Posted by Condom Depot on 04/10/2005
This is one of those stories that makes me wonder: How can anyone so stupid be in charge of education?
The Montgomery County, Md., school board is getting scorched by parents and churches for plans to teach 10th-graders how to put condoms on cucumbers, and teach eighth-graders that experimenting with homosexuality is as normal as white socks in gym class.
Some schools' sex-ed classes stun parents, trip porn filters
By Peter Bronson
Daily Enquirer (MA) staff writer
This is one of those stories that makes me wonder: How can anyone so stupid be in charge of education?
The Montgomery County, Md., school board is getting scorched by parents and churches for plans to teach 10th-graders how to put condoms on cucumbers, and teach eighth-graders that experimenting with homosexuality is as normal as white socks in gym class.
"Sexual orientation being introduced to eighth-graders is totally inappropriate for such a young age and is only going to confuse kids, and it's contrary to what many parents want to teach their children," said a mother who resigned from the curriculum committee in protest. She told the Washington Times, "I don't understand why we have to teach kids how to put on a condom. If they can't figure out how to put on a condom, then they're too stupid to be having sex."
But still smart enough for the school board. The board president defended the plan: "It is important for children to have facts about the way life really is."
Ah, yes - real life
Someone should tell her how "life really is" for teens who get sexually transmitted diseases and have babies because they were brainwashed to believe condoms are "safe sex."
A national Zogby poll found 88 percent of parents oppose condom college in junior high (71 percent for high school). So why do school boards do it? My guess is contagious imbecility - which is another way of saying political correctness.
In Idaho, Florida, Michigan and California, they've had the same battles. Critics say sex-ed plans by the federal Sex Information and Education Council are inappropriate, gay-agenda indoctrination. Supporters call the parents and churches "bigots from the Christian right.''
We'd be having the same battle in Ohio, but similar lessons hatched by education officials were killed five years ago.
"I remember, it was so ironic. They called it Programs That Work," said Sen. Jim Jordan, who led the fight. "The Department of Education had not yet introduced it into the classrooms, but they had trained all these teachers, and some were coming to me saying, 'This is not good stuff.' I looked. They were right.''
Ohio just said no
Ohio's sex-ed lessons were funded by a $900,000 federal grant from the Clinton administration. They included explicit teaching on homosexual sex, and oral-sex instructions.
When protesters blocked it, the Ohio Department of Education threw a fit and tried to deny it. Then they made cosmetic changes, renamed it "abstinence'' and tried again. After packed, emotional hearings, lawmakers said "no way."
"They wanted the money so bad," Jordan said. "But we were one of two states that sent it back. We figured if you're spending it on something that stupid, we're not going to keep it.
"It's been five years, and they have not tried to bring this baloney back."
The rest of the nation is not so lucky. A Heritage Foundation report on lessons used in some schools begins: "Warning: This chapter contains sexually explicit, graphic material, as quoted from the material reviewed."
When an angry parent wrote to the Montgomery County school board to protest, his e-mail was rejected because words from the sex-ed lessons couldn't pass the schools' own porn filter.
No wonder a recent California study found that 20 percent of 14-year-olds have tried oral sex. In some schools, it's practically homework.
"You would think adults would be smarter than this," Jordan said.
You'd think.
Keywords
Sex Education,
In The News,
... [+]
Post A Comment
Fields marked with an asterisk* are required. All HTML will be removed. A valid email is required but will never be published.
Other Recent Articles
Creative condoms becoming more popular despite high costs » - Condoms. They're rarely used for pleasure.
Rather, they act as a means of protection from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
But one condom company wants to change the way some couples think of condoms -- as a hassle and pleasure barrier.
Ansell, based in Australia, is making novelty condoms to spice up sex lives while promoting safe sex. And it's working.
«Fed's Sex Ed Website Misleads - Last year, when a profound schism erupted between the American scientific community and the Bush administration, a key point of contention concerned the alteration of sexual health information on several government Web sites. A National Cancer Institute fact sheet temporarily suggested the possibility of a link between abortion and breast cancer (scientists say with near unanimity that there isn't one). A statement explaining why educating teens about how to use condoms does not increase sexual activity was deleted from a Centers for Disease Control fact sheet. And so forth.
| 
Search:
