregnant. Everett said that the counselors at the clinics are more like telemarketers. They are trained to schedule abortions and use wording to eliminate a potential clients’ fears and objections concerning abortion.

Everett, who left the abortion industry after a Christian business counselor she hired lead her to Christ, also talked about how damaging government-funded sex education programs are. In her speech at the Rose Dinner, she took aim at the programs for stealing away the innate modesty of children and creating a rift between children and their parents.

read full article

abortion, abstinence, children, culture, education, government, ideology, indoctrination, nanny state, political correctness, propaganda, relativism

Filed under: abortion, abstinence, children, culture, education, government, ideology, indoctrination, nanny state, political correctness, propaganda, relativism

Education or abstinence, freedom or regulation – make up your mind

What’s the preferred solution for dealing with teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases? The notion of abstinence is frequently ridiculed as pointless. Education about safety is touted as the best solution.

What’s the preferred solution for dealing with guns? Abstinence is touted as the best solution, and education about safety is ridiculed as pointless. The argument “they’re going to do it anyway” is conspicuously absent from the same people who say kids are going to engage in sex anyway.

Surprisingly, the gun control crowd seems to find evidence that abstinence works with guns, and that education doesn’t. Never you mind the logical contortion and intellectual dishonesty required to “find” such evidence. Funny how people find evidence of what they like, and conveniently can’t find evidence supporting what they don’t like.

With women’s rights (code for abortion) the political left tells us even a 13 year old girl should have an unregulated right to abortion. No parental permission or knowledge required. But when Planned Parenthood holds a poster contest to commemorate an anniversary of Roe v Wade, we find that any participant in said contest younger than 18 is required to prove parental consent. Hmm. With abortion, we are not supposed to ask questions. We are supposed to simply conform to the argument that the issue at stake is constitutional rights, and that is enough to squelch debate, because said right is sacrosanct. No challenge should be taken seriously. Because, if any regulation of abortion is permitted, that proves a slippery slope, inviting further regulation. And regulation, in itself, threatens the rights being regulated.

The right to speech is treated similarly. With some notable exceptions, the political left generally prefers to keep speech free from regulation (unless you happen to have an opinion different from theirs). If we make communism illegal, that is a violation of the first amendment. If we regulate violence on television or in movies, that violates the first amendment. If pornography is treated as exploitation or harmful, this mentality somehow threatens all speech. The issue is not about the harm these things cause to society, the issue is that a constitutional right is at stake. And that is enough to squelch debate, because said right is sacrosanct. Any regulation proves a threat to the right, and that is unacceptable.

But the right to own guns is met with precisely the opposite attitude. On this issue regulation is touted as vital to the survival of civilization. The more regulation the better. Never mind that pesky old document, it’s out of date anyway. We are to ignore examples of how regulation failed, while individual action succeeded. Textbook example of how to deal with a school shooter.

How can one support constitutional rights, especially with the ferocity the left has for abortion and speech, and yet utterly disregard the right to keep and bear arms – the right to defend oneself, especially against government? Selective reasoning at its best. What is this blind faith and adoration the left has for government based on?

Filed under: abstinence, bias, culture, education, first amendment, free speech, government, gun rights, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, nanny state, philosophy, political correctness, politics, propaganda, public policy, regulation, second amendment, tragedy

Study shows abstinence education does work

Abstinence-only programs might work, study says
February 2, 2010 by Rob Stein

Sex education classes that focus on encouraging children to remain abstinent can persuade a significant proportion to delay sexual activity, researchers reported Monday in a landmark study that could have major implications for U.S. efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.

Only about a third of sixth- and seventh-graders who completed an abstinence-focused program started having sex within the next two years, researchers found. Nearly half of the students who attended other classes, including ones that combined information about abstinence and contraception, became sexually active.

The findings are the first clear evidence that an abstinence program could work.

“I think we’ve written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence,” said John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who led the federally funded study. “Our study shows this could be one approach that could be used.”

The research, published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, comes amid intense debate over how to reduce sexual activity, pregnancies, births and sexually transmitted diseases among children and teenagers. After falling for more than a decade, the numbers of births, pregnancies and STDs among U.S. teens have begun increasing.

The Obama administration eliminated more than $170 million in annual federal funding targeted at abstinence programs after a series of reports concluded that the approach was ineffective. Instead, the White House is launching a $114 million pregnancy prevention initiative that will fund only programs that have been shown scientifically to work — a program the administration on Monday proposed expanding to $183 million.

“This new study is game-changing,” said Sarah Brown, who leads the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. “For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex.”

The study is the first to evaluate an abstinence program using a carefully designed approach comparing it with several alternative strategies and following subjects for an extended period of time, considered the kind of study that produces the highest level of scientific evidence.

“This takes away the main pillar of opposition to abstinence education,” said Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who wrote the criteria for federal funding of abstinence programs. “I’ve always known that abstinence programs have gotten a bad rap.”

Longtime critics of the approach praised the study, saying it provides strong evidence that such programs can work and might merit taxpayer support.

abstinence, children, culture, education, family, health, ideology, news, philosophy, political correctness, public policy, research, science, sex, study

Filed under: abstinence, children, culture, education, family, health, ideology, news, philosophy, political correctness, public policy, research, science, sex, study

How to stir up feminist outrage

The fight over abstinence at Harvard
August 11, 2009 (hat tip Education Watch International)

At Harvard, it’s sounding a lot like the ’70s again. Thanks to the provocations of True Love Revolution, the university’s three-year-old pro-abstinence club, brainy women are defending their right to have sex with whomever they want, whenever and however they want. “To say that a consensual sexual act is degrading to you is the complete opposite of feminism,” insisted Silpa Kovvali when I spoke with her last week. “For women to take control of the sex act can be an incredibly empowering experience.” Kovvali, a computer-science major, was echoing an editorial she recently published in The Harvard Crimson.

I went to college in the early 1980s, when feminist arguments like Kovvali’s were as ordinary as air: I think True Love Revolution is on to something.

abstinence, bigotry, education, elitism, feminism, freedom, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, relativism, sex

Filed under: abstinence, bigotry, education, elitism, feminism, freedom, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, relativism, sex

Political correctness run amok in UK

Don’t kid yourself into thinking such things will stay in Europe.

Mandatory sex lessons for every 15-year-old
November 6, 2009 by Joanna Sugden (hat tip to Education Watch International)

Sex education is to be made compulsory for all pupils, prompting fury from faith groups which said that the move would contravene the right for children to be educated in accordance with their parents’ beliefs.

All 15-year-olds must receive at least one year of sex and relationship lessons, Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, said yesterday. Those whose religious or moral values prevent them from attending will be classed as truants and may be punished by the school. Until now parents could opt out of lessons about contraception, sexually transmitted diseases and homosexuality until their children were 19.

Parents to be fined if they take their children out of sex lessons
November 6, 2009 by Laura Clark (hat tip to Education Watch International)

Parents will face fines if they remove 15-year-old children from sex education lessons as they become part of the national curriculum for the first time.

Lessons in relationships and sex will begin at five, with prescribed content for each age group.

Parents will still be able to withdraw children on moral and religious grounds, but this right – which currently extends until students are 19 – will be lost at 15.

abstinence, anti-religion, bias, bullies, bureaucracy, children, culture, education, elitism, extremism, family, freedom, ideology, indoctrination, law, left wing, legislation, liberalism, marxism, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, regulation, relativism, scandal, sex

Filed under: abstinence, anti-religion, bias, bullies, bureaucracy, children, culture, education, elitism, extremism, family, freedom, ideology, indoctrination, law, left wing, legislation, liberalism, marxism, nanny state, oppression, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, regulation, relativism, scandal, sex

‘The Early Show’ Uses Palin Drama to Bash Abstinence

‘The Early Show’ Uses Palin Drama to Bash Abstinence
May 6, 2009 by Iris Somberg

CBS “The Early Show” attacked sexual abstinence while Bristol Palin appeared on “Good Morning America” and “Today” to voice her support for it. Levi Johnston, the father of Bristol’s child who has told numerous stories to hurt the family, went on CBS in what can only have been an attempt to counter or distract from Palin’s message.

The daughter of former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, Bristol gave birth to son Tripp on Dec 27 2008. Since then, Bristol has become a Teen Ambassador for the Candies Foundation, which promotes teen abstinence.

news media, bias, left wing, liberalism, sex, abstinence, children, family, video

Filed under: abstinence, bias, children, family, left wing, liberalism, news media, sex, video

Study Shows Abstinence Education Reduces Teenage Sexual Behavior
abstinence, family, culture, sex, education

August 15, 2006, by Steven Ertelt

A new study conducted by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania finds that teaching abstinence education to young teenagers in public schools reduces their sexual behavior. The study found that abstinence helped delay the starting point at which teenagers begin having sexual relations.

The Penn researchers studied 662 African-American students in 6th and 7th grade from inner-city schools in Philadelphia.

Filed under: abstinence, culture, education, family, sex

Study Finds Major Shift in Abortion Demographics
abortion, news, abstinence

I thought abstinence and parental notification wouldn’t work!

September 23, 2008, by Rob Stein

The face of women who have abortions has shifted significantly in the past 30 years, with relatively fewer white childless teenagers and more mothers of color in their 20s and 30s opting to terminate their pregnancies, according to a report being released today.

Michael J. New, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama who works with the Family Research Council, attributed the drop in teenage pregnancies to a combination of factors, including increased contraceptive use, more teenagers delaying sex and state laws requiring parental consent.

Filed under: abortion, abstinence, news

Pages

Categories

July 2017
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31