Report: Education

American Pro-Life Encyclopedia

CHAPTER 12. CONTROL OF THE FUTURE THROUGH CONTROL OF THE SCHOOLS

CHAPTER 114. HOMESCHOOLING: THE ALTERNATIVE FOR CARING CHRISTIAN FAMILIES

CHAPTER 139. HUMANISTIC SEX EDUCATION: THE DEATH OF INNOCENCE

==============================

CHAPTER 12. CONTROL OF THE FUTURE THROUGH CONTROL OF THE SCHOOLS

“The right to abortion will be guaranteed ... As far as the policy toward the family, it will be recognized for what it is: not some holy or sacred institution to be preserved for all time ... not only will the family be a secondary form for determining children’s upbringing, but its influence in promoting conservatism among its members, especially the women and children, will be actively combatted. While the parents will still have significant responsibility for their children, this does not mean they are “theirs,” and there will be struggle to prevent parents from imposing old values, and conservative, non-revolutionary thinking generally on the children.”-- Revolutionary Communist Party’s New Programme , page 78.[1]

The Humanist Mission of Our Schools.

“I think the most important factor leading us to a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all other myths of alleged history.”-- Humanist writer Paul Blanshard.[2]

Extending State Control.

Humanists know that the future of our country rests with our children. Therefore, in order to control the future of our country, they must control the minds of our children. And the easiest way to control our children is to control the schools.

Radical left-wing writers, including Alexander Cockburn and James Ridgeway, incessantly rail against parental “interference” in schools, because, as they openly acknowledge, “The Left can’t survive politically without a public school system to spread leftist attitudes.”[3]

Now that they have virtually absolute control over the schools, the Humanists would like to guarantee the success of their agenda by extending their pervasive control to the home. This is why they are so fanatically opposed to any type of home schooling. They say that they care about homeschooled children and worry about how they may be falling behind academically.

This is utter nonsense; homeschoolers have always excelled in academics and have always far outstripped their public-school educated peers, primarily because they have the personal attention of their parents.

The real reason the Humanists oppose home schooling is because it is a direct challenge to their system of absolute authority and control. They know that children who are homeschooled will grow up to challenge the Humanist agenda. And the Humanists, as we all know, despise dealing with opposing voices and viewpoints, because they hinder the headlong rush to the Utopian society.

As always, the Humanists use the United States court system to advance the various points of their agenda, because they know that the American people and their state legislatures generally have the common sense to reject their silly proposals. The Humanists have achieved contraception, abortion, homosexual equality, divorce, and even the banning of religion from public life -- and always through the courts.

As an example of this trend that is germane to homeschooling, United States Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, in the decision Wisconsin v. Yoder , stated twenty years ago that parents really may not have the right to impose their “narrow” religious views upon their children.

The implications of this ‘principle,’ fully embraced by the Humanists, are truly frightening.

The Glittering Bait.

Curiously, the means by which the Humanists have achieved absolute control over our children is by offering them absolute freedom . Children desire and need discipline, but they even more strongly yearn for freedom. This is due to the fallen nature that all human beings share. They are thus strongly attracted by any philosophy that emphasizes their power to overcome man-made limits on their behavior.

This chapter describes some of the “bait” used to lure our children to absolute freedom, including “situational ethics” and the various sex education curricula offered in our schools today.

However, it is very interesting indeed to first take a glimpse at the ultimate goals of the Humanists.

The Ultimate Goals for Your Children.

“When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already ...”“-- Adolf Hitler.[4]

“Kiddie Lib.”

The ultimate goal of the so-called “Children’s Liberation Movement” is to make all children, no matter how young, completely autonomous.

This means that all parental authority must be eliminated, because the “Children’s Liberationists” believe that any parental control -- no matter how necessary or minor in nature -- infringes upon the rights of the child.

The Motive.

Why do the Humanists want to eliminate parental control? Why, so they can control the children themselves , of course. The “Kiddie Lib” activists who push such nonsense realize that, when children have more freedom to make their own decisions, they are much more vulnerable to falling under the control of well-organized outside sources -- such as the public school system and even pedophiles.

David Thorstad of the pervert organization North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) wants to have sex with underage boys. So he claims that he is fighting for “... the rights of children to control their own bodies.”[5] Of course, what he really means is that he is fighting for his right to control children’s bodies, just as men who support abortion are fighting for their right to control women’s bodies.

In other words, the “Children’s Liberationists” do not really desire freedom for children -- they merely want to transfer control from parents to themselves, so that they can more efficiently inculcate the children with their values.

The Demands.

Figure 12-1 outlines two sets of typical “Kiddie Lib” demands. Predictably, these demands were written by adults , with little or no input from the children they allegedly represent.

FIGURE 12-1 TYPICAL DEMANDS OF THE “CHILDREN’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT”

“A CHILD’S BILL OF RIGHTS”

1. THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION. Children should have the right to decide the matters which affect them most directly.

2. THE RIGHT TO ALTERNATIVE HOME ENVIRONMENTS. Self-determining children should be able to choose from among a variety of arrangements: residences operated by children, child exchange programs, 24-hour child-care centers, and various kinds of schools and employment opportunities. Parents are not always good for their children ...

3. THE RIGHT TO RESPONSIVE DESIGN. Society must accommodate itself to children’s size and to their need for safe space. To keep them in their place, we now force children to cope with a world that is either not built to fit them, or is actually designed against them.

4. THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION. A child must have the right to all information ordinarily available to adults -- including, and perhaps especially, information that makes adults uncomfortable.

5. THE RIGHT TO EDUCATE ONESELF. Children should be free to design their own education, choosing from among many options the kinds of learning experiences they want, including the option not to attend any kind of school. Compulsory education must be abolished because the enforced threatening quality of education in America has taught children to hate school, to hate the subject matter, and, tragically, to hate themselves.

6. THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM FROM PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT. Corporal punishment is used impulsively and cruelly in the home, arbitrarily in the schools, and sadistically in penal institutions.

7. THE RIGHT TO SEXUAL FREEDOM. Children should have the right to conduct their sexual lives with no more restrictions than adults. Sexual freedom for children must include the right to information about sex, the right to nonsexist education, and the right to all sexual activities that are legal among consenting adults.

8. THE RIGHT TO ECONOMIC POWER. Children should have the right to work, to acquire and manage money, to receive equal pay for equal work, to choose trade apprenticeship as an alternative to school, to gain promotions to leadership positions, to own property, to develop a credit record, to enter into binding contracts, to engage in enterprise, to obtain guaranteed support apart from the family, to achieve financial independence.

9. THE RIGHT TO POLITICAL POWER. Children should have the vote and be included in the decision-making process. To become a constituency they must have the right to vote.

10. THE RIGHT TO JUSTICE. Children must have the guarantee of a fair trial with due process of law, an advocate to protect their rights against the parents as well as the system, and a uniform standard of detention.

“YOUTH LIBERATION PROGRAM -- LIST OF WANTS.”

“We must liberate ourselves from the death trip of corporate America.”

1. We want the power to determine our own destiny.

2. We want the immediate end of adult chauvinism.

3. We want full civil and human rights.

4. We want the right to form our education according to our needs.

5. We want the freedom to form into communal families.

6. We want the end of male chauvinism and sexism.

7. We want the opportunity to create an authentic culture with institutions of our own making.

8. We want sexual self-determination. We believe all people must have the unhindered right to be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual.

9. We want the end of class antagonism among young people.

10. We want the end of racism and colonialism in the United States and the world.

11. We want freedom for all unjustly imprisoned people.

12. We want the right to be economically independent of adults.

13. We want the right to live in harmony with nature.

14. We want to rehumanize existence.

15. We want to develop communication and solidarity with the young people of the world in our common struggle for freedom and peace.

References. “A Child’s Bill of Rights” was authored by Richard Farson and was printed in the March 1974 issue of Ms . Magazine. “Youth Liberation Program -- List of Wants” is in the International Year of the Child (IYC)-endorsed book The Children’s Rights Movement , pages 329 to 333, and authored by the Youth Liberation Group of Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Notice that these demands reflect the desires of various radical special-interest groups; the “Kiddie Libbers” demand that children be allowed to be exploited by low wages; by pedophiles; by homosexuals; by starvation and incompetence; and, in short, that children be free to be used by any adult or group of adults who can gain control of them.

It is obvious to every father and mother that children need their parents to defend them against the perversions and the perverts of the world --including those who wrote the lists of demands shown in Figure 12- 1 (curiously, the “Kiddie Libbers” who wrote these demands are unmarried and childless). These demands, if fulfilled, are nothing less than a prescription for absolute social anarchy and eventual destruction of our children.

It is interesting that the United Nations supported such resolutions during the International Year of the Child (IYC) in 1976 through UNICEF (the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund).

The New Curriculum.

“The future of any nation lies with its youth. So corrupt them; since religion teaches moral virtue, erode the churches and divert the young from religion. Make them interested only in themselves. Get them involved in drugs, alcohol, and sex. Get them addicted to privileges and rights.”-- Vladimir Lenin’s “Rule for Revolution” #1.

“Reading, writing and arithmetic” no longer figure prominently in today’s exotic public school curricula. Children who attend public school will be compelled to learn the following;

· that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle;

· that abortion is a matter to be decided not by the church or by the state, but solely by a woman and her physician;

· that Communism is merely another economic system that is inherently superior to Capitalism in many ways, and which must ultimately prevail;

· that the Christian religion has absolutely no place in education, although “New Age” and various African and Eastern religious practices abound;

· that there are absolutely no concrete ethical or moral rules, and that all problems must be considered on a case-by-case basis (the insidious ethical relativism or “situational ethics”);

· that there is really no good or evil, and that the concept of “sin” is outmoded;

· and that, above all else, the highest of all virtues are compassion and tolerance.

· And the children are exposed to the following;

· ‘lifeboat exercises,’ where children are forced to conclude that some life is worth living, and some life is not;

· secret psychological counseling where parental authority is ruthlessly undermined;

· totally amoral comprehensive sex education classes, where chastity is either ignored or ridiculed as “outmoded and quaint,” and where all manner of birth control devices will be demonstrated in lurid and lingering detail;

· ‘death education,’ where children may be forced to write suicide notes, visit mortuaries, and lie in coffins;

· a school environment literally saturated with gangs, weapons, and drugs; and

· an overall nihilistic atmosphere that shows the child that life is really not worth living, except for the moment.

Value-Free Nonprinciples.

“We continue to clamor for those very qualities that we are rendering impossible. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”-- C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man .

Inventing the Beast.

In 1968 and 1969, the first formal “value-free” curriculum was formulated by the Western Behavioral Sciences Institute in La Jolla, California. This effort, which was funded by the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, took the historic step of replacing the standard upon which personal decisionmaking was based. The original standard was human reason ; the new standard was human feelings .

Root of the Principle.

The fundamental underlying concept of this new “value-free” curriculum was moral relativism, or “situational ethics.”

This philosophy asserts that the only rule that is absolute is that there are really no rules that are absolute -- not even laws against murder. The moral relativists argue that every rule has exceptions, and that people must be free to judge whether or not society’s rules apply to them in various situations.

So far, so good. Virtually every rule does indeed have its exceptions. And, of course, people must occasionally judge whether or not these rules apply to them.

But such decisions are properly made only in the context of the most extreme or very unusual situations. Such decisions generally occur when one must commit one evil in order to prevent or ameliorate a greater evil. Examples would be to trespass on private property in order to save lives, to destroy property in order to save property of much greater value, or even to kill a person in order to save a number of persons, as in a hostage situation.

Shifting the Focus.

But the situational ethicists have extended this principle -- which ordinary people might encounter once in an entire lifetime -- to everyday living. They have also shifted the focus of the beneficiary from society in general to the individual in particular.

In other words, if a person simply has the opinion that he can derive more personal benefit from a possession than someone else, then nobody can really tell him that it is wrong to steal the object in question. If a person feels that the United States is embarking upon a mission of capitalist imperialism, he can feel perfectly justified in avoiding the draft by taking off to Canada. If he believes that clearcutting a forest will degrade the environment, he may feel that destruction of logging equipment (“ecotage”) is the answer. If a preborn child interferes with a relationship, even in the most trivial manner, it immediately becomes expendable.

The situational ethicists usually contradict themselves by producing a laundry list of exceptions to their exceptions to the rules. In short, all rules may be broken except the rules that they say cannot be broken, such as laws and ordinances against racism, sexism, and homophobia.

Doin’ Bad and Feelin’ Good.

Therefore, it is obvious that we are brought right back to the only possible conclusion; that “situational ethics” courses are simply another fancy tool used by Humanists to control and indoctrinate our children.

Our kids do not object to this covert manipulation, because one sub-objective of Humanistic teaching is to make them feel good about themselves. And, of course, good little students who are kept psychologically numbed and sated with sex, drugs, freedom, and everything else they could possibly want are not likely to rebel against the Humanistic system. Even as kids spout meaningless drivel about personal freedom and independence, they are becoming imbedded in the Humanist system as surely as a fly caught in a spiderweb will soon become part of the spider.

The effects of this brainwashing became evident as the result of a study performed with 100 seventh-graders from six countries in 1989. These students took a rigorous mathematics test and were then asked how they thought they performed against seventh-graders from the five other countries.

The Korean children performed exceptionally well on the mathematics test, followed by the Spanish, British, Irish, and Canadian children in that order. Students from the United States finished dead last, far behind even the Canadians.[6]

However, when the children were asked if they considered themselves to be good at mathematics, the Koreans came in last (23% answering yes) and the Americans first (68% answering yes). This meant that the children from the United States had an inverted sense of reality regarding their own performance.

In other words, children from the United States are failing abysmally in academics while they are being indoctrinated into not caring that they are failing. All that matters is that they feel good about themselves.

The implications for our national and international policies are staggering.

Move Over, Frankenstein! Psychology professor Dr. W.R. Coulson helped design the first situational ethics curriculum, but scrapped the program as unworkable and harmful. Nevertheless, the Reynolds Company resolutely tested the new curriculum in a college, two high schools, and 57 elementary schools operated by the Immaculate Heart order of Catholic nuns.

Laboring under this poisonous and demotivating system, the entire school system eventually collapsed. However, the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and the Tobacco Institute carried on and sponsored such refined “value-free” programs as “Helping Youth Decide” and Quest International’s affective learning programs in all fifty states. Other similar programs include “Here’s Looking at You,” “Me-ology,” “Project Charlie,” “DECIDE,” and “Ombudsman,” most of which are heavily funded by the tobacco industry.[7]

The Bottom Line.

The Surgeon General of the United States has stressed that the health of the tobacco industry depends on getting kids to experiment with smoking (this is undoubtedly the motivation behind the R.J. Reynolds Company’s funding of the experimental curriculum in the first place). Children follow affective, value-free education, and hundreds of studies have shown that they are more likely to experiment with cigarettes, drugs, and sex after such programs.

Children are not told that such behaviors are wrong; they are told simply that they have free choice and that they are “running the risks of personal growth.” Of course kids are going to like this kind of message, because it appeals to their adventuresome spirits!

Speaking of the effects of his “value-free” school curriculum, Dr. Coulson concluded; “So it turns out to be a deadly scheme we hatched those 20 years ago.”[7]

National Education Association: Humanist Stooges.

“As long as the child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness can produce only rather precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes that favor jingoism ...”-- UNESCO’s Towards World Understanding .[8]

Humanist Army.

The National Education Association (NEA) is the teacher’s trade union, and it aggressively embraces the entire Humanist agenda. Although most NEA members are blissfully unaware of their union’s far-left stance, the NEA is, quite literally, the Humanist cadre in the schools.

In order to accomplish their objectives, as listed in Figure 12-2, the NEA must have complete control of the public school environment.

FIGURE 12-2 OFFICIAL OBJECTIVES OF THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

NEA Objective: to gain complete control over the school libraries, so that it may reserve to itself the exclusive right to determine exactly what will be and will not be in public school libraries. Input from parents, citizens, or taxpayers will be strictly banned (page 156);

NEA Objective: to vigorously oppose tuition tax credits and homeschooling, because they would decrease the NEA’s total control of the public school environment (page 139);

NEA Objective: to completely ban Creationism from the schools (page 156);

NEA Objective: to support a total freeze on nuclear weapons and support mandatory graphic classes on the effects of nuclear war (page 165);

NEA Objective: since it is constantly at the Federal trough, the NEA opposes a balanced-budget Constitutional amendment (page 139);

NEA Objective: to demand that the United States get “out of Nicaragua” (page 144);

NEA Objective: to emplace permissive sex education, school-based clinics, and mandatory AIDS education (page 150);

NEA Objective: to insure that abortion on demand remains the law of the land (page 138);

NEA Objective: to support equal armed forces drafting of men and women (page 140); and

NEA Objective: to include ‘homosexual orientation’ as a protected civil rights category (page 163).

Reference. National Education Association. Today’s Education .

It is interesting to note that the NEA has always strongly supported the slaughter of preborn babies. At its July 1978 annual national meeting, the NEA adopted the following resolution; “The [National Education] Association supports the United States Supreme Court decisions that guarantee reproductive freedom to all women. The Association urges all branches of federal, state and local governments to give high priority to complying with these Supreme Court decisions and to making available all methods of family planning to women unable to take advantage of private facilities.”[9]

Perhaps parents should ask themselves what possible concern teachers should have with such a topic, especially since the NEA relentlessly pushes school-based clinics and, in fact, any philosophy that will further drive wedges between parents and their children.

NEA members who are sick and tired of their organization’s illogical pro-death attitude may wish to join the pro-life teacher’s group;

Teachers Saving Children

Post Office Box 55103

Trenton, New Jersey 08638

Telephone: (609) 298-4843

(information packet available for $1.50).

School Is Hell.

In the midst of the academic and ethical sewer created by the NEA and other Humanists, your sons and daughters will be so poorly educated in the standard curriculum (in particular math and science) that they will scarcely be able to function in our technological society. Religion is totally banned and censored in the schools, and even its pivotal role in American culture has been stricken from all history textbooks by atheistic “history committees.”

The National Education Association has caused the typical American classroom to become a mind-destroying holding tank populated by unmotivated and uncaring students who, for the large part, are taught by teachers who see them all as potential juvenile delinquents who must be kept off the streets until they are at least 18 years old.

The attitude of the NEA, of course, profoundly influences our children’s future. Consider the appalling fact that an average American child spends ten hours in school and ten hours in front of a television set for every hour spent with his or her parents! All Christian parents know that our television programming is blatantly pro-abortion and pro- homosexual; it is saturated with sex and violence, and it ridicules traditional values and morality and the Christian lifestyle relentlessly.

For a detailed explanation of this phenomenon and many concrete examples, refer to Chapters 124 to 127 in Volume III, “Media Biases.”

Perhaps it is fitting that the most accurate representation of the public school environment has been published not by a learned committee nor by a distinguished government think-tank, but by a cartoonist.

Matt Groening’s cartoon book School is Hell is intended to be funny, but it describes the prevailing public school situation with frightening accuracy and clarity. The book is somewhat obscene, but is nevertheless recommended to parents who are thinking about homeschooling their children.

Groening is continuing his scathing but woefully accurate depiction of the school environment in his wildly successful television series, “The Simpsons.” Unfortunately, he is also slandering the family in his strained pursuit of humor.

Bart Says: “Forget the PTA, Dudes!” Some Christian parents put their trust in the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA). They believe that this organization gives them influence with the school system.

This belief could not be further from the truth. The PTA has two purposes: (1) to effectively “soak up” and absorb the force of any parental objections to public school programs, and (2) to make parents believe that they are having an impact when in reality they are not.

The PTA supports contraception in the schools (school sex clinics) and abortion on demand, and opposes any sort of school-choice program, including home schooling. In general, the PTA agrees with the entire motley left-wing agenda embraced by the National Education Association. This means that they also oppose any parental involvement in public education.

As one example, in 1989 the California PTA strenuously opposed legislation that would have required parents to approve of the sex education program their children participated in.

Evidence of these attitudes may be obtained from the National PTA itself, at 700 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2571.

You can order the typical booklets described below;[10]

· “PTA Guide to Extremism,” which automatically labels any Christian activist groups (including pro-lifers) as “extremists;” and

· “How to Talk to Your Child About Sex,” which embraces abortion and contraception and refers questions to Planned Parenthood, the Sex Education and Information Council of the United States (SIECUS), and masturbation guru Sol Gordon.

The National Council for Better Education is a grassroots organization dedicated to promoting the traditional open relationship between school boards and parents, and is vastly preferable to the secretive and manipulative PTA. Its address and telephone number are listed below.

National Council for Better Education

717 Second Street NE, Suite 311

Washington, DC 20002

Telephone: (202) 547-0645.

The Critical Role of Humanist Censorship.

“Always preach true democracy, but seize power as completely and ruthlessly as possible. Vigorously censor viewpoints that conflict with ours.”-- Vladimir Lenin’s “Rule for Revolution” #5.

The Ripest Field.

As should be expected, the ripest field for Neoliberal indoctrination is our public schools. While loudly decrying ‘censorship by the right wing,’ Neoliberals carry on a massive and pervasive program of history revisionism in the schools that consists of two primary tactics: Outright censorship and the subtle manipulation of facts.

Among other groups, People for the (Un)American Way (PAW) and the National Education Association (NEA) are rigidly committed to the pervasive Humanist double standard, and so they never mention any incident of censorship directed against Christian values -- including the most blatant censorship of all, the total banning of the Bible from every public school in the country.

Introduction.

History has repeatedly shown us that nobody practices censorship as thoroughly or as ruthlessly as those organizations that paint themselves as champions of free speech. They fawningly claim that “We may not agree with what you say, but we’d die for your right to say it.”

When somebody tells you this, you can be certain that they are doing all they can to suppress your viewpoint while you aren’t looking -- so watch your back!

Self-appointed watchdog groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Coalition Against Censorship, and People for the American Way squawk endlessly when a conservative objects to any pornographic or anti-Christian material in the schools. However, these same organizations are simultaneously and hypocritically insuring that religion and morals are aggressively banned from the schools. The ACLU and PAW instantly file lawsuits against any perceived violation of the Humanist kingdom in the schools, no matter how trivial.

Norman Lear, head of PAW and a fallen-away Jew, denounces the “Fundamentalist Christianizing of America,” while failing to realize that the basis for Christian-motivated societal change is rooted in Leviticus and Genesis, whose principles emanate from the Jewish Chumash .

Alleged Christian Censorship.

Naturally, these self-proclaimed “anti-censorship” groups want to cover up their activities. So they use the psychological principle of transference by projecting their undesirable characteristics onto their opponents (for more detailed information on the transference principle, see Chapter 13).

These “anti-censorship groups” attempt to whip up a public frenzy of indignation by giving the impression that Bible-beating fundamentalist parents are banging on the doors of the schools and trying to ban every book that does not precisely mirror their “narrow morality.” However, it is interesting to see just what kind of material has been the target of such so-called “censorship.”

Generally speaking, Christians object to books that are thinly-veiled attempts to inculcate students with a utilitarian “anything goes” attitude towards living, such as;[11]

· Wardell Pomeroy’s Boys and Sex , in which the author states that “I have known cases of farmboys who have had a loving sexual relationship with a farm animal and who felt good about their behavior;”

· The poetry book Male and Female Under 18 , which includes the poem “The City To a Young Girl.” This poem begins with the lines “The city is one million horny, lip-smacking men screaming for my body,” and deteriorates from there;

· Studs Terkel’s Working , which describes in graphic detail the career of a prostitute and the various perverted sex acts she performs;

· Soul On Ice , whose primary thesis is that all White women are consumed by lust for Black men;

· The Los Angeles grade-school reading series “Impressions,” which features monsters biting children’s heads off and Indian chiefs who urge children to cut their sibling’s and parent’s hearts out while they are sleeping; and

· Jean Auel’s Clan of the Cave Bear , a lengthy Neanderthal-era story about the physically impossible exploits of the ‘first feminist,’ who is sexually initiated by repeated brutal rape.

Judith Blume, Director of the Juvenile Division of the American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom, recommends Judy Blume’s books for children as young as nine years old because of “... her realistic portrayals of young people’s problems.”

An example of this realism can be found in Judy Blume’s book Deenie , which portrays a girl in her early teens: “As soon as I got into bed, I started touching myself. I have this special place, and when I rub it, I get a very nice feeling. I don’t know what it’s called or if anyone else has it, but when I have trouble falling asleep, touching my special place helps a lot ...”

When the mother of a ten-year old girl in Rohnert Park, California complained about this book, the principal told her that he had ordered his secretary to examine it for references to God.

She found none, and so it was approved![12]

The Humanist Reaction.

Because of such objections, the badly-misnamed People for the American Way (PAW) maintains a running list of “censorship efforts” in the United States. This list is published annually with the self-serving title Attacks on the Freedom to Learn .[3] This list, of course, only includes conservative attempts at censorship, which supposedly violate the principle of ‘pluralism.’

Apparently, this list did not gain wide enough circulation, so the NEA and the American Library Association, supported by People for the American Way, recently sponsored a traveling exhibit entitled “Censorship and Libraries,” which organized presentations all over the country for two years. Needless to say, this exhibit emphasized and decried the “heavyhanded tactics” of “right-wing, Bible-thumping religious fanatics” who “want to cram their values down your throat!”

This absurd, values-free project was funded by your tax dollars through a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

In other words, we conservatives are paying for the privilege of being slandered and censored.

Ain’t America great?

Humanist Censorship.

People for the American Way and the National Education Association are rigidly committed to the pervasive Humanist double standard, and so they never mention any incident of censorship directed against Christian values -- including the most blatant censorship of all, the total banning of the Bible from every public school in the country.

If a conservative parent is conscious of the situation in the public schools, he or she will be frantic about the value-free pabulum being dished out under the guise of “education.” Our children are being subjected to a propaganda campaign that would break the strongest adult. But an effective propaganda or indoctrination campaign always has two components; the presentation of one view, and the suppression of opposing views.

As they make grand speeches about freedom of expression, Humanists consistently censor any viewpoint that they do not subscribe to, and such examples are too numerous even to count. This censorship becomes bolder and bolder as each successive Humanist social goal (i.e., abortion and “gay rights”) is achieved. Any opposition is immediately painted by the formidable media machine as a “terrifying and unacceptable breach of the wall of separation between church and state.”

A very few of the most blatant examples of Humanist censorship are described below.

Religionists Need Not Apply.

The best-known example of Humanist censorship, of course, is the total banning of the Bible from public schools. Not only is the Bible banned because of its religious nature, but it cannot even be examined in its historical or literary context!

New York University psychologist Paul Vitz performed a comprehensive study of the left-wing bias in textbooks for the National Institute of Education, and concluded that “Religion, traditional family values, and conservative political and economic positions have been reliably excluded from children’s textbooks.”[13]

The Buffalo, New York McKinley High School would not permit a Bible study after hours in an empty classroom, but eagerly accommodated a Dungeons and Dragons group that focused on the occult. In fact, the school district filed a lawsuit against three students merely for seeking permission to study the Bible in the schools! [14]

After the United States Supreme Court ruled in June 1990 that public schools must admit Bible study clubs, Edd Doerr of the comically-misnamed “Americans for Religious Liberty” (he also happens to be on the board of the American Humanist Association) sniveled that “We can expect school Bible clubs to bring in adult missionaries to proselytize students as young as 11 or 12 without parental consent; divisiveness as students self-select into sectarian clubs on school premises; disappearance of traditional extracurricular activities; disruption of schools by such groups as the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and anti-women’s right clubs.”[15]

The Slant is Leftish.

The Humanists relentlessly exclude from the schools those books that unfavorably comment on the Humanist/Neofeminist way of life. Such works include George Gilder’s Sexual Suicide (1985) and Men and Marriage (1986) and Nicholas Davidson’s The Failure of Feminism (Prometheus, 1988).

“Inclusive language” is a powerful weapon being used by Neoliberals to insure that the accomplishments of women and minorities are disproportionately represented in history textbooks. For example, California law mandates that school texts not simply exclude “adverse portrayals” of any group, but must include “equal portrayal” of women, minorities, and the handicapped. The law states that “Texts on history or current events, or achievements in art, science, or any other field, the contributions of women and men should be represented in approximately equal numbers.”[6]

This ridiculous ruling hobbles and distorts the teaching of history beyond recognition in many instances. For example, any teacher who describes the Bill of Rights is blatantly violating “inclusive language” laws, because women, minorities, and the handicapped did not participate in the formulation of the first ten Amendments to the United States Constitution.

A Matter of Degree.

If the teachers have anti-Christian attitudes, it is inevitable that they will pass them on to their students. How has this benefitted our children? What benefits have two decades of humanistic education bestowed upon our children?

It is interesting to compare the environment in public schools today with that of 25 years ago by listing those problems considered most serious by public school teachers then and now, as shown below.

MAIN PROBLEMS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS: THEN AND NOW

1940	1990
Truancy	Teenage pregnancy
Tardiness	Drug addiction
Clandestine smoking	Alcoholism
Dress code violations	Concealed weapons
Talking in class	Assault on teachers
Chewing gum	Teenage suicide
Making noise	Rape
Running in halls	Robbery
Getting out of turn	Arson
Littering	Vandalism
Extortion	Venereal diseases

References: Suzanne M. Rini. “Disorder and Early Sorrow: Sex Education as Moral Seduction.” Fidelity Magazine, April 1989, page 38. Also see David Brooks. “Forget the Fire -- Just Keep Teaching!” National Review , December 13, 1985, pages 24 to 29.

Religion: Terra Incognita in Today’s Textbooks.

Researchers funded by the National Institute of Education examined sixty standard social studies textbooks used by the majority of children in grades one through twelve in public schools.

The conclusion of the study was dramatic: it found that religion, traditional family values, and conservative positions on virtually every issue have been completely censored from the curriculum of all public school students.[13]

· not a single word of the more than 1.5 million total words in the sixty volumes referred to any religious activity in contemporary American life.

· the words “marriage,” “wedding,” “husband,” and “wife” did not appear once in any of the sixty textbooks. No text even suggested that being a wife, mother, or homemaker was a worthy occupation in any way. No story gave any significance to children or babies. However, there were plenty of examples of aggressively Humanist/Neofeminist stories that derided and belittled traditionally male-oriented roles.

· of the 23 “role models” held up as examples to modern youths by the sixty texts, only one was a conservative. The only role models who were not Democrats were women. Not a single contemporary role model was a white male. There was not a word about the experiences and influence on society of a prominent preacher or clergyman, including Billy Graham, Terence Cardinal Cooke, and Norman Vincent Peale.

Sex Education: Bait for Destruction.

“A feminist is an evolutionary anachronism, a Darwinian blind alley. In biological terms, there is nothing that identifies a maladaptive pattern so quickly as a below-replacement level of reproduction; an immediate consequence of feminism is what appears to be an irreversible decline in the birth-rate. Nations pursue feminist policies at their peril.”-- Katarina Runske.[16]

A Formidable Weapon.

There is one sensitive area in which the entire considerable might of the public school system is most directly arrayed to attack and destroy Christian values in children.

This area is sex education.

Most Christian objections are raised in response to various permissive sex education materials that are used by our school systems. The Humanists know that the easiest way to win the loyalty of children is to dangle before them the fruit of absolute freedom, and nowhere is the adolescent drive for freedom more powerful than in sexual matters. Even more than smoking, drinking, using drugs or driving a car, having sex is the most vivid and treasured “proof” that an adolescent has grown up.

The Contrasts.

While Christianity emphasizes chastity before marriage and faithfulness to spouse afterward, public schools laugh at God and tell our kids that contraception, abortion, fornication, adultery, and even sex with animals is value-free and therefore involves fundamental human rights that cannot be tampered with or interfered with -- especially by parents. Where Christianity teaches the necessary skill of self-control, the Humanists dangle the tempting vision of complete freedom in front of our children.

The following paragraphs describe the contents of some of the most common sex education books and curricula used by public schools today. Please recognize that all of them emphasize the “rights” to birth control, abortion, free sex, adultery, and even sex with animals; in other words, they are all irretrievably objectionable throughout. The quotes given below are typical of their entire contents.

Guide For Young Adults.

Dr. Patricia Shiller, founder of the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists (AASECT), says that Gary F. Kelly’s Learning About Sex: The Contemporary Guide for Young Adults is “... a must for all young people.” It includes the following statements; “Sado-masochism may be very acceptable and safe for sexual partners who know each other’s needs and have established agreements for what they want from each other ... Some people are now saying that partnerships -- married or unmarried -- should not be exclusive. They believe that while a primary relationship is maintained with one person, the freedom for both partners to love and share sex with others should also be present.”[17]

Changing Bodies.

Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships is probably the most popular sex education textbook in the country today and has been in use in thousands of high schools since it was published more than a decade ago. Among many other atrocities, the author asserts that “Bisexuality is an openness to loving, sexual relationships with both sexes ... our true nature ... Gay men, too, have many ways of making love. One may caress the other’s penis with his hand or his mouth. Or one may put his penis in the other’s anus.”[18]

Boys and Girls and Sex.

Planned Parenthood veteran Wardell Pomeroy’s companion books Boys and Sex and Girls and Sex are so extreme that they are the most popular “example target” used by Christians when opposing permissive school sex education programs. These texts say that “Premarital intercourse does have its definite values as a training ground for marriage or some other committed relationship ... to make everyday comparisons again, it’s like taking a car out for a test run before you buy it ... I have known cases of farm boys who have had a loving sexual relationship with an animal and who felt good about their behavior until they got to college, where they learned for the first time that what they had done was ‘abnormal.’ Then they were upset.”[19]

Enhancing Skills.

The extremely popular (and misleadingly-named) sex education program entitled Enhancing Skills to Prevent Pregnancy demonstrates how teachers can break down their student’s inhibitions by using the formidable weapon of peer pressure; “Some teachers are able to combine humor with demonstration by bringing cucumbers or zucchini to class and showing how to apply and remove condoms. Open the packages and unroll condoms for students to inspect. Pass them around. If you are using cucumbers, have one student hold the cucumber while the other student puts the condom on the cucumber. Expect students to laugh at first and be embarrassed! This is healthy ... “[20]

One Washington state parent testified about the coercive nature of many sex education programs. The objective of such programs is to use peer pressure to forcibly destroy the natural modesty that young people possess; “There is one teacher in Bellevue who has all the boys say ‘vagina;’ he calls them individually, and they all have to say it out loud in class. The boys say ‘vagina’ and the girls say ‘penis.’ One girl told me that she was so embarrassed that she could hardly bring out the word ‘penis’ because all these boys were sitting in the class. It just embarrassed her so. So he made her get up in front of the class and very loudly say it ten times.”[21]

Conclusion.

It is in the best interests of the individual schools and school systems to keep the contents of their sex education curricula strictly confidential. Some teachers are instructed to tell their students to lie to their parents about the contents of such courses of instruction. Others take the position that only “enlightened” parents (i.e., known Humanists) can see the details of the programs.

Just because your children do not show any obvious and sudden changes doesn’t mean that they have not been exposed to this poison. The only certain way to make absolutely certain that your children are receiving proper moral instruction is to teach them at home.

For more information on the destructive influence of comprehensive sex education in the schools, see Chapter 139 of Volume III.

The Evidence by Humanists Against Humanism.

Have the humanists and atheists really taken over our schools? Or is this the paranoid raving of a motley crew of far-right fundamentalist fanatics?

Well, instead of listening to rumors or opinions from your pastor or Christian magazines and friends, why don’t we simply allow the humanists to speak for themselves?

Some of their “choicest” quotes are shown in Figure 12-3.

FIGURE 12-3 STATED OBJECTIVES OF THE HUMANIST SCHOOL CONTROLLERS

“And how does a god die? Quite simply, because all his religionists have been converted to another religion, and there is no one left to make children believe they need him ... We need only insure that our schools teach only secular knowledge ... If we could achieve this, god would indeed be shortly due for a funeral service.”-- G. Richard Bozarth. “On Keeping God Alive.” The American Atheist , November 1977. Page 7.

“I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being ... The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new -- the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evil and misery, and the new faith of humanism, resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never-realized Christian ideal of “love thy neighbor” will finally be achieved.”-- John J. Dunphy. “A Religion for a New Age.” The Humanist , January/February 1983. Page 26.

“A large majority of the educators of American colleges and universities are predominantly humanists, and a majority of the teachers who go out from their studies in colleges to responsibilities in primary and secondary schools are basically humanist, no matter that many maintain a nominal attachment to church or synagogue for good personal, social, or practical reasons.”-- Morris Storer, Humanist Ethics , 1980. Quoted in Dr. D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation of Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21.

“The crazies [Catholics and fundamentalists] don’t do all that much reading. If they did, they’d find out that they have already been defeated.”-- Sheila Schwartz, The Humanist , January-February 1976. Also quoted in Dr. D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation for Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21.

“The school as a social center means the active and organized promotion of this socialism of the intangible things of art, science, and other modes of social intercourse.”-- John Dewey, the “Father of progressive American education,” quoted in Jon Barton and John W. Whitehead, Schools on Fire . Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House, 1980, page 65.

Lifeboat Exercises.

Introduction.

One of the more frightening and effective tools the humanists use to denigrate and destroy your children’s Christian values is the notorious “lifeboat exercise,” or some variant thereof. The expressed purpose of these exercises is to break down the Christian idea that some acts are intrinsically immoral and can never be tolerated. In other words, these “lifeboat exercises” are your child’s introduction to moral relativism: That any act is acceptable if it can be justified by the person doing it -- even murder!

The following “lifeboat exercises” (Situations A through C) are extracted from a Population Dynamics course presented at Shippensberg State College, Pennsylvania, at the Conference on Human Ecology in June of 1971. This course was given to local teachers so that they could pass it on to the children in their classes.

The participants were strictly instructed not to let parents see the teaching materials . This is typical of the usual skulking and sneaky tactics used by the popcon fanatics. They know that parents would disapprove, and so hide their tactics and agenda. This is yet another example of how Big Brother knows what’s best for your kids.

There can only be two reasons for such exercises; (1) to actually desensitize the participants to death, and (2) to propagandize the participants into accepting anti-life goals.

Situation A.

The most common type of “lifeboat exercise” forces children to select a specified number of persons for death. Situation A, shown in Figure 12-4, is one example of this type of exercise.

Situation A is formulated by the same people who stress that everyone must be nonjudgmental. Yet the exercises force each child to play God and condemn 18 people to death! By the way, in the intensive discussions following the exercise, these persons are usually considered ‘fit to live:’ Doctor, mechanic, conservationist, builder, scientist, and always , of course, abortionists and the Planned Parenthood representative. The last selection for ‘life’ is not at all surprising in light of the fact that these exercises are frequently conducted by Planned Parenthood representatives, and it is socially ever so awkward, my deah, to condemn the moderator to death.

FIGURE 12-4 TYPICAL PUBLIC SCHOOL EXERCISES IN SITUATIONAL ETHICS

SITUATION A: A new country is being formed because the problem of overpopulation has completely destroyed your former country. There is not enough food. water, and other essentials for people to share. Keep in mind that the people you select should be those who might be able to avoid the problems that occurred in the old country. The remaining 18 will die of starvation. Give reasons for your selections.

1. Abortionist

2. Priest

3. Teacher

4. Clerk

5. Builder

6. Mechanic

7. Teenager

8. Baby

9. Retired old person

10. Sanitation worker

11. Plumber

12. Businessman

13. Musician

14. Farmer

15. Janitor

16. Doctor

17. Entertainer

18. Electrician

19. Gardener

20. Conservationist

21. Street cleaner

22. Scientist

23. Attorney

24. Unmarried pregnant woman

25. Married pregnant woman

26. Planned Parenthood counselor

SITUATION B: The United States Congress has passed a law saying or stating that married couples may have only two children. Have students react by asking the following questions:

(1) What would be the reason a law like this would be passed?

(2) What is your personal reaction to this? Could it be enforced?

(3) Would this law solve any problems?

SITUATION C: Give the following attitude survey to the class on overpopulation. The students are to fill in their true feelings about the statements in this survey. Results are to be discussed, debated, placed on the chalkboard, or graphed.

1. There are too many people in my _____.

2. There are more _____ people in the world that there should be.

3. People should take steps to _____ the number of people in the world.

4. When I am in a crowded elevator I feel _____.

5. I wish I had _____ more people in my family than I have.

6. I wish I had _____ less people in my family than I have.

7. I plan to have _____ children if I get married.

8. Families who have many children are _____.

9. Overpopulation is _____.

SITUATION D: Your husband or wife is a very attractive person. Your best friend is very attracted to him or her. How would you want them to behave?

a. Maintain a clandestine relationship so you wouldn’t know about it.

b. Be honest and accept the reality of the relationship.

c. Proceed with a divorce.

References: Situations A, B, and C are extracted from a Population Dynamics course presented to Pennsylvania State teachers at Shippensberg State College, Pennsylvania, at the Conference on Human Ecology in June of 1971. Situation D is described in Gary L. Bauer. “Parents Must Protect Children From Pornography.” National Federation for Decency Journal , January 1986, pagess 4 and 5.

Notice that ‘lives devoid of value’ generally include priests, pregnant women, retired persons, and those with menial jobs -- and you will experience a shadow of the chill of someone who has witnessed the Nazi extermination programs first-hand. Significantly, the persons most often selected for death are those who are considered to be useless in the brave new society that the children are building.

Situation B.

Situation B, shown in Figure 12-4, makes the bald assumption that overpopulation is imminent, and that some form of legal coercion must be taken at some point in the future for the good of the country.

It is quite obvious that Situation B is designed to start children thinking about the merits of an enforced “one-child” policy which may be implemented in the United States as it has in the People’s Republic of China. Planned Parenthood officials have recommended such a program for the United States. This program would include forced abortions, mandatory birth control, and compulsive sterilization of all couples with two children.

For more information on this heinous program, see Chapter 50 in Volume II, “Forced Abortions.” For information on the eugenics mentality that leads to such atrocities, see Chapter 105 in Volume III.

Situation C.

Situation C, shown in Figure 12-4, compels the child to “clarify” his values. However, this “values clarification” is never done in a vacuum. There is always a teacher (with the proper Humanist credentials, of course) hovering nearby to “guide” the student into making “responsible social decisions” that support the Humanist population control agenda.

Now, whatever happened to the Humanist’s vaunted ‘right to privacy?’ Apparently it doesn’t apply when Humanist teachers are working to mold young minds into the ‘proper’ shape.

Imagine the kind of racist and eugenicist statements that children might produce in response to Situation C! Question 2 could be answered with the words “Black” or “Jewish.” Question 8 could be answered with the words “selfish” or “crazy,” thereby engendering contempt for those couples who happen to love children and decide to have seven or eight of them.

And, of course, these answers would not be condemned because, in these exercises, there are no wrong answers! Is this not the heart and soul of situation ethics?

Situation D.

It goes without saying that every “lifeboat exercise” or “values clarification drill” is totally devoid of Christian values. In fact, they are not only devoid of Christian values, they actively attack them! For example, a typical “values clarification” exercise is shown in Figure 12-4 as Situation D.

Notice that there is no option (d): Avoid the possibility of adultery in the first place! This choice is omitted because it reflects the Christian values of self-discipline, honesty, fidelity, regard for others, and respect for the institution of marriage.

This identical lack of Christian values is reflected in secular sex education curricula; your spouse and your best friend are going to be adulterous anyway, so you might as well accommodate them and make life as pleasant as possible for everyone involved by playing the cuckold quietly.

By the way, although there is really no firm “correct answer,” the suggested course of action is (b), above. After all, we must always be frank and honest, my deahs.

Other Examples.

Many other imaginative forms of role playing are used to accomplish various Humanist objectives.

One woman from Tucson, Arizona testified in the March 1984 Department of Education hearings that an outside teacher visited her child’s classroom and taught that it was “normal” for the children to hate their parents. At the beginning of her class, she surveyed the children and found that three of the thirty attendees hated their parents. At the end of the presentation, 27 said that they hated their parents![22]

In Detroit, parents testified that their children had been told to close their eyes and fantasize about designing and then using an ideal method of birth control.[22]

A Missouri mother testified that, in a required English class, her daughter was ordered to play the part of a prostitute and proposition a boy in the class who played the part of a married man.[22]

The Christian Version of Values Clarification.

Values clarification exercises as such are not intrinsically evil, if they are performed under the watchful eye of a caring Christian parent. In fact, Christian values clarification exercises can be as beneficial to a child as the secular versions are harmful.

As someone once said, “Make lemonade out of lemons.” For example, the popular board game “Scruples” is centered around the idea that no act is intrinsically right or wrong. The objective is to select game cards that describe situations requiring ethical judgment, such as; “You and your mate expect loyalty and honesty from one another. One night, out of town, you have a fling. Do you tell?” Each player’s goal is not to find an ethical solution, but to guess how others would react.

Still, about 150 of the cards depict non-sexual situations that are valuable for playing “What If?” games with children. A pro-lifer could find the game at a garage sale and then discard the game board, rules, and cards depicting sexual situations. The remaining cards are very useful for conducting Christian values clarification exercises.

Death Education.

The Humanists used comprehensive sex education to inculcate our children with a pro-abortion attitude. But times change, and the Humanist strategists have moved beyond abortion to euthanasia. So now it is time to propagandize our kids with material on the alleged “Right to Die.”

In order to prepare children to accept the killing of born human beings that society considers useless, more and more schools are mandating compulsory “death education.”

One mother from Orlando, Florida said that “In one program in our county, little first graders made their own coffins out of shoe boxes.”[22]

One of the textbooks used in a ‘death education’ class is Russell and Purdy’s Coping With Death and Dying , published by Scott, Foresman. It relies on the absurd thesis that “Committing suicide may represent a last attempt to make an independent, personal decision.”[23]

In another “death education” curriculum, students are required to write an essay on “What I Would Do On My Last Day.” Yet another requires students to visit mortuaries and touch human corpses, and even makes them lie in coffins.

And another requires the teacher to give a series of talks and interactive presentations, including;[23]

· “Reincarnation -- Can We Come Back From the Dead?”

· “End of the World -- Coming Soon or Not?”

· “Infanticide -- Right or Wrong?”

· “Active Euthanasia for Deformed Infants -- Right or Wrong?”

· “Death -- Do the Hopelessly Ill Have the Right to Die?”

===========================================

[1] Revolutionary Communist Party’s New Programme . “The Proletariat, Upon Seizing Power, Will Immediately Take Up the Transformation of Society,” page 78.

[2] Humanist writer Paul Blanshard. The Humanist , March-April 1976. Quoted in Dr. D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation of Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21.

[3] Joseph Sobran. “The Abortion Culture.” Human Life Review , Spring 1981, pages 7 to 19.

[4] Adolf Hitler, speaking about the schools and their indoctrination of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth Corps). Quoted in William Shirer. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich . New York: Simon & Schuster, 1960. Page 249.

[5] David Thorstad of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), quoted in John Leo. “Cradle-to-Grave Intimacy.” Time Magazine, September 7, 1981, page 69.

[6] Charles Krauthammer. “Education: Doing Bad and Feeling Good.” Time Magazine, February 5, 1990.

[7] W.R. Coulson, Ph.D, Professor of Psychology at the U.S. International University. “Founder of ‘Value-Free’ Education Says He Owes Parents an Apology.” American Family Association Journal , April 1989, pages 20 and 21.

[8] The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Towards World Understanding , Page 58, Book V. 1949.

[9] “NEA Endorses Reproductive Freedom.” Options [Newsletter of the ‘Religious’ Coalition for Abortion Rights], November/December 1978, page 12.

[10] National Monitor of Education , June 1990, page 6.

[11] Don Feder. “Censorship is in the Eye of the Beholder.” New Dimensions Magazine, December 1990, page 15.

[12] Cal Thomas and Wayne Stayskal. Liberals for Lunch . Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1985. Pages 45 and 129.

[13] Paul C. Vitz. “Scholars Say Textbooks Censor Out Religion.” National Federation for Decency Journal , March 1986, page 6.

[14] Catholic Twin Circle , June 25, 1989, page 15.

[15] Joseph Sobran. “Liberals Obsessed with Imaginary Dangers.” Conservative Chronicle , July 25, 1990, page 30.

[16] Katarina Runske. “Empty Hearts and Empty Homes.” Feminism v. Mankind . Family Publications, Wicken, Milton Keynes, Britain, 1990. Page 23.

[17] Gary F. Kelly. Learning About Sex: The Contemporary Guide for Young Adults . Barron’s: New York, 1968. Pages 61 and 136.

[18] Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships (Random House: New York, 1980). Pages 117 and 122.

[19] Wardell Pomeroy, Ph.D. Boys and Sex . Delacorte Press, New York, 1981. Pages 117, 171, and 172.

[20] R.P. Barth. Enhancing Skills to Prevent Pregnancy . School of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, Network Publications. Page 95.

[21] “America’s XXX-Rated Sex Education Curricula.” New Dimensions Magazine. September 1990.

[22] Cal Thomas. “Blowing the Whistle on Teachers.” Conservative Digest , April 1985, page 23.

[23] Phyllis Schlafly. “Death Education Courses Are a Tragedy.” The Phyllis Schlafly Report .

===========================================

CHAPTER 114. HOMESCHOOLING: THE ALTERNATIVE FOR CARING CHRISTIAN FAMILIES

“Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?”-- C.F. Potter. Humanism, a New Religion .[1]

Anti-Life Philosophy.

“According to a myth carefully cultivated by the advocates of tax aid for sectarian private schools and of school-sponsored religious teaching of devotions, and accepted uncritically by many others who have no ax to grind, our country’s public schools are “promoting the religion of secular humanism.” The charge is sometimes as hard to refute as a drunk’s claim that he is being pursued by purple polka-dot pterodactyls.”-- Edd Doerr of the American Humanist Association.[2]

Only religious fanatics homeschool their children, because they have this ‘thing’ about control. They want to rigidly control their kids so they can grow up to be good little robot copies of their narrow-minded, bigoted parents. Home schooling should be outlawed because the United States has the best public school system in the world.

Additionally, homeschooled children commonly experience severe and chronic psychological trauma. They become virtual slaves to their parents, they are deprived of interaction and socialization with other children, and they are not exposed to the outside world, thereby becoming virtual recluses who are unprepared to deal with reality when they reach adulthood. This is unhealthy and infringes grossly upon the child’s fundamental rights.

Introduction.

“We have to abolish and reform the institution of marriage ... By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God ... We must understand what we are attempting is a revolution, not a public relations movement ... it is humanism that is the goal.”-- Gloria Steinem.[3]

Our Academically and Morally Illiterate Children.

Among developed nations, The United States ranks third in terms of education expenditures per pupil, just behind the Netherlands and Sweden.[4] Our country spends the second largest percentage of its gross national product on education out of all the countries in the world -- 7.5 percent, as compared to Japan’s 5.5 percent and West Germany’s 4.5 percent.[5]

Yet our children are virtually illiterate when they leave high school. They can hardly read and they have difficulty performing simple mathematically-oriented chores such as balancing a checkbook. Incredibly, one-third of our high school graduates cannot even locate the United States on a world globe!

Parents No More.

The public school system is conditioning our children to live as nonthreatening, incompetent, contented cogs in a giant Socialist paradise.

Parents have been forcibly divested of their most important responsibilities by Planned Parenthood, the National Education Association, and the all-powerful State. Our children are force-fed value-free pabulum. They are taught that there are really no absolute standards; that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle; that religion has no place in the mind of a thinking person; and that abortion is a purely private matter between a woman and her physician.

In fact, this philosophy has been put into concrete action. With the help of in-school clinics, our daughters can get free, taxpayer-funded birth control pills and abortions without their parent’s consent or knowledge . Our children are ruthlessly indoctrinated into believing that homosexuality is on a par with normal relationships. And, of course, God and His word have been banned from discussion in the schools.

The Basic Mission of Our Schools.

Extending State Control.

Humanists know that the future of our country rests with our children. Therefore, in order to control the future of our country, they must control our children. And the easiest way to control our children is to control the schools. Radical Left-wing writers, including Alexander Cockburn and James Ridgeway, incessantly rail against parental “interference” in schools, because, as they openly acknowledge, “The Left can’t survive politically without a public school system to spread Leftist attitudes.”[6]

Now that they have virtual absolute control over the schools, the Humanists would like to guarantee the success of their agenda by extending their pervasive control to the home. This is why they are so fanatically opposed to any type of home schooling. They claim that they care about homeschooled children and worry about how they may be falling behind academically.

The real reason the Humanists oppose home schooling is because it is a direct challenge to their system of absolute authority and control. They know that children who are home schooled will grow up to challenge the Humanist agenda. And the Humanists, as we all know, despise dealing with opposing voices and viewpoints, because they hinder the headlong rush to the Utopian society.

As an example of this trend that is germane to home schooling, United States Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, in the decision Wisconsin v. Yoder , stated twenty years ago that parents really may not have the right to impose their “narrow” religious views upon their children.

The implications of this ‘principle,’ fully embraced by the Humanists, are truly unlimited.

The Glittering Bait.

Curiously, the means by which the Humanists have achieved absolute control over our children is by offering them absolute freedom . Children desire and need discipline, but they even more strongly yearn for freedom. They are thus strongly attracted by any philosophy that emphasizes their power to overcome man-made limits on their behavior.

This chapter describes some of the “bait” used to lure our children to absolute freedom, including “situational ethics” and the various sex education curricula offered in our schools today. However, it is very interesting indeed to first take a glimpse at the ultimate goals of the Humanists.

The Ultimate Goals for Your Children.

“When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already ...”“-- Adolf Hitler.[7]

“Kiddie Lib.”

The ultimate goal of the so-called “Children’s Liberation Movement” is to make all children, no matter how young, completely autonomous. This means that all parental authority must be eliminated, because the “Children’s Liberationists” believe that any parental control -- no matter how necessary or minor in nature -- infringes upon the rights of the child.

The Motive.

Why do the Humanists want to eliminate parental control? Why, so they can control the children themselves , of course. Those “Kiddie Lib” activists who push such nonsense realize that, when children have more freedom to make their own decisions, they are much more vulnerable to falling under the control of well-organized entities outside the family --such as the public school system.

In other words, the “Children’s Liberationists” do not really want freedom for children -- they merely want to transfer control from parents to themselves, so that they can more efficiently inculcate the children with their own values.

The Demands.

Figure 114-1 outlines two sets of typical “Kiddie Lib” demands. Predictably, these demands were written by adults , with little or no input from the children they allegedly represent.

FIGURE 114-1 TYPICAL DEMANDS OF THE “CHILDREN’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT”

“A CHILD’S BILL OF RIGHTS”

1. THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION. Children should have the right to decide the matters which affect them most directly.

2. THE RIGHT TO ALTERNATIVE HOME ENVIRONMENTS. Self-determining children should be able to choose from among a variety of arrangements: Residences operated by children, child exchange programs, 24-hour child-care centers, and various kinds of schools and employment opportunities. Parents are not always good for their children.

4. THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION. A child must have the right to all information ordinarily available to adults -- including, and perhaps especially, information that makes adults uncomfortable.

6. THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM FROM PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT. Corporal punishment is used impulsively and cruelly in the home, arbitrarily in the schools, and sadistically in penal institutions.

9. THE RIGHT TO POLITICAL POWER. Children should have the vote and be included in the decision-making process. To become a constituency they must have the right to vote.

“YOUTH LIBERATION PROGRAM -- LIST OF WANTS.”

“We must liberate ourselves from the death trip of corporate America.”

1. We want the power to determine our own destiny.

2. We want the immediate end of adult chauvinism.

3. We want full civil and human rights.

4. We want the right to form our education according to our needs.

5. We want the freedom to form into communal families.

6. We want the end of male chauvinism and sexism.

7. We want the opportunity to create an authentic culture with institutions of our own making.

8. We want sexual self-determination. We believe all people must have the unhindered right to be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual.

9. We want the end of class antagonism among young people.

10. We want the end of racism and colonialism in the United States and the world.

11. We want freedom for all unjustly imprisoned people.

12. We want the right to be economically independent of adults.

13. We want the right to live in harmony with nature.

14. We want to rehumanize existence.

15. We want to develop communication and solidarity with the young people of the world in our common struggle for freedom and peace.

References. “A Child’s Bill of Rights” was authored by Richard Farson and was printed in the March 1974 issue of Ms . Magazine. “Youth Liberation Program -- List of Wants” is in the International Year of the Child (IYC)-endorsed book The Children’s Rights Movement , pages 329 to 333, and authored by the Youth Liberation Group of Ann Arbor, Michigan.

It is truly fascinating to realize that the demands posed by the “kiddie libbers” in Figure 114-1 are almost identical to those of the pederast group North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), as described in Chapter 121, “Homosexuality and Child Molestation.”

It is obvious to every father and mother that children need their parents to defend them against the perversions and the perverts of the world --including those who wrote the lists of demands shown in Figure 114-1 (curiously, the “Kiddie Libbers” who wrote these demands are unmarried and childless). These demands, if fulfilled, are nothing less than a prescription for absolute social anarchy and eventual destruction of our children.

The New Curriculum.

C.F. Potter’s bold quote at the beginning of this chapter is unquestionably both accurate and prophetic. If your child attends public school, he or she will ‘learn’ the following;

· that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle;

· that abortion is a matter to be decided not by the church or by the state, but solely by a woman and her physician;

· that Communism is merely another economic system that is inherently superior to Capitalism in many ways, and which must ultimately prevail;

· that the Christian religion has absolutely no place in education, although “New Age” and various Eastern and African practices abound;

· that there are absolutely no concrete ethical or moral rules, and that all problems must be considered on a case-by-case basis (the insidious ethical relativism or “situational ethics”);

· that there is really no good or evil, and that the concept of “sin” is outmoded;

· and that, above all else, the highest of all virtues are compassion and tolerance.

And your child will be exposed to the following;

· ‘lifeboat exercises,’ where children are forced to conclude that some life is worth living, and some life is not;

· secret psychological counseling where parental authority is ruthlessly undermined;

· ‘death education,’ where children may be forced to write suicide notes, visit mortuaries, and lie in coffins;

· a school environment literally with saturated gangs, weapons, and drugs; and

· an overall nihilistic atmosphere that shows the child that life is really not worth living, except for the moment.

Value-Free Nonprinciples.

Inventing the Beast.

Root of the Principle.

The fundamental underlying concept of this new “value-free” curriculum was moral relativism, or “situational ethics.”

So far, so good. Almost every man-made rule does indeed have its exceptions. And, of course, people must occasionally judge whether or not these rules apply to them.

But such decisions are properly made only in the context of the most extreme or very unusual situations. Such decisions generally occur when one must commit one evil in order to prevent or ameliorate a greater evil. Examples would be to trespass on private property in order to save lives, to destroy property in order to save property of much greater value, or even to kill someone in order to save a number of other people, as in a hostage situation.

Shifting the Focus.

But the situational ethicists have extended this principle -- which ordinary people might need to employ once or twice in an entire lifetime -- to everyday living. They have also shifted the focus of the beneficiary from society in general to the individual in particular.

In other words, if a person can derive more personal benefit from a possession than someone else, then nobody can really tell him that it is wrong to steal the object in question. If a person feels that the United States is embarking upon a mission of capitalist imperialism, he can feel perfectly justified in taking off to Canada or cheating on his income tax return. If he believes that clearcutting a forest will degrade the environment, he may feel that destruction of logging equipment (“ecotage”) is the answer. If an unborn child interferes with a relationship in even the most trivial manner, it immediately becomes expendable.

Doin’ Bad and Feelin’ Good.

Our kids do not object to this covert manipulation, because one sub-objective of Humanistic teaching is to make them feel good about themselves. And, of course, good little students who are kept psychologically numbed and sated with sex, drugs, freedom, and everything else they could possibly want are not likely to rebel against the Humanistic system. Even as kids spout meaningless drool about personal freedom and independence, they are becoming imbedded in the Humanist system as surely as a fly caught in a spiderweb will soon become part of the spider.

The effects of this brainwashing became evident as the result of a study performed with 100 seventh-graders from six countries in 1989. These students were subjected to a rigorous mathematics test and were then asked how they thought they performed against seventh-graders from the other five countries.

However, when the children were asked if they considered themselves to be good at mathematics, the Koreans came in last (23% answering yes) and the Americans first (68% answering yes).

This meant that the children from the United States had an inverted sense of reality regarding their own performance.

The implications for our national and international policies are staggering.

A second extensive program of surveys and testing was carried out by the Educational Testing Service for the National Science Foundation and the United States Department of Education, and confirmed of a number of earlier studies. One math and one science test were given to 9-year olds and 13-year olds in 15 countries, including the United States. In science, the American 13-year olds ranked 13th out of 15 countries, ahead of only Ireland and Jordan and behind Hungary, Slovenia, Scotland, and nine other countries. In math, they scored 14th out of 15, ahead of only Jordan.

But the United States was 2nd out of the 15 countries in terms of spending on education with 7.5% of its GNP, second behind Israel’s 10.2 percent.[9]

The Bottom Line.

Dr. Coulson finally concluded; “So it turns out to be a deadly scheme we hatched those 20 years ago.”[10]

National Education Association: Humanist Stooges.

Humanist Army.

The National Education Association (NEA) is the teacher’s trade union, and it aggressively embraces the entire Humanist agenda. Although most NEA members are blissfully unaware of their union’s far-Left stance, the NEA is, quite literally, the Humanist cadre in the schools.

In order to accomplish its objectives, as listed in Figure 114-2, the NEA must have complete control of the public school environment.

FIGURE 114-2 OFFICIAL OBJECTIVES OF THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION (NEA)

NEA Objective: to vigorously oppose tuition tax credits and homeschooling, because they would decrease the NEA’s total control of the public school environment (page 139);

NEA Objective: to completely ban Creationism from the schools (page 156);

NEA Objective: to support a total freeze on nuclear weapons and support mandatory graphic classes on the effects of nuclear war (page 165);

NEA Objective: since it is constantly at the Federal trough, the NEA opposes a balanced-budget Constitutional amendment (page 139);

NEA Objective: to demand that the United States get “out of Nicaragua” (page 144);

NEA Objective: to emplace permissive sex education, school-based clinics, and mandatory AIDS education (page 150);

NEA Objective: to insure that abortion on demand remain the law of the land (page 138);

NEA Objective: to support equal armed forces drafting of men and women (page 140); and

NEA Objective: to include ‘homosexual orientation’ as a protected civil rights category (page 163).

Reference. National Education Association. Today’s Education , 1988.

Perhaps parents should ask themselves what possible concern teachers should have with such a topic, and why the NEA relentlessly pushes school- based clinics and, in fact, any philosophy that will drive psychological and moral wedges between parents and their children.

NEA members who are sick and tired of their organization’s illogical pro-death attitude may wish to join a pro-life teacher’s group;

Teachers Saving Children
Post Office Box 55103
Trenton, New Jersey 08638
Telephone: (609) 298-4843
(information packet available for $1.50).

School Is Hell.

In the midst of the academic and ethical sewer created by the NEA and other Humanists, our sons and daughters will be so poorly educated in the standard curriculum (in particular math and science) that they will scarcely be able to function in our increasingly- technological society. Religion is totally banned and censored in the schools, and even its pivotal role in American culture has been stricken from all history textbooks by atheistic “history committees.”

The National Education Association has caused the American classroom to become an atheistic holding tank populated by unmotivated and uncaring students who, for the large part, are taught by teachers who see them all as potential juvenile delinquents who must be kept off the streets until they are at least 18 years old.

Bart Says: “Forget the PTA, Dudes!”

Some Christian parents put their trust in the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA). They believe that this organization gives them influence with the school system.

They could not be further from the truth. The PTA has two purposes: (1) to effectively “soak up” and absorb the force of any parental objections to public school programs, and (2) to make parents believe that they are having an impact when, in reality, they are not.

The PTA supports contraception in the schools (school sex clinics) and abortion on demand, and opposes any sort of school-choice program, including home schooling. Additionally, the PTA is one of the primary agitators for permissive sex education programs in the public schools. As the virulently pro-abortion Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) acknowledges, “More than 500 school superintendents queried, from the country’s largest school systems, reported that the initial impetus for sex education programs came from local PTA’s, when it didn’t come from the superintendents themselves.”[13]

In general, the PTA pushes the entire motley Left-wing agenda that is warmly embraced by the National Education Association. This means that the organization also opposes any parental involvement in public education.

As one example, in 1989 the California PTA strenuously opposed legislation that would have required parents to approve of the sex education program their children participated in.

Evidence of these attitudes may be obtained from the National PTA itself, at 700 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2571. The PTA publishes the booklets described below;[14]

· “PTA Guide to Extremism,” which automatically labels any Christian activist groups (including pro-lifers) as “extremists;” and

· “How to Talk to Your Child About Sex,” which recommends abortion and contraception and refers questions to Planned Parenthood, the Sex Education and Information Council of the United States, and masturbation guru Sol Gordon.

National Council for Better Education
717 Second Street NE, Suite 311
Washington, DC 20002
Telephone: (202) 547-0645.

The Critical Role of Humanist Censorship.

“Always preach true democracy, but seize power as completely and ruthlessly as possible. Vigorously censor viewpoints that conflict with ours.”-- Vladimir Lenin’s “Rule for Revolution” #5.

Introduction.

When somebody tells you this, you can be certain that they are doing all they can to suppress your viewpoint while you aren’t looking -- so watch your back!

Self-appointed watchdog groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Coalition Against Censorship, and People for the ‘American’ Way squawk endlessly when a conservative group or a parent objects to any pornographic or anti-Christian material in the schools. However, these same organizations are simultaneously and hypocritically insuring that religion and morals are aggressively banned from the schools. The ACLU and PAW instantly file lawsuits against any perceived violation of the Humanist kingdom in the schools, no matter how trivial.

Alleged Christian Censorship.

The “anti-censorship groups” attempt to whip up a public frenzy of indignation by giving the impression that Bible-beating fundamentalist parents are banging on the doors of the schools and trying to ban every book that does not precisely mirror their “narrow morality.”

However, it is interesting to see just what kind of material has been the target of such so-called “censorship.”

Generally speaking, Christians object to books that are thinly-veiled attempts to inculcate their students with a utilitarian “anything goes” attitude towards living, such as;[15]

· Studs Terkel’s Working , which describes in graphic detail the career of a prostitute and the various perverted sex acts she performs;

· Soul On Ice , whose primary thesis is that all White women are consumed by lust for Black men;

· Jean Auel’s Clan of the Cave Bear , a lengthy Neanderthal-era story about the physically impossible exploits of the first feminist, who is sexually initiated by repeated brutal rape.

When the mother of a ten-year old girl in Rohnert Park, California complained about this book, the principal told her that he had ordered his secretary to examine it for references to God. She had found none, and so he approved it![16]

The Humanist Reaction.

Because of such objections, the badly-misnamed People for the American Way (PAW) maintains a running list of “censorship efforts” in the United States. This list is published annually with the self-serving title Attacks on the Freedom to Learn .[6] This list, of course, only includes conservative attempts at censorship, which supposedly violate the principle of ‘pluralism.’

This absurd, values-free project was funded by your tax dollars through a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

In other words, we conservatives are paying for the privilege of being slandered and censored. Ain’t America great?

Humanist Censorship.

Parents must realize that an effective propaganda or indoctrination campaign always has two components; the presentation of one view, and the suppression of opposing views.

As they make grand speeches about freedom of expression, Humanists constantly censor any viewpoint that they do not subscribe to, and such examples are too numerous even to count. This censorship becomes bolder and bolder as each successive Humanists social goal (i.e., abortion and “gay rights”) is achieved. Any opposition is immediately painted by the formidable media machine as a “terrifying and unacceptable breach of the wall of separation between church and state.”

Naturally, the Leftists themselves will puff up with indignation if anyone catches them in the act of banning books. They are never guilty of such a crude tactic as “censorship” -- just ask them.***

For example, the Council on Interracial Books for Children monitors texts for signs of “racism, sexism, ageism, materialism, elitism, and individualism,” the last of which “should be discouraged as a highly negative force.” After it identifies such “offensive” books, the Council vigorously attacks any school board that has adopted them and demands that the texts that it doesn’t like be dropped from the curriculum.

But the Council stridently denies that it censors books; no, what it does is (and these are the Council’s exact words ): “Enlightened weeding and selection.”[17]

A few more of the most blatant examples of Humanist censorship are described below.

‘Religionists’ Need Not Apply.

New York University psychologist Paul Vitz performed a comprehensive study of the Left-wing bias in textbooks for the National Institute of Education, and concluded that “Religion, traditional family values, and conservative political and economic positions have been reliably excluded from children’s textbooks.”[15]

The Slant is Leftish.

“Inclusive language” is being used to insure that the accomplishments of women and minorities are disproportionately represented in history textbooks. For example, California law mandates that school texts not simply exclude “adverse portrayals” of any group, but must include “equal portrayals” of women, minorities, and the handicapped: “In texts on history or current events, or achievements in art, science, or any other field, the contributions of women and men should be represented in approximately equal numbers.”[8]

Pro-Abortionists Only, Please.

A pro-life student approached psychology teacher Guy Cavallo at Arlington’s Washington-Lee High School, and asked him to show the motion picture “The Silent Scream.” Cavallo agreed, and scheduled an after-school showing. The principal required signed permission slips from parents in order for their children to see the film.

But stopping their own children from seeing the film wasn’t good enough for a small group of pro-abortion parents, who demanded that the film be canceled and that nobody else’s children be allowed to see it, either.

The principle obediently canceled the film.[16]

Tasmanian Devils.

The Humanist censors regularly say that they would like to see Australian and Swedish education practices imported to the United States.

There is a reason for this: The Humanists have a complete stranglehold on what books are allowed in the schools in these countries. For example, in Tasmania (an Australian State), Humanists sent teams of “anti-sexist” librarians into public schools in order to purge them of over five hundred books that they said were “sexist,” including Snow White, Born Free , and of course, the Bible.[20]

A Matter of Degree.

If the teachers have anti-Christian attitudes, it is inevitable that they will pass them on to their students. How has this benefitted our children? What has two decades of humanistic education bestowed upon our children?

MAIN PROBLEMS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS; THEN AND NOW

Problems in 1940	Problems in 1990
Truancy	Teenage pregnancy
Tardiness	Drug addiction
Clandestine smoking	Alcoholism
Dress code violations	Concealed weapons
Talking in class	Assault on teachers
Chewing gum	Teenage suicide
Making noise	Rape
Running in halls	Robbery
Getting out of turn	Arson
Littering	Vandalism
	Extortion
	Venereal diseases

Religion: Terra Incognita in Today’s Textbooks.

Researchers funded by the National Institute of Education examined sixty standard social studies textbooks used by the majority of children in grades one through twelve in public schools.

The conclusion of the study was dramatic: It found that religion, traditional family values, and conservative positions on virtually every issue have been completely censored from the curriculum of all public school students.[21]

· not a single word of the more than 1.5 million total words in the sixty volumes referred to any religious activity in contemporary American life.

· the words “marriage,” “wedding,” “husband,” and “wife” did not appear once in any of the sixty textbooks. No text even suggested that being a wife, mother, or homemaker was a worthy occupation in any way . No story gave any significance to children or babies. However, there were plenty of examples of aggressively Humanist/Neofeminist stories that derided and belittled traditionally male-oriented roles.

· of the 23 “role models” held up as examples to modern youths by the sixty texts, only one was a conservative. The only role models who were described were either Democrats or women. Not a single contemporary role model was a white male. There was not a word about the experiences and influence on society of a prominent preacher or clergyman, including Billy Graham, Terence Cardinal Cooke, and Norman Vincent Peale.

Sex Education: Bait for Destruction.

A Formidable Weapon.

There is one sensitive area in which the entire considerable might of the public school system is most directly arrayed to attack and destroy Christian values in children. This area is sex education.

Most Christian objections are raised in response to various permissive sex education materials that are used by our school systems. The Humanists know that the easiest way to win the loyalty of children is to dangle before them the fruit of absolute freedom, and nowhere is the adolescent drive for freedom more powerful than in matters involving sex. Even more than smoking, drinking, using drugs or driving a car, having sex is the most vivid and treasured “proof” that an adolescent has grown up.

The Contrasts.

While Christianity emphasizes chastity before marriage and faithfulness to one’s spouse afterward, public schools laugh at God and tell our kids that contraception, abortion, fornication, adultery, and even sex with animals and incest is value-free and therefore involves fundamental human rights that cannot be tampered with or interfered with --especially by parents.

Where Christianity teaches the necessary skill of self-control, the Humanists dangle the tempting vision of complete freedom before our children.

The following paragraphs describe the contents of some of the most common sex education books and curricula used by public schools today.

Please recognize that all of them emphasize the “rights” to birth control, abortion, free sex, adultery, and even sex with animals; in other words, they are all irretrievably objectionable throughout. The quotes given below are typical of their entire contents.

Guide For Young Adults.

This text includes the following statements;

“Sado-masochism may be very acceptable and safe for sexual partners who know each other’s needs and have established agreements for what they want from each other.

“Some people are now saying that partnerships -- married or unmarried --should not be exclusive. They believe that while a primary relationship is maintained with one person, the freedom for both partners to love and share sex with others should also be present.”[23]

Changing Bodies.

Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships is probably the most popular sex education textbook in the country today and has been used by thousands of high schools since it was published more than a decade ago.

“Bisexuality is an openness to loving, sexual relationships with both sexes ... our true nature.

“Gay men, too, have many ways of making love. One may caress the other’s penis with his hand or his mouth. Or one may put his penis in the other’s anus.”[24]

Boys and Girls and Sex.

“I have known cases of farm boys who have had a loving sexual relationship with an animal and who felt good about their behavior until they got to college, where they learned for the first time that what they had done was ‘abnormal.’ Then they were upset ...”[25]

Enhancing Skills.

“Some teachers are able to combine humor with demonstration by bringing cucumbers or zucchinis to class and showing how to apply and remove condoms. Open the packages and unroll condoms for students to inspect. Pass them around. If you are using cucumbers, have one student hold the cucumber while the other student puts the condom on the cucumber. Expect students to laugh at first and be embarrassed! This is healthy.”[26]

One Washington state parent testified about an incident that is indicative of the coercive nature of many sex education programs. The objective of such programs is to use peer pressure to forcibly destroy the natural modesty that young people possess; “There is one teacher in Bellevue who has all the boys say ‘vagina;’ he calls them individually, and they all have to say it out loud in class. The boys say ‘vagina’ and the girls say ‘penis.’ One girl told me that she was so embarrassed that she could hardly bring out the word ‘penis’ because all these boys were sitting in the class. It just embarrassed her so. So he made her get up in front of the class and very loudly say it ten times.”[27]

Conclusion.

It is in the best interests of the individual schools and school systems to keep the contents of their sex education curricula strictly confidential. Some teachers are instructed to tell their children to lie to their parents about the contents of such courses of instruction. Others take the position that only “enlightened” parents (i.e., known Humanists) can see the details of the programs.

For more information on the destructive influence of comprehensive sex education in the schools, see Chapter 139.

The Evidence by Humanists Against Humanism.

Have the humanists and atheists really taken over our schools? Or is this the paranoid raving of a motley crew of far-right fundamentalist fanatics?

Well, instead of listening to rumors or opinions from your pastor or Christian magazines and friends, why don’t we simply allow the humanists to speak for themselves?

Figure 114-3 includes a few sample quotes from Humanists who believe that the public school system is their most powerful ally.

FIGURE 114-3 HUMANISTS SPEAK ON THE VALUE OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO THEIR CAUSE

“The Left can’t survive politically without a public school system to spread leftist attitudes.”-- Alexander Cockburn, quoted in Joseph Sobran. “The Abortion Culture.” Human Life Review , Spring 1981, pages 7 to 19.

“Every child in America who enters school at the age of five is mentally ill, because he comes to school with allegiance toward our elected officials, toward our founding fathers, toward our institutions, toward the preservation of this form of government we have -- patriotism, nationalism, sovereignty -- all of that proves the children are sick, because the truly well individual is the one who has rejected all of those things and is what I would call the true international child of the future.”-- Dr. William Pierce, Harvard University. Quoted in Dr. Vince Nesbitt. Humanistic Morals and Values Education . Self-published at 12 Beta Road, Lane Cove, New South Wales, 2066 Australia. Also in Education to Remold the Child . The Parent and Child Advocate, Route 4, Watertown, Wisconsin 53094. Also quoted in Dr. Robert Simonds. “The Truth About Sol Gordon.” ALL About Issues , August-September 1986, page 53.

“A large majority of the educators of American colleges and universities are predominantly humanists, and a majority of the teachers who go out from their studies in colleges to responsibilities in primary and secondary schools are basically humanist, no matter that many maintain a nominal attachment to church or synagogue for good personal, social, or practical reasons.”-- Morris Storer, Humanist Ethics , 1980. Quoted in D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation of Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21.

“The crazies [Catholics and fundamentalists] don’t do all that much reading. If they did, they’d find out that they have already been defeated.”-- Sheila Schwartz, The Humanist , January-February 1976. Quoted in D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation of Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21.

“The right to abortion will be guaranteed ... As far as the policy toward the family, it will be recognized for what it is: Not some holy or sacred institution to be preserved for all time ... not only will the family be a secondary form for determining children’s upbringing, but its influence in promoting conservatism among its members, especially the women and children, will be actively combatted. While the parents will still have significant responsibility for their children, this does not mean they are “theirs,” and there will be struggle to prevent parents from imposing old values, and conservative, non-revolutionary thinking generally on the children.”-- Revolutionary Communist Party’s New Programme . “The Proletariat, Upon Seizing Power, Will Immediately Take Up the Transformation of Society,” page 78.

Lifeboat Exercises.

Introduction.

One of the more frightening and effective tools the Humanists use to denigrate and destroy our children’s Christian values is the notorious “lifeboat exercise” or some variant thereof. The expressed purpose of these exercises is to break down the Christian idea that some acts are intrinsically immoral and can never be tolerated.

In other words, these “lifeboat exercises” are your child’s introduction to moral relativism: That any act is acceptable if it can be justified by the person doing it -- even murder!

The participants were strictly instructed not to let parents see the teaching materials . This is typical of the usual skulking and sneaky tactic used by the popcon fanatics. They know that parents would disapprove, and so hide their tactics and agenda. This is yet another example of how Big Brother knows what’s best for your kids.

There can only be two reasons for such exercises;

(1) to actually desensitize the participants to death, and

(2) to propagandize the participants into accepting anti-life goals.

Situation A.

The most common type of “lifeboat exercise” forces children to select a specified number of persons for death. Situation A, shown in Figure 114-4, is one example of this type of exercise.

FIGURE 114-4 TYPICAL PUBLIC SCHOOL EXERCISES IN SITUATIONAL ETHICS

SITUATION A: A new country is being formed because the problem of overpopulation has completely destroyed your former country. There is not enough food. water, and other essentials for people to share. Keep in mind that the people you select should be those who might be able to avoid the problems that occurred in the old country. The remaining 18 will die of starvation. Give reasons for your selections.
1. Abortionist	10. Sanitation worker	19. Gardener
2. Priest	11. Plumber	20. Conservationist
3. Teacher	12. Businessman	21. Street cleaner
4. Clerk	13. Musician	22. Scientist
5. Builder	14. Farmer	23. Attorney
6. Mechanic	15. Janitor	24. Unmarried pregnant woman
7. Teenager	16. Doctor	25. Married pregnant woman
8. Baby	17. Entertainer	26. Planned Parenthood counselor
9. Retired old person	18. Electrician
SITUATION B: The United States Congress has passed a law saying or stating that married couples may have only two children. Have students react by asking the following questions:
(1) What would be the reason a law like this would be passed?
(2) What is your personal reaction to this? Could it be enforced?
(3) Would this law solve any problems?
SITUATION C: Give the following attitude survey to the class on overpopulation. The students are to fill in their true feelings about the statements in this survey. Results are to be discussed, debated, placed on the chalkboard, or graphed.
1. There are too many people in my _____.
2. There are more _____ people in the world that there should be.
3. People should take steps to _____ the number of people in the world.
4. When I am in a crowded elevator I feel _____.
5. I wish I had _____ more people in my family than I have.
6. I wish I had _____ less people in my family than I have.
7. I plan to have _____ children if I get married.
8. Families who have many children are _____.
9. Overpopulation is _____.
SITUATION D: Your husband or wife is a very attractive person. Your best friend is very attracted to him or her. How would you want them to behave?
a. Maintain a clandestine relationship so you wouldn’t know about it.
b. Be honest and accept the reality of the relationship.
c. Proceed with a divorce.

Situation A is formulated by the same people who stress that everyone must be nonjudgmental. Yet the exercises force each child to play God and condemn 18 people to death!

By the way, in the intensive discussions following the exercise, these persons are usually considered ‘fit to live:’ doctor, mechanic, conservationist, builder, scientist, and always , of course, the abortionists and Planned Parenthood representative. The last selection for life is not at all surprising in light of the fact that these exercises are frequently conducted by Planned Parenthood representatives, and it is socially ever so awkward, my deah, to condemn the moderator to death.

Significantly, the persons most often selected for death are those who are considered to be useless in the brave new society that the children are building.

Situation B.

Situation B, shown in Figure 114-4, makes the bald assumption that overpopulation is imminent, and that some form legal coercion must be taken at some point in the future for the good of the country.

For more information on this heinous program, see Chapter 50 of Volume II, “Forced Abortions.” For information on the eugenics mentality that leads to such atrocities, see Chapter 105.

Situation C.

Situation C, shown in Figure 114-4, compels the child to “clarify” his values. However, this “values clarification” is never done in a vacuum. There is always a teacher (with the proper Humanist credentials, of course) hovering nearby to “guide” the student into making “responsible social decisions” that support the Humanist population control agenda.

Now, whatever happened to the Humanist’s vaunted ‘right to privacy?’ Apparently it doesn’t apply when Humanist teachers are working to mold young minds into the ‘proper’ shape.

And, of course, these answers would not be condemned because, in these exercises, there are no wrong answers!

Situation D.

It goes without saying that every “lifeboat exercise” or “values clarification drill” is totally devoid of Christian values. In fact, they are not only devoid of Christian values, they actively attack them! For example, another typical “values clarification” exercise is shown in Figure 114-4 as Situation D.

This identical lack of Christian values is reinforced by secular sex education curricula; your spouse and your best friend are going to be adulterous anyway, so you might as well accommodate them and make life as pleasant as possible for everyone involved by playing the cuckold quietly.

By the way, although there is really no firm “correct answer,” the suggested course of action is (b), above. After all, we must always be frank and honest -- right?

Other Examples.

Many other imaginative forms of role playing are used to accomplish various Humanist objectives.

One woman from Tucson, Arizona testified in the March 1984 Department of Education hearings that an outside teacher visited her child’s classroom and taught that it was “normal” for the children to hate their parents. At the beginning of her class, she surveyed the children and found that three of the thirty attendees said that they hated their parents. At the end of the presentation, 27 said that they hated their parents![28]

In Detroit, parents testified that their children had been told to close their eyes and fantasize about designing and then using an ideal method of birth control.[28]

A Missouri mother testified that, in a required English class, her daughter was ordered to play the part of a prostitute and proposition a boy in the class who played the part of a married man.[28]

The Christian Version of Values Clarification.

As someone once said, “Make lemonade out of lemons.” For example, the board game “Scruples” is centered around the idea that no act is intrinsically right or wrong. The objective is to select game cards that describe situations requiring ethical judgment, such as; “You and your mate expect loyalty and honesty from one another. One night, out of town, you have a fling. Do you tell?” Each player’s goal is not to find an ethical solution, but to guess how others would react.

Still, about 150 of the cards depict non-sexual situations that are valuable for playing “What If?” games with your children. You could find the game at a garage sale, discard the game board, rules, and cards depicting sexual situations. The remaining cards are very useful for conducting Christian values clarification exercises.

Death Education.

The Humanists have used comprehensive sex education to inculcate our children with a pro-abortion attitude. But times change, and the Humanist strategists have moved beyond abortion to euthanasia.

So now it is time to propagandize our kids with material on the alleged “Right to Die.”

In order to prepare children to accept the killing of born human beings that society considers useless, more and more schools are mandating compulsory “death education.”

One mother from Orlando, Florida said that “In one program in our county, little first graders made their own coffins out of shoe boxes.”[28]

One of the textbooks used in a ‘death education’ class is Russell and Purdy’s Coping With Death and Dying, published by Scott, Foresman. It relies on the absurd thesis that “Committing suicide may represent a last attempt to make an independent, personal decision.”[29] (Say what!?)

And another requires the teacher to give a series of talks and interactive presentations, including;[29]

· “Reincarnation -- Can We Come Back From the Dead?”

· “End of the World -- Coming Soon or Not?”

· “Infanticide -- Right or Wrong?”

· “Active Euthanasia for Deformed Infants -- Right or Wrong?”

· “Death -- Do the Hopelessly Ill Have the Right to Die?”

The Decisive Christian Response -- Homeschooling!

“I am much afraid that the schools will prove to be the very gates of Hell, unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures, and engraving them in the hearts of youth. I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount.”-- Martin Luther.

Introduction.

Even rats know that it is desperately dangerous to stay on board a ship that is beyond repair and sinking fast. Many Christian parents are sick to death of monitoring their child’s school system constantly, and insuring that permanent damage is not done by atheistic school teachers and staff, school-based clinics, drugs, venereal disease, Planned Parenthood, and a thousand other dangers.

Any Christian parent who knows the nature of the public schools and the tactics of the social engineers also realizes that it is physically impossible to protect their children against all of the baleful influences that they will encounter there. In other words, no parent has the capability of monitoring their children to the point where they will not be propagandized. The public schools have our kids for more than 10,000 hours, and they have a thousand ways to indoctrinate our kids.

Our schools have been transformed literally into obstacles that our children must survive and endure.

Therefore, more and more Christian parents are pulling their children out of the militantly atheistic American public school system and are educating them properly -- themselves! In fact, more than one hundred thousand children from first to 12th grade are being homeschooled in this country --and they are loving it!

The Advantages of Homeschooling.

There are many reasons for this seemingly radical action. A homeschooled child does not learn about “safe sex.” He does not learn that homosexuality is a “perfectly acceptable alternative lifestyle,” or that abortion is simply a private decision between a woman and her doctor. He is not exposed to secret psychological counseling, “lifeboat exercises,” Planned Parenthood, or value- and God- free education. Additionally, he is allowed to proceed at his own learning pace, rather than being held back in order to accommodate slower students. On the other hand, if the child is slow in some areas, he is not warehoused in a ‘slow’ section and forgotten, and is not exposed to ridicule and embarrassment. He is also not exposed to pervasive peer pressure to violate his Christian value system thought sex, drugs, and violence.

Numerous studies and interviews by a wide variety of organizations (some of them quite liberal) reveal that homeschooled children score higher on achievement tests, are superior in their breadth and depth of knowledge, and are more adaptable and sociable than publicly-schooled children.

The paramount advantage of homeschooling, of course, is that your children will receive the proper training in Christian values.

Homeschooling Resources.

Introduction.

Many faiths, from Roman Catholic to Episcopalian to Mennonite, have outstanding homeschooling curricula that have been proven by the test of time. The organizations listed below can get you in touch with the people who organize and distribute these programs, and can also answer any questions that you might have.

Christian Life Workshops.

Each year, Christian Life Workshops (CLW) presents a two-day ‘starter course’ in Christian home schooling in about twenty cities all over the country.

All topics required for a successful home schooling program are covered: How to begin, the advantages of home schooling, discipline, history, evangelism, legal aspects, and resources.

The CLW also publishes an excellent informational magazine entitled Family Restoration Quarterly for $7.50 annually. To order, call Gregg Harris at (206) 834-2372.

For further information on the Christian Life Workshops, write to: Christian Life Workshops, Inc., 182 SE Kane Avenue, Gresham, Oregon 97080.

HELP Magazine.

This excellent quarterly magazine on home life in general is published by Bill and Mary Pride. It addresses all aspects of Christian home living, from natural family planning to home-run businesses, with the objective of assisting families in establishing a Christian lifestyle as families.

HELP Magazine can be ordered from Home Life, Post Office Box 1250, Fenton, Missouri, 63026-1250. Subscription price is $15 for one year and four 24-page issues. Contributions are welcome, and the magazine has an extensive letters section which allows readers to voice their opinions on all sides of every issue.

Mary Pride’s books The Way Home and All the Way Home are also gold mines of information on Christian home living, and can be ordered from the above address. Additionally, she has published a series of books entitled The Big Book[s] of Home Schooling , which contain a treasure trove for homeschooling parents, regardless of experience level.

The Legal Status of Home Schooling.

Some states are very supportive of home schooling, and require only a year-end test for each child to insure that he is keeping up. In other states, parents who dare to try to homeschool their own children are thrown in jail!

The legal status of home schooling in your state can be obtained from;

The Rutherford Institute
Post Office Box 510
Manassas, Virginia 22110
Request the Home Education Reporter for your state. Each Reporter is ten dollars.

The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) issues a quarterly newsletter entitled “The Home School Court Report.” This organization requires annual dues of $100, but provides relatively cheap legal aid if trouble should arise from your homeschooling activities. The HSLDA charges from $100 to respond to threats from a local official to $5,000 for trial appearances and preparation, including those at the appellate court level. For information, contact;

Home School Legal Defense Association
Paeonian Springs, Virginia 22129
Telephone: (703) 882-3838

State Homeschooling Support Groups.

“Upon the subject of education, I can only say that I view it as the most important subject which we as a people can be engaged in.”-- Abraham Lincoln.

It is sometimes very difficult to school your children at home in the face of societal pressures. Homeschooling is still unfortunately perceived as ‘strange’ or ‘radical’ by the majority of Americans. Your friends, family, and fellow churchgoers and workers may not understand your methods or motivations. And, of course, the National Education Association, Planned Parenthood, and all of the other organizations that want to control your children’s minds and inculcate their own values are totally opposed to homeschooling.

The best solution to these problems is to contact other individuals and organizations that can support you and answer your questions. Figure 114-5 contains the names and addresses of homeschooling support organizations in each of the fifty states.

FIGURE 114-5 STATE HOMESCHOOLING SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS

ALABAMA: Christian Home Education Fellowship of Alabama, 3375 Ching Dairy Road, Montgomery, Alabama 36618.

ALASKA: Alaska Private & Home Educators Association, Box 70, Talkeetna, Alaska 99676.

ARIZONA: Christian Home Educators, Post Office Box 13445, Scottsdale, Arizona 85267.

ARKANSAS: Christian Home Education Association, Post Office Box 501, Little Rock, Arkansas 72203.

CALIFORNIA: Christian Home Educators, Post Office Box 28644, Santa Ana, California 92799.

COLORADO: Homes Offering Meaningful Education, 1015 South Gaylord Street, Suite #226, Denver, Colorado 80209.

CONNECTICUT: The Education Association of Christian Homeschoolers, Post Office Box 446, Broad Brook, Connecticut 06016.

DELAWARE: Delaware Home School Association, 2272 St. James Drive, Wilmington, Delaware 19808.

FLORIDA: Florida At Home, 7615 Clubhouse Estate Drive, Orlando, Florida 32819.

GEORGIA: Georgians for Freedom in Education, 209 Cobb Street, Palmetto, Georgia 30268.

HAWAII: 96706.

IDAHO: Idaho Home Educators, Post Office Box 4022, Boise, Idaho 83711.

ILLINOIS: Christian Home Educators, Post Office Box 261, Zion, Illinois 60099.

INDIANA: Indiana Association of Home Educators, Post Office Box 17135, Indianapolis, Indiana 46217.

IOWA: Iowa Home Educators Association, Post Office Box 213, Des Moines, Iowa 50301.

KANSAS: Teaching Parents Association, 100 East 109th Street North, Valley Center, Kansas 67147.

KENTUCKY: Christian Home Educators of Kentucky, 691 Howardstown Road, Hodgensville, Kentucky 42748.

LOUISIANA: Christian Home Educators Fellowship, Box 74292, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70874.

MAINE: Homeschoolers of Maine, Post Office Box 124, Hope, Maine 04847.

MARYLAND: Maryland Assn. of Christian Home Education Organization, Post Office Box 1041, Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727.

MASS.: Home Learning Association, 15 Ohio Street, Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887.

MICHIGAN: Information Network for Christian Homes, 5241 Plainfield NE, Suite B, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49505.

MINNESOTA: Christian Home Educators, Post Office Box 188, Anoka, Minnesota 55303.

MISSISSIPPI: Mississippi Home Educators Association, Box 2067, Starkville, Mississippi 39579.

MISSOURI: Families for Home Education, 4400 Woods Road, Sibley, Missouri 64088.

MONTANA: Montana Coalition of Home Schools, Box 654, Helena, Montana 59624.

NEBRASKA: Nebraska Home Educators Association, 5000 Grand View Lane, Lincoln, Nebraska, 68521.

NEVADA: Nevada Home Schools, Post Office Box 21323, Reno, Nevada 89515.

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Christian Home Educators, Box 1653, Hillsboro, New Hampshire 03244.

NEW JERSEY: Education Network of Christian Home Schoolers, 65 Middlesex Road, Matawan, New Jersey 07747.

NEW MEXICO: Christian Home Educators, 5749 Paradise Boulevard NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87114.

NEW YORK: Loving Education at Home, Post Office Box 332, Syracuse, New York 13205.

NORTH CAROLINA: North Carolina for Home Education, 204 North Person Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601.

NORTH DAKOTA: Home School Association, Box 486, Mandan, North Dakota 58554.

OHIO: Christian Home Educators, 3691-A Massillon Road, Uniontown, Ohio 44685.

OKLAHOMA: Coalition of Christian Home-Educators, Box 741032, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74147.

OREGON: Christian Home Education Association Network, 2515 NE 37th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97212.

PENNSYLVANIA: Christian Home Schoolers, RD 2, Box 141, Wrightsville, Pennsylvania 17368.

RHODE ISLAND: Rhode Island Guild of Home Teachers, 272 Pequot Avenue, Warwick, Rhode Island 02886.

SOUTH CAROLINA: Home Educators Association, Box 33, Goose Creek, South Carolina 29445.

SOUTH DAKOTA: Western Dakota Christian Home Schools, Box 528, Black Hawk, South Dakota 57718.

TENNESSEE: Tennessee Home Education Association, 3677 Richbriar Court, Nashville, Tennessee 37211.

TEXAS: Home-Oriented Private Education for Texas, Box 43887, Austin, Texas 78745.

UTAH: Christian Home Schooling, 3190 South 4140 West, West Valley City, Utah 84120.

VERMONT: Home Schoolers Association, Box 161, Pittsford, Vermont 05763.

VIRGINIA: Home Educators Association of Virginia, Post Office Box 1810, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.

WASHINGTON: Washington Association of Teaching Christian Homes, Box 980, Airway Heights, Washington 99001.

WEST VIRGINIA: Christian Home Educators, Post Office Box 266, Glenville, West Virginia 26351.

WISCONSIN: Christian Home Educators, 2307 Carmel Avenue, Racine, Wisconsin 53405.

WYOMING: Homeschoolers of Wyoming, Box 926, Evansville, Wyoming 82636.

Reference: Summer 1991 Annual summary card entitled “Home Schooling State Organizations and Convention Information.” The Teaching Home Magazine .

National organizations that can assist in proper homeschooling include the following.

Christian Educators Association International
Post Office Box 50025
Pasadena, California 91105
Telephone: (818) 798-1124
Helps Christian educators in public and private schools. Offers information for parent-action groups, legal advice, counsel, and curriculum materials.

Citizens for Educational Freedom
Rosslyn Plaza, Suite 805
1611 North Kent Street
Arlington, Virginia 22209
Telephone: (703) 524-1991
Promotes local control of public schools and respect for the religious and moral values and rights of parents and children. Provides options for released-time religious instruction and promotes educational vouchers for parents who want to send their children to non-government controlled schools in ‘school choice’ programs.

Citizens for Excellence in Education
Box 3200
Costa Mesa, California 92628
Telephone: (714) 546-5931
A division of the National Association of Christian Educators that promotes better education in academics and moral and spiritual values in public schools.

Educational Research Analysts
Post Office Box 7518
Longview, Texas 65601
Mel and Norma Gabler head this organization, which is the most successful group in America at getting better textbooks into American public schools. Offers books, reviews of books, and step-by-step instructions for becoming involved in the selection of textbooks in local schools.

National Association of Christian Educators
Bob Simonds
Post Office Box 3200
Costa Mesa, California 92628

National Monitor of Education
Post Office Box 402
Alamo, California 94507
(415) 945-6745
The National Monitor of Education tracks educational reform and legislation, monitors and opposes the secret psychological testing of children, analyzes sex and death education programs, counters threats to homeschoolers, and works with an organization named Concerned Educators Against Forced Unionism. The National Monitor of Education publishes an informative monthly newsletter for $18.

The Rockford Institute
934 North Main Street
Rockford, Illinois 61103-7061
Telephone: (815) 964-5053
References: Home Schooling.

==========================================

[1] D.L. Cuddy. “Are Public Schools Opening the Door to Humanism?” National Federation of Decency Journal , October 1986, page 21. This is an excellent discussion of the various methods used by Humanist groups to censor Christian viewpoints.

[2] Edd Doerr. “The Myth of Public-School Humanism.” The Organized Attack on Public Education From the New Right . Texas State Teachers Association (Affiliated with the National Education Association), 316 West Twelfth Street, Austin, Texas 78701. 125 pages, undated.

[3] Gloria Steinem, quoted in the Saturday Review of Education , March 1973.

[4] United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States . Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. 1990 (110th Edition). Table 1,445, “Public Expenditures for Education and Illiteracy, By Selected Country.”

[5] John McLaughlin. “Bennett the Bold.” National Review , November 1, 1985, page 23.

[6] Joseph Sobran. “The Abortion Culture.” The Human Life Review , Spring 1981, pages 7 to 19.

[7] Adolf Hitler, speaking about the schools and their indoctrination of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth Corps). Quoted in William Shirer. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich . New York: Simon & Schuster, 1960. Page 249.

[8] Charles Krauthammer. “Education: Doing Bad and Feeling Good.” Time Magazine, February 5, 1990.

[9] Jeff Nesmith, Cox News Service. “U.S. Ranks Near Last of Class.” The Oregonian , February 6, 1992, pages A1 and A12.

[10] W.R. Coulson, Ph.D, Professor of Psychology at the U.S. International University. “Founder of ‘Value-Free’ Education Says He Owes Parents an Apology.” American Family Association Journal , April 1989, pages 20 and 21.

[11] The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Towards World Understanding , Page 58, Book V. 1949.

[12] “NEA Endorses Reproductive Freedom.” Options [Newsletter of the ‘Religious’ Coalition for Abortion Rights], November/ December 1978, page 12.

[13] Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS). “Winning the Battle for Sex Education.” SIECUS, 130 W. 42nd Street, Suite 2500, New York, New York 10036. 1982, page 5.

[14] National Monitor of Education , June 1990, page 6.

[15] Don Feder. “Censorship is in the Eye of the Beholder.” New Dimensions Magazine, December 1990, page 15.

[16] Cal Thomas and Wayne Stayskal. Liberals for Lunch . Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1985. Pages 45 and 129.

[17] Nat Hentoff. “Censorship in the Schools.” Learning Magazine, March 1981.

[18] Catholic Twin Circle , June 25, 1989, page 15.

[19] Joseph Sobran. “Liberals Obsessed with Imaginary Dangers.” Conservative Chronicle , July 25, 1990, page 30.

[20] Valerie Riches. “A Radical Feminist Charter.” Feminism v. Mankind . Family Publications: Wicken, Milton Keynes, Britain, 1990. Page 35.

[21] Paul C. Vitz. “Scholars Say Textbooks Censor Out Religion.” National Federation for Decency Journal , March 1986, page 6.

[22] Katarina Runske. “Empty Hearts and Empty Homes.” Feminism v. Mankind . Family Publications, Wicken, Milton Keynes, Britain, 1990. Page 23.

[23] Gary F. Kelly. Learning About Sex: The Contemporary Guide for Young Adults . Barron’s: New York, 1968. Pages 61 and 136.

[24] Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships (Random House: New York, 1980). Pages 117 and 122.

[25] Wardell Pomeroy, Ph.D. Boys and Sex . Delacorte Press, New York, 1981. Pages 117 and 171 to 172.

[26] R.P. Barth. Enhancing Skills to Prevent Pregnancy . School of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, Network Publications. Page 95.

[27] “America’s XXX-Rated Sex Education Curricula.” New Dimensions Magazine. September 1990.

[28] Cal Thomas. “Blowing the Whistle on Teachers.” Conservative Digest , April 1985, page 23.

[29] Phyllis Schlafly. “Death Education Courses Are a Tragedy.” Conservative Chronicle , July 4, 1990, page 19.

==========================================

CHAPTER 139. HUMANISTIC SEX EDUCATION: THE DEATH OF INNOCENCE

“Sexual science is of two kinds, that which is used for controlling or overcoming the sexual passion, and that which is used to stimulate and feed it. Instruction in the former is as necessary a part of a child’s education, as the latter is harmful and dangerous, and fit, therefore, only to be shunned.

“The sex education that I stand for must have for its object the conquest and sublimation of the sex passion. Such education should automatically serve to bring home to children the essential distinction between man and brute, to make them realize that it is man’s special privilege and pride to be gifted with the faculties of head and heart both, that he is a thinking no less than feeling animal, and to renounce the sovereignty of reason over the blind instincts is, therefore, to renounce a man’s estate. In man, reason quickens and guides the feeling; in brutes, the soul lies ever dormant.”

-- Mahatma Gandhi.[1]

Anti-Life Philosophy.

“[Question] 14. Will sex education in the schools encourage kids to be sexually active?

“[Answer]: By the best evidence, that is a myth. Or an invention -- to use a charitable term -- designed to prey on the fears of anxious parents.”

-- Irving R. Dickman, of the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS).[2]

“Discussing contraception -- which is vitally important, we stress again --does not mean and is seldom interpreted by teenagers to mean that you have given permission for them to have intercourse...”-- Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA).[3]

It is essential that every child be instructed in all aspects of human sexuality at the very first opportunity. Comprehensive sex education is the only answer to such sex-related ills as abortion, venereal disease, teen pregnancy, and homophobia.

Those parents who oppose this type of necessary training are naive and want to shelter their children from the imaginary evils that their paranoid minds seem to constantly generate. This reclusive and antisocial attitude will only hurt their children in the long run, and the parent’s ignorance will only make their children susceptible to unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and sexually-transmitted diseases.

Introduction.

“[Being a virgin] is nothing to be ashamed of. It’s sacred ... sex is the ultimate gift a woman can give a man ... sex is meant for procreation, and I want to consummate a relationship with a man who’s going to be the father of my children.”-- Brooke Shields.[4]

Sex Education is a Necessity.

Every Christian parent knows that sex education is a necessity for everyone, even those who choose to remain chaste throughout their lifetimes. Christians believe that God would not have given us the marvelous gift of reproduction if He had not wanted us to know about it and use it wisely.

Committed Christians and secularists agree on very little beyond this fundamental point.

The method by which sex-related information is presented is the primary point of disagreement, and is usually the source of the friction that takes place between Christian parents and secular school authorities when discussing sex education programs.

The Bottom Line for Christians.

This chapter uses quotes and studies provided by the secular sex educators themselves to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that comprehensive sex education leads to increased premarital sex and use of contraception; that this contraception fails at an astonishing rate -- especially for teenagers -- and therefore leads to more , not less teen pregnancy and abortion; and that premarital sex leads to loss of self-esteem and other self-destructive behavior in teenaged boys and girls.

The Two Types of Sex Education.

No matter what fancy names are applied to them, there are basically only two types of sex education;

(1) Biological sex education, which merely presents information on the functioning of the human reproductive system. This information is pure data and, like all pure data, is ‘value-free,’ because it is literally impossible to attach values to pure biological instruction, if the teaching is done correctly.

(2) Comprehensive sex education, which not only addresses the biological facets of sex, but also teaches children about birth control, abortion, masturbation, homosexuality, and other evils. This type of sex education alleges to be value-free, but this is of course impossible. When a class teaches that no sexual behavior is immoral, and that we should not judge others who happen to have ‘different sexual lifestyles’ than ourselves, this by definition teaches an amoral set of values.

Planned Parenthood’s Definition.

Planned Parenthood, the country’s leading expert in comprehensive sex education, defines sex ed as a course of instruction that includes at least four of the following six topics;[5]

(1) Biological facts about human reproduction;

(2) Information on sexual development;

(3) Information on preventing sexual abuse;

(4) Comprehensive birth control information;

(5) Information on abortions and how to obtain them; and

(6) Information on contraceptives and how to obtain them.

Strictly biological sex education would contain only points (1) and (2), above.

The Basic Problem With Comprehensive Sex Ed.

“But as losing causes go -- causes that someone still must fight for -- I read a new Census Bureau report the other day and found myself wishing that we had armies of people telling our teenagers that they ought to shun sex and childbirth out of wedlock, that they ought to take marriage as a serious, long-lasting commitment.”-- Neoliberal columnist Carl Rowan.[6]

The Messages.

The (non)values transmitted to children during a course of comprehensive sex education are contained within a larger framework of values that are not only secular, but anti-Christian.

Reviews of all secular comprehensive sex education programs have shown that they bear certain common traits. All such programs subtly and progressively displace the God-given authority of parents by suggesting to children that sexual decisions are theirs alone to make. The programs also teach ‘situational ethics;’ i.e., that there are no absolute standards of behavior, and that such activities as abortion and fornication are acceptable if certain very minimal conditions are met -- usually that both (or all) parties consent, and that nobody is hurt.

Finally, the overall implicit message given to children in matters of sex is “if it feels good, do it.”

This is the type of sex education that is fully supported by the National Education Association (NEA), the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA), and every one of the more than 200 national affiliates of Planned Parenthood.

The Objective.

Sex education expert David Perkins summed up the attitude of the comprehensive sex educators nicely at the 1987 University of Maine conference entitled “A Strategy for Preventing Teenage Pregnancy” when he said that “Stopping teenage sex is not our objective. Stopping teen pregnancy is .”[7]

And Faye Wattleton, former president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the country’s premier abortion and birth-control pusher, says that; “Too many of us are focused upon stopping teenage sexual activity rather than stopping teenage pregnancy ... Sexuality education must be a fundamental part of the school curricula from kindergarten through twelfth grade in every school district in the country ... Easier access to contraception must be another priority -- access without any barriers. We must establish many more school-based health clinics that provide contraceptives as part of general health care.”[8]

For more detailed information on school-based health clinics (SBCs), see Chapter 82 in Volume II.

The Roots of Secular Sex Education.

“Planned Parenthood programs of sex education in no way resolve the problem of teen-age pregnancies, but rather increase it by encouraging promiscuity.”-- Edouard Cardinal Gagnon, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family.[9]

Amoral sex education and school-based clinics are, of course, only two small symptoms of a culture infected with a larger and deadlier virus --the so-called Sexual Revolution (which is, itself, a significant and fundamental portion of the “Humanist Revolution”).

“Sex reformers” have always been active in this country. In the late 1800s, they consisted of a motley and disreputable gaggle of anarchists, neo-Malthusians, sex educators, self-appointed “researchers,” and eugenicists.

They raved pointlessly and harmlessly about “selective breeding” and “life devoid of value” until their fondest dreams became shockingly true in the concentration camps of Nazi Germany.

The history of eugenics and the role played by the early sex educators are described in Chapter 105. A detailed history and explanation of the Humanist philosophy, which leads inevitably to the anti-life mentality, is provided in Chapter 2 of Volume I.

The Goals of Secular Sex Education.

“Try this: A high school principal tells his assembled students that shoplifting is risky, both for its moral implications and because of the prospect of jail, and he wishes they wouldn’t do it. ‘But if you think you might shoplift anyhow, we have a visiting team of experts in Room 301 who will tell you how to avoid getting caught ...’”-- Washington Post syndicated columnist William Raspberry.[10]

Introduction.

After the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps were revealed to the world, the ideas of the sex reformers were not so easily ignored. Because such a movement can only operate under a curtain of secrecy and covert activity, it became quiescent for a while.

When the sex reformers re-emerged under the umbrella organization “National and World Sex Reform Leagues” after World War II, they listed four prime objectives essential to their self-proclaimed mission, as listed and described below.

PRIMARY GOALS OF THE SEX REFORMERS

Goal #1: Self-perpetuation.

Goal #2: Transform private vice into public virtue.

Goal #3: Eliminate restrictive laws.

Goal #4: Neutralize the enemy.

Goal #1: Self-Perpetuation.

The foremost objective of the sex reformers, as with any movement or organization, was survival or self- perpetuation. After all, without a strong foundation to work from, none of the sex educator’s goals beyond survival would be accomplished.

In order to not only survive but flourish , the sex reformers had to sanitize their image.

They succeeded in this quest brilliantly. The birth controllers eventually became so skilled with euphemisms that they put an entire nation to sleep. Some of the necessary changes in terminology that they effectively instituted are listed below.

CHANGES IN LANGUAGE INSTITUTED BY THE SEX EDUCATORS

ORIGINAL TERM	“PROGRESSIVE” TERM
Fornication, ‘shacking up’	“cohabitation”
Contraception	“responsible family planning”
Abortion	“women’s rights”
Euthanasia	“death with dignity”
Pornography	“sexually explicit material”
Promiscuity	“serial monogamy”
Sexual perversions	“alternative lifestyles”
Sodomites, homosexuals	“gay” people
Adultery	“flexible monogamy”
Partner in adultery	“significant other”
Bestiality	“interspecies love”
Sado-masochism (S&M)	“exchange of power”
Child molestation	“intergenerational love”
Modesty, chastity	“sexual hangups”
Self-discipline	“unhealthy repression”
Moral irresponsibility	“freed up”

For a detailed explanation of how the sex reformers helped warp our language to suit their own purposes, and for a “dictionary” of more than 100 anti-life words and their true meanings, see Chapter 15 in Volume I, “Newspeak.”

Goal 2: Vice to Virtue.

The sex reformers had to transform private vice into public virtue . In order to accomplish this objective, they had to first couch their vices in terms of “freedom” and “rights,” a philosophy that appeals strongly to Americans (and, much more fundamentally, to our basic fallen human nature). The rights that the World Sex Reform League (and later, Planned Parenthood and SIECUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States) specifically support are listed in Figure 139-1. The accomplishment of these objectives are backed by a variety of prominent sex educators and sex researchers, as shown by the quotes in Figure 139-2.

The organizations that have officially gone on record as supporting some or all these goals are listed in Figure 139-3.

FIGURE 139-1 OBJECTIVES OF THE SEX EDUCATORS

(1) Fornication

(2) Adultery

(3) Divorce

(4) “Trial marriages” (shacking up)

(5) Commercial sex (prostitution)

(6) Sodomy

(7) Euthanasia

(8) Suicide (individual or assisted)

(9) Masturbation

(10) Infanticide

(11) Pedophilia and pederasty

(12) Sado-masochism

(13) Bestiality

(14) Incest

(15) Unlimited free (tax-paid) contraception

(16) Unlimited free (tax-paid) abortion on demand, for any reason

(17) Unlimited free (tax-paid) sterilization

(18) Eugenic breeding, sterilization, and abortion to “improve the human race” (all mandatory, if necessary)

(19) Unlimited access to pornography of all types, including that porn which depicts torture, rape, homosexual perversions, and sex with children and animals

(20) State-mandated programs of compulsory birth control, sterilization, and abortion for ‘selected groups’ (purportedly for the purposes of population control, actually for negative eugenics)

References: Quotes by prominent sex educators as listed in the body of Chapter 139 and in Figure 139-1.

FIGURE 139-2 QUOTES BY SCHOOL SEX EDUCATORS

SUPPORTING THE GOALS OUTLINED IN FIGURE 139-1

“Our alternative solution is to be ready as educators and parents to help young people obtain sex satisfaction before marriage. By sanctioning sex before marriage, we will prevent fear and guilt. We must also relieve those who have them of their fears and guilt feelings, and we must be ready to provide young boys and girls with the best contraception measures available so they will have the necessary means to achieve sexual satisfaction without having to risk possible pregnancy. We owe this to them.”-- Dr. Lena Levine. “Psychosexual Development.” Planned Parenthood News , Summer 1953, page 10.

“Too many of us are focused upon stopping teenage sexual activity rather than stopping teenage pregnancy ... Sexuality education must be a fundamental part of the school curricula from kindergarten through twelfth grade in every school district in the country ... Easier access to contraception must be another priority -- access without any barriers. We must establish many more school-based health clinics that provide contraceptives as part of general health care.”-- Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). The Humanist , July/August 1986 page 7.

“If, however, you have separated your sex and love needs ... then you could have a hundred partners and still be a perfect candidate for a good close relationship later on. So having multiple sexual partners in itself doesn’t mean anything.”-- Harvey Caplan, M.D., staff clinician at Planned Parenthood/World Population of Alameda-San Francisco. Quoted in The Joy of Birth Control by Stephanie Mills, Planned Parenthood Federation of America board member.

“Premarital intercourse does have its definite values as a training ground for marriage or some other committed relationship ... to make everyday comparisons again, it’s like taking a car out for a test run before you buy it ... I have known cases of farm boys who have had a loving sexual relationship with an animal and who felt good about their behavior until they got to college, where they learned for the first time that what they had done was ‘abnormal.’ Then they were upset...”-- Wardell Pomeroy, Ph.D. Boys and Sex . Delacorte Press, New York, 1981. Page 117. This book is used in numerous public school systems in the United States.

“Do you want a convenient warm body? Buy one. That’s right. There are women who have freely chosen that business; buy one. Do you want a virgin to marry? Buy one. There are girls in that business, too. Marriage is the price you’ll pay, and you’ll get the virgin. Very temporarily.”-- Sheri Tepper. “You’ve Changed the Combination!” Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, Denver, Colorado, 1977, page 18.

“No religious views, no moral standards, are to deflect the child from the overriding purposes of self-discovery, self-assertion, and self-gratification.”-- Planned Parenthood Sex Education and Mental Health Report , 1979.

“Sex is too important to glop it up with sentiment. If you feel sexy, for heaven’s sake, admit it to yourself. If the feeling and the tension bother you, you can masturbate.”-- Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood pamphlet, “The Perils of Puberty.”

“You can say to your male boyfriend, My parents won’t be home until 2 AM, why don’t you stop at Lucky’s and get some condoms ... If you’re out in Waller Park, and you’ve got about half your clothes off, and you say to your boyfriend, Freddie, let’s get our clothes back on and drive home and get my diaphragm and come back to the park ... And the advantages of the pill are that a woman can take a pill for breakfast every morning and then later on that day nobody has to stop and do anything, nobody has to be embarrassed finding a diaphragm, putting on a condom, or anything else. And let’s face it, when you males like to get into your females, it’s fun, enjoyable ...”-- Robert Webber, Director, Santa Barbara North County Planned Parenthood, during a sexuality class given at Santa Maria Catholic High School, California, November 16, 1983.

“There are certain things that you do not want to talk about to your parents. There are certain things they don’t want to talk about to you. The only thing you owe anyone is courtesy. You don’t owe anyone ‘love.’ If you think your parents are great, that’s wonderful. If you don’t get along, that’s too bad but it’s no lifetime tragedy. How you feel about them isn’t nearly as important as how you feel about yourself. And if you start thinking and talking about them all the time, you may find yourself still doing it at age fifty with no one listening.”-- Sheri Tepper, “You’ve Changed the Combination!” Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, Denver, Colorado, 1977, page 18.

“Sado-masochism may be very acceptable and safe for sexual partners who know each other’s needs and have established agreements for what they want from each other ... Some people are now saying that partnerships -- married or unmarried -- should not be exclusive. They believe that while a primary relationship is maintained with one person, the freedom for both partners to love and share sex with others should also be present.”

“A fair percentage of people probably have some sort of sexual contact with an animal during their lifetime, particularly boys who live on farms. There are no indications that such animal contacts are harmful, except for the obvious dangers of poor hygiene, injury by the animal, or guilt on the part of the human.”-- Gary F. Kelly. Learning About Sex: The Contemporary Guide for Young Adults . New York: Barron’s, 1968. Pages 61 and 136. Quoted in Gene Antonio. “America’s XXX-Rated Sex Education Curricula.” New Dimensions Magazine, September 1990, pages 72 to 77.

“Young people are not paying any attention to us because we have these dumb messages ... and the dumbest one is ‘just say no!’ ... If I was going to sue anybody ... the 38th person, in order of importance, that I would sue, would be the pornographer, in order of influence on the rape ... Don’t you [teachers] dare try to implement anything I say unless you have job security and tenure ... If a supervisor says to you, ‘But you’re not supposed to do this stuff,’ always say, ‘Oh, I didn’t know.’”-- Sol Gordon addressing the October 1988 meeting of the National Organization of Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenting (NOAPP), in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Quoted in Margo Szews. “The Pied Piper of Sex and Sleaze: Dr. Sol Gordon and Friends Tell Kids to “Just Say Yes! ““ ALL About Issues , June-July 1989, pages 40 to 42.

FIGURE 139-3 ORGANIZATIONS DIRECTLY SUPPORTING COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SCHOOL-BASED CLINICS FROM 1940 TO THE PRESENT

Abortion Reform Association

Adolescent Pregnancy Child Watch Project (APCW)

Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Clearinghouse

Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI)

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

American Association of Marriage Counselors (AAMC)

American Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians

American Association of Sex Educators and Counselors

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)

American Eugenics Society

American Humanist Association (AHA)

American Medical Association (AMA)

American Public Health Association (APHA)

American School Health Association (ASHA)

American Social Hygiene Association (ASHA)

Association for the Study of Abortion (ASA)

Association for Voluntary Sterilization (AVS)

Carnegie Corporation of the New York Foundation

‘Catholics’ for a Free Choice (CFFC)

Center for Population Options (CPO)

Children’s Defense Fund (CDF)

Churchill Films of Los Angeles

Clergy Consultation Service

Concern for Dying

Contemporary McGraw-Hill Films of New York

Council of Churches of Christ in the United States

Dignity (unrepentant former Catholic homosexuals)

Euthanasia Educational Council

Euthanasia Society of America

Family Source Association of American (FSAA)

Ford Foundation

Gay Caucus of Public Health Workers

Gay Caucus of the American Bar Association (ABA)

Gay Caucus of the American Psychiatric Association

Gay Teacher’s Caucus, National Education Association

Kinsey Institute for Research on Sex, Gender, and Reproduction

Metropolitan Community Churches (formerly the ‘Sodomy Church’

Multi-Media Resource Center, California

National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL)

National Association of Sex Education (NASE)

National ‘Catholic’ Education Association

National Education Association (NEA)

National Organization for Women (NOW)

National Sex and Drug Reform

National Support Center for School-Based Clinics

Negative Population Growth (NPG)

North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA)

Noyes Foundation

Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO)

Office of Population Affairs, Department of Health, Education and Welfare

Packard Foundation

Pathfinder Fund

Parent-Teacher Association (PTA)

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA)

Playboy Foundation

Population Council (PC)

Population Crisis Committee (PCC)

Population Institute

Population Reference

Masters and Johnson

‘Religious’ Coalition for Abortion Rights (RCAR)

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Rockefeller Family Fund

Rockefeller Foundation

Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS)

Society for Humane Abortion

Unitarian Universalist Association

United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF)

United Methodist Church (Board of Church and Society)

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

United States Catholic Conference (USCC)

United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), later United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Victor Bostrum Population Fund

William C. Brown Company, Iowa

World Health Organization, United Nations (WHO)

World League for Sexual Reform

Young Women’s ‘Christian’ Association (YMCA)

Zero Population Growth (ZPG)

It is very interesting indeed to see how the sex reformers react to having their own children immersed in the ethical morass that they have helped to create.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America is the most prominent organization pushing for the goals listed in Figure 139-1. PPFA’s president, Faye Wattleton, said in 1985 that “My daughter is ten, and like other ten-year olds, she has got the world on a string. My solace in confronting her sexual maturation is the knowledge that she attends an all- girl school, and that’s exactly where I intend to keep her for as long as I can.”

This is an attitude typical of the sex educators. They feel free to experiment on other people’s children, but they would never allow their programs to be inflicted upon their own children!

This double standard tells us volumes.

Goal #3: Eliminate ‘Restrictive’ Laws.

The sex education cartel has been devastatingly effective in meeting this goal. It may seem imaginable in this age, but in 1965, it was illegal to sell contraceptives to married couples!

Through a decade-long campaign of agitation in the courts, the Neoliberal ‘sexperts’ not only struck down all limits on contraception and abortion, but laid the foundation for the ushering in of euthanasia and “gay rights” as well with their malignant “privacy doctrine.”

Chapter 89 in Volume II, “Supreme Court Decisions on Abortion,” shows the progressive elimination of all laws governing sexual behavior. The sex educators have almost completed their drive to legalize all of the behaviors listed in Figure 139-1.

Goal #4: Neutralize the Enemy.

As in all wars, in order for an army to win, it must effectively eliminate, confuse, or neutralize the enemy -- in this case, the moral standards of Western civilization in general and the Catholic and evangelical churches in particular. The most powerful weapon in the Neoliberal/Humanist is the strategy of infiltration and subversion, as described in Chapter 10 of Volume I.

There have always been five traditional teachers of morality in any culture: The law, the schools, the media, the churches, and the family. The sex reformers have succeeded in turning the first three of these against traditional morality. The Church has also been neutralized and now sits helplessly on the sidelines.

The only remaining bulwark against the moral revisionism taking place in our society today is the family. This is why it is being attacked by Neoliberals so relentlessly and so viciously. If the last teacher of morality in the country -- the family -- can be destroyed, redefined out of existence, or simply marginalized to the point of invisibility, the Neoliberals can write their own ticket, and no voice will be raised in protest.

Strategies of the Sex Educators.

Introduction.

The ‘sex education complex’ c consisting of SIECUS, NFPRHA, Planned Parenthood, the PTA, and all of the other sex pushers must accomplish two concurrent tasks if it wants to be totally in charge of molding the sexual morals of our children.

The first task is to design and establish a secular sex education program, and the second is to eliminate all other programs that might conflict with Humanist goals.

Figure 139-4 outlines the tried and true five-step program that has been used by the sexperts all over the country to get sex education and school-based clinics (SBCs) into public schools.

FIGURE 139-4 FIVE-STEP STRATEGY FOR INSTALLING A SCHOOL-BASED CLINIC OR A SEX ED CURRICULUM

STEP 1: Lay the foundation for implementing the school-based clinic or sex education curriculum. This involves three basic simultaneous tasks: (1) Create the impression that there is a need, (2) make connections, and (3) attack the opposition.

To begin with, get one or more major public officials concerned about the high teen pregnancy rate by using doctored statistics. Preferably, this person or persons will be school district superintendents or the mayor of the city and city council members.

Secondly, make contacts with only pro-abortion groups while ignoring conservative or pro-life groups. A Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) publication entitled Winning the Battle for Sex Education advises networking specifically with the National Abortion Rights Action League, the National Organization for Women, Planned Parenthood, the YWCA, and the League of Women Voters. The same book says that “The key word for successful public relations for a sex education program is anticipation: Preparing in advance. Initial contacts should in any case be made at the latest several weeks before you have agreed to “go public” with information/details about the program. Public relations is in certain respects the art of knowing when you want publicity and when you don’t.”

Finally, begin a series of confidential meetings with high-ranking personnel from friendly media outlets. Supply them with derogatory material about people who might be concerned about the program and who might voice any objections whatever. The SIECUS “how-to” publication entitled Winning the Battle: Developing Support for Sexuality and HIV/AIDS Education shows how to paint any opposition as “fanatics” by ruthlessly stereotyping them and lying about their objectives; “Regardless of their official platform, their goal is often to curtail freedom of expression and academic freedom as well as the right to one’s privacy, the right to sexual information, and right to a healthy, sexual life ... They mistakenly believe that telling young people about sexuality causes them to have sexual intercourse, become promiscuous, and get pregnant.” Specific groups are targeted by SIECUS: The American Family Association, American Life League, Concerned Women for America, Eagle Forum, Focus on the Family, and the National Association for Abstinence Education.

The same publication shows how to attack abstinence-based sex ed programs like Sex Respect , regardless of their effectiveness. Instances of coercing schools to drop the Sex Respect course in favor of explicit sex ed are labeled “success stories” in the book, showing that SIECUS does not believe in plurality, and that, in its mind, its solution is the only right one.

STEP 2: Get the “concerned citizens” to appoint a “Blue Ribbon Committee” to study the problem. Pack this committee with church, political and school leaders who have the appearance of being open-minded, but who are in fact sympathetic to Planned Parenthood/SIECUS-type goals. Insure that one (and only one) committee member is a Catholic priest, prominent Evangelical pastor, or other such representative of the conservative view, but make certain that this person is not really informed about the life issues. The presence of this one person will deflect criticism that the Committee is “loaded,” and will give the appearance of fairness. As SIECUS says, “In Memphis, Tennessee, a Catholic priest who was a member of the [sex education planning] committee effectively neutralized the opposition’s charge that religious values were being ignored.”

The (SIECUS) publication entitled Winning the Battle: Developing Support for Sexuality and HIV/AIDS Education advises “In many communities, opponents are invited to serve on the planning committee for new programs. Although it may seem easier to have only proponents on this committee, it

is one way to defuse the opposition at an early stage. According to sexuality educator Mary Lee Tatum, “Listen to them and let them participate on committees; then make committee statements using facts and data, underscoring the majority opinion.”“

In other words, put one or two of the “opposition” on the 12- to 14-member board for appearance’s sake, and then act as if they and their viewpoints do not exist by emphasizing only the pre-ordained “majority opinion.”

STEP 3: Insure that the Committee makes the proper recommendations (i.e., in favor of school-based clinics or sex education). These recommendations are usually copied almost verbatim from previous Committee releases that have been issued in other areas. Insure if possible that NO PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE ALLOWED! Public recommendations may only be submitted by letter, which are ignored if they attack the proposed SBC or sex ed program. Always claim that at least 80 percent of all mail favors the proposed SBC or sex ed curriculum. When dealing with unfavorable comments, SIECUS recommends “In fact, if possible, the [responding] statement can ignore the charges entirely and consist of a positive statement about the program and its real or potential accomplishments.”

Parental involvement in the decisionmaking process is encouraged only if the parents are “enlightened.” This exalted term applies only to those parents who share the views of the sex educators and SBC pushers. Of course, in their opinion, the vast majority of parents are by no means “enlightened.”

STEP 4: If intense opposition surfaces against the birth control and abortion referral features of the SBC, install the SBC anyway, but without these features. A simple amendment to the charter can be made adding these features when the original uproar has died down and people have forgotten about the SBC. It is much easier to add birth control and abortion referral after the clinic has been established than it is to include these features in the original plan.

Joy Dryfoos of the Center for Population Options stated in the March/April 1985 issue of the Alan Guttmacher Institute’s Family Planning Perspectives that clinics “Can avoid local controversy by starting with primary health care and then adding family planning services.”

STEP 5: Trumpet the “fact” that the teenage birth rate is down, and conceal the fact that abortions have gone up. Use this “success” story to spread the clinics or the sex ed program to other high schools in the area.

Just in case opposition surfaces at some future date, entrench sex education by blending it with instruction in other courses. SIECUS advises “They [strategists] agree with many experienced sex educators that various facets of sexuality can -- and should be -- incorporated into biology, physiology, English, history, and other courses in a natural context.”

References. (1) Irving R. Dickman. Winning the Battle for Sex Education . The Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), 80 Fifth Avenue, Suite 801, New York, New York 10011. 1982, 60 pages, $6.00. (2) Debra W. Haffner and Diane de Mauro. Winning the Battle: Developing Support for Sexuality and HIV/AIDS Education . SIECUS, March 1991.

Attacking Effective Programs.

The secular sex educators correctly recognize that they are engaged in a tremendous battle for the hearts of our nation’s youth.

They have chosen their battlefield well: The public school system is a natural indoctrination ground for Neoliberals. As Alexander Cockburn has written, “The Left can’t survive politically without a public school system to spread leftist attitudes.”[11]

Alan Guttmacher revealed one of the primary purposes of value-free sex education when he admitted that “The only avenue the International Planned Parenthood Federation and its allies could travel to win the battle for abortion on demand is through sex education.”[12]

The sex educators have also correctly identified the Achilles heel of our youth: Their sexual instinct.

Therefore, whenever a “counterattack” against their programs is launched in the form of an effective values-based sex ed curriculum, the secularists believe that such teachings will undermine their influence.

The sex educators not only want to insure that their programs are mandatory, they want to make certain that all other programs are banned completely, even if the alternatives are more effective than their own. This shows that the secular sex educators’ highest goal is not a decrease in teen sexual activity, but the perpetuation of their own curricula. Obviously, any alternative sex ed program that stresses responsibility and chastity undercuts the Humanist view that children have no loyalty to anyone but themselves.

Such a program is Sex Respect . This value-based sex education curriculum, which emphasizes abstinence, was adopted by 1,800 school districts in all 50 states. The results of the program were literally spectacular; in those school districts where the Sex Respect program was initiated, the teen pregnancy rate fell by an average of 45 percent over an average period of two years.

Despite (or perhaps because of) this success, the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood bitterly attacked the Sex Respect program in the courts, alleging that it violated the principle of separation of church and state.

In an undated form letter entitled “The Sex Respect curriculum, and alternatives,” written to “Interested individuals,” Susan Newcomer, the Director of Education, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., wrote that

“The [ Sex Respect ] program is inappropriate because it is a text with a religious point of view. A major portion of the references are from authors, organizations or publishers with specific religious agendas:

Couple to Couple League ---------------- CATHOLIC

Human Life Center ------------------------ CATHOLIC

Hayes Publishing Co. ------------------------ Pro-Life

Franciscan Herald Press ---------- CATHILIC [sic]

Augsburg ------------------------------- LUTHERAN

Our Sunday Visitor Press ---------------- CATHOLIC

Womanity Publications ----------------------- Pro-Life

Dr. J.C. Willke ------------------- Right to Life

Tyndale House Pub. --------------------------- Biblical

Pearson Institute ---------------------------- CATHOLIC

Life Cycle Books ---------------------------- Pro-Life

The question is; can you use any or all of a textbook with strong religious leanings? I think that utilization of this text violates the separation of church and state.”

One would think that allegedly educated people like Newcomer could think of a more original premise under which to oppose a sex education program that has been proven effective.

Of course, Newcomer’s real reason for vilifying the Sex Respect program is clear: Planned Parenthood doesn’t make any money off of chastity, only from school-based clinics, condoms, birth control pills, and abortions. Note, in the above list, that any group that Newcomer cannot link to a particular religion -- even a group that does not even mention religion -- is simply labeled “Biblical,” “Right to Life,” or “Pro-Life,” and lumped in with all of the other organizations.

This attack proved conclusively that the objective of the secular sex educators is not to reduce teen pregnancy, but to indoctrinate our children in their own values.

What Are Your Kids Learning About Sex?

“For years I thought the pill would not lead to promiscuity, but I’ve changed my mind. I think it probably has.”-- Dr. Robert Kirstner of Harvard Medical School, one of the original developers of the birth control pill.[13]

Introduction.

Our children spend more than one-third of their waking hours in the public school system. Therefore, the schools inevitably exert a profound influence upon their morals and attitudes.

Most of the time, our children are exposed to an indirect erosion of Christian values through censorship and omission. The Bible and school prayer are officially banned. Texts entirely omit the role of God or religion in the formation and development of our country. And situational ethics -- the absolute antithesis to the teachings of Christ -- defines student behavior.

While these constitute an indirect erosion of Christian values, there exists one area of instruction where the entire considerable might of the public school system is arrayed in a posture that directly attacks Christian values. This area is sex education.

Where Christianity emphasizes chastity before marriage and faithfulness to God and spouse afterward, public schools have diligently banned God, and tell our kids that contraception, abortion, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, and even sex with animals is value-free and therefore involve rights that cannot be tampered with or interfered with --especially by parents.

The following paragraphs describe the contents of some of the most common sex education books and curricula used by public schools today. Please recognize that all of them emphasize the “rights” to birth control, abortion, free sex, adultery, homosexuality, and even sex with animals; they are all objectionable throughout. The quotes given below are typical of their entire contents.

Guide For Young Adults.

Changing Bodies.

Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships is probably the most popular sex education textbook in the country today and has been in continuous use in thousands of high schools since it was published more than a decade ago. It includes the statement “Bisexuality is an openness to loving, sexual relationships with both sexes -- our true nature ... Gay men, too, have many ways of making love. One may caress the other’s penis with his hand or his mouth. Or one may put his penis in the other’s anus.”[15]

Boys and Girls and Sex.

These books assert that “Premarital intercourse does have its definite values as a training ground for marriage or some other committed relationship ... to make everyday comparisons again, it’s like taking a car out for a test run before you buy it ... I have known cases of farm boys who have had a loving sexual relationship with an animal and who felt good about their behavior until they got to college, where they learned for the first time that what they had done was ‘abnormal.’ Then they were upset...”[16]

Enhancing Skills.

One Washington State parent testified about the coercive nature of many sex education programs. The objective of such programs is to use peer pressure to forcibly destroy the natural modesty that young people possess; “There is one teacher in Bellevue who has all the boys say ‘vagina;’ he calls them individually, and they all have to say it out loud in class. The boys say ‘vagina’ and the girls say ‘penis.’ One girl told me that she was so embarrassed that she could hardly bring out the word ‘penis’ because all these boys were sitting in the class. It just embarrassed her so. So he made her get up in front of the class and very loudly say it ten times.”[18]

Expanding the Program.

Parents who demand to see the textbooks and teaching aids for a particular sex education program may be presented with material that appears to be perfectly innocuous.

However, teachers are by no means constrained to teach only what is contained in their study guides. The messages actually transmitted by adults to children are the most important influence -- not what is contained in the study materials.

Sol Gordon, the “Sultan of Sleaze,” whose teaching have been defined as pornographic by the courts, describes how sex-ed teachers may say anything they want and get around any limitations merely by feigning ignorance of the rules; “Young people are not paying any attention to us because we have these dumb messages ... and the dumbest one is “just say no!” ... If I was going to sue anybody ... the 38th person, in order of importance, that I would sue, would be the pornographer, in order of influence on the rape ... Don’t you [teachers] dare try to implement anything I say unless you have job security and tenure ... If a supervisor says to you, “But you’re not supposed to do this stuff,” always say, “Oh, I didn’t know.”“[19]

In practical effect, sex educators can say anything they want to in class. Many conservative organizations have reported that Gordon’s type of instruction in deception and outright lying is common in comprehensive sex education programs.

And, when one thinks about it, this is perfectly logical. What is the purpose of secular sex education other than to prepare teenagers for premarital sex (fornication)?

Other Gateways.

Christian parents should by no means assume that secular sex ed programs are the only tools available for the corruption of their children. The evil intentions of the ‘sexperts’ are only matched by their almost limitless imaginations.

Planned Parenthood workers, of course, have the most active imaginations of all. They have spawned literally hundreds of programs designed to ‘desensitize’ children to sexual acts. Translated, this means that the first step to getting kids in bed with each other is to get them used to the idea.

One entirely typical program of this nature was Vermont Planned Parenthood’s “Safety Dance,” where kids were instructed to use nametags and placards to arrange the sequence of events associated with putting on a condom. Another ‘skit’ had kids arrange some 25 “sexual activities” in order of HIV-infection potential, as shown in Figure 139-5.

FIGURE 139-5 EXCERPTS FROM THE OUTLINE OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD’S “SAFETY DANCE” FOR TEENS

“2. “Puttin’ On the Condom” (adapted from “Condom Comfort” in Positive Images: A New Approach to Contraceptive Education by Brick and Cooperman). During the course of the evening, each person receives and wears a nametag depicting a different step in condom use. During this activity, participants arrange themselves in a line (or a circle) according to how they think a condom is used (if there are a large number of participants, have several groups perform the activity at the same time, and compare the results)! After the line is formed, have the participants read off their tags in order. Acting out the steps can increase the fun of this activity. The nametags are labelled as follows:	“5. Safer Sex Continuum Activity. Participants tape placards containing a “sexual activity” on a wall ranking them from least risky to most risky for HIV infection.
Physical attraction	Massage
Leave space at tip	Fantasy
Think about having sex	Dry kissing
Roll condom down penis	French kissing
Talk about having sex	Sex toys
Enough lubrication?	Body paints
Decide to use a condom	Hugging
If no, use KY jelly	Backrub
Pool money	Making out/petting
... or, more foreplay	Flirting
Go to a condom store	Wrestling
Intercourse	Saunas/Jacuzzi
Decide what kind to buy	Stargazing
Ejaculation	Bubble bath
Take box off rack	Candlelight dinner
Hold on to rim of condom	Incense
Pay cashier	Phone sex
Withdraw penis	Fast dancing
Decide where to store them	Slow dancing
Remove condom	Walk along beach
Meet your lover	Cruising/parking
Loss of erection (two of these)	Showering together
Decide to have sex	Masturbation
Decide where to throw condom away	Mutual masturbation
Need to use a condom	Intercourse without condom
Trash it	Dressing/undressing one another
Open package	Skinny-dipping/moonlight swimming
Wash penis	Erotic films and magazines
Penis hard?	Oral sex on a woman (cunnilingus)
Relax (throughout)	Oral sex on a woman with a dental dam
Place condom on penis	Oral sex on a man wearing a condom
Feel good? (throughout)	Oral sex on a man (fellatio)
Fall in love (throughout, or at all)?	Intercourse with a condom (and foam)
Partner have an orgasm?	Oral/anal contact (rimming)
	Anal intercourse without a condom
	Anal intercourse with a condom
	Eating fresh strawberries dipped in chocolate/sensuous feeding
	Snuggling in a beanbag chair eating chocolate chip cookies

Reference. Vermont Planned Parenthood description and instruction guide for its teen “Safety Dance.” Described in “PP’s “Safety Dance.” STOPP News , May 5, 1989, pages 1 to 3. Stop Planned Parenthood Inc., Post Office Box 8, LaGrangeville, New York 12540, telephone: (914) 473-3316.

The instruction manual for the “Safety Dance” suggested that the event be made part of a homework assignment for kids, so they would be faced with a coercive choice: Participate in the brainwashing or receive a failing grade for the day.

The “Safety Dance” is just one of the ways that Planned Parenthood deliberately and systematically undermines parental and familial values. But, like termites, PP does its most dangerous work out of sight -- not in high-profile contests, but in day-to-day classroom instruction.

For example, in its widely-used “Sensitivity Training” program, Planned Parenthood breaks down home training by having mixed groups of students discuss “Virginity, Oral-Genital Sex, Intercourse, Masturbation, Sterility, Group Sex, Homosexuality, Extra-Marital Relations, Abortion, and Nudity --with acquaintances, with family, with the opposite sex, with the same sex, and with close friends.” Those members of the group who refuse to change their attitudes “are considered non-conformists or deviants.” In some schools, failure to participate in these classes results in the student being suspended from school.[20]

And in its “Positive Imaging” program, Planned Parenthood tries to establish guided and fantasy imagery in students’ minds. In one scenario, they are told to have fantasies involving “... sexual feelings about people of the same or opposite sex, parents, brothers and sisters, old people, animals, nature, inanimate objects, and almost anything you can imagine.”[21]

There can be no possible purpose for these and similar exercises other than to break down the inhibitions of students and get them to take the first road to an uninhibited and omnisexual lifestyle -- by getting them to imagine and talk about every kind of perverted sex act in the book.

On the Ineffectiveness of Secular Sex Education.

The Future Lies in Europe.

Europe is dying. Only one European country --Ireland -- is replacing its population. People have simply stopped having children!

Why is this?

Because the pervasive and mandatory ‘value-free’ sex education programs have decisively separated procreation from the sexual union. Sex is now good for nothing but pleasure, and pregnancy is a dreaded disease, to be avoided at all costs.

The results of such programs, instituted on a national scale, are staggering. And they are utterly predictable.

Denmark is one example. Concerned about rising illegitimate births, the country instituted compulsory sex education in 1970. The result? The March 30, 1985 Human Events reports that “Illegitimate births, which were supposed to drop, instead nearly doubled; abortion rates, which were predicted to fall with the ready availability of condoms and other contraceptives in grocery stores, actually doubled; venereal disease more than doubled; and divorces doubled.”

In the United States.

This country’s leading sexologists have acknowledged that providing contraceptive information to teenagers is completely ineffective at stopping teenage pregnancy (some of their quotes are shown in the next section).

However, the psychological investment these “sexperts” have made in sex education is enormous. To quit or to change direction at this late date would not only mean admitting error, but liability as well. Additionally, these “sexperts” have become locked into their own self- perpetuating bureaucracy, whose primary purpose (as with any bureaucracy) is survival and, if possible, expansion.

Comprehensive sex education has definitely contributed to an exploding teen pregnancy rate by encouraging unlimited fornication. In 1970, only 4.6 percent of all girls aged 15 had fornicated before marriage. In 1990, this rate had increased more than sevenfold to 33.1 percent. Of all unmarried girls in the 15 to 19 age bracket, 28.6 percent had fornicated in 1970. This rate had more than doubled to 61.4 percent by 1990.[23]

And so, as the teenage pregnancy rate rises, the “sexperts” continue to recommend more and more of the poison that caused the illness in the first place.

In 1986, Harris and Associates performed a comprehensive poll for Planned Parenthood regarding teenage sexual activity and the effects that sex education has upon it. The results were as follows;[24]

Teenagers receiving comprehensive sex education	46% had engaged in sexual intercourse.
Teenagers receiving no sex education whatsoever	32% had engaged in sexual intercourse.
Teenagers receiving biological sex education	26% had engaged in sexual intercourse.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute, affiliated with Planned Parenthood, is the nation’s foremost research institution regarding sexual practices. In 1987, it performed a survey of nearly 10,000 teenaged girls, and found that their annual contraceptive user-failure rates are as follows;

CONTRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATES FOR TEENAGERS (PERCENT PER YEAR)

Birth control pill	11 percent
Condoms	14 percent
Diaphragm	16 percent
Spermicides	34 percent
Other methods (i.e., withdrawal)	38 percent

Reference: Robert A. Hatcher. Contraceptive Technology, 1986-1987 . 13th Revised Edition, New York, Irvington Publishers, 1986, page 139.

Consider the above statistics for just a moment. The birth control pill is the most effective contraceptive method commonly used by teenagers. A girl on the Pill will have a one in nine chance of becoming pregnant each year . And a girl who begins using the Pill at the age of 15 and uses it for six full years (till the age of 21) will have a

50 percent chance of becoming pregnant! If her boyfriend faithfully uses condoms, this probability increases to 60 percent. If she uses a diaphragm it is 65 percent. And if she uses any other method, she is virtually assured of becoming pregnant at least once over a period of six years.

And the “sexperts” scratch their heads and wonder out loud why the teenage pregnancy rate is so high.

For more information on these calculations, see Chapter 99, “Contraceptive Effectiveness and Use.”

The State’s Experience.

It is very interesting indeed to compare the experiences of states that have instituted mandatory sex education programs and those that have not by comparing the changes in important indicators that occur when sex education is brought into all of a state’s schools.

Maryland mandated sex ed in 1970 and it was installed in all state schools by 1974. Kentucky installed mandatory sex education in 1973.

On the other hand, Louisiana, which did not have mandatory sex education classes during the same period, had a similar population but did better than both Maryland and Kentucky on the most important statistical measures; teen pregnancies and teen abortions, as shown below.

COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCES: STATES WITH AND WITHOUT COMPULSORY SEX EDUCATION

Maryland (with sex education)
Indicator	1971	1978	Increase
Teen pregnancies	13,621	16,958	24.5%
Teen abortions	2,539	8,339	228.4%
Percent aborted	18.6%	49.2%	164.5%
Pregnancies/1,000	70	82	17.1%
Abortions/1,000	13	40	207.7%
Kentucky (with sex education)
Indicator	1974	1977	Increase
Teen pregnancies	14,935	16,302	9.2%
Teen abortions	1,898	3,537	86.4%
Percent aborted	12.7%	21.7%	70.9%
Pregnancies/1,000	90	96	6.7%
Abortions/1,000	11	21	90.9%
Louisiana (without sex education)
Indicator	1974	1977	Increase
Teen pregnancies	16,019	19,095	19.2%
Teen abortions	331	2,558	672.8%
Percent aborted	2.1%	13.1%	523.8%
Pregnancies/1,000	80	90	12.5%
Abortions/1,000	2	12	500.0%

Reference: Christian S. White IV. “Ineffectiveness of Sex Ed Shown by Simple Statistics.” ALL About Issues , July 1982, pages 16 to 18.

The “Sexperts” Speak.

The same people who instituted and administered these disastrously ineffective sex education programs are the best- qualified to monitor and assess the results.

Their verdict is virtually unanimous: Comprehensive sex education programs are aggravating the problems of teenaged pregnancy and STDs, not ameliorating them.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI, Planned Parenthood’s research arm) possesses the world’s foremost experts on sex education and its effects. AGI and other experts acknowledge the abysmal failure of secular comprehensive sex education in the quotes shown in Figure 139-6.

FIGURE 139-6 SEX EDUCATORS AND OTHER EXPERTS ADDRESS THE FAILURE OF SECULAR SEX EDUCATION

“It is widely believed that providing teenagers with information about pregnancy and birth control is crucial if the incidence of adolescent pregnancy is to be reduced, and that formal sex education programs are an appropriate and important vehicle for providing information. Between 57 percent and 65 percent of teenagers receive formal contraceptive instruction before initiating coitus. However, our analyses fail to show any consistent relationship between exposure to contraceptive education and the subsequent initiation of intercourse ... The final result to emerge from the analysis is that neither pregnancy education nor contraceptive education exerts any significant effect on the risk of premarital pregnancy among sexually active teenagers -- a finding that calls into question the argument that formal sex education is an effective tool for reducing adolescent pregnancy.”-- Alan Guttmacher Institute. “The Effects of Sex Education on Adolescent Behavior.” Family Planning Perspectives , July/August 1986, pages 162 and 169.

“Teenagers need to be reassured that it is normal not to have sex. The best people to learn that from is their parents. There are no substitutes for parental guidance. Sex education without morals and values is useless.”-- Sex educator Sol Gordon. Raising a Child Conservatively in a Sexually Permissive World . Quoted in Reginald C. Tsang, M.D. “Fighting Teen-Age Pregnancies.” National Federation for Decency Journal , August 1987, page 12.

“It is clear that the family planning programs have contributed directly to an increase in the rate of abortion among teenagers.”-- James Ford, M.D., and Michael Schwartz. “Birth Control for Teenagers: Diagram for Disaster.” Linacre Quarterly , February 1979.

“Instead of the expected reductions in overall teenage pregnancy rates, greater teenage involvement in family-planning programs appears to be associated with higher, rather than lower, teenage pregnancy rates.”-- Stan Weed and Sam Olson. “Effects of Family Planning Programs for Teenagers on Adolescent Birth and Pregnancy Rates.” Family Perspective , Volume 20, Number 3, page 153.

“Oral contraceptives, in fact, have been linked by some to increasing STD [sexually-transmitted disease] rates by (1) causing abandonment of barrier methods and (2) leading to increased sexual activity ... Epidemiologic and biologic evidence seems to indicate that infection with Chlamydia Trachomatic is enhanced by oral contraceptives.”-- Robert A. Hatcher, editor. Contraceptive Technology, 1986-1987 . 13th Revised Edition, New York, Irvington Publishers, 1986, page 137.

“More teenagers are using contraceptives and using them more consistently than ever before, yet the number and rate of adolescent pregnancies continue to rise.”-- Lynn C. Landma. “Anniversaries.” The Alan Guttmacher Institute’s Family Planning Perspectives . October 1980, page 2.

“In 1982, 1,888 women (ages 15 to 19) were surveyed and researchers found that ‘prior exposure to a sex education course is positively and significantly associated with the initiation of sexual activity at ages 15 and 16.”-- William Marsiglio and Frank Mott. “The Impact of Sex Education on Sexual Activity, Contraceptive Use and Premarital Pregnancy Among American Teenagers.” Alan Guttmacher Institute’s Family Planning Perspectives . July/August 1986, pages 151 and 158.

“Massive, federally subsidized ‘sex education’ programs entered the American public school system during the 1970s, often supplemented by clinics located in the schools and offering additional information and referrals on matters of sex, pregnancy and abortion. Before these programs began, teenage pregnancy was already declining, for more than a decade.

“This long decline in teenage pregnancy then reversed and teenage pregnancies soared, as ‘sex education’ spread pervasively throughout the public schools. The pregnancy rate among 15- to 19- year-old females was 68 per thousand in 1970 and 96 per thousand by 1980...

“Soaring rates of abortion were in fact offsetting soaring rates of pregnancy. Between 1970 and 1987, for example, the number of abortions increased by 250,000, even though the number of teenagers declined by 400,000.”-- Thomas Sowell. “The Big Lie.” Forbes , December 23, 1991, page 52.

“We find basically that there are no measurable -- I want to underline that word and put it in boldface -- there is no measurable impact upon the use of birth control nor upon pregnancy rates or birth rates. This is all based upon the survey data.”-- Douglas Kirby, Director, Center for Population Options. Session on “Education,” speech given at the 16th annual meeting of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA), Washington, D.C., March 2, 1988.

“Prior exposure to a sex education course is positively and significantly associated with the initiation of sexual activity at ages 15 and 16.”-- Results of a 1982 poll of 1,888 teenagers. Described in William Marsiglio and Frank Mott. “The Impact of Sex Education on Sexual Activity, Contraceptive Use and Premarital Pregnancy Among American Teenagers.” The Alan Guttmacher Institute’s Family Planning Perspectives , July/August 1986, pages 151 and 158.

“From 1971 to 1981 there was a 306 percent increase in Federal expenditures on family planning ‘with a corresponding 48.3% increase in pregnancies and a 133% increase in abortions for women aged fifteen to nineteen ... Those states with the highest expenditures on birth control ... showed the largest increases in abortions and illegitimate births between 1970 and 1979.”-- George Mosbacker. “The Final Step: Clinics, Children, and Contraceptives.” School-Based Clinics , page 64.

“Asking schools to teach morally and ethically neutral sex education is asking for failure.”-- Dr. Donald McDonald, former Administrator of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, quoted in “Censorship is in the Eye of the Beholder.” New Dimensions Magazine, December 1990, page 15.

“It is important to note at the outset that most researchers agree that sex education does not decrease the rate of teenage pregnancies or the incidence of sexual activity.”-- D.A. Dawson. “The Effects of Sex Education on Adolescent Behavior.” Alan Guttmacher Institute’s Family Planning Perspectives 18:(1986)162.

The Long-Term Results of Secular Sex Education.

“It is clear that the family planning programs have contributed directly to an increase in the rate of abortion among teenagers.”-- James Ford, M.D.[25]

Compulsory sex education has been with us for a long time now. Not surprisingly, Washington, D.C. -- the major city that has incorporated mandatory sex education programs for the longest time -- has the highest teen pregnancy rates and abortion rates in the country.

There can be no question that value-free and morals-free sex education has had a profound effect upon American society. When authority figures tell an entire generation of children that sex is for recreation and that all sexual expressions are good, these attitudes will inevitably be translated and incorporated into lifestyles.

Figure 139-7 shows that the sexual activity of teenagers has risen to the saturation point, and Figure 139-8 shows that our teenaged girls have a very high birthrate (it must be stressed that our country uses different measuring criteria for teenaged pregnancy than do other developed nations; if the same criteria were used for all developed countries, the United States would wind up in the middle of the pack).

FIGURE 139-7 SEXUAL ACTIVITY OF AMERICAN TEENAGERS BY AGE

	Not Currently		Sexually Active
Age	Sexually Active		Unmarried		Married
	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
13	88.0%	98.3%	12.0%	1.7%	---	---
14	75.8%	89.1%	24.2%	10.8%	---	0.1%
15	64.7%	80.1%	35.3%	19.5%	---	0.4%
16	54.7%	66.7%	45.3%	31.6%	---	1.7%
17	47.7%	52.3%	52.3%	41.9%	---	5.8%
18	33.1%	42.3%	64.1%	45.3%	2.8%	12.4%
19	21.0%	32.0%	72.3%	47.7%	6.7%	20.3%
20	16.6%	25.7%	71.6%	45.3%	11.8%	29.0%
21	22.8%	23.8%	56.3%	39.2%	20.9%	37.0%

Reference: Alan Guttmacher Institute. “Teenage Pregnancy: The Problem that Hasn’t Gone Away.” 1981, 79 pages, $10.00. Figure 1, page 7. A “sexually active” teenager is defined as one having intercourse at least once during the last twelve months.

FIGURE 139-8 ANNUAL BIRTHS PER 1,000 TEENAGED GIRLS FOR SELECTED COUNTRIES

ANNUAL BIRTHS PER 1,000 TEENAGED GIRLS

Japan	3
Switzerland, Netherlands	10
Singapore	14
USSR	16
Hong Kong	17
West Germany	18
Spain	21
Denmark, Ireland, France	23
Sweden	25
Belgium	27
Finland	28
Norway, United Kingdom	32
Canada, Australia	33
Poland	34
Portugal	37
Tunisia	39
Israel	41
Philippines	43
Malaysia	44
Fiji	46
Greece	48
New Zealand, Martinique	50
Italy, Brunei	51
UNITED STATES	52
Thailand	54
Czechoslovakia	56
East Germany	60
Yugoslavia	69
Romania	70
Hungary	74
Bulgaria	78

Reference: United Nations Department of International Economic and Social Affairs. Demographic Yearbook 1978 . New York: United Nations, 1979, Table 11. Also described in Alan Guttmacher Institute. “Teenage Pregnancy: The Problem That Hasn’t Gone Away.” Figure 18, page 22.

From 1970 to 1985, a span of just fifteen short years, we have seen the following;[26]

· Abortions have increased 333 percent;

· Illegitimate births have increased 103 percent;

· Child abuse has increased 382 percent;

· Divorces have increased 72 percent; and

· ‘Shacking up’ has increased 279 percent.

· Sexually transmitted diseases have increased 245 percent.

It is not at all surprising that the sex educators have had such a profound effect upon our society. Figure 139-3 shows that their combined power and scope is worldwide. Their network is extremely well-organized and richly funded, and they rigidly control the sexual mores of this country.

Thank you, sex educators. You have done your job very well -- very well indeed .

Our Teenagers Are Not Uncontrollable Animals.

“Then said He unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offenses will come: But woe unto him through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”-- Luke 17:1-2.

Transference Personified.

Nowhere is the principle of transference more evident than in school sex education programs. The sexologists are ruled by their gonads instead of their brains, so they arrogantly assume that everyone else is just like them -- and you can almost hear them thinking that this applies especially to those uncontrollable teenagers, whose gushing hormones drive them to fornicate endlessly whenever they get the chance!

The sex educators call our society “prudish” -- yet every drug store and convenience store stocks a dazzling display of condoms, thousands of rock records urge instant capitulation to sexual urges, sex saturates TV, Playboy and Penthouse and Screw and Hustler are available at local newsstands, X-rated videos can be rented for a dollar a night, motels rent beds by the hour -- and all of this is easily accessible to our teenagers.

Teenagers Aren’t Animals.

The sexologists don’t bother to ask the opinions of parents or students. They just go right ahead and put their programs in place over everyone’s protests. The social realities and attitudes are far different from their pornographic fantasies;

“Seven out of eight teenagers do not want a contraceptive-dispensing clinic in their schools. Sixty percent do not want clinics that dispense contraceptives located anywhere close to their schools ... Three out of four teenagers believe that teenagers should wait until they are adults before engaging in sexual intercourse.”-- “The Planned Parenthood Poll.” American Teens Speak: Sex, Myths, TV, and Birth Control . This comprehensive poll of teenagers was conducted for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America by Louis Harris and Associates, September and October of 1986. See pages 18 and 71. Also see the discussion of this poll in Robert H. Ruff’s Aborting Planned Parenthood . New Vision Press, 1988.

“A teen services program at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital found that of the girls under age sixteen it surveyed, nine out of ten wanted to learn how to say ‘no’.”-- Public School Sex Education: A Report. “Key Players in the Sex Education Game.” American Family Association Journal , October 1990, page 15.

“Science supports mothers and fathers in wanting their children spared the trials of sexual precocity, AIDS or not. And it supports the children in asking not to be underestimated. Self-discipline isn’t beyond them, if they’re told the truth ... The truth is summed up in six words: Abstinence before marriage, fidelity within it. Our children and grandchildren don’t deserve to be judged sexually insatiable.”-- William R. Coulson and J.D. Coulson. “Confessions of an Ex- Sexologist.” Social Justice Review , March/April 1988, pages 43 to 47.

Psychiatrist Melvin Anchell, M.D., who has written several books on human sexuality, summed up our country’s sex education situation concisely and accurately when he wrote that;

“Some educators have a compulsion to teach sex, beginning with the three-year-old and continuing until high school graduation. Paradoxically, the effects of their schooling produce the very abnormalities that parents and, perhaps, some well-meaning sex educators wish to prevent.

“Devoid of real clinical experience and, in some cases, sexual maturity, sex educators can cause severe maladjustments by undue meddling.

“Such interferences can prevent the ‘capability’ to feel compassion. The results can be increasingly noted in the antisocial behavior of sexually overstuffed youths.

“In natural development, preteen children derive sexual pleasure from sensual excitements caused by sexual fantasies. Sex educators who catapult the child into a world of authoritative sexual knowledge shatter these normal fantasy satisfactions ... Later in life, drugs and pornography are used as adjuncts to help recapture the pleasures from thwarted childhood fantasies that had not been allowed to resolve naturally.

“By their loyalty, normal parents teach children that sex is a one-woman/one-man affair. The sex educator’s advice, ‘Sex is for fun,’ desecrates the affectionate and monogamous nature of human sexuality.”[27]

Homosexual Recruiting and Indoctrination.

“Some changes are desperately needed. Schools can no longer be permitted to carry out such a horrendously effective program for drying up students’ sense of their own sexual identity. The schools must not be allowed to continue fostering the immorality of morality. An entirely different set of values must be nourished.”-- Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students .[28]

Introduction.

It is obvious that sex perverts (homosexuals) cannot reproduce, so they must recruit. And what better place could there possibly be for recruiting and for enacting the homosexual agenda than so- called “sex education” classes?

Homosexuals moan long and loud and beat their chests whenever they are confronted with this accusation.

If this sounds like a paranoid and fanciful Christian delusion, consider that all known comprehensive sex-ed classes teach the following principles;

· that homosexuality is a perfectly legitimate ‘lifestyle,’ on a par with heterosexuality;

· that we mustn’t be judgmental or intolerant of other lifestyles, no matter how repugnant they may seem (this initial revulsion will be “desensitized” out of the children after rigorous exposure);

· that ten percent of all teenagers are “gay,” and this is perfectly normal and nothing to be ashamed of; and

· that sodomy can be committed safely -- here’s how to practice “safe(r) sex” and avoid social diseases, including, of course, the deadly AIDS.

Training Grounds.

The more aggressive sodomite activists fully recognize the extraordinary value of the public schools as recruitment grounds. Therefore, every major national sodomite group has issued resolutions and/or demands that every public school include comprehensive sex education to all students as part of its mandatory curriculum. This education, they say, must include homosexual “sensitivity training.”

Keep in mind that such unanimity would not be forthcoming unless homosexual groups had something very concrete to gain from such sex education programs.

One example of such a set of demands is the 1987 New York State Gay and Lesbian Youth Caucus’ “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions.” This Declaration, which is reproduced in its entirety in Chapter 117, “Homosexual Objectives.”

This document includes the demands listed below. Editorial comments are in brackets.

EXCERPTS FROM THE NEW YORK STATE GAY AND LESBIAN YOUTH CAUCUS DECLARATION OF RESOLUTIONS

“RESOLVED, that all federal, state, and local funding for public and private schools and universities be cut off until all discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation be eradicated” [note the sodomite’s willingness to force their beliefs down everyone else’s throats].

“RESOLVED, that all schools and universities, public and private, cover all sexualities in the curricula” [this is ‘Newspeak’ for enforced and mandatory “sensitivity training,” whose purpose is to propagandize and force students into accepting that sodomy is ‘just another lifestyle].

“RESOLVED, that all schools and universities, public and private, mandate sensitization workshops on gay and lesbian issues, beginning at the elementary level” [Note that this objective has already largely been met in our public school system].

Example Homosexual Propaganda.

The AIDS outbreak was a Godsend in one way for the homosexuals. Normal people who were at first perplexed by the slogan “AIDS IS OUR STRENGTH!” now understand that the disease greatly enhanced the homosexual’s treasured status as a privileged “victim class” worthy of public sympathy and general support.

This victim status allows the homosexuals to transgress all normal tactical bounds, and gives them the ability to foist off the most useless and outrageously propagandistic disinformation on our children in the name of “AIDS Education.”

For example, a $161,000 Title 10-funded program entitled “Mutual Caring/Mutual Sharing” was prepared by sodomite activist Cooper Thompson, a key figure of the “Homophobia Task Force.”

Recognizing that parents must be kept entirely ignorant of the type of blatant propaganda that their children are being fed, the instructions included with the program state that “it is unrealistic and even undesirable to include parents in this program.”[29]

The primary objective of the program is, according to the literature, “to foster an acceptance of the various sexual preferences and orientations of their peers, and an acceptance of their own preference or orientation.”[29]

Another sodomite propaganda program begins with instructions to the students to make certain that their parents do not know what they are being told in class; “Caution: Participants should not be given extra copies of the form to show to their parents or friends. Many of the materials of this program shown to people outside the context of the program itself, can evoke misunderstanding and difficulties.”[30]

This program, currently used by more than one thousand public high schools, features color slides of homosexual intercourse and hard-core pornographic audio tapes of sexual perverts talking about the many rewards of their strange “orientation.”

The purpose of this program is stated in the literature: “To make clear that sexual relationships with the same sex during youth are normal.”[30]

One of the several textbooks used to push the homosexual agenda under the guise of “AIDS education” is entitled One Teenager in Ten , which is designed to give the now-discredited impression that ten percent of all individuals are prone to sodomy.

One Teenager in Ten is filled with fabricated “case histories” that are nothing more than a pornographic come-on to the homosexual deathstyle. Its purpose is to ensure that any child who has the slightest inclination or curiosity towards perversion (and even many who don’t) will be influenced towards participating in homosexual activity.[18]

One of the many “case studies” involves a 13-year old girl, “Amy,” who describes various perversions inflicted upon her after she was seduced by a 23-year old lesbian. She gushes that “I became a lesbian and a woman that weekend!”

Another phony “case study” centers on “Rick,” who, at the age of 15, was sodomized by a drifter: “He came back with a tube of KY [lubricant] stuck in his towel ... I felt like a bride on her honeymoon ... I was in love.”

There is no mention of the depression or the loneliness, not a word about the dozens of diseases that infect sodomites, nothing at all about the overtly exploitative nature of homosexual “love.”

In this book, everything is sweetness, light, flowers, and KY lubricant.

This is the type of homosexual propaganda that our children are being regularly exposed to in high school. Why do they need it? What purpose can it possibly serve? Has anyone asked these questions?

Conclusion.

The above examples are typical of homosexual propaganda that is being forced onto millions of children every year with the full and hearty complicity and approval of the public school system, the National Education Association, the PTA, and all of the other Neoliberal quasi- intellectuals.

Even the school textbook publishers have abandoned all pretense of selectivity and enthusiastically endorse everything that is “politically correct” (P.C.), regardless of its moral content or potential damage to individuals and society in general.

All that matters now is the ideology. In the foreword to One Teenager in Ten, Publisher’s Weekly describes the contents: “Heard here are the courageous voices, voices of young people wise beyond their years.”

Wise? What kind of wisdom could they possibly be referring to? Haven’t any of these people heard of growing up too fast?

The World’s Foremost Sex Researcher.

Introduction.

It is instructive indeed to examine the life and methods of the world’s foremost sex researcher, Alfred Kinsey, and the research organization he founded, the “Kinsey Institute for Research on Sex, Gender, and Reproduction.” The methods used by this man and his organization reveal much about how the sex researchers and sex educators operate.

His Methods.

Kinsey’s Institute swallows millions of tax dollars and produces volumes of information every year that form the basis for much of our country’s sex education ‘industry.’ However, the information and ‘research’ generated by Kinsey’s institute is dubious at best, because the Institute steadfastly refuses to reveal its sources and study methods. This, in and of itself, is enough to render its research utterly meaningless, because it cannot be checked by replication.

The prime directive of scientific research is that it is useless without verification or replicability.

Kinsey was so fanatical about secrecy that he told his staff photographer William Dellenback that he would destroy all his files and risk imprisonment rather than let authorities see his files.[31]

Kinsey’s unbendable rules included having no journalists present when he talked, and demanding journalists submit any articles mentioning him or his institute to him for approval before publication, in order to screen them for unfavorable remarks or implications.

All of this renders meaningless the Kinsey Institute slogan; “All Kinsey Institute activities derive from the belief that social policy and personal decisions about sex, gender, and reproduction should be made on the basis of factual information rather than on ignorance. The Kinsey Institute continues its commitment to providing such information.”[31]

In summary, the Kinsey Institute has received tens of millions of dollars in tax money but allows no inquiries whatever into its research methods. It is supposedly a library of information on sex, but it allows nobody to peek into its files, not even for the purpose of scientific verification.

Typical Kinsey ‘Research.’

Some of Kinsey’s ‘research’ was both pornographic and abusive of young children.

For example, Kinsey’s book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male describes mechanically-induced orgasm in young children. Kinsey’s staffers manipulated a four-year old boy’s genitals for 24 consecutive hours, during which time he attained ‘orgasm’ 26 times.

Many other incidents described in the book appear to be physically impossible.

According to Kinsey’s book, an 11-month old infant had 14 ‘orgasms’ in a period of 38 minutes. One 13-year old had three orgasms in one minute. Such intense physical stimulation appeared to be agonizing to the youngest children, as evidenced by the description of their reaction when being “manipulated;” “Extreme tension with violent convulsion, often involving the sudden heaving and jerking of the whole body ... gasping, eyes staring or tightly closed, hands grasping, mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding; whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching ... violent jerking of the penis ... groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children).”[31]

When syndicated columnist Patrick Buchanan read this material and dared to publish charges against Kinsey, Harriet Pilpel of the American Civil Liberties Union threatened him with legal action.

The ‘Right to Privacy’ In the Schools.

Kinsey’s preoccupation with privacy could only have one purpose: self-protection. This obsession with concealment naturally spills over into the public school system.

Homosexuality is uniformly presented as a higher good in secular sex education programs. This is perhaps the primary reason the school sex education experts will do anything to prevent parents from seeing the materials that their children are exposed to.

For example, the paganistic Unitarian Universalist Association’s sex education program entitled About Your Sexuality depicts, among other things, explicit scenes of anal intercourse -- which it labels “harmless,” and “only one possible variation of sexuality,” equal to all the others. There have been many instances of parents being banned from even previewing these and like materials because of a lack of “open-mindedness,” “good faith,” or some other indefinable fault.

In summary, parental involvement in secular sex education programs is encouraged only when the parents are deemed to be “enlightened.” This terms applies only to those parents who exactly share the views of the sex educators and school-based clinic pushers.

In their lofty opinion, of course, the vast majority of parents are by no means “enlightened.”

Finally, the Truth.

Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward W. Eichel co- authored a book on Kinsey and the sex educators entitled Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud . In this work, they refer to Kinsey’s most famous works, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female as the “... most egregious example of scientific deception in this century.”[31]

Despite the shoddiness of the research that backed up these “studies,” they have had a profound impact upon our society, because the sex educators seized upon Kinsey’s tattered results much as the population controllers seized upon Paul Ehrlich’s ridiculous book The Population Bomb .

A ‘Star’ is Born.

Through the sheer force of publicity and compelled uniformity, the sex educators declared Kinsey to be the equivalent of Newton, Galileo, or Einstein. They had to make such comparisons because they knew full well that no proper research would support their views. Therefore, they had to make a “star:” Alfred Kinsey.

Kinsey’s most famous statistic held that ten percent of the male population is “more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55.” Kinsey also claimed that four percent of all males are exclusively homosexual throughout their entire lives.

This is the source of the sodomite claim that ten percent of all people are homosexual.

How did he achieve this result? First, by hiring biased researchers (several applicants who believed that homosexuality was wrong were not hired).

Then, he deliberately biased the result of the study by including, in his sample, at least 25 percent of prison inmates and convicted sex offenders (the actual percentage of the population that meets this description is less than one percent).

Reisman and Eichel have concluded that the actual percentage of male homosexuals in the United States is at most one to two percent.

What Can You Do?

“How Could this Happen?”

The vast majority of American parents do not even know whether or not their children are receiving sex education in their school. Those who do know are usually entirely ignorant of the contents of the program, if such is being taught. And most of those who know the contents of the program couldn’t care less what effect the course of instruction has on their children. They mindlessly and unquestioningly trust the “sexperts.”

This haze of indifference lasts only until their daughter turns up pregnant. Or damaged by a “safe and legal” abortion. Or when their son contracts a sexually-transmitted disease that threatens his health.

Or when their child contracts AIDS.

Then they begin to care very much.

And then they ask “How could this happen? “

The Brutal Truth.

The brutal truth of the matter is this: Parents who do not very carefully inform themselves about the sex education that their children are receiving are, by default, allowing their children assume the values of others. They are allowing their children to venture into a sexual minefield without the necessary armor of moral standards. These parents simply do not care about their children as much as they say they do.

They are abandoning their children to a system that they simply are not equipped to cope with.

The Results of Promiscuity.

The way we conduct ourselves sexually is an indication of how we live the rest of our lives. This is particularly true of teenagers, who are in the process of constructing the moral framework that they will use to guide the way they think and act.

Drs. Donald Orr and Gary Ingersoll of Indiana University Medical School studied thousands of unmarried teenaged girls who fornicated and thousands who did not. They found that teenaged girls who fornicate are five times as likely to be suspended from school for a serious offense, ten times more likely to have used illegal drugs, and six times as likely to have attempted suicide. Boys who fornicate are six times as likely to abuse alcohol and five times as likely to use marijuana.[32]

Significantly, girls who fornicate experience severely diminished self-esteem, while boys who fornicate actually experience an increase in self-esteem. The implications of this comparison are obvious. Dr. Ingersoll states that “Girls with low self-esteem may be using sex as a way to build esteem, but then it only makes them feel worse about themselves. Early experience is still regarded as more deviant for girls.”[32]

Those people who fornicate, use illegal drugs, and commit other illegal and/or immoral acts are tortured by their guilt, which builds until it is unbearable. There are only two ways out of this agonizing situation: Repentance or rationalization, as explained in Chapter 2 of Volume I, “The Anti-Life Mentality.”

Take Action!

The New Liberals (“Neoliberals”) tend to chuckle condescendingly at conservatives who worry about their kids. Neoliberals like to think of concerned parents as control-oriented, paranoid religious fanatics who see a conspiracy around every corner.

Although the “sexperts” do not themselves operate in a conspiracy per se , they think in a similar manner and utilize similar tactics when attempting to achieve their goals.

The only defense against the well-organized sex educators and reformers is to maintain positive and constant contact with your children. It is also essential to know what they are being taught in school.

If the gaining of this knowledge requires parents to conduct a little overt surveillance in class or to make themselves a royal pain in the neck to the local “sexperts,” then so be it. We should not be apologetic about monitoring our children and guiding their development. Despite what the Humanist experts say, the upbringing of our children is our God-given duty -- not theirs!

Parents should band together to accomplish their objectives. They should demand to know the details of sex education curricula, and they should study these materials diligently. If the materials are offensive, or if they are stonewalled by the bureaucracy, parents should pull their kids out of the class with no apologies!

If the situation is really bad, parents might make the ultimate statement of disgust with the school system by pulling their children out of school completely and educating them at home.

Pro-Chastity Organizations.

It is not enough to be against secular sex education programs; parents must be armed with facts and with the most up-to-date materials.

The organizations listed below can provide information, guidance, and materials that are useful in educating other parents and children on chastity and Christian sex education.

Alliance for Chastity Education (ACE)
Post Office Box 11297
Cincinnati, Ohio 45211-0297

American Life League (ALL)
Post Office Box 1350
Stafford, Virginia 22554
Telephone: (703) 659-4171

Americans Against Abortion (AAA)
Post Office Box 70
Lindale, Texas, 75771-0070

Birthright
686 North Broad Street
Woodbury, New Jersey 08096
Telephone: (609) 848-1819

Catholic Bishop’s Committee
For Pro-Life Activities
1312 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 659-6673

Catholics United for Life (CUL)
New Hope, Kentucky, 40052

Family of the Americas Foundation
Post Office Box 1170
Dunkirk, Maryland 20754
Telephone: (301) 627-3346

Focus on the Family
Post Office Box 35500
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80935

Human Life International (HLI)
7845-E Airpark Road
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879
Telephone: (301) 670-7884

Last Days Ministries
Post Office Box 40
Lindale, Texas 75771

National Chastity Association
Post Office Box 402
Oak Forest, Illinois 60452
Telephone: (708) 687-1767

National Right to Life Committee (NRLC)
419 7th Street NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone: (202) 626-8800
FAX: (202) 737-9189

National Teens For Life
419 7th Street NW, Suite 402
Washington, DC 20004

National Youth Pro-Life Coalition
99 Jackson Avenue
Hastings-on-Hudson, New York 10706
Telephone: (914) 478-0103

Teen Aid
West 22 Mission
Spokane, Washington 99201
Telephone: (509) 466-8679

==========================================

[1] Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in Father A.S. Antonisamy. Wisdom for All Times: Mahatma Gandhi and Pope Paul VI on Birth Regulation . Family Life Service Centre, Archbishop’s House, Pondicherry 605001 India. June 1978. Quotes are taken from D.G. Tendulkar (Editor). The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi , Volumes 2 and 4. Published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India.

[2] Irving R. Dickman. Winning the Battle for Sex Education . The Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), 80 Fifth Avenue, Suite 801, New York, New York 10011. 1982, 60 pages, $6.00.

[3] Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). How to Talk with Your Child About Sexuality . Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1986, 150 pages. A detailed review of this book may be obtained from Jim Sedlak, Director, Stop Planned Parenthood (STOPP), Post Office Box 8, LaGrangeville, New York 12540.

[4] “Brooke Shields on Virginity’s Virtues.” USA Today , July 21, 1991, page 2D.

[5] Concerned Women for America Newsletter, March 1989, page 3.

[6] Liberal columnist Carl Rowan, News America Syndicate, Washington Post , May 28, 1985.

[7] David Perkins, quoted in Fidelity Magazine, October 1987, page 16.

[8] Faye Wattleton, former president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). The Humanist , July/August 1986 page 7.

[9] Edouard Cardinal Gagnon, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, in his address to the Bishops of the United States on March 10, 1989.

[10] Washington Post syndicated columnist William Raspberry, quoted in Barrett Mosacker. “Teen Pregnancy and School-Based Health Clinics.” National Federation for Decency Journal , November/December 1986, page 5.

[11] Alexander Cockburn, quoted in Joseph Sobran. “The Abortion Culture.” Human Life Review , Spring 1981, pages 7 to 19.

[12] Alan Guttmacher, May 3, 1973, quoted in Humanity Magazine, August/September 1979, page 11.

[13] Dr. Robert Kirstner, Harvard Medical School, one of the original developers of the birth control pill. Quoted in ALL About Issues , June 1981, page 5.

[14] Gary F. Kelly. Learning About Sex: The Contemporary Guide for Young Adults . New York: Barron’s, 1968. Pages 61 and 136. Quoted in Gene Antonio. “America’s XXX-Rated Sex Education Curricula.” New Dimensions Magazine, September 1990, pages 72 to 77.

[15] Changing Bodies, Changing Lives: A Book for Teens on Sex and Relationships . Random House: New York, 1980. Pages 117 and 122.

[16] Wardell Pomeroy, Ph.D. Boys and Sex . Delacorte Press, New York, 1981. Pages 117, 171, and 172.

[17] R.P. Barth. Enhancing Skills to Prevent Pregnancy . School of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, Network Publications. Page 95.

[18] Gene Antonio. “America’s XXX-Rated Sex Education Curricula.” New Dimensions Magazine, September 1990.

[19] Sol Gordon addressing the October 1988 meeting of the National Organization of Adolescent Pregnancy and Parenting (NOAPP), in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Quoted in Margo Szews. “The Pied Piper of Sex and Sleaze: Dr. Sol Gordon and Friends Tell Kids to “Just Say Yes! ““ ALL About Issues , June-July 1989, pages 40 to 42.

[20] Eleanor S. Morrison and Miln Underhill Price. Values in Sexuality . New York: Hart Publishing Company and A&W Publishers. 1974, page 100.

[21] “What is Sexual Fantasy?” What’s Happening? Atlanta: Emory University, Grady Memorial Family Planning Program. 1976, page 4.

[22] Dr. Donald McDonald, former Administrator of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, quoted “Censorship is in the Eye of the Beholder.” New Dimensions Magazine, December 1990, page 15.

[23] “The US Family Staggers Into the Sexy Secular Future.” Family Research Newsletter, January-March 1991, page 1, Table 1 entitled “Percentage of Women Aged 15-19 Who Reported Having Had Premarital Sexual Intercourse, By Race and Age -- United States, 1970-1988.” Numbers from 1988 to 1992 linearly extrapolated using 1985-1988 rates.

[24] For an excellent overview of how to find out what is going on in your school’s sex education program, and how to respond to it, read Chapter Six of the Public School Sex Education Report in the October 1990 issue of the American Family Association (AFA) Journal . This completely documented, 23-page summary is available for $2.00 from the AFA, Post Office Drawer 2440, Tupelo, Mississippi 38803.

[25] James Ford, M.D., and Michael Schwartz. “Birth Control for Teenagers: Diagram for Disaster.” Linacre Quarterly , February 1979.

[26] United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States . 1990 (110th Edition).

[27] Psychiatrist Melvin Anchell, M.D. Sex and Insanity . Portland, Oregon: Halcyon House Publishers, 1983.

[28] Simon and Sidney, et.al. Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students . New York: Hart Publishing Company. 1978, pages 18 to 20.

[29] S.G. Philliber and M.L. Tatum. “The Impact of Sex Education on Students, Parents, and Faculty: A Report from Falls Church.” November 1979, page 11.

[30] “Public School Sex Education: A Report.” Published in the October 1990 issue of the AFA Journal . Also available for $2.00 from the American Family Association, Post Office Drawer 2440, Tupelo, Mississippi 38803. This is an excellent encapsulation of the incredible nonsense being drilled into our children by sex educators posing as teachers. If this is not a powerful incentive to home school, nothing else will be.

[31] E. Michael Jones. “The Case Against Kinsey.” Fidelity Magazine, April 1989, pages 22 to 35.

[32] Marilyn Elias. “Early Teen Sex May Indicate Drugs, Drinking.” USA Today , February 6, 1991, page D1.

==========================================