Now here’s a good idea. (Heavy sarcasm)
A high profile British homosexual activist wants the age of sexual consent lowered to 14, on the basis that currently underage sex “is mostly consenting, safe and fun”. Read more…
by Bill Bumpas and Jody Brown
he full results of a national study that favors abstinence education is being withheld from researchers and the public.
The taxpayer-supported survey from 2008 found that around 70 percent of parents and their teenagers believed that teens should wait until marriage to have sex. Despite release of the study’s summary and its highlight at two major public health conferences last year, the Department of Health and Human Services is withholding the full results according to Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Foundation. Read more…
by Dr. Miriam Grossman (Dr. Grossman will be the keynote speaker at the next It takes a Family Conference.) This article was originally published at Mercatornet.com on July 30, 2010.
It is not what you would want to read before breakfast, but it’s the sex menu they are serving up to children.
Sex education for tots is in the headlines. Last month it was a policy in Provincetown, Massachusetts making condoms available to first graders. Student requests were to be kept secret and parents’ objections ignored.
Now the news is from Montana. If the Helena school district has its way, kindergarteners will learn about “reproductive body parts”: the penis, vagina, breast, nipples, testicles, scrotum, and uterus. Ten year olds will be taught that “sexual intercourse includes but is not limited to vaginal, oral, or anal penetration”. Two years later they will discover this may involve “the penis, fingers, tongue or objects”. Read more…
In the beginning, there was patriarchy. And it was EEEEEEEEEVIL. Under patriarchy, men were expected to get married. And they were expected to have children soon after getting married. You know why they had children? Because patriarchy was oppressive and forced them to marry women.
There was not a lot of choice built into the system. Men not only had to marry women, but they had to marry women of the appropriate station.
If Henry wanted to get married, he could marry Katherine or Anne or Jane. That was it.
Now that the enlightened Baby Boomers have overthrown the dreaded Patriarchy, people have more choice in matters marital and sexual. Henry does not have to confine his choices to Katherine, Anne or Jane. He can now also marry Tiffany, Barbara, Aiko, Taliqua, or Fatima. Not only that, in some states Henry can even “marry” James, Edward or Robert. Or he can even forget about marriage altogether and play the field for the rest of his life.
It seems that Henry is spoiled for choice. He must constantly frolic and rejoice to celebrate all that choice. That’s how things work, right? The more choices people have, the happier they are. Right? Right? Read more…
When this was brought to my attention (look on the third page) all I could think is “You have got to be kidding…”
But because we are by now such a thoroughly (indeed absurdly) non-judgmental, morally neutral, nonsensically ‘tolerant’, hyper-inclusive, politically correct society there are bound to be those who insist that the National ‘Education’ Association simply must allow the Drag Queens among them to have their own caucus if they are also willing to countenance the NEA Christian Prayer Service Caucus, the Catholic Caucus, the Creation Science Educators Caucus, the Jewish Caucus, or the People of Faith Caucus; as they in fact do.
And because our culture has to a significant extent succumbed to nihilism, some will also dismissively declare, “So what? How much more cynical is that than the Bourbon Caucus or the (apparently) competing No Cocktail Left Behind caucus? Or does it sound any sillier than the Princess Caucus?” And the NEA does also consent to those as well, after all…
Some will even assert (mindlessly, if you ask me) that the NEA Drag Queen Caucus is adequately counterbalanced by their Ex-Gay Educators Caucus.
And even I can understand how the Lesbian & Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus could be relevant to advocating the ‘rights’ of it’s members in the workplace.
But be honest with your self. Are any of those others in any way morally comparable to a Drag Queen Caucus? So now we are to be compelled to provide our children to cross-dressers so they can act out their ‘sexuality’ in front of a captive (and compliantly impressionable) audience?
For an organization that purports to be attending to the education and care of all of our young to indulge such a bent is beyond cynical. It’s just plain malicious.
I wonder if the geniuses who thought up the idea of giving all children sex ed really thought through all of the possible consequences.
Witness the experience of one Wendy Shalit:
It is very strange to be on the receiving end of all this enlightenment, before the onset of sexual awakening. I remember when the sex educator arrived in my fourth-grade Wisconsin public elementary school classroom, carrying a Question Box, with black question marks all over it. It was our learning tool, she explained. Opening the lid, she pulled out a long white slip of paper and cheerily read: “And the first question is . . . ‘What is 69?’ ” Read more…
Troubling, indeed, to think that three and four-year-olds calling “kissing crocs” one boy and one girl is “a problem.” I don’t call that a problem; I call it normal! Let them be normal. If that’s the way they’re thinking naturally, than it’s natural. Why try to mess with them?
by Carolyn Moynihan
Sexuality engineers may be coming to a childcare centre near you.
Let’s get one thing straight: are we against the sexualization of children or are we not? If we — adult, mainstream society — are against it, we had better start explaining to ourselves why there are people employed in public institutions who say openly that they do not believe in the sexual innocence of children and want to expose it as a myth. Read more…
The thought of kids having kids is really disturbing to me. I had my first child when I was 25, and I can say, it’s serious business. I can’t imagine doing it while trying to go to high school or even college. And who is really going to be raising these children anyhow? My guess is, the grandmothers. Let’s do a survey of how mothers of pregnant teens feel about teen pregnancy.
The picture a 13-year-old boy sitting next to his baby, which accompanied an article on this topic a while back, still burns in my memory. It was such a heart-wrenching sight. The thirteen-year-old looked so tiny. Plus his face spoke volumes of “What have I gotten myself into?” This dad is still asking to have his pb and j cut into triangles and for rides to the library. I wouldn’t let a 13-year-old boy babysit my toddlers. Babies deserve more. Read more…
This part cracks me up: The woman in charge of the sex ed program was upset saying that they had to “kow-tow to parents.” Oh, please forgive parents for caring what their children learn on the topic! She acts as though parents are idiots and know nothing. Well, they ARE parents.
by Brian Lilley
A government plan for explicit sex-ed gets shut down by parents.
Parents are the primary educators of their children. While this may seem to be a rather mundane statement, it is becoming radical in many parts of the world. Yet last week parents rose up to tell the politicians, experts and bureaucrats that run Ontario’s education system that they had had enough and a strange thing happened; the parents won the day. Read more…
A group of American paediatricians concerned about policies that encourage teenagers to think positively about same-sex attraction has set up the website FactsAboutYouth.com and sent a letter to the superintendents of all public schools in the United States. Read more…
Sex ed programs aren’t working. The solution: keep having them!
By Professor Brenda Almond
After 13 years in power, a sense of chronic disappointment hangs over the Labour administration.
Yesterday, another of the Government’s shameful failures was exposed: the bankruptcy of its policy to tackle Britain’s awful record as western Europe’s teenage pregnancy capital. Read more…
Way to break it down. This is what they wanted to do. This is what they did. Thanks a lot. I miss the 50’s (had I lived during them).
by Joanna Bogle
As possibly one of its last acts as government, British Labour bids to make sex education compulsory.
Sex education. The very words strike a note of gloom. Long, long ago, back in the 1950s when schoolgirl pregnancies were a rarity, and anyone who gave children contraceptives and urged them to enjoy “safe sex” would have been arrested, things looked different. Read more…
The British schools secretary is under fire for making allowances to religion-based schools to teach sex ed according to their beliefs. Those complaining against him sound like intolerant whiners to me.
Nathalie Rothschild
‘Every single one of you is the result of a good shag.’ Those were the opening words of my biology teacher as he introduced my class to its very first sex-education lesson. They were memorable words – indeed, they are all I can recall of the few, awkward and pretty useless lessons that our poor teacher was forced to deliver as part of the science curriculum.
As sex education will soon become compulsory for all schools in England, English kids will also have the chance to taunt and embarrass their teachers, just as me and my classmates did in our school in Sweden. Yet judging from the outrage caused by the UK government’s decision to allow faith schools a measure of freedom to tailor sex education according to their beliefs, for many people teaching kids about sex is a very serious business indeed. Read more…
My money is on the horrible movies and tv shows geered toward teens. Just a preview for an American Pie movie was enough to make me want to retch.
Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow -
Teen pregnancies were up three percent in 2006, which is the latest reporting period available. Proponents of comprehensive sex education are blaming abstinence programs for the increase. Read more…
by Helen M. Alvaré, J.D., Senior Fellow in Law and Ruth Institute Advisory Board Member
Every presidential administration in Washington DC does some things that appear stupid in hindsight. It gets caught up in the moment, pandering to this or that political constituency, or reacting too precipitously to some big or newsworthy event. In our 24-hour-news-cycle world, and especially if we’re sophisticated news consumers, we simply discount the importance of poor presidential decisions and move on, even as we might grow incrementally more cynical over time about government in general. Read more…
This can’t be a good thing. And why would anyone think that it is?
Pete Chagnon – OneNewsNow -
Fox News has picked up on reports that Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), has been surrounded by controversy concerning his organization as GLSEN has been accused of visiting middle and high schools where spokespersons engage in explicit sexual discussions with students.
In conjunction with the controversial talks, it has been uncovered that GLSEN has recommended an alleged pornographic reading list for underage students. Exact details of the reading list are too explicit for print, but the material includes frank descriptions and the glorification of adult-on-minor homosexual sex.
Continue reading: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=819656
Inquiring Lefty minds want to know. Speaking as a dyed-in-the-wool, unapologetic right wing-nut who hangs around with others of same description of all colors: I can tell you there are plenty of blacks with traditional religious and family values who are disgusted with Obama. Let me lis the things I’ve heard them say they don’t like: cutting off abstinence education funds, appointing a lesbian as a commissioner to the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, allowing his people to shove same sex marriage down the throats of the District of Columbia, and promoting abortion in the health care bill.
Yes, many blacks don’t like abortion. They feel targeted by the population controllers.
Matthew Hanley, Mercatornet.com
World AIDS Day 2009 reminds us once again of the failure of risk reduction strategies.
December 1, 2009 is World AIDS Day — the first in the era of “hope and change”. So it is a particularly good time to ponder how well “risk reduction” measures for AIDS control — the most emphasised approaches to preventing new HIV cases — produce change and generate hope. Read more…
Marcia Segelstein – Guest Columnist -OneNewsNow
Listen up, parents. The goal of sex education is not to prevent unwanted pregnancies and diseases. The goal is to promote sexual freedom.
That may sound outrageous, but it’s the premise of Dr. Miriam Grossman’s new book, You’re Teaching My Child What?, and it’s backed up by plenty of cold, hard facts. Here’s what she writes in the introduction: “From a review of many of today’s sex ed curricula and websites, it would appear that a ’sexually healthy’ individual is one who has been ‘desensitized,’ who is without any sense of embarrassment or shame (what some might consider ‘modesty’), whose sexuality is always ‘positive’ and ‘open,’ who respects and accepts ‘diverse’ lifestyles, and who practices ’safer sex’ with every ‘partner.’ This is not about health, folks. This is about indoctrination.” Read more…
By George Delgado, M.D.
No one likes the feeling that something has been shoved down his or her throat. Merck, the pharmaceutical giant is looking like a bully in how it thrust Gardasil, the first genital human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine, on the US market.
You might imagine genital HPV infection being like an iceberg. The small tip represents those infections that lead to cervical cancer. Below the water is the vast majority of the infections, those that do not transform into cervical cancer because they are cleared by the body. Read more…
Loading ...
