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

[Other_Eric]

Why ignorance? Why not truth? The problem is our culture takes a utilitarian view of life. We want solutions. If pregnancy or disease is the problem the the solution must be a condom regardless of what is true and good or bad and evil.

We do not seem to care about what is important and we only care about achieving a certain end while giving lip service to what is right. Also, teaching the use of condoms seems to further the idea illicit sex can be done without peril to the body or soul. It is no solution.

It is fine to take a romantic view of such things as sex education and assume that if we only give to children the proper information, that they will always use the sexual act in ways that are above reproach. Since my faith teaches that all are subject to the effects of Original Sin from conception, thinking with the mind of the Church compels a different view. I repeat that there is no need to know anything about the sexual act until one’s wedding night. Until that time, any information given, even views that promote abstinence have an unacceptable likelihood of being misused.

The truth is that there is no reason to be supplied with graphic details of sexual activity until one is in a position to use them in a licit fashion. Until then, great care must be taken to ensure that the innocence God gives to children is preserved.

 

[Other_Eric]

That’s great logic…
I suppose we should wait till a child freaks out that she is bleeding from a private area before she learns about menstration too !
Actually while we’re at it, lets not mention anything about where baby’s come from, and go back to telling kids that mommy is just fat and the stork brings them.

You present a false dichotomy. As if the only way to deal with natural issues of bodily development are either to supply sexual information in pornographic detail or to lie. One need not resort to either of these in order to satisfactorily explain issues of growth or where babies come from.

 

[Jennifer123]

You present a false dichotomy. As if the only way to deal with natural issues of bodily development are either to supply sexual information in pornographic detail or to lie. One need not resort to either of these in order to satisfactorily explain issues of growth or where babies come from.

AMEN!! Thank you. False dichotomy exactly, a complete straw-man argument, and it is indictative of the debate that surrounds sex education.

I can’t tell you how much I distrust the sex-ed curriculum considering that, as a product of the public school system, I really didn’t know anything about my own sexual organs, my complete menstrual cycle, etc. Sorry for being graphic but this is exactly what children should be taught, the physiology of the body parts, NOT HOW TO USE THEM.

Sure I knew “where babies came from” but not knowing about the “pelvic floor”, the “perineum”, the actual birthing process, all of these things women should know about their bodies but aren’t told until they are pregnant IF they are told at all, well, my ignorance really affected my health permanently. In all my years of going to the OB, taking the ABC they gave me, engaging in ultimately demoralizing sexual activity, I knew NOTHING about my body.

How did I learn? I became a pro-lifer, a mother and am learning NFP. I will not let my daughter make the same mistake. Education is the key, not this faux stuff they give to kids, which is really meaningless.

As for an abstinence program, I don’t have one. They are few and far between. There is one I know of that claims it has “balanced” approach: advocatesforyouth.org/index.htm

But I just saw that they partnered with SEICUS:
commondreams.org/pressreleases/june99/060299b.htm

Which is a HUGE red flag, showing me that maybe this group is politically motivated masquerading as an education non-profit. SEICUS is based on the work of Alfred Kinsey, and if I remember correctly, founded by his direct associates. Kinsey’s work is the most influential within the sexual and behavioral field that these sex-ed curriculums are based on, his work is taken now as fact since it’s been taught almost exclusively in universities and his conclusions are taken as gratned for fact. It is completely bankrupt morally as well as factually just plain innaccurate. However, his work continues to poison the minds of our youth.

So, you can see how hard it is to get true, accurate information that IS NOT politically motivated. It is such a shame that our kids are the battlefield for this war of culture. It’s truly shameful IMHO.

But I too would be interested if there were an acceptable abstinence based education that gave real education on the body rather than just how to be “inclusive” and how to put on a condom correctly.

 

[fix]

It is fine to take a romantic view of such things as sex education and assume that if we only give to children the proper information, that they will always use the sexual act in ways that are above reproach. Since my faith teaches that all are subject to the effects of Original Sin from conception, thinking with the mind of the Church compels a different view. I repeat that there is no need to know anything about the sexual act until one’s wedding night. Until that time, any information given, even views that promote abstinence have an unacceptable likelihood of being misused.

The truth is that there is no reason to be supplied with graphic details of sexual activity until one is in a position to use them in a licit fashion. Until then, great care must be taken to ensure that the innocence God gives to children is preserved.

Have you read my posts? I am against so called sex ed classes. My problem with your post was the wording. Ignorance is not the goal. Truth is the goal.

 

[Other_Eric]

Have you read my posts? I am against so called sex ed classes. My problem with your post was the wording. Ignorance is not the goal. Truth is the goal.

I repeat, the truth is that ignorance of the sexual act is proper until one’s wedding night.

 

[Valke2]

I repeat, the truth is that ignorance of the sexual act is proper until one’s wedding night.

a/k/a recipe for disaster. a/k/a fantasy world.

 

[rayne100]

AMEN!! Thank you. False dichotomy exactly, a complete straw-man argument, and it is indictative of the debate that surrounds sex education.

I can’t tell you how much I distrust the sex-ed curriculum considering that, as a product of the public school system, I really didn’t know anything about my own sexual organs, my complete menstrual cycle, etc. Sorry for being graphic but this is exactly what children should be taught, the physiology of the body parts, NOT HOW TO USE THEM.

Sure I knew “where babies came from” but not knowing about the “pelvic floor”, the “perineum”, the actual birthing process, all of these things women should know about their bodies but aren’t told until they are pregnant IF they are told at all, well, my ignorance really affected my health permanently. In all my years of going to the OB, taking the ABC they gave me, engaging in ultimately demoralizing sexual activity, I knew NOTHING about my body.

How did I learn? I became a pro-lifer, a mother and am learning NFP. I will not let my daughter make the same mistake. Education is the key, not this faux stuff they give to kids, which is really meaningless.

As for an abstinence program, I don’t have one. They are few and far between. There is one I know of that claims it has “balanced” approach: advocatesforyouth.org/index.htm

But I just saw that they partnered with SEICUS:
commondreams.org/pressreleases/june99/060299b.htm

Which is a HUGE red flag, showing me that maybe this group is politically motivated masquerading as an education non-profit. SEICUS is based on the work of Alfred Kinsey, and if I remember correctly, founded by his direct associates. Kinsey’s work is the most influential within the sexual and behavioral field that these sex-ed curriculums are based on, his work is taken now as fact since it’s been taught almost exclusively in universities and his conclusions are taken as gratned for fact. It is completely bankrupt morally as well as factually just plain innaccurate. However, his work continues to poison the minds of our youth.

So, you can see how hard it is to get true, accurate information that IS NOT politically motivated. It is such a shame that our kids are the battlefield for this war of culture. It’s truly shameful IMHO.

But I too would be interested if there were an acceptable abstinence based education that gave real education on the body rather than just how to be “inclusive” and how to put on a condom correctly.

My point was that ignorance is definitely not the answer as is your point. I was just esponding to the poster regarding this issue, not trying to make a point regarding the lesson plan in particular.

 

[Other_Eric]

My point was that ignorance is definitely not the answer as is your point. I was just esponding to the poster regarding this issue, not trying to make a point regarding the lesson plan in particular.

My point remains that individuals have no business knowing anything about sexuality until they are in a position to use it licitly. That means marriage.

Jennifer123’s post indicates that she was supplied with all sorts of information regarding the mechanics of sexuality and that she used this information to live a licentious lifestyle. If she had been deprived of this information, things might have been very different. You can’t sin sexually when you don’t know about sex in the first place.

I repeat my view that ignorance in this regard will foster the type of moral strength that is all too lacking in the youth of today.

 

[rayne100]

My point remains that individuals have no business knowing anything about sexuality until they are in a position to use it licitly. That means marriage.

Jennifer123’s post indicates that she was supplied with all sorts of information regarding the mechanics of sexuality and that she used this information to live a licentious lifestyle. If she had been deprived of this information, things might have been very different. You can’t sin sexually when you don’t know about sex in the first place.

I repeat my view that ignorance in this regard will foster the type of moral strength that is all too lacking in the youth of today.

Um if that is true then how did the first humans discover sex? how about aboriginal tribes that have no sex education?
Simply not teaching about sex, does not mean children will not inadvertantly find out about it, and with it, harmful myths and preconcieved notions, fears and irrational behaviors.

 

[fix]

I repeat, the truth is that ignorance of the sexual act is proper until one’s wedding night.

That is a broad statement that requires refinement. My point is the truth of morality needs to be taught. I am not talking about specific details.

 

[Jennifer123]

Um if that is true then how did the first humans discover sex? how about aboriginal tribes that have no sex education?

These people existed without knowing the Creator and therefore were fallen in their knowledge in a sense. It doesn’t take much to know how these things work, but just because it can be done doesn’t mean it should. We know ourselves now to have a greater dignity than the lower animals that act purely on instinct. We have reason.

But I would guess that even these peoples had a moral code as Aztecs knew virgins were valuable. Well, I know they had a “moral code” because of he existance of natural law, but I suspect that even they had “standards”.

 

[Jennifer123]

My point remains that individuals have no business knowing anything about sexuality until they are in a position to use it licitly. That means marriage.

Jennifer123’s post indicates that she was supplied with all sorts of information regarding the mechanics of sexuality and that she used this information to live a licentious lifestyle. If she had been deprived of this information, things might have been very different. You can’t sin sexually when you don’t know about sex in the first place.

I repeat my view that ignorance in this regard will foster the type of moral strength that is all too lacking in the youth of today.

I agree with you Eric, my point was that I didn’t receive “sex education” like proper education on abstinence and information on our physiology, rather I learned how sex can be experienced, and I most likely wouldn’t have debased myself like I did if these options were available to me. At least until I was an “adult” and completely brainwashed by our “Sex and the City” lifestyle handed to young adults.

I think these curriculums are more “sexual indoctrination” rather than any sort of education.

 

[Other_Eric]

That is a broad statement that requires refinement. My point is the truth of morality needs to be taught. I am not talking about specific details.

Sexual morality is best taught by implication to those who are young. If males and females are kept separate from one another through their adolescent years, the opportunities for sexual misbehavior are few. It also inculcates a healthy lack of personal knowledge about the opposite sex. With care, one can foster a sort of apprehension of the opposite sex that will counteract any illicit predispositions. If we supplement the segregation with ignorance of the sexual act, the possibilities for sexual misbehavior fall even more. I fail to see what refinement is needed here. Children, adolescents and even young unmarried adults have no need to know anything about sex or sexuality. The only way they can make use of such information is by sinning. Once they are married, they may then have access to all the information about the mechanics that they desire.

 

[rayne100]

These people existed without knowing the Creator and therefore were fallen in their knowledge in a sense. It doesn’t take much to know how these things work, but just because it can be done doesn’t mean it should. We know ourselves now to have a greater dignity than the lower animals that act purely on instinct. We have reason.

But I would guess that even these peoples had a moral code as Aztecs knew virgins were valuable. Well, I know they had a “moral code” because of he existance of natural law, but I suspect that even they had “standards”.

That wasn’t the point of my response. I was indicating to Eric that his stance on total ignorance of the marital act until the wedding night did not ensure that nothing ilicit would take place. that is not the case. Not teaching about what sex is is another story altogether. Simply thinking that not teaching about sex altogether does not ensure the safety of children, since they will innevitable discover sex on their own. My examples were used as just that examples.
I guess it could have been taken more than one way…sorry for the confusion.

 

[rayne100]

Sexual morality is best taught by implication to those who are young. If males and females are kept separate from one another through their adolescent years, the opportunities for sexual misbehavior are few. It also inculcates a healthy lack of personal knowledge about the opposite sex. With care, one can foster a sort of apprehension of the opposite sex that will counteract any illicit predispositions. If we supplement the segregation with ignorance of the sexual act, the possibilities for sexual misbehavior fall even more. I fail to see what refinement is needed here. Children, adolescents and even young unmarried adults have no need to know anything about sex or sexuality. The only way they can make use of such information is by sinning. Once they are married, they may then have access to all the information about the mechanics that they desire.

So you are basically stating that no knowlege whatsoever of sex should be fostered and that to ensure this we should move backwards to segregating children by sex in schools so that they have no knowledge of biology of the opposite sex?
interesting… should we seperate them in the family too? How can you grow up with siblings of the opposite sex then? Isn’t it important that those living together as a family, understand the changes in bodies that are occurring?

This topic is going off topic, but I was curious…

 

[fix]

Sexual morality is best taught by implication to those who are young. If males and females are kept separate from one another through their adolescent years, the opportunities for sexual misbehavior are few. It also inculcates a healthy lack of personal knowledge about the opposite sex. With care, one can foster a sort of apprehension of the opposite sex that will counteract any illicit predispositions. If we supplement the segregation with ignorance of the sexual act, the possibilities for sexual misbehavior fall even more. I fail to see what refinement is needed here. Children, adolescents and even young unmarried adults have no need to know anything about sex or sexuality. The only way they can make use of such information is by sinning. Once they are married, they may then have access to all the information about the mechanics that they desire.

I will stick with the Vatican:

“Sex education, which is a basic right and duty of parents, must always be carried out under their attentive guidance, whether at home or in educational centres chosen and controlled by them. In this regard, the Church reaffirms the law of subsidiarity, which the school is bound to observe when it cooperates in sex education, by entering into the same spirit that animates the parents”.

1. Parents should pay particular attention to their children’s gradual development and to their physical and psychological changes, which are decisive in the maturing of the personality. Without showing anxiety, fear or obsessive concern, parents will not let cowardice or convenience hinder their work. This is naturally an important moment for teaching the value of chastity, which will also be expressed in the way sexual information is given. In this phase, educational needs also concern the genital aspects, hence requiring a presentation both on the level of values and the reality as a whole. Moreover, this implies an understanding of the context of procreation, marriage and the family, a context which must be kept present in an authentic task of sexual education.

1. Beginning with the changes which their sons and daughters experience in their bodies, parents are thus bound to give *more detailed explanations about sexuality *(in an on-going relationship of trust and friendship) each time girls confide in their mothers and boys in their fathers. This relationship of trust and friendship should have already started in the first years of life.THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY
   THE TRUTH AND MEANING
   OF HUMAN SEXUALITY
   Guidelines for Education within the Family

 

[Other_Eric]

I will stick with the Vatican:

Nothing in the document you have referenced contradicts keeping children ignorant of the sexual act until marriage. Any information a child requests in their formative years can be explained in developmental terms rather than sexual ones.

 

[fix]

Nothing in the document you have referenced contradicts keeping children ignorant of the sexual act until marriage. Any information a child requests in their formative years can be explained in developmental terms rather than sexual ones.

Nothing in that document supports your argument. Nice try.

 

[Melchior]

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. "

The real issue is that Christians of all stripes are still submitting their children to government indoctrination (education). We cannot protest that an hopelessly flawed institution is flawed. We need to protect out children by not handing them over to people who teach them things contrary to Christianity, natural law and common sense, in their most formative years for hours a day, 5 day a week for 12 years.

Homeschool, private school, Catholic School. The only way to stop feeding this monster is to starve it a take back our children.

You cannot complain that Godzilla is making travel difficult and write letter to the Highway Authority. You get your family the L out of Tokyo as fast as you can.

Dave

 

[Other_Eric]

Nothing in that document supports your argument. Nice try.

Well, then, since neither of us can point to Church teaching to affirmatively validate either of our positions, we are left with the prudential approach. We can teach children about sexuality in ways that will lead to teenage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Alternatively, we can guard their innocence until such time as it is necessary for them to learn of the mechanics behind sexuality and reap the rewards of a chaste society. It seems to me that the decision makes itself.