Obama Did Vote to Teach Sex Ed (and Much More) to Kindergartners
Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 06:09AM You’ve probably seen John McCain’s You Tube ad saying Barack Obama’s only legislative accomplishment on education was voting yea on teaching kindergarteners sex education
The Obama campaign refutes the ad. They say the legislation taught kindergartners how to discern sexual predators.
Not true. The McCain ad is right. Obama voted in the Illinois Senate to pass a bill for comphrensive sex education for grades K-12.
- This is the full text of Bill SB0099, the bill Barack Obama supported.
- This is the life and death of the bill, filed on 1/29/2003 and died on 1/11/2005.
- Here are the Health & Human Services Members, of which the then Illinois state senator Barack Obama was Chairperson.
- Here is a list of all bills sponsored by Barak Obama in the Illinois Senate
The curriculum Obama wanted to use is from SIECUS which provides the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, Kindergarten through 12th Grade
(Source: McCain/Palin website/MSNBC)
Let’s take a look at what Obama wanted to teach kindergartners through 3rd graders. Kindergarten is referred to as Level 1 , or “middle childhood, ages 5 through 8; early elementary school”
Here is the course curriculum for kindergartners through 3rd grade:
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Topic 2: Puberty
Level 1
- Bodies change as children grow older.
- Puberty is a time of physical and emotional change that happens as children become teenagers.
- People are able to have children only after they have reached puberty.
Topic 3: Reproduction
Level 1
- Men and women have reproductive organs that enable them to have a child.
- Men and women have specific cells in their bodies (sperm cells and egg cells) that enable them to reproduce.
- Reproduction requires that a sperm and egg join.
- Vaginal intercourse – when a penis is placed inside a vagina – is the most common way for a sperm and egg to join.
- When a woman is pregnant, the fetus grows inside her body in her uterus.
- A woman can be pregnant with more than one fetus at a time.
- Babies usually come out of a woman’s body through an opening called a vagina.
- Some babies are born by an operation called a Caesarian Section.
- A woman’s breasts can provide milk for a baby.
- Not all men and women have children.
- People who cannot have children may choose to adopt.
Topic 4: Body Image
Level 1
- Individual bodies are different sizes, shapes, and colors.
- All bodies are equally special, including those that are disabled.
- Differences make us unique.
- Good health habits, such as eating well and exercising, can improve the way a person feels about his or her body.
- Each person can be proud of his/her body.
Topic 5: Sexual Orientation Subconcept: As people grow and develop they may begin to feel romantically and/or sexually attracted to people of the same and/or a different gender.
Level 1
- Human beings can love people of the same gender and people of another gender.
- Some people are heterosexual, which means they can be attracted to and fall in love with someone of another gender.
- Some people are homosexual, which means they can be attracted to and fall in love with someone of the same gender.
- Homosexual men and women are also known as gay men and lesbians.
- People deserve respect regardless of who they are attracted to.
- Making fun of people by calling them gay (e.g. “homo,” “fag,” “queer”) is disrespectful and hurtful.
Topic 6: Gender Identity (begins at level 2)
SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
Topic 1: Sexuality Throughout Life
Level 1
- Most children are curious about their bodies.
- Bodies can feel good when touched.
Topic 2: Masturbation
Level 1
- Touching and rubbing one’s own genitals to feel good is called masturbation.
- Some boys and girls masturbate and others do not.
- Masturbation should be done in a private place.
Topic 3: Shared Sexual Behavior Subconcept: Individuals express their sexuality with a partner in diverse ways.
Level 1
- People often kiss, hug, touch, and engage in other sexual behaviors with one another to show caring and to feel good.
Topic 5: Human Sexual Response Subconcept: Female and male bodies respond both similarly and differently to sexual stimulation.
Level 1
- Both girls and boys may discover that their bodies feel good when touched.
Topic 6: Sexual Fantasy (begins at level 3)
SEXUAL HEALTH
Topic 2: Contraception Subconcept: Contraception enables people to have sexual intercourse and avoid unintended pregnancy.
Level 1
- Some people have children and others do not.
- Each family can decide how many children to have, if any.
Topic 4: Abortion Subconcept: When a woman becomes pregnant and chooses not to have a child, she has the option of having an abortion.
Level 1
- • Sometimes women become pregnant when they do not want to be or are unable to care for a child.
Topic 5: Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Level 1
- Sexually transmitted diseases are caused by germs such as bacteria and viruses.
- There are many types of sexually transmitted diseases.
- People who do not engage in certain behaviors do not get STDs.
- A small number of children are born with STDs that they get from their mothers during pregnancy or birth.
- The most common ways for a person to get an STD is to participate in sexual behavior or share a needle with another person who is already infected with an STD.
- Children who find needles on the ground should not touch them and should tell an adult.
SOCIETY AND CULTURE
Topic 2: Gender Roles
Level 1
- Girls and boys have many similarities and a few differences.
- Some people may expect or demand that boys and girls behave in certain ways, but this is beginning to change.
- Both women and men can be involved and caring parents.
- Boys and girls can do the same chores at home.
- Men and women are capable of doing almost all the same jobs.
- Some men and women may be told that certain jobs and tasks are only for women or only for men, but this is beginning to change.
Topic 4: Sexuality and Religion
Level 1
- Some families go to a church, mosque, or synagogue to worship; some families do not.
- Religions teach people how to love each other, how to behave, and what is right and wrong.
- Different religions may promote similar or different values.
Topic 5: Diversity Subconcept: Our society has a diversity of sexual attitudes and behaviors; some people are unfairly discriminated against because of the way they express their sexuality.
Level 1
- Individuals differ in the way they think, act, look, and live.
- Talking about differences helps people understand each other better.
- The belief that all members of a group will behave the same way is called a stereotype.
- Stereotypes can hurt people.
- All people should receive fair and equal treatment.
- People who are different are often treated negatively or unequally, which is unfair.
Now please, tell me that Barack Obama doesn’t want to teach sex ed to kindergartners. You don’t want to know what the program teaches high school kids.
Trackback URL: http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/2274519
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (82)
And then people wonder how Palin's daughter ends up pregnant with a mother who believes in abstinence only.
Folks, you can talk to your kids and tell them the facts of life but no matter what you tell your kids about living right and good, they go to public school and it's all taken away.
Public education spends more time on the sexualization of children than it does on giving them knowledge and helping to develop critical thinking skills.
This is sick. The sad part is that hardly anyone under the age of 30 realizes just how sick it is because they're "just used to it."
Steph, it gets really graphic if you look at what high schoolers are taught. I would not let my kids go to a school that taught with that curriculum.
I previewed the sex ed in my kids' school, even the AIDS program, which was surprisingly good. Nothing inappropriate, just a talk about not sharing drinks at lunch time, not making blood pacts, that sort of thing. This curriculum that Obama supported teaches gay tolerance, religious indoctrination, and all sorts of sexually inappropriate material.
And Obama acted indignant about McCain's ad. That's a joke.
Apart from that, it's also full of, let's say, very strange approaches to certain topics. Take Sexual Behavior,Topic 3, level 1. "People often kiss, hug, touch, and engage in other sexual behaviors with one another to show caring and to feel good. " To me, this implies that a hug is sexual behavior. Same for a kiss. So, when my 8-year old niece hugs me, that's sexual behavior? Excuse me? When I give her a kiss on the head, then it's sexual behavior? Who wrote this crap? I'm in no way surprised that someone like Obama would vote "yes" on this piece of... let's not go there.
--when I saw the ad it rang true because I have heard so many parents complain about sex ed at far too early an age--with far too much specific information--and with a very liberal slant(ie family is any group that cares about each other)--then the democrats assume the ads are "successful" because of how they are presented--actually they are successful because they ring true--ie when I saw obama in berlin I thought it was totally over the top and proved nothing about his ability to be commander in chief
Ah, maybe I missed it but where is the teaching about sexual predators?
The sexual behavior section without emphasis on how to handle unwanted touching seems right out of the pedophile handbook. Don't pedophiles manipulate their victims by saying if feels good and it how you show love and caring?
Would it be so hard to include a section on Unwanted Touching, to emphasize such a section?
Not only is it actual way to advanced sex education, there isn't any info on sexual predators to support Obama's claim.
The curriculum mentions at the kindergarten level or Level 1 that kids should report to a grown up anyone who touches them in a way that isn't appropriate. But I think this program makes the public school the predator.
And yet we are amazed when major media reports a group of '6 year olds' are involved in a 'sex' club in a public school. While it doesn't discern whether the sex involved was hetero, homo, etc... I could never imagine sexual inclinations at 6 years old.
Until I was roughly 12 years old, I simply used that area for the practical purpose of urination. The mere thought of touching someone else's sexual organs was, well, yucky :-) Now, thanks to liberal sex education, 6 year olds think sex among children is the natural thing to do.
Does anyone realize that 6 year olds are not mentally, or emotionally, adapted to deal with sex education? Do we need more proof of this? Treating 6 years olds as sexual beings is right in line with the thinking of groups like NAMBLA. It is deviate behavior on the part of the adults that support these issues. They need to be held accountable for the results.
JKB ... the part on sexual predators wasn't included here. If you follow the link that Amy included, you will see that the guidelines are far more comprehensive than what she extracted for her post here. You will also see that this is *not* a curriculum, but a set of guidelines - developed by a broad group of experts (and no, these experts are not just people with a crazy, liberal agenda) that communities and schools can use to implement a logical sex ed program that works within their values.
A quote from the guidelines:
"... In addition, in programs or communities where sexuality education does not start until middle school or junior high school (Level 3), it may first be necessary to introduce students to the developmental messages suggested in earlier levels. (Felicity's comment - in other words, communities decide how to use these materials - it's not all or nothing)
It is also important to note that while the developmental messages contain the age-appropriate information that young people need to learn, they are not meant to simply be read or quoted verbatim in materials or activities. Instead, they are intended for educators and other adults who are in a better position to understand the best language and methods to use when sharing this information with young people."
Pregnant and then married 17 year-olds, teens believing that oral sex isn't really sex... liberal and conservatives alike can agree that these are not good things, can't we?
Another section Amy didn't choose to include from these guidelines shows that values are discussed throughout these guidelines and in a way that is respectful of families choosing their own values. The first topic in the Personal Skills section is about values:
Topic 1: Values
Sub-concept: Values guide our behavior and give purpose and direction to our lives.
Developmental Messages:
Level 1
• Values are strong feelings or beliefs about important issues.
• Individuals and families have a variety of values.
• Children learn most of their values from parents, other family members, community, cultural and religious teachings, and their peers.
Honestly, folks ... look at the whole document from SIECUS and then form your opinion.
Good post, Amy. Very important to point this out.
Felicity, I have read the entire document and reached my own conclusion. Obama lied. But it's not the first time and it won't be the last.
The issue with protecting children from predators isn't knowing that some touches are good and some are bad. I think children who are abused know the touching is "icky." What they need is a safe person to confide in, so they can tell on the perpetrator. If they are in a dysfunctional home they are very reluctant to tell because of the bizarre rules enforced in these homes. This curriculum is a way to introduce children to sex long before they are ready for it. It's not appropriate even for sixth graders, in my opinion, and I would not allow my children to participate.
You failed to mention how 80% of Republicans are a bunch of pedophiles and there are records to prove it. Isn't that a little worse?
Oh and you're insane.
Don't Scare Yourself
If there are records to prove it why didn't you provide some? Honestly, that's the snake oil salesman's pitch. Throw the claim out there and wait for the people to argue that there's proof, then buy into the claim, only to find out there was no such proof.
Oh, and proof needs to be something documented from places other than Kos and its clones. They LIE and it's such a habit there now I wouldn't believe anything they say without backing it up from 100 different nonpartisan sources.
The above is not true. I don't know where you got it, but it is not part of the Illinois state curriculum. My mother has been a public school teacher in Illinois for over 25 years and I can assure you, unequivocally, that the above is not the sex ed covered in their classes. My mother currently teaches first grade. The ONLY sex ed taught is basics that let kids know that they have places on their bodies that no one should be touching but them and if anyone is touching them, they can talk to people like their teachers about it. It isn't like this is a half hour class every day. It is more along the lines of the day that they cover fire safety, or the day that a police officer comes in to talk about what to do in emergencies.
Don't underestimate teachers. NO teacher in their right mind would teach what was outlined above to kindergartners or first graders. Kindergarten is only half days for goodness sakes...they don't even mention things like puberty or sexual orientation.
The above is a joke and it isn't used in Illinois schools, end of story.
Thank goodness for chicago-cr!!!!! These scare tactics are just plain wrong. I welcome a fair and truthful exchange but fear mongering is rife in this election. Its time for it to stop! Many people don't take the time to really get at the truth. They only pay attention to negative ads and misleading blogs. I wish that there weren't so many ill-informed voters.....as a 74 year old white woman who, could you tell, is an Obama fan...yes, its true! And I voted for Eisenhower and Nixon and Reagan....I am feeling discouraged this time around. If Barack weren't a black man he'd be ahead by a large margin.
P.S. This is the first time I've written a blog but am too upset by what I read here not to respond.
Humans are sexual beings, and should be educated about it. It's only the Christian fascists/christianists who want to keep people ignorant, weak, and suggestible.
ad is false.
you haven't provided any proof of Obama endorsing these SIECUS guidelines.
my advise: quit these sleazy attacks. it is going to backfire.
'mccain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election'
"And then people wonder how Palin's daughter ends up pregnant with a mother who believes in abstinence only. " -- StephC
If she "believed" it, she wouldn't have had sex, dimwit. And, yes, abstinence is the ONLY "method" that is 100% effective in (a) preventing pregnancy, and (b) preventing disease.
It is also the only moral choice, something Leftists wouldn't have a clue about. Oh, dear, how dare I preach "morals" when they are so hard to keep? Humans make mistakes, but we have to keep trying to do what is right. If we fail, we have to deal with that as honestly as possible.
But Leftists? What's their solution? They have no morals. They think that failure is normal, which is why they are so angry with anyone who strives to maintain a higher standard. They hate whatever shows them for the reprobates they are. Rather than "change" to improve themselves, they want to drag everyone down to their disgusting level, a level below even that of animals. That is why THEY are the losers, not folks like Sarah Palin's daughter, who, for all their faults, will still regret mistakes and continue to strive for the highest ideals, without which no one can really be called "human."
"you haven't provided any proof of Obama endorsing these SIECUS guidelines." -- caesu
Here's proof, unless you are too stupid to understand it.
"sad but hopeful lunatic"
I refuse to believe you voted intelligently for Ike (twice?) and Nixon and Reagan. It makes no sense to now vote for someone as corrupt as Obama. I just can't believe it. I mean, it's not just that he's a little left, he's in bed with crooks, terrorists and commies up to his eyeballs.
I think that if Obama promoted this curriculum, he has done you a service. It seems to present the facts of human sexuality in a fairly benign, albeit, banal way. It is up to you dear wives of Stepford, to confound and confuse, degrade and demoralize your children until you mold them into the frigid, phalliphobic, fornihaters you've turned out to be.
Obama is considered to be a "handsome" fellow. That couldn't have been an advantage in a Muslim school, given the proclivity of the Mullah's for monkeyshines.
@yonason
it doesn't say anything about SIECUS in the link you provided.
so you seem to be so stupid that you have to make stuff up.
"instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV"
don't touch needles. that would be good to tell children wouldn't it?
vdavisson
If you lived in Californica <A HREF="http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/2007/05/california-state-senate-passes.html">you wouldn't have a choice</A>.
And Schwartzenazi's program [I might appoologize for that if he vetoes it] makes O'Bunko's look pretty tame by comparison (and I don't approve of his one bit, either).
Sounds like the state acting in place of the parents. Maybe because mons and dads are out making tax money for the central government and are not home to tell their kids about SE and related issues. It is a system of benifits for the state as a proxy-parent. It gives more power and money to the central authority -- undemocratic. Often republicans are wrongly accused of programs that centralize authority, yet with each legislation period, the dems vote for more central government powers - while at the same time suggesting that they are more democratic than the republicans.
"it doesn't say anything about SIECUS in the link you provided." -- caesu
You don't know how to use the internet any better than McCain does? Or are you just lazy?
Here, I'll give you this one, but from here on you're on your own.
"... many school districts across the country look to The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) when shaping guidelines. Those guidelines may make many parents shudder. They include teaching children 5-8 years old about homosexuality, names for body parts and specific details about how a baby is made...
Regarding the polling that was done on this issue, the Republican strategist told me that:
“No one seeing those guidelines believed that that material was age appropriate.”
The Obama campaign sent out the SIECUS guidelines to MSNBC when asked about this issue last year. The problem confronting the Obama campaign on this issue is that while he may not be for any of the more intense language contained in the SIECUS guidelines, he does support age-appropriate sex ed for kindergartners and the polling suggests voters are uncomfortable with that..."
If his campaign is sending out the literature, then that's what he wants. It doesn't matter that he pretends to only accept some of the recommendations, because honesty is, well, just not him.
"don't touch needles. that would be good to tell children wouldn't it?" -- caesu
NO.
You don't know much about children, do you?
You keep needles out of reach of children, because if you leave them lying about and you tell them not to touch them, you are assured that they will. It's the parent's job, not the state's. Unless you want cameras in every home to make sure state directives are being implemented, one has to trust the citizens. If the citizen fails, that's when laws should come into play, not before by trying to prevent every possible thing that could go wrong. That's "big brother" and is completely antithetical to democracy.
@yonason
this Illinois curriculum gives no mention of SIECUS.
you can post as much links to other blogs as you want.
but that doesn't proof anything at all.
and of course needles should be kept out of reach of children.
but tell that the junkies.
there's nothing wrong with educating children about all kinds of dangers.
for example about needles if they are found lying on the streets.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but anyone who would advocate this curriculum likely exhibits pedophile tendencies.
About ten years ago, I listened to an interview of a woman from Texas who owned several Planned Parenthood facilities; or at least was the executive in charge and talked about ongoing efforts to teach sex education in as young a grade as possible because they understood that getting kids to talk about sex early on would increase the likelihood of sexual activity resulting in an increase in abortions. If given the opportunity, they would lecture in kindergarten through 6th grade. Of course they would frame it as something that 'shouldn't occur' but the point wasn't to encourage sexual activity; the point was to encourage conversation which would stimulate curiosity and subsequent sexual activity.
So, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that Obama would support this as he fully supports abortion as well. Fair market and all.
And BTW, be careful pedophiles, when you comment, you leave a trail of breadcrumbs that law enforcement love to follow. Just ask Bernie Ward.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/29/BAG212JO5B.DTL
This post is ludicrous and results in you losing credibility, Amy. Our country is in serious trouble, with a dire economic and housing crisis on our hands and dangerous developments overseas. There are so many more significant topics to discuss regarding how McCain or Obama can impact the direction our country takes..but you choose to focus on an already-debunked accusation regarding sex education for kindergartners? This is downright pathetic and Rovian.
I would urge everyone who participate in these kinds of forums to take the time to read unbiased reports or look to the actual source of a document (ie: the bill in question in the Illinois State Legislature) for factual information. Your first problem is that your source is McCain’s website. Your second problem is that you didn’t actually read the Bill in question (SB0099 from the 93rd Assembly) or the actual Illinois sex ed curriculum-- you falsely assume that the Seicus guidelines are listed verbatim in this curriculum-- which they are not. If you actually read the Bill, it does discuss age-appropriate education, including education on sexual predators for kindergarten and elementary-aged children; allows all parents an opt-out policy (their kids do not have to go through this education without parental permission); and there is a strong abstinence component provided as part of the curriculum. Furthermore, numerous leading Democrats, non-partisan organizations (factcheck.org, etc), the media and noted Republicans (including Karl Rove, of all people) have cried foul on the allegation that Obama wants “explicit, comprehensive sex education for kindergartners” because it is a completely false allegation.
In light of the embarrassing teen pregnancy of Sarah’s Palin’s daughter, shame on McCain, for having the nerve to even mention-- let alone distort--Obama’s reasonable positions on sex education. And shame on the reader (StephC) who blames Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy on the comprehensive sex education she must be receiving in the Alaska public schools. Well, again, please check your facts, as there is no requirement that the sex ed be taught in Alaska, and its largest school district, Anchorage, emphasizes abstinence, with a program called "Abstinence Plus”. This is sad, as Alaska has one of the highest rates of sexually transmitted diseases and is 30th in the U.S. for teen pregnancy rates.
The reality is that teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases are a horrendous problem in our country. I would know, as I’m an Ob/Gyn at an academic center and see teen pregnancy practically on a daily basis. The majority of the young women who experience this dilemma have not been well educated on the issues, have not sought protection, and have limited education regarding the seriousness of STDs. Teen pregnancy does not discriminate--I see young women from low income backgrounds and girls from affluent homes. Whether you’re a Democrat, Republican or Independent, I think we can all agree that we need to find a way to reduce teen pregnancy and STD rates. I do not perform abortions but I do believe strongly in providing comprehensive sex education and education about birth control to my patients, and support comprehensive, age-appropriate sex ed in the schools. You can teach abstinence all you want (and I would encourage stressing this concept), but the reality, it’s not enough and teen pregnancy happens even in the best of families (The Palins). Numerous prominent professional associations in the fields of medicine (American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, etc) , public health, adolescent health, and psychology, argue that abstinence-only programs fail to provide adequate information to protect the health of young people. This is corroborated by many studies from independent organizations, medical centers, as well as Congressional studies.
Both candidates have stretched the truth in their campaigns, but McCain has done so more than his opponent as of late with major outcry from Dems and Republicans alike. I am not a liberal and have been struggling for awhile about who to vote for in the upcoming election. Alas, the ethical "maverick McCain ”, seems to have disappeared lately, and been replaced by right-wing cynicism and Rove-style campaigning. McCain’s recent distortions of Obama’s positions result in his compromising his integrity in the interests of winning this election. He's counting on Americans to not verify the facts. Well, I’m not going to fall for it this time, and at this point, am leaning toward Obama/Biden. I urge you and all of your readers to learn about issues from both sides and obtain your information from independent organizations, like factcheck.org.
Sir Knob makes a good point:
And we wonder why teachers and students are having sex, too, when public school has become a Petri dish for sexual exploration.
Felicity, the broad guidelines of this program allow the teacher to go even further than what is stated in the guidelines. And it is a guideline for the curriculum. The curriculum is outlined in those bullets. I.E. that is the curriculum minus the details, which is scary.
The Values concept is trash, Felicity. It’s multi-cultural value mining that makes all values equal. Homosexual values are not the same as nuclear family values. Different? Sure, but equal? No. Citing indistinguishing “values” by this program does not make the filth in the program any better.
Gayle, you’re right, Obama did lie about this. I watched the View (I flipped there accidentally, I cannot stomach those chicks) and they happened to be talking about this issue. Elizabeth Hassleback didn’t even know about this program. The public perception is that Obama just wanted to protect little kids from sexual predators. Joy Bonehead said the Obama campaign should run an ad calling McCain a supporter of pedophilia because he opposes the legislation Obama voted for. People have no clue. This is important for people to take note of.
Barack Obama is a radical. There is a trend here, people, from this, to his outrageous abortion positions, to Black Liberation Theology, to his unfamiliarity towards respecting the U.S. flag. He is a radical man with a radical agenda. He looks like a Beetle, but he’s more of the late 70’s hippie Beetles than the 60’s Beetles.
The state does not have the right to indoctrinate my children, particularly in kindergarten and in their elementary years. This sex ed program represents radical social views trying to be mainstreamed into this generation of children.
Don’t Scare Yourself said:
Maybe he/she is thinking of Barney Frank, the Democrat? Please provide the illustrious record DSY. That’s what I thought.
chicago-cr, the legislation Barack Obama voted for in the state senate passed in 2003. The curriculim Obama advocated may or may not be used in Illinois, I don't know. The fact is that this was his intent for education "change" in Illinois.
Amy is right. There are not that many pedophiles in Republican government. Far fewer than say.......ummm...I don't know...oh yes...the Catholic Church, for instance.
Pedophilia and other sicknesses are contradictory to the Catholic faith. The Church is the biggest supporter of children's and human rights in the world. If the Church could successfully filter out and ban all liberals from the Church we wouldn't have these problems, which make up less than 1% of the priesthood. It is liberal and gay priests who bring scandal to the Church.
093_SB0099:
The Obama Campaign Issues Document Citing Sex-Education Curriculum For Kindergarteners From The SIECUS And Oregon Department Of Education. "In addition, he issued a document showing that the Oregon Department of Education has guidelines for sex education for children in grades K-3 (which includes understanding the difference between a good touch and a bad touch), and that the Sexuality Information And Education Council of the United States [SIECUS] has curriculum for those in kindergarten." ("Obama And Sex Ed For Kids," NBC News' "First Read," firstread.msnbc.msn.com, Accessed 7/19/07)
There is nothing reasonable about Obama's view on sex education. Palin's life threatens liberals because she doesn't just talk the talk, she walks the walk. Her daughter had an unexpected pregnancy. So she did the responsible thing understanding all life is precious. Palin herself had a baby with Downs despite the fact that many doctors suggest abortions for such cumbersome pregnancies. She respects life and is raising her baby. THAT is responsible, not teaching elementary kids about abortion and masturbation.
Disregarding the misinformation regarding the sexual orientation of pedophiles for a moment, what you seem to be saying Amy, is that the church would be scandal free if you could just get rid of everyone causing the scandals. True enough, and a roast beef sandwich would be vegetarian if you could just get rid the beef.
But really this is not true of the Catholic church. These sexual abuses are just the latest in a laundry list of human rights violations which date back to the Crusades and include the Inquisition, and the churches continued financial dealings with an actively genocidal Nazi Germany.
The Catholic church is a for profit cult with a membership every bit as blinded and baffled by its leaders as any member of Scientology Hare Krishna. And you Amy, are its misguided mouthpiece. Pedophilia is not the sickness of the church merely the latest symptom of the disease.
Correction Above: 'or Hare Krishna'
Amy: "Pedophilia and other sicknesses are contradictory to the Catholic faith. ... If the Church could successfully filter out and ban all liberals from the Church we wouldn't have these problems, which make up less than 1% of the priesthood. It is liberal and gay priests who bring scandal to the Church."
SG: Interestingly interesting political and sexual demarcations ....
Liberals and gay priests are the pedophiles. They are only 1% of the Church (I guess a factually based statement, because they wear "1%" patches or something).
However, the problem of abused children in the Catholick Church wasn't just the 1% gay, liberal pedophile priests, but the other 99% straight, conservative part that enabled these "1%-ers" by hiding and moving these guys around to cover up the problems. Without the straight conservative enablers this problem would have come to a head decades sooner and thousands of kids would have been spared life long scars.
Anywayz, I am certain Christ is real impressed with your politically exclusive, filtered form of Christian Church ... particularly when it comes to the Christian response to sexual inappropriateness, as reflected in Christ's, 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone ...' There is a virtual stone quarry forming here
Snerd
Snerd, with all due respect you have no clout on the issue of religion. We have discussed this issue at length on other threads and I'll provide you a link to one if you want. As a practicing Catholic in good standing with the Church, I stand by my comments.
Back to Obama. This from CBN news:
There are two different issues going on here. One that he voted for a bill that eventually died. The other is the curriculum he wanted to use.
Ya know... the article's point is more to make it plain that Obama supported this, not that it is being used now. No one has answered anything to counter that point.
yonason, calling people names is not the way to get your point across unless the point you wish to make is that you can call people names and get away with it.
Almost every state in the union has some sort of sex education program similar to the one Amy laid out with the result of ever increasing number of teen pregnancies, child molestation, and other sexual behavior long before the kids are mature enough to handle it. You send your kids to public school you lose any control over them because the education system is set up to make it happen. That was my point.
How many kids are getting molested by their own teachers let alone peripheral adults in and around the school systems? And the lefties want to continue with policies that promote this sort of thing? And call us stupid for opposing it?
Just more "my way or the highway" for the liberal ultra-tolerant left. There's a point where such "tolerance" becomes abuse and I believe the left has reached it.
One wonders how many of those supporting it are pedophiles in the real lives away from the computer.
Steph,
You talk as if there is some proof that there is a direct correlation between sex ed and the problems you describe. Would you care to share your data? Following this thread, I have noted that whenever a "liberal" makes a claim it is immediately discredited for its failure to provide evidence, but you are guilty here sin of omission.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/family/failure.htm
That should be good enough for your liberal sensibilities since it comes from The Atlantic. They try to "pretty it up" but it's still a failure. And that was 14 years ago.
My statement is a personal opinion based on the number of such cases being reported in the news other than the MSM and studies done at the CDC and other such organizations. I didn't believe I needed to cite anything for stating a personal opinion.
Let's see, there's the sex pact in Maine where a group of girls decided to get pregnant at the same time, while still in high school, even to using a homeless man as part of the pact, and the principle just shrugs his shoulders over it.
There's Planned Parenthood that allows 14 year olds to get an abortion without their parents' knowledge.
There are numerous incidences of teachers having sex with their students. Or how about the one who kidnapped her lover and absconded to Mexico rather than stop having the affair?
The line between adulthood and childhood is being blurred so far that our children are being forced into adulthood far too early without the cognitive and critical thinking skills to withstand the onslaught. From what I've seen of sex education it spends an inordinate amount of time normalizing underage sexual activity than it does with real world consequences.
But then, liberals want everybody dependent and they do like to catch them young, don't they? Easier to control, easier to make dependent on a government that could really care less about what's right for the people.
I noticed you left out clergy. A group far more vocal than others against public school based sex education. Apparently they like em young and dumb.
Oh, yes, fall back on the clergy "young and dumb."
Redirection and obsfuscation seem to be the only things liberals are good at.
Patrick, let's not change the subject here. As a Catholic I am very ashamed by the previous scandal in the Church but know that this is a small minority. That doesn't justify it but your pot shots are completely inaccurate. But that is for another thread. Unless you've run out of defenses for Obama, which is what I suspect.
Amy,
I was trying to be vague with my implication towards People who support this idea having Pedo tendencies, but Patrick has 'come out of the closet' so to speak.
We as parents have an ordained responsibility to protect our children from the wiles of those who would prey on them; a responsibility to raise them as people, not sexual objects, and to NOT rely on the public school system to become surrogate parents.
And efforts to divert or change the topic are clear evidence that some individuals DON'T have our children's best interests at heart which underscores the parent's responsibility to be vigilant.
Amy your own thread comments include value judgments which have nothing to do with Obama's bill. My "pot shot" at the church is merely my way of saying you are a hypocrite. You hold your crucifix and your churches poisonous teachings to be the moral high ground, when they are every bit as guilty as you accuse the political left of being of manipulating the educational process for their own dark ends.
And as a member of a local suicide prevention group I have seen the devastation caused by your casual intolerance of masturbation, homosexuality, and birth control. I see the result of your sexual bigotry in the form of 15 year old homosexual boys hanging themselves in their bedrooms, rather than live with the scorn of their zealously rigid Catholic parents. And I have seen girls hemorrhage and die trying to induce abortion rather than carry the child produced not by the molestation of her public school teacher but by her Catechism instructor. Your house needs cleaning Amy. That's all I am saying.
This is why my kids go to private school and why I am no longer a teacher in the public schools myself.
The schools are just as much a product of the oversexualization of our society as anything else in our society. Seriously - this kind of education for children at such a young age is propostorous. I have real moral issues wtih teaching kids this kind of information at such a young age. It's bordering on disgusting.
And just because someone believes in abstinence education doesn't mean that person is wrong. Abstinence IS the only surefire way to NOT get pregnant or get an STD. But kids are given mixed messages - media shoves sex down their throats and tells them its ok. No wonder kids are confused and our rates of STDss and pregnancies are so high.
Like McCain, Palin and their Rovian political machine, many of you are continuing to make your same erroneous assumptions in the face of logic and evidence without backing up your own statements with fact. I feel sorry for those who insult with cheap shots because they're lacking in reason (like calling anyone who supports comprehensive education "a pedophile" ); this is the most immature debate tactic imaginable. This is no joking matter--hundreds of children and teens are abused daily by sexual predators and the real pedophiles; Barack Obama is trying to improve the lives of these children by educating them about the dangers of inappropriate touching and behavior.
None of you have shown me where it states in the proposed Bill or in the Illinois Sex Ed curriculum that kindergartners would receive the explicit sex education you accuse Obama of supporting. The Siecus guidlines are just that..guidelines and "Level 1" spans 4 years of elementary school education. It insults everyone's intelligence by expecting us to believe that Obama thinks kindergarteners should be taught how to use condoms before they're taught to read. Don't even go there, because he doesn't. He is only advocating for age appropriate education about children's bodies and about inappropriate touching and sexual predators for early-age elementary kids.
I myself am the mother of a kindergartner in a wonderful public school distric in Ohio and my child has the option of participatingin a brief session on "Stranger Danger and Inappropriate Touching" similar to the proposed curriculum in Illinois. I can assure you that just like in Illinois, my boy will not be learning about condoms, intercouse and masturbation and this session requires parental consent.
Finally, those who keep defending Palin as a martyr for her decision to choose life: I agree, it is admirable that she is raising Trig, but guess what? She's not the first woman to do this. Thousands of Democrats, Repulicans and Independents have chosen life in this situation, and in my research, it has been Democrats, in fact, that have provided the most progressive support for special needs children and adults in this country. What I don't respect Palin for is her wish for family privacy regarding her daughter's pregnancy but then parading the boy who got her daughter pregnant on the national stage. That is shameful, and we don't know if Bristol Palin really "chose life" or if her parents chose it for her. Irregardless, I'm surprised that none of you are more critical about the teen pregnancy and the hypocrisy with Palin supporting "abstinence-only" programs. This could be a golden 'teachable-moment" for Palin and her daughter (in time) time to acknowledge "Hey, I never wanted this for my daughter but we're going to do the best we can. Teen pregnancy is a horrible problem--let's continue to find solutions to combat this problem". I'd like to remind all of you based on the disdain many of you have for "liberals": if this were Obama's daughter, you would all have him by the throat. You'd all be more credible if you could turn the lens on yourselves and your candidates from time to time and acknowledge the hypocrisy that exists in both parties.