Rita Diller

Is Planned Parenthood in your children’s schools?

Rita Diller
Rita Diller
Image

March 12, 2014 (STOPP) - We hear almost weekly from anxious parents who want to know whether Planned Parenthood is in their children’s school. Some have already started making phone calls and sending letters to the school district to find out when they contact us. Others are at a loss where to start.

Here is a resource to help you find quick answers about the prevalence, source, and format of sex education in your geographical area.

Q. Where in the US have sex ed programs been implemented? Where in my state have sex ed programs been implemented?

A. Sometimes we need look no further than the website of the enemies of life and morality to find a wealth of information. After all, these entities receive obscene amounts of government and/or foundation funding in order to advance their agenda and track their progress.

The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S.—a pro-abortion organization intricately intertwined with Planned Parenthood—maintains a website that it says “represents the most complete portrait ever assembled of sexuality education and abstinence-only-until-marriage programs in the United States.”

It also tracks funding streams, grantees, and funded programs. It identifies “examples of model programs, policies, and best practices being implemented in public schools across the country that provide more comprehensive approaches to sex education in schools. The Fiscal Year 2010 edition undertakes the enormous task of creating a portrait of comprehensive sexuality education and abstinence-only-until-marriage programs happening across the country and provides an unparalleled amount of information and includes profiles for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the other U.S. territories,” according to the SIECUS website.

Keeping in mind that SIECUS is 100 percent behind repugnant “comprehensive” sex classes and vehemently fights abstinence until marriage, one may follow this link and click on any state to find a great deal of information about funding received and programs being taught in various school districts across the state. Keep in mind, also, that this information is current only as of 2010. However, it was in 2010 that huge streams of renewable funding opened up for “comprehensive sex education” through the federal government.

Be aware that the programs that are referenced here as viable abstinence programs are not strictly abstinence. They teach about contraception and most go far beyond that. The contraception portions of many contain demonstrations that would scandalize grown-ups. If a program leans more toward abstinence and traditional marriage, SIECUS will complain that it uses fear-mongering, information and statistics promoting the benefits of marriage, heterosexuality, and other such things that SIECUS considers dreadful, bigoted, hateful, and harmful.

At the college level, Planned Parenthood maintains a presence on college campuses through its VOX (Voices for Choice) clubs and programs. To find whether VOX is on your campus, simply search the Internet for the name of your university paired with “VOX.”

A word about SIECUS: SIECUS was launched in 1964 by the Kinsey Institute to teach the Kinsey philosophy of sex education in American schools. Dr. Mary Calderone, a former medical director at Planned Parenthood, was the first director of SIECUS.

Dr. Alfred Kinsey authored the “Kinsey Reports” in 1948 and 1953. These reports were the basis for a sexual revolution that promoted and sanctioned promiscuity, pornography, and homosexuality. Kinsey’s research was disproportionally based on surveys of prison inmates, sex offenders, and prostitutes.

Quoting Concerned Women of America’s report, A Nation Deceived:

“To obtain data about the sexual behavior of children, Dr. Kinsey worked with trained pedophiles who sexually abused hundreds of children (as young as two months) to prove to the world that infants, toddlers, and juveniles could enjoy sex pre-puberty with the help of an adult. Their sexual torture was recorded as pleasure.” Read more about SIECUS here.

Q. How does Planned Parenthood and its network get into schools?

A. Anti-abstinence, “sex positive” entities with a broad national reach, like SIECUS, Planned Parenthood, Advocates for YouthAnswerETR Associates, and the Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy are instrumental in laying the groundwork to facilitate implementation of what the Planned Parenthood network refers to as “comprehensive sex education.”

Entities targeting regional areas to implement sex classes in schools recently revealed by STOPP include SHARE in Arizona, and WISE, now reaching into nine states.

SHARE: The Sexual Health and Responsibility Education initiative is the vehicle created by Planned Parenthood of Arizona to push its sex education programs into schools. According to the Planned Parenthood of Arizona (PPAZ) website, the Sexual Health and Responsibility Education initiative, or SHARE, is actively working to provide:

• Assistance with the selection of a comprehensive sexuality education curriculum that aligns with National Sexuality Education Standards-Core Content and Skills, K-12 [Read more about the National Sexuality Standards created by Planned Parenthood and cohorts here.]

• Resource support for teacher training

• Technical support-coaching and curriculum mapping

• Parent workshops

In fact, the job description for Planned Parenthood’s new community organizer/regional health coordinator in Yuma, Arizona, says that person, under the guidance of the PPAZ director of education “identifies target school districts and works with school leadership to move toward adoption of a comprehensive sexual health curriculum policy in these districts to advance the Sexual Health and Responsibility Education (SHARE) initiative.”

WISE: The Working to Institutionalize Sex Education initiative, with the goal of institutionalizing, or normalizing, the Planned Parenthood network’s repugnant, hedonistic “comprehensive” sex education, targets geographical areas with “favorable policy climates” for the normalization of sustainable school-based sex education. Current locations targeted by WISE include Washington; Oregon; California; Colorado; Iowa; Georgia; North Carolina; West Virginia; and Rochester, New York.

WISE works from the top down, beginning at the state education board level. By working at the state level, it is much easier to bypass parents in implementing laws that require or promote “comprehensive” sex classes in schools.

The Wednesday STOPP Report has covered the WISE initiative extensively. Read more about the far-reaching impact of WISE here.

Q. Who funds these blanket organizations pushing classroom sex education and legislation to require it?

A. SIECUS thanks “Anonymous Foundation, The Brico Fund, The Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, The Educational Foundation of America, and the WestWind Foundation” for funding its public policy and advocacy efforts, in its FY 2010 report.

According to the WISE initiative’s “method toolkit,” the initiative is “led by the Grove Foundation . . . [and] supported by a collaboration of funders including the Ford, William and Flora Hewlett, and David and Lucile Packard Foundations.”

SHARE is listed as an initiative of Planned Parenthood of Arizona. No funding source is identified.

Q. Who is teaching the PP curriculum? Teachers from districts or PP employees?

It varies from place to place. We know that Planned Parenthood of Arizona is training “facilitators to help teachers and other youth serving professionals develop the confidence they need to successfully deliver the curriculum to students.”

In Georgia, the lead WISE initiative partner GCAPP says,

The WISE Initiative services to school districts include: support in selecting sexual health curriculum, teacher training, parent workshops, and technical assistance as needed throughout the implementation process. Since 2009 GCAPP has trained 200 teachers in over 75 elementary, middle, and high schools to implement medically accurate, age appropriate curricula reaching over 17,000 students in the 2012-13 school year alone.

From the WISE toolkit website we learn:

In the first three years of the initiative, all of the WISE sites made significant progress toward their objectives. Collectively, over 100,000 students have been impacted due to WISE related activities; over 700 teachers have been trained; and 120 schools have implemented sex education where there was previously no sex education before or where it was significantly improved upon due to WISE.

Planned Parenthood keeps a low profile in the structure of WISE. However, looking down the ladder at the structure of the lead partners, Planned Parenthood comes clearly into focus. For instance, a WISE Iowa Project brochure lists Planned Parenthood as a partner. In Colorado, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains is an alliance member of Colorado Youth Matter, the organization that is leading the WISE initiative there. Similar connections between Planned Parenthood and WISE lead partners exist in other states receiving WISE initiative funding.

In Oregon, a list of WISE board members includes three Planned Parenthood employees. In California, one must dig a bit deeper to find Planned Parenthood’s involvement. There we find that ETR heads up the California WISE initiative. ETR began as the educational arm of Planned Parenthood of Santa Cruz. Former ETR marketing director Steve Bignell, editor of the Family Life Education curriculum and Family Life Educator magazine, served as education director at Planned Parenthood of Santa Cruz.

An educational venture presented by Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and endorsed by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), Planned Parenthood University offers “nationally recognized professional certification in reproductive health and sexuality education.” It awards a “Sexuality Education Certificate for educators, trainers, and outreach staff of Planned Parenthood affiliates and related organizations, providing sexuality and reproductive health presentations to groups in their communities and in schools and other educational settings.” The list goes on and on.

The bottom line is that Planned Parenthood participates, whether directly or indirectly, in many settings in teaching classroom sex classes, or in teaching others to teach sex classes in our schools. It is necessary to examine each location, and sometimes to dig very deeply into the structure of the program to determine Planned Parenthood’s involvement.

For detailed information about fighting Planned Parenthood sex education, read Jim Sedlak’s Parent Power!! Be sure to subscribe to the Wednesday STOPP Report and remember that its archives are searchable. It contains a wealth of information and research about Planned Parenthood sex education.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, , , ,

The first pro-abortion Republican enters the 2016 presidential race

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

EXETER, NH, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The large and expanding field of would-be Republican presidential candidates grew by one today, as George Pataki became the first GOP presidential hopeful this election season to openly support abortion-on-demand.

The 69-year-old long-shot candidate also has a history of supporting homosexual legislative causes.

In the weeks leading up to his formal announcement, George Pataki took out TV ads asking Republicans to refrain from talking about abortion and gay “marriage,” branding them “distractions.”

“In 12 years [as governor], I don’t think I talked about that issue twice,” he once said of abortion.

On same-sex “marriage,” he says, “I think, leave it to the states. I don’t think it’s a role in Washington.”

However, Pataki has a long history of enacting the homosexual political agenda as governor of New York from 1994-2006. He signed a “hate crimes” law that added the words “gay” and “lesbian” to New York state law for the first time.

He signed the Sexual Orientation Nondiscrimination Act (SONDA), which prohibits business owners from “discriminating” against homosexuals in housing or hiring, with an exemption only for religious institutions.

He also added sexual orientation to state civil rights laws, alongside such immutable characteristics as race and sex, in an apparent quid pro quo for a gay activist group's endorsement in his last run for governor. The New York Times reported that, under pressure from Pataki, then then-Senate Majority Leader “shifted his position on the bill as part of what is tacitly acknowledged, even by Senator [Joseph] Bruno's senior aides, to have been a deal to win an endorsement for Governor Pataki from the state's largest gay rights group, the Empire State Pride Agenda.”

After the LGBT activist group endorsed Pataki in 2002, citing a long list of his service to the homosexual political cause, Pataki personally lobbied senators for the bill's passage, then signed it into law that December.

Coupled with his stance on gun control, environmentalism, and other issues, he stands well to the left of the Republican mainstream.

The three-term governor of New York, who belongs to the Roman Catholic Church, took his own advice by largely avoiding social issues today. The closest he came was his vow, “I'd repeal oppressive laws like ObamaCare and end Common Core.”

He added that he would “fire every current IRS employee abusing government power to discriminate on the basis of politics or religion. That is not America!”

Otherwise, Pataki's announcement speech hewed to stand pat Republican issues like reducing taxes, shrinking the number of federal employees, increasing military spending, and supporting entrepreneurship.

He began by thanking his supporters, in English and Spanish.

Smiling, his head pivoting between twin teleprompters, he said, “Let me tell you some of the things I'd do right away to get oppressive government off the backs of Americans.”

He would institute a lifetime ban on congressmen acting as lobbyists after they leave office. “If you ever served one day in Congress, you will never be a lobbyist,” he said. He favors forcing Congress to live under the laws it passes, so there will be “no special rules for the powerful.”

He cited his history of cutting taxes, reducing welfare rolls, and leaving his state with billions of dollars in surplus. “That's what our policies can do,” he said. “I know we can do the same thing for the United States.”

In recent weeks, he has called for a more interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East. Today, he reminded his audience that he was governor of New York in 9/11. “I will not fear the lesson of September 11,” he said. “To protect us, first we must protect the border,” he said – an unexpected phrase, as Pataki supports amnesty for the at least 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.

“We will stand with our ally, Israel, a democracy on the front lines of terror and barbarism,” he said.

Like former Sen. Rick Santorum, who announced he is running for president yesterday, Pataki agreed that “if necessary, American forces will be used to actually defeat and destroy ISIS on the ground – although he promised not to become “the world's policeman.”

Some of his campaign promises drew skepticism, such as seeking to develop self-driving cars and to cure Alzheimer's disease and cancer within the next decade.

The speech's venue was chosen deliberately by Pataki, who considered entering the presidential race in 2000, 2008, and 2012. The town of Exeter, New Hampshire, claims to be the founding place of the Republican Party. (Ripon, Wisconsin, makes a similar claim.)

More importantly, the first-in-the-nation primary skews more libertarian on social issues than evangelical-dominated Iowa and South Carolina, so Pataki has essentially staked his candidacy on doing well in New Hampshire. Fellow pro-abortion Republican Rudy Giuliani made a similar bet in 2008, banking on a good showing among transplanted New Yorkers in the Florida primary. He left the race after finishing a distant third.

Short of a stunning upset in the Granite State, Pataki has little chance of breaking through the pack this year. A Fox News poll ranks him dead last among 16 announced and potential candidates. Holly Bailey of Yahoo! News said, “George Pataki would never say this, but you do have to wonder if he's sort of, maybe, gaming for vice president.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Pataki is not the first “pro-choice” Republican to run for president.  Giuliani (who supported partial birth abortion) and Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore (another potential 2016 candidate, who supports abortion during the first trimester) ran in 2008. Twelve years earlier, both California Gov. Pete Wilson and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter supported abortion-on-demand. Arlen Specter later left the party and became a Democrat.

In 1988, General Alexander Haig opposed a human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So did Texas Gov. John Connally in 1980.

George H.W. Bush supported abortion and voted for Planned Parenthood funding early in his career but changed his position by the time he ran for president the second time, in 1988.

President Gerald Ford was the last Republican nominee to proclaim himself “pro-choice.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Steve Jalsevac / LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

, , , ,

Ireland ‘defied God’ by voting for gay ‘marriage’: Cardinal Burke

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

OXFORD, May 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Cardinal Raymond Burke lamented how formerly Catholic Ireland has gone further than the pagans in the pre-Christian days of old and “defied God” by calling homosexual behavior “marriage” in the referendum last week.

“I mean, this is a defiance of God. It’s just incredible. Pagans may have tolerated homosexual behaviours, they never dared to say this was marriage,” he told the Newman Society, Oxford University’s Catholic organization, in an address Wednesday about the intellectual heritage of Pope Benedict XVI. The Tablet, Britain’s liberal Catholic newspaper, reported his remarks.

On Friday, 1.2 million Irish people voted to amend the country’s constitution to say: “Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.” A little over 734,000 people voted against the proposal. 

Burke said that he could not understand “any nation redefining marriage.”

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

The cardinal also emphasized the important role that parents play in protecting their children in a culture increasingly hostile to God’s laws. “The culture is thoroughly corrupted, if I may say so, and the children are being exposed to this, especially through the internet,” he said. One practical piece of advice that he offered families was to put computers in public areas to prevent children from “imbib[ing] this poison that’s out there.”

During the same Oxford visit, but during a homily at a Mass the day before, Burke called marriage between a man and woman a “fundamental truth” that has been “ignored, defied, and violated.”

Burke warned during the homily of the dangers of “various ideological currents” and of “human deception and trickery which strives to lead us into error.”

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
John Stonestreet

,

Why young Christians can’t grasp our arguments against gay ‘marriage’

John Stonestreet
By John Stonestreet

May 28, 2015 (BreakPoint.org) -- For five years, Dr. Abigail Rine has been teaching a course on gender theory at George Fox University, an evangelical school in the Quaker tradition.

At the beginning of the semester, she tells her students that “they are guaranteed to read something they will find disagreeable, probably even offensive.”

Writing at FirstThings.com recently, she related how five years ago it was easy to find readings that challenged and even offended the evangelical college students “considering the secular bent of contemporary gender studies.”

But today, things are different. “Students now,” she says, “arrive in my class thoroughly versed in the language and categories of identity politics; they are reticent to disagree with anything for fear of seeming intolerant—except, of course, what they perceive to be intolerant.”

And what do they find “intolerant”? Well, in her class, an essay entitled “What is Marriage?” by Sherif Girgis, Robert George, and Ryan Anderson, which was the beginning of the book “What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense.”

In their article, Girgis, George, and Anderson defend what they call the conjugal view of marriage. “Marriage,” they write, “is the union of a man and a woman who make a permanent and exclusive commitment to each other … that is naturally fulfilled by bearing and rearing children together.” They defend this view against what they call the “revisionist view” of marriage, which redefines marriage to include, among other things, same-sex couples.

“My students hate it,” Dr. Rine wrote. They “lambast the article.” “They also,” she adds, “seem unable to fully understand the argument.” And again, these are evangelical students at an evangelical school.

The only argument for conjugal marriage they’ve ever encountered has been the wooden proof-texting from the Bible. And besides, wrote Rine, “What the article names as a ‘revisionist’ idea of marriage—marriage as an emotional, romantic, sexual bond between two people—does not seem ‘new’ to my students at all, because this is the view of marriage they were raised with, albeit with a scriptural, heterosexual gloss.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

As Rine points out “the redefinition of marriage began decades ago” when “the link between sexuality and procreation was severed in our cultural imagination.”

And if marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction,” then it seems mean-spirited to Rine’s students to argue that marriage by its very nature excludes same-sex couples.

And where do students get the idea that marriage “has only an arbitrary relationship to reproduction”? Well, everywhere—television, church, school, their homes, in youth groups.

Rine writes, “As I consider my own upbringing and the various ‘sex talks’ I encountered in evangelical church settings over the past twenty years, I realize that the view of marital sex presented there was primarily revisionist.”

In other words, once you say, “I do,” you get “the gift” of sex which is presented as “a ‘gift’ largely due to its [erotic], unitive properties, rather than its intrinsic capacity to create life.” Even in the Church, children have become an optional add-on to married life rather than its primary purpose.

What can we do to win back our children, our churches, and the culture? In our recent book “Same Sex Marriage,” Sean McDowell and I lay out a game plan. We offer strategies for the short-term and the long-term, with the ultimate goal: re-shaping the cultural imagination towards what God intended marriage to be, starting with the church. Come to BreakPoint.org to pick up your copy.

As Chuck Colson once said in a BreakPoint commentary about marriage, “We Christians are very good at saying ‘No.’ But we’ve got to get better at saying ‘Yes’: showing how God’s plan for humanity is a blessing. That His ways, including faithful, life-giving marriage between one man and one woman, lead to human flourishing physically, emotionally, and spiritually.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Reprinted with permission from Break Point.

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook