Posts Tagged ‘sex education’
The UN believes teachers and politicians are the only ones qualified to teach sex-ed.
By Nathan A. Cherry
Martinsburg, WV – A fantastic article came across my desk by Janice Shaw Crouse, writing at Townhall.com, entitled “A Report on the U.N.’s Shocking Sexuality Guidelines.” I would encourage every parent of a school-aged child to read this article in order to gain a better understanding of the liberal-lefts agenda in “educating” your children. But for the space I would reproduce the article here, I will however summarize some keys aspects and hope you will take time to read the full article later.
This summer the United Nations Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) – two United Nations agencies – issued some very controversial and troubling new guidelines for desired sex-education of children around the world. Let me highlight some of the main points of the new guidelines:
The “need and entitlement” for sexuality education for children beginning at age five.
The absolute human “right” of young people to have sexuality education, access to condoms, and abortion-on-demand.
In the view of the United Nations, sexuality education is the responsibility of “education and health authorities” not parents.
Five- to eight-year-olds are told that “touching and rubbing one’s genitals … ‘can feel pleasurable.
Nine- to twelve-year-olds learn how to get and use condoms, emergency contraception, the “signs and symptoms” of pregnancy, and all about sexual pleasure and orgasm.
Twelve- to fifteen-year-olds are told about their right to safe abortions and post abortion care, how to use emergency contraception, and that the size and shape of the penis or breasts does not affect sexual pleasure. Read the rest of this entry »
Recent studies show that abortion harms women, abstinence far more successful in the classroom.
By Nathan A. Cherry
Martinsburg, WV – “The thought of the word “abortion” should be unthinkable.” These words were spoken recently by Alveda King at a locally organized pro-life event at Rocky Mount High-School. I wish more people had this mind-set when it came to the murder of innocent children.
Ms. King, relative of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. became a staunch pro-life supporter after her own abortion experiences before accepting Christ in 1983. At the community event she said,
“This country was founded upon the respect for personal freedom; nobody should go against his or her conscious or moral values in order to keep their job. This is what abortion will do.” (Click here for origin)
Ms. King is referencing an open letter written to President Obama regarding his proposed health-care reform in which abortion on demand will be included at tax-payer’s expense; and doctors and nurses will risk losing their jobs for refusing to perform abortions on religious grounds.
Amazingly it would seem that all that is needed to reduce abortion rates is a little education on abstinence and the potential hazards for a woman’s health that exist from abortion.
“Abstinence is the first line of defense in preventing abortion. A woman does have the right to choose. But her moment of choice comes before she has made the choice to become sexually active. We need to educate people on that moment of choice,” said Marica Brown, director of the “Worth Waiting 4” program. Read the rest of this entry »
I brought you commentary earlier this week on the striking difference between the attitude toward sex education in other parts of the world like India and Latin America; and the attitude here in the United States. These countries claim that sex-education is the duty of parents and has no business in the public schools being taught by government employees, to which I full agree.
Now a federal sex-education program which stresses abstinence is set to expire, and the Obama administration has no plans to reinstate it.
In the mid 90’s a program called Title XX Adolescent Family Life (AFL) began as a sex-education program geared toward teaching abstinence to the youth of America. The program has since changed its name to Title, but the message that the only truly safe sex is within the confines of a monogamous, committed relationship has not changed. And it’s this message that has opponents of Title V eagerly awaiting its expiration on June 30 of this year.
Part of Title V opponents’ disdain for the program is due to its operating definition of what human sexuality ought to be. This definition said that the “expected standard of human sexual activity was a mutually faithful, monogamous relationship in the context of marriage.”
Call me crazy but that sounds like a pretty good working definition of what human sexuality ought to be. Only within the boundaries of a committed, monogamous relationship can a person guarantee their sexual and physical health. Dangers of STD’s and other issues become immensely more magnified when either the word “committed,” or “monogamous” is replaced.
Those at the greatest risk are the youth between the ages of 15-24 years of age. The CDC reports that Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and Syphilis cases have been steadily rising for several years. This tells me that the governments re-shifted focus on comprehensive sex-education in schools, with an emphasis on condom and birth control distribution, has largely failed.
Let’s be honest, if you take a bunch of hormone driven young people and give them exclusive access to all the condoms and birth control they want, and then tell them to “be responsible,” what do you think is going to happen? The result will be a rise of teenage pregnancy, followed by a rise in both the rate of teenage abortions or single moms on government subsidized programs that don’t finish high-school or college. And let’s not forget a rise in unpaid child support, which will tie up the courts for years to come. The evidence of this can be clearly seen in the present social climate.
So is government mandated abstinence based sex-education the answer? No, I don’t think so. I think the answer has nothing to do with the government at all. The government, especially in regards to public education needs to focus on the life skills that will prepare our children to be productive members of society; not teenage dropouts dependant on Uncle Sam. The public education should be focusing on ways to increase reading, math and science scores, not how to use a condom.
As for sex-education, it’s time for moms and dads across the country to be responsible parents and teach your kids about sex. It’s time for church youth and college ministries to quit being silent on the issue and teach your youth groups how to stand in a culture of giving in.
However, if you, mom and dad, and you, church youth minister, choose to ignore this responsibility, please don’t whine and complain about “government interference,” and the “terrible state of society.” Afterall, you helped contribute to the problem.
Further Food for Thought: “Sex Education – Not the Governments Job”
The decree by liberal educators and social psychologists that government mandated sex-education and 24/7 access to condoms and abortion clinics is helpful has found stark contrast in other countries; particularly India and Latin America.
In a report carried by Christian New Wire, Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer, president of Human Life International, blasted the UN Economic and Social Council after it called for “comprehensive sexuality education starting in early childhood,” after claiming that such education “neither accelerates sexual debut, nor increases the frequency of sexual relations.” Mr. Euteneuer’s comments are below in their entirety from the article.
“This is absolute nonsense! We know from almost every study on the topic that this is the exact opposite of the truth. Condom promotion has not stopped HIV in the developing world. And propagandizing young children about a value-neutral approach to sex, and telling them that they’ll be safe if they use condoms is exactly how you get them to start practicing sex before marriage.”
“This outrage is perpetrated by pagans forcing their hedonistic values on the families of the only Catholic continent in the world. It is a violation of sovereignty of nations and of the rights of parents to teach their kids on these delicate matters. The innocence of children is too precious of a gift to throw away in deference to government and its coercive modern amorality. Parents, teachers, and all people of good will, let’s tell them to get their grubby hands off our kids!”
I would like to thank Mr. Euteneuer for his words or wisdom, and pass them along to American educators and lawmakers on the behalf of millions of American parents who whole-heartedly agree with such a philosophy. But not before I add a few more thoughts and comments from the Indian government on a proposed introduction of sex-education into their public school. The following comments are from Lifesitenews.com:
“The Indian government has rejected western-style sex education programs, saying they do nothing to solve the problem of teenage pregnancy but only exacerbate the problem by promoting sexual promiscuity.
According to the government, the curriculum prepared with material from UNICEF, had ‘shocked the consciences’ of the country and was described as ‘quite frightening.’ If implemented, the report said, it would ‘promote promiscuity of the worst kind.’
If implemented, the petitioners said, the program would ‘corrupt Indian youth and lead to collapse of the education system.’ Over all, they said, such programs are nothing more than an ‘education to sell condoms’ that will lead to the creation of an ‘immoral society’ and to an increase in single-parent families. The Indian government’s reasoning stands in sharp contrast to that of the West, which, in reaction to steadily increasing rates of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, has invariably increased access to free contraceptives and abortion and exposed ever-younger children to more explicit sex education.”
As advanced as America may be, it sounds to me like we could learn a lesson from Latin America and India regarding what is essential and appropriate in our education systems. Sex education is not essential for kindergarteners or high-schoolers. It does not prepare them for function within society. But the negative of sex-education, listed quite intelligently in the comment above are certainly true for American schools; and our education rankings are proof.
A 2007 survey result published in the UK Telegraph shows the top 25 in the world in the areas of Math, Reading and Science. Sadly, America is not the top 25 in any category.
Maybe its time we stop teaching kids how to do what will inevitably come naturally, and should be taught by parents, and start teaching them the skills they will need to thrive in society. Thank-you India and Latin America for saying what needs to be said right here in America.