Readers react to New Zealand sex education program for 5-year-olds
Most sexual education programs are designed to promote immoral sexual behaviors and are not designed to prevent immoral sexual behaviors, unplanned pregnancies, or STD transmission. There are norms of sexual morality that are of divine law and which are binding on all persons regardless of intention, circumstances, or religious beliefs. Children do certainly need to be taught right from wrong in the area of sexual morality at an appropriate age, but immoral sexual behaviors should never be promoted and children should not be taught how to engage in them.
Contracepted intercourse, rape, masturbation, sodomy, and adultery are always morally wrong regardless of intention, circumstances, marital state, or religious beliefs, and these immoral behaviors are being promoted in sexual education programs. The only sexual act that can be morally good is non-contracepted natural sexual intercourse between a man and a woman who are married to each other.
The human sexual act is designed to be more than a mere means to sexual pleasure, more than a mere means to human reproduction, and more than a mere expression of love because the human sexual act is intended to simultaneously facilitate the bringing forth of new human life, unify the married couple together, express marital love, and strengthen the marital bond.
Non-marital sexual activity can also result in emotional scars that can affect a person who has engaged in non-marital sexual activity for the rest of his or her life. Children should be taught these truths regarding sexual morality before they reach their teenage years, but they shouldn't be taught these truths at too early of an age.
I, a grandfather, have a 5 year-old granddaughter in my custody, and no pathetic Canadian "education machine" is going to be rolling over me! Already her school tried the absurdity of presenting it's anti-bullying programme as a "fight homophobia and transphobia". (Guess who was behind that perversion of truth!) I challenged that, wouldn't back down, and today when children are asked to wear pink parents are informed that the school is fighting "bullying". A small victory, but a start.
What is occurring is absurd and anyone, like this feckless Kathryn Heape, has mental issues if they imagine that five year-old children need this graphic sex 'education' material. Parents have got to get together and collectively confront schools, not simply capitulate to schools and boards of education intent upon indoctrinating 'their' children. These are 'their' children, not the school's or department of education's children. Canada is degenerating into an appalling excuse for a democracy. It's citizens are being run over roughshod by morals destitute bureaucrats and homosexual groups with an agenda. They need to develop some moral indignation, get up off their backsides, stand up and fight for decency and the mental and moral health of their children.
It is designed this way to cause sexual interference of the mind & confusion of a child's own sexuality in the hopes that the Gay Society can manipulate the sexuality of teens & the general population in future years.
Donnie Mac Leod
There is good evidence that sex education is effective education in making the student want to try it out. The follow-up studies shows that the more sex education, the more sex activity and the earlier the sex education, the earlier the sexual activity and the more sexual activity the more sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancies, abortions and sexual aberrations. NZ parents should insist that the program promoters and teachers provide scientific data to show that this program is better than no program. Why would pragmatic Kiwis pay lots of money to buy something without evidence that the darn thing works like it is billed.
The more I hear about such sex-ed programs for young children, the more I am convinced that pedophiles are behind these efforts.
But after the screaming is over, one must still put their best foot forward and apply a practical solution. I couldn't wait until BC decided sex-ed was bad- they still haven't- so I decided in 1990 to homeschool and thereby take on the responsibility for the children's education. You can't let the kids rot in an evil environment while one tries to change the system.... It's good to be pro-active and go to meetings, and start petitions, and pray....but you still have to decide which day-to-day environment you want your children to be a part of.
I (we) had to put a lot of trust in God that things would work out because we were doing the right thing-me giving up my nursing career- and following up on what we could already see was a disaster in the making (The conditions of the schools) A parent who isn't yet ready to follow the conclusions that his observations have brought him to, will find probably a myriad of reasons (not to mention fake humility...I can't do it) to not homeschool. Anyone who signs up for it is obviously doing it for the first time.
Trust me, if you are confident about parenting, you will be able to homeschool, it's the same one-day-at-a-time thing. There are rules for it, guidelines, support groups vendors with tons of curriculum, and many computer-based "Distance -Learners" programs, complete with teachers!!! It's worked for our family and all the families that I know around here that are doing it...and I've been doing it for 23 years! Four are either finished/still attending university and two are still high school age with more activities than you can shake a stick at. And we live out in the country with less access to programs.
I'm pretty sure that during that five to 12 year old time of my life I was naturally curious about where babies came from. I already knew from my parents that my parents didn't make themselves, because I remember thinking early on, at about the age of three or four, that maybe my parents were the ones that made everything, and when I asked them they told me God made everything in the natural world, and that we use those things to make houses and cars, etc.
The subject of where babies came from was handled a little differently, but I certainly knew that babies came from mom and dad just like baby cats came from adult cats making them, all the way back to the first cats, who were originally made by God. That's all I needed to know about that. And it satisfied my curiosity about how everything came to be, and Who caused it to be. That's all I knew. I really didn't want or need to know more than that about how things come to be.
When other information was revealed to me by other kids about this and that concerning sex, I don't remember being overly curious about it, because the original information I'd already gotten from my parents about how babies and everything came to be had already put things in a high enough plane where I didn't ask for graphic details about what these kids were talking about. If parents concentrate on keeping information about sex on a high plane, it inoculates kids from taking the subject into the gutter.
How many times have you seen on TV where there's a controversial adult issue where a spokesman for the company accused of this or that "Declined to come on and discuss the subject." Why can't educators just understand that there's only one good way to teach kids about sex, and that that way is unavailable to teachers, because they are NOT ALLOWED to talk about God in school. But, obviously, now the teaching profession thinks it not only should talk about sex to kids, but should tell them EVERYTHING EXCEPT THE "GOD PART" about sex.
The problem with getting half-truths about things is that sometimes, you get ahold of the wrong half. Giving kids the graphic half about reproduction without giving the simple spiritual half about it is like giving a loaded weapon to kids and just telling them about the "loud bang" the gun makes when you pull the trigger.
Find a full listing of LifeSiteNews' coverage of the Ontario government's explicit sex-ed program here.