Sex Education

  • Thread starter Thread starter Karin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Karin

Guest
**Montgomery sex ed to be determined by ‘professional educators’ **
***Some want abstintence only class
***By ELIZABETH WEILL-GREENBERG | Jul 28, 12:40 PM The Montgomery County Board of Education voted unanimously at their meeting Wednesday night that the new Citizens’ Advisory Committee will act in an advisory manner only. “Professional educators,” not the CAC, will create the sex education curriculum, they agreed.

The new committee will include, among other representatives, a person from Parents and Friends of ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX) and Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC). The reconstituted committee will be announced at the Oct. 11 Board meeting.

In May, the Montgomery County Board of Education voted to create a new sex education program after CRC and PFOX sued the school district over complaints that the revised curriculum “normalized” homosexuality. The Board settled the suit and agreed to have a representative from CRC and PFOX on the new advisory committee.

But the debate continued at Wednesday’s meeting between those who support the revised, and now scrapped curriculum, and those who oppose it.

Opponents to comprehensive sex education in Montgomery County insist they are not anti-gay. But some of their comments at Wednesday night’s meeting may indicate otherwise.

Ruth M. Jacobs, a physician who is against the revisions adopted last year, said that the risks of anal sex should be taught. However, she made no mention of ways to protect oneself from the potential risks of anal sex or that heterosexuals engage in it too. The information she distributed to the audience only discussed health risks for men who have sex with men.

“Teaching about homosexuality and rectal sex at the public school may be just as fun as a “swirly” but all fun is relative,” she told the Board. Jacobs explained that a “swirly” is when a person dunks his or her head in the toilet and flushes.

She continued: “Everyone knows it is risky to put your head in a toilet. No one should sanitize the risk of rectal sex.”

Some speakers asked that the health curriculum include a discussion of the widely discredited reparative therapy, which aims to change people’s sexual orientation.

“Groups such as the American Psychological Association currently recommend schools censor all ‘ex-gay’ materials,” said Samara Mendoza, a parent and opponent of comprehensive sex education. “Respect for diversity, however, requires teaching about all principled positions.”

But is reparative therapy a principled position? Former advisory committee member David S. Fishback told the Board that according to several major medical associations, including the American Medical Association, the answer is no. In fact, he stated, PFOX president Richard Cohen was expelled from the American Counseling Association.

Several speakers implored the Board to offer an abstinence only alternative class that would depict a “traditional family” as the ideal to strive for. A “traditional family,” according to their definition, is a married man and woman. They claimed that the new curriculum marginalized these families.

However, the new curriculum only listed several types of families that can be found in Montgomery County, including same sex families. The discussion of homosexuality was limited to a series of terse definitions and statements, like that most medical experts agree homosexuality is not a choice and that it is not a mental disorder. (The complete curriculum can be found at www.teachthefacts.org.)

An alternative class is also needed because opting-out stigmatizes students, several speakers told the Board. Spencer Irvine, a senior, opted out of his eighth grade health class. It was awkward and uncomfortable to have to leave class and sit in the library by himself, he said. His health class did not mention homosexuality but his family opposed its discussion of contraception.

“Some of the things in there did not relate to my moral beliefs about abstinence,” Irvine said. When asked why his commitment to abstinence meant he couldn’t learn about contraception, his mother interjected, "I think that’s up to the parents.
http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=1795
 
Let me see. Were there more or fewer sexual problems–STD’s teen pregnancies, HIV, HPV, etc–before the advent of sex education done by “professional educators.”
 
Statistics show clearly that in schools that teach a **sex **education program that emphasizes saving intercourse for marriage, the teen pregnancy rate drops dramatically in as little as one year.Condom-based sex-education programs basically teach teen-agers that they cannot control their sexual desires, and that they must use condoms to protect themselves.
Some people believe that if teens can be taught how to use contraception and condoms effectively, rates of pregnancy and STD infection will be reduced dramatically. But common sense and statistics tell us otherwise. At Rutgers University, the rates of infection of students with STD varied little with the form of contraception used. For example, 35 to 44% of the sexually active students were infected with one or more STDs whether they used no contraceptive, oral contraceptive, the diaphragm, or condoms
64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:epSYsuUwQD4J:www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/safesex.html+Statistics+about+Sex+Education&hl=en
 
The Silent Scandal: Promoting Teen Sex

With millions of dollars in sex-education programs at stake, it is not surprising that the groups that have previously dominated the arena have taken action to block the growing movement to abstinence-only education. Such organizations, including the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SEICUS), Planned Parenthood, and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL), have been prime supporters of “safe-sex” programs for youth, which entail guidance on the use of condoms and other means of contraception while giving a condescending nod to abstinence. Clearly, the caveat that says “and if you do engage in sex, this is how you should do it” substantially weakens an admonition against early non-marital sexual activity.

Not only do such programs, by their very nature, minimize the abstinence component of sex education, but many of these programs also implicitly encourage sexual activity among the youths they teach. Guidelines developed by SEICUS, for example, include teaching children aged five through eight about masturbation and teaching youths aged 9 through 12 about alternative sexual activities such as mutual masturbation, “outercourse,” and oral sex.16 In addition, the SEICUS guidelines suggest informing youths aged 16 through 18 that sexual activity can include bathing or showering together as well as oral, vaginal, or anal intercourse, and that they can use erotic photographs, movies, or literature to enhance their sexual fantasies when alone or with a partner. Not only do such activities carry their own risks for youth, but they are also likely to increase the incidence of sexual intercourse.

In recent years, parental support for real abstinence education has grown. Because of this, many traditional safe-sex programs now take to calling themselves “abstinence plus” or “abstinence-based” education. In reality, there is little abstinence training in “abstinence-based” education. Instead, these programs are thinly disguised efforts to promote condom use. The actual content of most “abstinence plus” curricula would be alarming to most parents. For example, such programs typically have condom use exercises in which middle school students practice unrolling condoms on cucumbers or dildoes.17

heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1533.cfm
 
It is my experience that the sex education programs are not getting the job done. I worked in a family planning clinic from 1997 until just recently. The teens I have worked do not know the facts. It seems that those teens who have not had “sex ed” know as much or as little as those who have had it. They are given just enough information to feel “safe” and risk free. I spent a great deal of time giving the facts… ABSTINENCE is the only 100% method of protection against STDs and pregnancy. The most informed teens are those with parents who teach them. The moral teachings are imperative. The moral issues associated with sexual activity outside of marriage are void in most sex ed programs. Then, these programs teach teens they can practice “safe sex”. Disaster!
alternative sexual activities such as mutual masturbation, “outercourse,” and oral sex
Yes, and the teens mistakenly believe this is risk free and are shocked to learn the facts!

I do believe that parents must educate themselves to properly and thoroughly educate their children. There are clearly parents without sufficient information to prepare their children.
Some people believe that if teens can be taught how to use contraception and condoms effectively, rates of pregnancy and STD infection will be reduced dramatically
Yes. I have heard this numerous times. I have read over and over that the United States continues to have substantially higher teen pregnancy rates and birthrates than other developed countries; in developed countries with lower teen pregnancy rates, contraception is more readily available, relatively inexpensive, and advertised on television. This is one of the arguments in favor of the provision of confidential reproductive health services for teens.
 
I was underpriveleged, having gone to school in the era before there was ANY sex education of any variety whatsoever. And, parents weren’t too forthcoming, either.

Still, at my high school (and most others), we managed to maintain a teen pregnancy and STD rate of zero percent. And we didn’t even have a school nurse.
 
Come to think of it, there were very few of these type of problems in the whole country before Griswold v Connecticut.

But that’s another thread entirely.
 
I was thinking about this the other day… when the “experts” discuss the US teen pregnancy rates and STDs, why don’t they look at the stats BEFORE the sexual revolution? Why don’t they compare those statistics rather than comparing the US to other developed countries that offer easy access to contraceptives?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top