Condom Failure in South Carolina

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, MS, SRAS   ~  Sexual Risk Avoidance Specialist

Robert Swain MS HIA

 

Health experts in South Carolina (SC) are finally showing concern about the high rates of STDs/HIV among teens. According to GoUpstate.com,

In one-year, the rate of HIV/AIDS jumped 11% among 15-19 year olds.

And, SC ranks in the top ten states for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and HIV/AIDS.

This data is surprising since HIV/AIDS rates are generally reported as declining. What are we to think? 

Regardless of its validity, you should know that the “health experts” mentioned in this article are members of the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education, a coalition run by SIECUS, which is a spin-off of Planned Parenthood. They are in league with over three hundred national Sexperts who promote Sexual Rights in our schools under the guise of Comprehensive Sexuality Education. (CSE).

Teaching students to delay sex until their brains are mature and they are self-sufficient adults is the best sexual health message, regardless of their sexual history or sexual orientation. However, that is not a Sexpert’s primary goal. Delaying sex just does not fit the Sexual Rights narrative, nor the sex industries’ lucrative business model. They want to get kids hooked on sex at an early age so that they become lifelong customers.

Sexual Rights advocates cannot admit that CSE or ‘contraception-only sex ed’ fails to protect our children from the consequences of sex, mainly STDs/HIV. Rather, they shift the blame to a lack of “access to health care services and affordability of health care services.” Really? Using vulnerable minors to politicize the STD/HIV crisis in SC is absolutely shameless. And for what? More condom distribution centers!

The problem is not health services; it is CSE in our schools. CSE is neither comprehensive nor educational. It is Sexual Rights indoctrination that normalizes and promotes sexual activity for minors. Students are legal minors and cannot consent to sex, so why are adults teaching them how to have sex?

Besides, many SC high school students are not even using condoms. GoUpstate.com reports that, “Only 59 percent of [sexually active] high school students report (2015) using a condom the last time they had sex.” This data does not even factor whether the condoms were used correctly or consistently.

If 59 percent were the only relative data point, this might sounds OK. But, the report neglects to inform us that condom use in SC peaked in 2005 at 67 percent and it has been in decline ever since! Most of this decline occurred during the Obama years when sexually explicit, pornographic, CSE programs began receiving more than 90 percent of all federal sex ed funding. Teaching kids the pleasures of sex and expecting them to care about their future health is ludicrous.

And, for those 41 percent that used a condom the last time they had sex, condoms are not protective enough. Exaggerating condom effectiveness or allowing students to believe that condoms will protect them from STDs is deceitful. Such medically inaccurate information gives students false assurance that they are protected and it encourages them to take more risks.

In addition to failed condom education, we reported last fall that a U.S. Health and Human Services replication study of  “evidence-based” CSE programs reveals that most were ineffective. The full review is in the American Journal of Public Health (October 2016). One of their conclusions was,

“While several of the evaluations did show positive outcomes, most of the programs had small or insignificant impacts on adolescent behavior.”

Valerie Huber, Founder/CEO of WeAscend.org, a national Sexual Risk Avoidance (SRA) policy organization, nailed it in her summary of the findings:

“Compared with their peers who were in the program, teens in some TPP-funded projects were more likely to begin having sex, more likely to engage in oral sex, and more likely to get pregnant. In fact, more than 80% of students in these programs fared either worse or no better than their peers who were not in the program.”

Those ignoring the devastating results of CSE programs are not competent to teach our children. To date, none of the failed CSE programs have been pulled from SC schools. Parents and taxpayers must demand that they be removed and replaced with proven-effective Sexual Risk Avoidance programs.

If CSE programs were seat belts, they would have been recalled years ago!

Comprehensive Sex Ed: Total Waste of Our Money!

Featured

By Mary S McLellan, SRAS (Sexual Risk Avoidance Specialist)

Do you ever wonder why our culture is more sexualized and pornified than eight years ago?

Nearly a BILLION DOLLAR$ of our money was funneled to Comprehensive Sexuality Education under the Obama administration. 


Comprehensive Sexuality Education is not about science, biology, or reproduction. It is about teaching minor children the pleasures of sex, Sexual Rights, and that sexual risks are no big deal. 

Most so-called Comprehensive Sexuality Education downplays STDs and solves every pregnancy with abortion. It is total indoctrination into a hedonistic lifestyle. Maybe that’s why condom use has flat-lined for twenty-years! (CDC YRBS)

Using terms like “medically accurate” and “age appropriate” are red flags when defined by Planned Parenthood, Advocates For Youth, or Obama’s complicit media. 

Today’s “Comprehensive” Sexuality Education leaves out the many benefits of and skills needed to delay sex until one is educated, self-sufficient, and ready to form a healthy family. That’s not comprehensive enough for most parents and grandparents, who want only quality education for their children. 

We need to defund Obama’s Sexual Rights Agenda so that America’s children can thrive and enjoy the freedoms they deserve. 

Learn more: StopCSE.org and WeAscend.org

Charleston, SC: The Horns Come Out!

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, MS, SRAS ~ Sexual Risk Avoidance Specialist

mens-scary-devil-horns-long-halloween-fancy-dress-9748-pLast week, the Charleston County School District had the audacity to protect the innocence of middle school students from the Sexual Rights Agenda. They voted unanimously to REJECT the Appendix to Making A Difference!, a Comprehensive Sex Education curriculum. The Board said that the Appendix contained inappropriate information for students in middle school.

 

Maybe it’s Halloween, but all Hell has broken loose! The horns are out from every Sexual Rights organization in and outside of South Carolina. How dare the school district defy them! The Sexual Rights Cartel is livid and won’t stop until parents and taxpayers tell them to shut-up and keep their hands off of children!

Who are these Sexual Rights organizations in SC demanding that minors learn how to have so-called “safe sex?” According to the media buzz, they are Women’s Rights & Empowerment Network – a new organization established by New Morning Foundation/Tell Them SCFlorence Crittenton, and Charleston County Teen Pregnancy Prevention Council, which is part of the SC Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. They all work in concert with the media: Post & Courier, Charleston Currents, and the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education to promote the Sexual Rights Agenda through taxpayer supported government infrastructure.

The so-called “revised” Making A Difference! curriculum has not been evaluated for effectiveness and it is doubtful that it is any different or better from the original 1998 version. The original version was never evaluated in a school based setting. Even then…

“The study did not find any statistically significant program impacts on rates of sexual intercourse for adolescents who were sexually experienced at baseline, or on frequency of sexual intercourse, condom use, or unprotected sexual intercourse for the full sample. The study found no statistically significant program impacts for the follow-ups conducted six and 12 months after the program ended.”

Making A Difference! is touted as an “abstinence” program, but the title tells the true story: “Making A Difference!” An Abstinence Approach to Prevent STDs, HIV and Teen Pregnancy.” It is not an authentic abstinence education program because appropriate boundaries for sex, such as commitment, monogamy and marriage, are not discussed. Without boundaries anything is permissible! The term “abstinence approach” is often used to deceive school districts, teachers, parents and taxpayers into thinking that they are supporting an effective sex ed program.

Read more articles about Making A Difference! at ExposeSexEdNow.com.

Why is this program not age appropriate? Middle school students are typically 11-13 years old. They are minors, which means that they are legally incapable of consenting to sex. Laws are written to protect minors from sexual predators or anyone that would make them vulnerable to enticement into sexual activities. This is a very serious matter in our culture.

Charleston County School Board is more than justified in nixing the Making A Difference! Appendix. It includes information about sexual orientation (which is a violation of state law), inaccurate and misleading information about the effectiveness of condoms, and ambiguous language about the definition of abstinence. It also suggests that sexual foreplay is an appropriate alternative to intercourse, and it normalizes sexual relationships for minors.

Judge for yourself! Here are just a few examples found in the Making A Difference! Appendix:

  • Pg. 222-225. Role Plays about Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual relationships.
  • Pg. 228 #9. (True) or False. “Anyone who has unprotected sex or shares needles can get HIV.”
    • While this is technically a true statement, it is also true that ‘Anyone who has protected sex (condoms) can get HIV.’ People still get HIV, even when using a condom. Condoms do not make sex safe enough.
    • Adolescents are primarily concrete thinkers and their brains have not developed to the point of higher abstract and critical thinking. Most adolescents (11-13) will not notice the discrepancies in their statement, which implies that using a condom is ‘just about’ as safe as abstinence.
  • Pg. 229
    • #16. Implies that condoms are 100% effective at preventing HIV transmission.  This is medically inaccurate, in fact fraudulent, information. Condoms can only reduce the risk of HIV infection.
    • Pg. 229, #20. Suggests sexual foreplay ideas and defines all of the listed behaviors as “sexual behaviors.”
      • Legal minors are asked to select 3 “sexual behaviors” that will not exchange bodily fluids.
      • Avoiding bodily fluids is not the only danger of having sex. This activity implies that sex is OK as long as bodily fluids are not transmitted.
      • 11-13 year old minors are legally incapable of consenting to sex. To normalize sex for minors makes educators complicit in contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
    • 252. The definition of abstinence is inadequate, misleading, and narrowly focused only on sexual intercourse.
      • In Making A Difference!, as well as in most Comprehensive Sex Education programs, abstinence is often defined as “not engaging in sexual intercourse of any type (oral, anal or vaginal).” This definition allows for sexual foreplay, which can transmit STDs, and often leads to sexual intercourse.
      • The medically accurate and age appropriate definition for abstinence is “not engaging in any sexual activity of any type, including oral, anal or vaginal.

The Sexual Rights Cartel has exposed their horns. They are not interested in protecting kids. They only want access to them.

Write the Charleston County School Board today and tell them thank-you for protecting the innocence of children. They need support from parents for this decision.

RECALL: “Making A Difference!”

Featured

by Mary S. McLellan, MS, SRAS ~ Sexual Risk Avoidance Specialist

massive-recall-for-takata-airbags1-791x445 Would you let your child’s life depend on an unreliable product that claims to only Reduce the Risks of harm? READ the research on “Making A Difference!” before you allow your child to take this course in middle school.

 

Back in 1998, the research design for “Making A Difference!” was considered strong and still, those results from a single study showed that the program only delayed sex for 3 months, in a small sample of 11-13 year old African American urban students, who – had NOT had sex.

However, at the 6 and 12 month evaluation, there was no impact on sexual initiation, sex, condom use, or unprotected sex. NO IMPACT!

“The study found that three months after the program ended, adolescents participating in the intervention who were sexually inexperienced at baseline were significantly less likely to report having had sexual intercourse in the previous 3 months. The study did not find any statistically significant program impacts on rates of sexual intercourse for adolescents who were sexually experienced at baseline, or on frequency of sexual intercourse, condom use, or unprotected sexual intercourse for the full sample. The study found no statistically significant program impacts for the follow-ups conducted six and 12 months after the program ended.”

This 18 year old program had only been evaluated ONCE; there were no replication studies to show that the same thing could happen again. (This is shoddy research.) Why was it deemed an Evidence-based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program and put on the US Health and Human Services’ and CDC’s list to push in public schools?

“Making A Difference!” has been promoted in public schools for eighteen years!

“Making A Difference!” has NEVER been officially evaluated in a school setting, but only in after-school and community settings (poor inner city minorities.) YET, it is widely used to teach all minors in school settings. Again, shoddy research and application!

“Making A Difference!” is touted as an “abstinence education program,” but uses the term “abstinence-approach” to fool school districts into thinking they have a proven effective abstinence education program.

An authentic Evidence-based Abstinence/Sexual Risk Avoidance Education program sets clear boundaries to avoid all sexual activity. Boundaries such as commitment, monogamy, and marriage. However, “Making A Difference!” does not set boundaries for how long the minor child is to delay sex. They teach…When you feel ready for sex. That could be today – right after school, this weekend, prom night, etc.

“”Making A Difference!” is an Abstinence Approach to Prevention of STDs, HIV and Teen Pregnancy is an eight module curriculum that provides young adolescents with the knowledge, confidence, and skills necessary to reduce their risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), HIV, and pregnancy by abstaining from sex. The curriculum is designed for middle school youth and is delivered by trained facilitators.”

“Making A Difference” is written by the Jemmotts, the same authors who wrote “Making Proud Choices!” and “Be Proud! Be Responsible.” They used a Sexual Risk Reduction approach, rather than a Sexual Risk Avoidance approach. Several of the Jemmott sex programs are advocated by Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, and other Sexual Rights Groups.

Sexual Risk Reduction means that as long as “protection” is used (condoms, birth control, alternative sex) then sex can be safe. Really? Is this what minors, who legally cannot consent to sex, need to hear? How has that been working for us over the past 20 years?

For more information, check out other articles on these programs at ExposeSexEdNow.com.

Just like Jewish lives…Black Lives DO Matter!

Featured

Tim ScottDid Jewish lives matter during World War II? Yes, and there was no quibbling about it. Jewish people were targeted by the Nazis for extinction and Christians, like Corrie Ten Boom with others in the Holland Underground, sacrificed their lives to save them.

Why are we whining about whether Black Lives Matter or All Lives Matter? It’s petty in the midst of the violence on our streets, deliberate slaughter of unborn Black babies, and fatherless children.

The Black family in America has been systematically under assault since the time of slavery, and especially since Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, designed ways to control Black populations. Along with Adolph Hitler, Sanger collaborated in eugenics to develop a pure race by getting rid of populations that, in their opinion, were unfit. Hitler targeted the Jews and Sanger targeted the “Negroes.” Both, also targeted the mentally deficient so that they would not be a burden on social services.

Margaret Sanger is quoted saying, “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

According to Dr. Paul Kenger, “Margaret Sanger spoke to a women’s organization affiliated with the KKK and she started the Negro Project to bring birth-control information and clinics to impoverished southern African-Americans. Moreover, the Planned Parenthood founder unequivocally preached a creed of “race improvement,” which meant refining the gene pool and controlling and limiting the reproduction of human beings whom she thought weakened the human race. She clearly saw “Negroes” as among those members of the human race whose reproduction she wanted to control. And there is no doubt that the KKK, being absolute racists, would have lauded that.”

Not only did Sanger seek to control the population growth of Black families, President Johnson’s War on Poverty during the 60’s targeted Black families for government dependency and birth control. Taxpayer funded Planned Parenthood clinics were located in predominately Black neighborhoods to target Black women seeking contraception or abortions. More American unborn Black babies are slaughtered in abortions than any other race. This is genocide.

Add to that, taxpayer funded public schools that indoctrinate generations of Black children through so-called Comprehensive Sex Ed. These sex programs promote early sexual activity, which sustains the Planned Parenthood business model through birth control, teen pregnancies, STD treatments, and abortions. Poor inner city Black youth have been used in “research projects” to develop many of the Comprehensive Sex Ed programs used in public schools across the nation. Such Sexual Rights programs are then funded by federal and state taxes to not only promote birth control and abortion, but also pornographic sex play, gender diversity and transgender agendas.

The ‘newest’ idea from Progressive think tanks is public boarding schools, where inner city youth in Washington, DC are housed during the week and indoctrinated. Once again, our taxes pay for this.

We are all being played by governmental systems and a complicit media. Government and money are the problem, not the solution.

Regardless of whose fault the violence and injustice belongs, the Black family needs help. Senator Tim Scott (SC), one of only two Black US Senators stated today, “The government cannot make us get along,” he said. Instead, Americans would have to do better, be kinder and listen with “their heads and their hearts.”

Black Lives Matter” is an urgent cry to pay attention. Stop defending Whiteness. If you are really not a racist, speak out for justice and stop the madness wherever you live.

PP-Network Takes Credit for Teen Abstinence??

1 in 4 girls has ever had sexWhile the Planned Parenthood Network (PP-Network) pumps out endless propaganda bashing abstinence-until-marriage education and takes credit for the dramatic decreases in teen pregnancies, CDC data shows that teens (15-17) have been abstaining from sex, at increasing rates, over the past decade. The most recent data shows that almost 75% of teens (15-17) nationally surveyed by the CDC, have not had sex.

To the PP-Network, the only problem with sex is that it makes babies and BABIES ARE A REAL PROBLEM for them. Sexual Rights is the PP-Network’s agenda. Therefore, whatever it takes to prevent babies from being conceived, developing or born is the goal of the sex and abortion industry.

Why is the PP-Network so OFFENDED by abstinence-until-marriage education?

Because, abstinence-until-marriage education promotes MARRIAGE and FIDELITY WITHIN MARRIAGE.

The PP-Network has no problem saying that they believe in abstinence, as long as they get to define what abstinence means. To them, oral sex, anal sex, and mutual masturbation are the same as abstinence, because these sex acts do not make babies.

And, these SexPerts have no problem telling kids to abstain, as long as there are no restrictions on how long they must wait. Abstinence to them can be until teens are 13, 16, 18 or whenever they feel they are ready to be “proud and responsible” enough to use condoms and take toxic hormones.

This is why Comprehensive Sex Education is such a farce. It is not, and cannot be, “comprehensive” since it would have to teach all views on the purposes of sex.

The PP view of sex ed is to promote hedonism without forming a family while Abstinence-Until-Marriage Education promotes romance and healthy family formation, within marriage, resulting in connected generations of families.

There is no comprehensive program or curriculum that could attempt to teach both views, with a straight face. It would be ludicrous! Which view do you think will provide the best future for your child?

Proponents of Comprehensive Sex Education claim that it covers abstinence and contraception and everything in between. Except that it doesn’t. What they hide from the public, and especially parents, is the fact that they do not teach about marriage, family formation, or the responsibilities of raising children. They teach sex.

Proponents also do not want it exposed that add-on programs, like Making A Difference! and Making Proud Choices!, both listed on PP’s website, teach sexual foreplay and intercourse, under the guise of STD prevention, so that condoms can be taught to younger and younger kids. However, sexual foreplay also spreads STDs. Medically Accurate?

Abstinence-Until-Marriage education is the exact opposite of the PP-Network’s Sexual Rights Agenda in the following ways:

Abstinence-Until-Marriage programs are holistic, meaning that humans are viewed as whole beings with value and uniqueness. The act of sex biologically impacts the mind, body, emotions and spirit as humans engage in it, even if there is no intercourse. This is why humans are different. We are not animals.

  • The PP-Network’s Sexual Rights Agenda views humans as genitals to be fondled, and maybe if convenient, protected from disease with condoms. Little girls and women are to use hormones to prevent or get rid of pregnancies. In the end, humans are simply sex toys for someone else’s pleasure. This is why the PP-Networks want no limits or restrictions on sex.  

Abstinence-Until-Marriage programs teach students that abstinence means not engaging in sexual activity until marriage, including vaginal, oral, anal sex and mutual masturbation. Such programs also teach about the dangers of porn, sexting, and cohabitation.

  • The PP-Network’s Sexual Rights Agenda promotes unbridled sexual activity – at any age – with anyone or anything – as long as there is “consent” – whatever that means.

Abstinence-Until-Marriage promotes life-long, faithful marriage. The social sciences have proven that there are at least Thirty Benefits of Marriage and that children fare best on all social indicators when raised by their own two married parents.

  • The PP-Network’s Sexual Rights Agenda seeks to destroy marriage as an institution and therefore the traditional family. Even the gay marriage movement is just a Progressive ploy to gradually redefine the family and get rid of marriage as an institution and a societal good. None of the sex programs for schools listed on the PP website promote marriage, even for gay couples.

Abstinence-Until-Marriage promotes the fact that sex is wonderful and creates intimacy – within the context of marriage. When sex takes place within a marriage, it is more likely to be safer than outside of marriage. Research has shown that married couples have more sex and more satisfying sex than singles.

  • The PP-Network’s Sexual Rights agenda promotes sex without boundaries, especially without the restraints of marriage, monogamy, or commitment. They portray an unrealistic, unsatisfying, and false view of “Hollywood” sex to get people of all ages hooked on sexual pleasures.    

Abstinence-Until-Marriage promotes the fact that waiting until one has finished their education, and married before having sex and children is the best way to become an economically self-sufficient and prosperous member of society with a stable family life.

  • The PP-Network’s Sexual Rights agenda teaches that humans are sexual from birth and need to have sex in order to mature properly. (Alfred Kinsey/SIECUS) They target poor, minority, inner city neighborhoods to push their sex without boundaries, contraception and abortion agenda. This increases the risks of generational poverty, drop-out rates, and unwed childbearing. 
  • Planned Parenthood receives millions of taxpayer dollars annually to promote their agenda, plus they are large part of Obamacare so the revolving door of poverty and dependency will continue to spin out of control.

So, why are teen pregnancy rates declining? For many reasons.

According to several CDC reports, more and more teens are choosing to delay sex and those who are having sex are being more selective. The PP Network cannot take credit for the increase in abstinence, because they do not seriously teach it.

Real credit needs to go to the smart teens themselves who are choosing to abstain. Also, to parents, faith leaders and educators who really care about kids and are not afraid to tell them to delay sex until marriage.

Let’s not give credit to those who are promoting a Sexual Rights Agenda and are being paid by the sex industries.

That would be a farce.

Ask a stupid question?

stupid alertTell Them SC, the advocacy arm of the New Morning Foundation, in league with the Planned Parenthood (PP) Sex Ed Network, is asking their members to send emails to the candidates for SC Governor and ask, “As Governor, would you support medically accurate sex education?”

That is really a stupid and leading question! I hope the candidates don’t fall for it!

Rather, the candidates should demand that “medically accurate sex education” be thoroughly defined by breaking down every component, providing scientific citations, and allowing transparency for all lessons taught in their so-called “age appropriate” programs.

That is how the PP Sexual Rights Agenda will be EXPOSED!

The PP Network in SC continues to push their so-called Healthy Youth Amendment (H3435) and will introduce it AGAIN in January 2015, even after two failed attempts. That’s what Progressives do!

To the PP Sex Ed Network, “medically accurate sex education” is defined by themselves (Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, Guttmacher Institute, National Sexuality Standards and Obamacare), along with their pro-abortion and “safe sex” advocates who publish in medical and public health journals.

Having the Planned Parenthood Network define “medically accurate sex ed” would be like having the R. J. Reynold’s Tobacco Company define “safe” cigarettes!

PP Sex Ed is “safe sex” education and it teaches minors as young as 11 years old how to “express their sexual feelings” through brainstorming activities about oral sex, sexual fantasy, anal sex, touching each others genitals and grinding. (Pg. 65 Making A Difference! for middle schools.)

The following is a direct quote from Making A Difference! Pg. 64: “We want you to know that at your age the proud and responsible things to remember are:

  • It’s OK to THINK about sex.
  • It’s Ok to TALK about sex.
  • It’s OK to DEVELOP feelings and attitudes about sex.

BUT it’s NOT a good idea to HAVE sex until you are prepared to have sex with respect and responsibility.” Really? Who determines what is means to be “age appropriate”, “respectful” and “responsible?”

  • When did I give the school permission to tell my 11-year-old son or daughter that:
  • it’s OK to TALK about sex? With whom? Could this lead to sexting?
  • it’s OK (for the PP Sex Network) to help my child “Develop feelings and attitudes about sex!”
  • when they know how to make “respectful and responsible” sexual decisions, it is OK to have sex?
  • what makes a good or bad idea? Are they teaching ideology? Values? Are these your values?

More than half of SC’s counties have PP “safe sex” programs in their schools and most parents have no idea what is taught. Just because a program, like Making A Difference!, says it is “Abstinence-only” does not mean it teaches “Abstinence-Until-Marriage.” It just means it does not promote contraception. Even so,  there is a big difference between “abstain until Friday night or when you feel ready” and “abstain until marriage.” Without boundaries, anything goes!

So, I hope our candidates, and our Legislators, won’t be duped into answering this stupid and leading question until the entire definition of “medically accurate sex education,” according to the Planned Parenthood Network is exposed.

Considering the welfare of your children, it may be the most important question they ever answer!

Read “What can I get away with today?” and more disturbing information about Sexual Foreplay Ed in our schools at ExposeSexEdNow.com