Act urgently to try to stop problematic sex-ed program in Maryland

[Jennifer123]

spiritdaily.com/school%20curriculum.htm

mcpscurriculum.com/

"All U.S. citizens can help here! Please help us to defeat Montgomery County Maryland Public Schools’ (MCPS) recent health curriculum revisions which are promoting anal intercourse and promulgating homosexuality as “innate”, natural, and the “norm” and promoting condoms without medically-indicated warnings.

If we don’t get a stay from the Maryland State Board of Education by Wednesday at 5pm, our appeal to the State Board of Education may be moot (no good to stop Spring Field testing). All US citizens can sign. Maryland citizens are particularly encouraged. "

 

[Benedictus]

spiritdaily.com/school%20curriculum.htm

mcpscurriculum.com/

"All U.S. citizens can help here! Please help us to defeat Montgomery County Maryland Public Schools’ (MCPS) recent health curriculum revisions which are promoting anal intercourse and promulgating homosexuality as “innate”, natural, and the “norm” and promoting condoms without medically-indicated warnings.

I reviewed the curriculum, and I must object to this characterization of it. While the curriculum has some things I’m uncomfortable with, it is not “promoting anal intercourse”.

The treatment of homosexuality and “transgendered” individuals has some difficulties, but the focus seems to be on accepting gays as people and is aimed at preventing harassment and mal-treatment. I don’t believe it to be promoting homosexual activity.

I am not sure what they mean by “medically-indicated warnings” with respect to condoms. The curriculum discusses the failure rate of condoms and the fact that they don’t effectively prevent all STIs/STDs.

 

[Jennifer123]

I recommend reading the organization’s review of the curriculum here:
mcpscurriculum.com/curriculum.shtml

Sorry I can’t get into more detail now but I have to make dinner.

 

[Benedictus]

I already read it. I’m not really impressed by it. They do make some good points about the effectiveness of condoms for preventing diseases in different situations. On the other hand, their suggestion to add information about ex-gays is shameful.

 

[Jennifer123]

I already read it. I’m not really impressed by it. They do make some good points about the effectiveness of condoms for preventing diseases in different situations. On the other hand, their suggestion to add information about ex-gays is shameful.

I don’t think the suggestion about ex-gays is shameful. The information presented about homosexuality is very one-sided, subjective, and completely ignores validated research about the condition. It gives the impression that homosexuals only suffer because of the bigoted nature of society and the attitudes they “grew up with”.

I also find it disturbing that the curriculum, while mentioning that abstinence is the only 100% effective means for preventing STDs, they give absolutely no information or teaching on how exactly to abstain from sex.

The addendum mentions that children raised by homosexuals do just as well as those raised by heterosexuals. That has not been established and the research supporting this is faulty.

There just seems to be a lot of misinformation passed off as fact which is just endemic to this kind of “curriculum”.

 

[Benedictus]

I also find it disturbing that the curriculum, while mentioning that abstinence is the only 100% effective means for preventing STDs, they give absolutely no information or teaching on how exactly to abstain from sex.

I would assume that the target audience already knows how not to take their pants off.

 

[Jennifer123]

I would assume that the target audience already knows how not to take their pants off.

Well, we are talking about teens who are already being told that having sex is good and natural and nothing about the emotional toll premature sex can have on young women in particular, for instance. Not to mention all the medical information that isn’t being presented in this or most other sex-ed curriculum.

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=37806

heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/wm461.cfm

pureloveclub.com/research/index.php?id=61

 

[Riley259]

Well, we are talking about teens who are already being told that having sex is good and natural and nothing about the emotional toll premature sex can have on young women in particular, for instance. Not to mention all the medical information that isn’t being presented in this or most other sex-ed curriculum.

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=37806

heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/wm461.cfm

pureloveclub.com/research/index.php?id=61

Thanks for these links showing research supporting abstinence.

 

[rayne100]

I would like to see a copy of the actuall curriculum and lesson plans that would be presented to the students. Does anyone have a link to these items?
I tried googleing but I kept getting news articles about them but not the actual documents.

 

[Benedictus]

Actual approved curriculum

 

[rayne100]

Actual approved curriculum

Thank you for providing this link.
I have read it in it’s entirety and nowhere do I see that instructors would be promoting anal sex nor promoting homosexual behavior.

What these lessons do promote is respect, and tolerance and reject harrasment and violence.

I would have no problem with my child attending this class. I would rather my child learn that it is not ok to stereotype anyone, nor harrass anyone, especially in a school setting.
These lesson plans state that personal beliefs regarding homosexuality do are not considered homphobic and harassing, and that no matter what your personal beliefs are, it is not ok to harrass or harm a person due to their sexual orientation.

In addition, the Condom curriculum states several times that abstinence is the only 100% way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It presents the student with factual information.

This is not a morality discussion, it is an informational discussion. Any discussion of morality should be done at home. In fact, I would think that most parents would read this curriculum and lesson plan and use it as a chance to broach the subject with their child at home. It would give parents a great opportunity to have a conversation with their child regarding their own beliefs and the beliefs of their own religion.

 

[mlchance]

What these lessons do promote is respect, and tolerance and reject harrasment and violence.

Which has what to do with sex education?

All sex education is about morality, or the lack thereof. Sex and morality cannot be divorced from each other.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[rayne100]

Which has what to do with sex education?

All sex education is about morality, or the lack thereof. Sex and morality cannot be divorced from each other.

– Mark L. Chance.

That is not correct. The quote you had from me was referring to the sexual diversity class which does not discuss sex in particular, but rather sexual orientation. It defines sexual orientation and teaches that you cannot judge a book by its cover. Moreover it also states that tolerance and respect in a school setting is expected and even protected so that no child should feel afraid of going to school.

Regarding the sex education class where both abstinance and protected sex were mentioned, that was also not a moral issue. It was health facts regarding the precaustions that should be taken if one is having sex. It also states that the only sure fire way to be totally protected is to abstain, and this is mentioned several different ways.
In regards to the condom instuction, it was also factual information.

Again, I state that this curriculum does not promote the things that the OP’s article claimed. I have read this curriculum and the lesson plan.

 

[Jennifer123]

That is not correct. The quote you had from me was referring to the sexual diversity class which does not discuss sex in particular, but rather sexual orientation. It defines sexual orientation and teaches that you cannot judge a book by its cover. Moreover it also states that tolerance and respect in a school setting is expected and even protected so that no child should feel afraid of going to school.

Regarding the sex education class where both abstinance and protected sex were mentioned, that was also not a moral issue. It was health facts regarding the precaustions that should be taken if one is having sex. It also states that the only sure fire way to be totally protected is to abstain, and this is mentioned several different ways.
In regards to the condom instuction, it was also factual information.

Again, I state that this curriculum does not promote the things that the OP’s article claimed. I have read this curriculum and the lesson plan.

It most assuredly does discuss sex, whatever else is sexual orientation about if not about sex in particular? This is what gets me about these discussions, as if any true authentic Christian would have a problem with limiting abusive behavior towards anyone regardless of orientation. But “tolerance” and “acceptance” are entirely two different things, and these programs seek to make them one.

The entire curriculum is subjective and that IS a value judgement. If it weren’t, why isn’t there the statistical information about engaging in pre-marital sex as I’ve posted? Just stating ONE factual blurb about abstinence but then absolutely no follow up with educational material about it specifically is hardly educating the kids.

STD’s are at a grossly high level, it is a major health epidemic, the majority of these diseases are permanent lifetime sentences AND affect women at a much higher rate than males. Do we really want to curb this growing epidemic or not? Seriously. There is just so much ideology regarding sexual “freedom” being pushed on now the 2nd, maybe 3rd generation of young people, and what do we have to show for it? Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and growing STD rates.

 

[mlchance]

That is not correct.

Oh, well, in that case…

…it was also factual information.

And also bogus information, such as that homosexual partners make just as good parents as married heterosexuals, and that children raised by homosexuals suffer no disadvantages as a result.

I have read this curriculum and the lesson plan.

So have I, and obviously with a keener eye than you.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[rayne100]

It most assuredly does discuss sex, whatever else is sexual orientation about if not about sex in particular? This is what gets me about these discussions, as if any true authentic Christian would have a problem with limiting abusive behavior towards anyone regardless of orientation. But “tolerance” and “acceptance” are entirely two different things, and these programs seek to make them one.

The entire curriculum is subjective and that IS a value judgement. If it weren’t, why isn’t there the statistical information about engaging in pre-marital sex as I’ve posted? Just stating ONE factual blurb about abstinence but then absolutely no follow up with educational material about it specifically is hardly educating the kids.

STD’s are at a grossly high level, it is a major health epidemic, the majority of these diseases are permanent lifetime sentences AND affect women at a much higher rate than males. Do we really want to curb this growing epidemic or not? Seriously. There is just so much ideology regarding sexual “freedom” being pushed on now the 2nd, maybe 3rd generation of young people, and what do we have to show for it? Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and growing STD rates.

 

[fix]

Regarding the sex education class where both abstinance and protected sex were mentioned, that was also not a moral issue. It was health facts regarding the precaustions that should be taken if one is having sex. It also states that the only sure fire way to be totally protected is to abstain, and this is mentioned several different ways.
In regards to the condom instuction, it was also factual information.

How is morality not part of any of that?

 

[rayne100]

How is morality not part of any of that?

Tell me where I make a moral statement:
" the only sure fire 100 % fool proof way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is abstinence, however if a person is having sex, precautions should be taken to reduce the risk of STD/s and Pregnancy.
Precaustions that are used are…
and they are used in the following way…"

 

[fix]

Tell me where I make a moral statement:
" the only sure fire 100 % fool proof way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is abstinence, however if a person is having sex, precautions should be taken to reduce the risk of STD/s and Pregnancy.
Precaustions that are used are…
and they are used in the following way…"

The ends do not justify the means. If one had a class in pharmocology or physiology and such medical issues were described to show how they worked that may be reasonable, depending upon age.

But, this is a so-called sex ed class. Claiming that if one is going to have sex one should do the following… is saying if you are going to do a bad act then make sure you get a good end by any means necessary. Those are all moral issues. Just stating mechanical things does not magically erase morality. It is a scandal. It helps to lessen morality. It tacitly encouarges and approves bad behavior. It demeans young people.

 

[Jennifer123]

Tell me where I make a moral statement:
" the only sure fire 100 % fool proof way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is abstinence, however if a person is having sex, precautions should be taken to reduce the risk of STD/s and Pregnancy.
Precaustions that are used are…
and they are used in the following way…"

That is not exactly what the curriculum states and there are value judgements made in the selective omission of certain other statistical facts and educational materials that encourage the abstinence of sexual activity.

These things are omitted because either people want children to have sex or think that they can not limit their behavior and abstinence is unreasonable. Either way, a judgement is being made.

IMHO what do we have to show for years of this type of sexual education curriculum? I think the fruits speak for themselves, personally.