Sex Slavery expands in Georgia

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, M.S., SRAS ~ ExposeSexEdNow.com

 

Sex Trafficking in GA Georgia is well known for having a human sex trafficking epidemic. Sex trafficking in Atlanta and other hot spots in Georgia have been reported for years and it’s only getting worse. So, why are children and families in Georgia so vulnerable to sex trafficking?

To make matters worse, recently Gov. Deal (R) caved to economic tyranny imposed by the Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC).HRC is one of the main proponents of normalizing sex for minors in the nation. As a result of HRC’s bully tactics, religious leaders must now marry couples against their church’s doctrine, thus promoting sexual practices that violate religious liberty guaranteed by the GA and US  Constitution.

The HRC is a member of the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education and author of the so-called  federal Healthy Youth Act. Their goal is to mandate Comprehensive Sex Education (Sexual Rights-only) in all public schools. One method of achieving this goal is to make it illegal in Georgia to teach students the benefits of delaying sexual activity and the importance of marriage for raising healthy families. California has already passed such legislation.

FLASH is a sex program listed on Planned Parenthood’s website and the primary source of sexual health information for students in DeKalb County schools in metro-Atlanta. FLASH curricula has been used for years in Seattle and Kings County, Washington throughout elementary, middle, and high schools. FLASH normalizes sexual activity among and with minors.

FLASH sex classes are required to be co-ed so that students can learn to feel comfortable talking about sex with their friends. Teachers are trained to “norm” the classroom so that students feel safe asking  questions and students are told not to talk about content or discussions outside of the classroom. “Family” is defined without including a traditional family model.

A review of FLASH videos and information for teachers reveals that minors, who cannot legally consent to sex, learn about the following subject matter:

  • LGBT Youth: Reteaching Gender & Sexuality

    • This film won awards from Gay and Lesbian film festivals in San Francisco, Seattle, London, and Rio.

    • It normalizes gay, lesbian, transgender relationships – everyone is queer. If you are not queer, you are the odd one.

  • STD Prevention: STD Myths from SexEtc.org, a project of Answer at Rutgers University (YouTube.)

    • While this film has some medically accurate information about STDs, it promotes sexual activity as normal among and with minors.

    • STDs are either treatable or manageable.

    • Condoms and dental dams are the “best protection,” if not practicing abstinence. However, abstinence is not recommended as the best sexual health option nor is it presented as the norm for teens, which CDC data supports.

    • SexEtc.org/Answer is funded by the US Health and Human Services Maternal and Child Health, an author of the National Sexuality Education Standards, and a member of the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education. All of these entities promote sexual activity.

  • HIV-Focus on Testing: Sexual Health

    • This film depicts sex acts among and with minors using comic book style storytelling.

    • Contains foul and coarse language. Portrays parents as idiots.

  • HIV-Focus on Communication, only for 12th grade: Your Body. Your Rules

    • Normalizes sex among and with minors.

    • Teaches that assertiveness is good, but only if you are demanding condom use.

    • Girl says that she only has one rule for having sex: Use a condom.

  • Talking with Partners About Prevention: Just Like You Imagined?

    • Normalizes sex among and with minors.

    • Portrays normal life of a teen as chaotic.

None of the content we found in FLASH curricula teaches minors the benefits of avoiding risky sexual behavior. FLASH violates basic public health policies by normalizing sexual activity that has long-term health consequences for the general public. FLASH also undermines the authority of parents by portraying them as ignorant, out of touch with reality, and incapable to providing wise guidance to their children.

By normalizing child sex in public education, adolescents and teens are groomed to accept and engage in sex. This makes them most vulnerable to pedophiles, sex traffickers, and pornographers. Georgia is conducting state sponsored sexual exploitation of minors and no one seems to care.

Georgia now owns your children, their education, their faith, and their future. Under the guise of Sexual Rights, your children are now sex slaves to the state.

 

“Tell Them” the Truth

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, MS, SRAS ~ ExposeSexEdNow.com

Alway, tell the truth.TellThemSC and the Sexual Rights Network are fighting the Personhood Act of South Carolina. Like similar personhood legislation across the nation, it states that life begins at fertilization (conception) and should be protected. Not only does this legislation jeopardize the right to abortion, it exposes some contraception drugs and devices as abortifacients.

The Sexual Rights Agenda markets contraception as the ideal way to enjoy sex without the worry of pregnancies, and therefore abortions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many women get pregnant using contraception. When that happens, women and men feel betrayed and are more likely to seek an abortion.

After all, they were taught in school that they have a “right to sex” without consequences!

We still live in a cause and effect universe. There are always consequences for our actions. Since many women still get pregnant on contraception, abortifacient contraception drugs and devices were developed that would not just prevent conception, but abort the fertilized egg if conception occurred. This kind of abortion is ideal because it is hidden from public scrutiny, undocumented, and convenient.

How was the public deceived into accepting abortifacient contraception? Progressively. Over the decades, the Sexual Rights Network redefined terms like “contraception”, “conception,” “personhood,” and “pregnancy.” Rather than recognize new life at the time of fertilization (conception), abortion advocates redefined “pregnancy” as implantation of the fertilized egg in the lining of the uterus. This allows five to six days after conception to destroy the human embryo before pregnancy is established.

The Personhood Act of South Carolina shines the light of truth on abortifacient contraception. If life is legally protected at conception, then any potentially life-ending drugs or devices will also be illegal.

TellThemSC admits that “emergency contraception, hormonal birth control pills and other methods of birth control…can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.” Read their statement:

“”Personhood” legislation would grant constitutional rights for fertilized eggs at the “moment of fertilization,” before pregnancy has occurred. This type of legislation is so broad, it would outlaw emergency contraception, hormonal birth control pills and other methods of birth control because they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.”

The Obamacare Contraception Mandate, currently before the Supreme Court, brought the debate over abortifacient contraception to a national level. Religious organizations opposed to abortion are forced under Obamacare to provide, not just contraception, but abortifacient contraception to their employees through contracts and/or agreements with insurance companies. This makes them complicit, thus violating their religion.

TellThemSC knows that abortifacient contraception destroys human life. They just don’t care. They, along with other SexPerts and abortion zealots, will continue to promote abortions at any and all stages of development. Their goal is sex without boundaries.

But, for those of us who do not support abortion and have been duped into thinking that all contraception prevents conception, it does matter. A lot.

We did not know, because the truth was censored. We believed the lie.

Now, let the truth speak. Lives depend on it.

When did Sex Ed become Porn?

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, M.S., SRAS – ExposeSexEdNow.com

 

Best Full NCSE_ExposeSeamlessConnections_600_2-9 (1)The New York Times’ opinion piece by Peggy Orenstein, entitled When Did Porn Become Sex Ed?, is a shameless promotion of her new book Girls and Sex. While pretending disdain for porn’s influence on our youth, Orenstein promotes Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) as the solution to porn.

 

 

Yet, much of CSE is porn under the guise of so-called “safe sex.”

Orenstein’s article labels youth, especially girls, as victims of the evil right-wing establishment that denies them the right to pleasurable sex. She continues by ridiculing sexual restraint, mocking parents, and of course demonizing abstinence education.

True to Alinsky, she tells teens and college students exactly what they want to hear. That their sexual exploits are justified because “the system” has failed them. Any consequences they may suffer are not their fault!

The author whines on…

So she had turned to pornography. “There’s a lot of problems with porn,” she wrote. “But it is kind of nice to be able to use it to gain some knowledge of sex.”

And while we are more often telling children that both parties must agree unequivocally to a sexual encounter, we still tend to avoid the biggest taboo of all: women’s capacity for and entitlement to sexual pleasure.””

Really? The real question should be…

When did Sex Ed become Porn?

CSE is Sexual Rights Education supported by staunch pro-abortion advocates. Since the late 80’s, these SexPerts have used federally funded Sex Ed programs to direct minors to the pleasures of sex. Much of the content is medically inaccurate and definitely not age appropriate. You can find out more by reading ExposeSexEdNow and by going to Stop the War on Children.

Decades ago the purpose of “sex ed” was to teach puberty, male and female reproduction, and the consequences of sex outside of marriage. Thanks to Kinsey, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, and the Sexual Rights Agenda, the purpose of Sex Ed today is to teach kids how to reach orgasm with multiple life-time partners.

CSE is taxpayer funded porn addiction. Porn creates neural pathways in the brain demanding more and worse porn to be satisfied. Porn has always been used to expose youth to the pleasures of sex. This is not new. It targets kids during their most vulnerable years, before their bodies and brains are mature. It is the ideal way to create addicts.

The timing of this NYTimes article is also deliberate. Currently, many state legislators are debating changes to their Sex Ed Laws. Sexual Rights Groups are mandating CSE-only for all public schools. Some even want to eliminate parental consent.

By promoting CSE, Peggy Orenstein exposes her bias towards promoting sexual liberties, even for legal minors who cannot consent to sex. She wants more porn, not less porn, for your child. And, she wants it mandated so that optimal sexual health messages, like sexual restraint, will be censored.

If CSE is mandated in your state and/or in your school district get your children out. Your tax money is indoctrinating them to believe the lie that the consequences of sexual freedom are worth the pleasures. However, sexual freedom often leads to sexual slavery.

Find out more about CSE and ask the right questions.

Public Health Crisis: Porn in Sex Ed

Featured

Mary S. McLellan, M.S., SRAS ~ ExposeSexEdNow.com

endsexualexploitation cycle diagramUtah legislators have connected the dots between porn in our culture and porn content in many taxpayer funded Comprehensive Sex Ed programs (CSE). This week, they had the audacity to pass a resolution (75-0) that pornography is a public health crisis. The resolution is ready for the Governor to sign. Earlier in the session the legislature defeated a bill to expand Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE). Someone is seeing the connections, at least in Utah!

What is porn? There are more sophisticated legal definitions, but porn is essentially any sexually stimulating visual, audible, or written content that promotes sex-without-boundaries. In too many CSE curricula, sex-without-boundaries is taught as normal and expected, while the healthiest boundaries for sexual activity are censored. Boundaries such as abstaining from all sexual activity outside of marriage, regardless of sexual orientation, are not mentioned.

When couples are bonded to each other for life, as in a healthy marriage, there is the expectation of goodwill towards each other and any children they may raise together.

ExposeSexEdNow exposes CSE that encourages students to explore their sexuality regardless of health risks or life-long consequences. Even for minors, who are legally incapable of consenting to sex, so-called “consent” is taught as the only requirement for sexual activity. Some CSE contains “how-to sex lessons” so that students as young as 11 years old can “have pleasurable and safe sexual experiences.” Under the guise of pregnancy and STD prevention some CSE teach the “skills” to make condoms, dental dams, and lots of lube “fun and pleasurable.”

Some CSE curricula introduce and/or reinforce sexual activity as healthy behavior. Yet, adolescent brain research clearly shows that sexually stimulating information during adolescence and teen years is neurologically dangerous and can lead to porn addiction.

The average age for porn addiction in both boys and girls is 12 years old!

Pornography is dangerous both in its use and abuse of women and children. Alfred Kinsey used porn sex to abuse babies, toddlers and children for so-called “scientific research.” Kinsey’s fraudulent “research” has been debunked, but continues to produce an industry of “credentialed” SexPerts, who are hell bent on mandating their hedonistic ideology throughout our government, schools and churches.

Any means of sexual exploitation should be prosecuted by our legal systems, but it is not. The 2016 Dirty Dozen list of top contributors of porn reveals rampant disregard for our children.

  • The US Department of Justice “refuses to enforce existing federal obscenity laws!”
    • “From the time Obama took office in 2008, no enforcement actions against illegal obscenity have been initiated by DOJ, and in 2011 former Attorney General Eric Holder dismantled the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force.”
    • Peddlers of obscenity and porn have had a green light from the feds for over 7 years! Add to that the millions of dollars funded to CSE and it is no wonder that the Sexual Rights Agenda is targeting our children at warp speed.
    • Nearly all states exempt primary and secondary schools from Obscenity Laws. That’s right! Most primary and secondary schools cannot get into legal trouble for obscenity that would land any of us in jail.
  • Another top contributor of porn is the American Library Association.
    • The ALA steadfastly refuses to put filters on computers to prevent clients from viewing porn, even child porn. Aren’t public libraries supported with our tax money?
    • Plus, many state schools and their libraries have weak, unclear, or non-existent filtering statutes for obscenity. What about computers and iPads in your child’s school?
    • Beware letting your kids roam free in the library! Not only are libraries safe havens for pedophiles, but many libraries have sexuality resources from organizations supportive of CSE in the pre-teen and teen sections of the library.
    • Yet, these same libraries censor information about the benefits of marriage or delaying sexual activity until marriage. 

Our pornified culture has crippled America. Chaotic family formation, disease, and social misery fill our streets, homes, and public school systems. It is intentional, leading generations into lives of poverty. In 2011, Greg Pfundstein’s Sex Ed Mandates and Children’s Innocence cited Reducing the Risks, a popular CSE curricula used in middle and high schools as based on ideology, not medically accurate information.

Pornography should be addressed as a public health crisis much like tobacco, alcohol and drugs. A public health approach requires a multifaceted campaign to eliminate the sources and behaviors (risks) related to porn, which in turn will greatly reduce the availability and consequences. Fifty-years ago, few thought that smoking could be drastically reduced, but is has been.

Parents, and most reasonable adults, know in their gut that something is terribly wrong. We daily hear of sexual exploitation, porn, and sexual rights demands. When the safety of our children is openly jeopardized, what can good parents do? We cannot sit still while our children are indoctrinated to think that sexual activities are normal fun entertainment. We cannot let them be groomed for “consensual sex.”

More states should follow Utah’s example and resolve to call pornography a public health crisis. We must expose and prosecute sexual exploitation, wherever it is.

SC: Planned Parenthood Admissions

Featured

Lee Bright PP South Atlantic2 ppYesterday, Planned Parenthood South Atlantic sent this email out to their South Carolina network bragging about working for seven years with public health organizations to pass legislation mandating the HPV vaccine. Planned Parenthood is angry at Sen. Lee Bright for holding up the vote on the vaccine and they are demanding action.

Indeed, the Planned Parenthood Network (includes Sexual Rights advocates) has been very involved for decades in such collaborations to control public health policies in South Carolina.

The Planned Parenthood Network has worked with federal and state agencies, nonprofits, and foundations that advocate for Sexual Rights to thwart state law. They also lobby SC legislators to mandate “safe sex-only” education in the schools and to censor optimal public health messages regarding the benefits of marriage and delaying sex until marriage, as state law requires.

So, in the spirit of transparency…we have ten questions:

  1. Who are these “public health organizations?”
  2. Were these meetings between public and private agencies opened to the public, as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires?
  3. Are the meetings FOIA-able, so that we can know which state agencies and employees participated? Were they taped?
  4. If state agency employees were involved, did they meet on the taxpayers dime?
  5. Do these public health organizations include the State Alliance for Adolescent Sexual Health (SAASH), housed at SC DHEC?
  6. Is Maternal and Child Health at U.S. Health and Human Services involved?
  7. What about Advocates for Youth, the lead author of the so-called and unapproved National Sexuality Education Standards? (Common Core for Sex Ed)
  8. Was SIECUS (Sexuality Information Education Council of the U.S.) involved? SIECUS is a spin-off of Planned Parenthood in charge of pushing Sexuality Education programs and curricula to school districts.
    1. Coincidentally, seven years ago SIECUS bragged in their 2009 Annual Report (page 23) about working “with colleagues and state government officials to change the state Board of Education’s policies on sex education.
    2. “Then they lied by saying…”As a result of this work, middle schools throughout the state are now required to deliver some form of sex education that addresses contraception. To be sure, this is far from perfect, but gradualism is how change comes on these issues in the state and we are working consistently and strategically to ensure that there is forward movement.” The lie is that middle schools are not required to teach contraception, but only at the approval of the local school board. This is an intimidation tactic used to strong arm school districts into teaching minors condoms-only sex ed!
  9. Did the meetings involve the SC Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, a nonprofit that trains public school teachers exclusively in Planned Parenthood/SIECUS sex programs with federal and state funding? None of their programs teach about marriage or the skills to abstain from sexual activity.
  10. Is New Morning Foundation and their social media component TellThemSC.org included as players? They will be bombard legislators next week (3.16.16) with propaganda to promote their Sexual Rights Agenda in the schools.

We appreciate Planned Parenthood’s transparency. Now everyone knows that they are behind the vicious attacks on Sen. Lee Bright and anyone else that believes in teaching students medically accurate information about HPV. Information that HPV is not caught like the common cold. That HPV is an STD spread skin-to-skin outside the protection of a condom. And, that abstaining from all sexual activity is the very best way to avoid all STDs. Tell the entire truth about what HPV is, how it is spread, and all of consequences.

Students deserve to know the medically accurate facts.

Secretly recorded tape reveals abortion clinic chain using similar fetal research methods as Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood/Sexual Rights Surrogates. There are so many and they do not all have the brand Planned Parenthood. The same with Comprehensive Sex Education. Many of the sex programs used in our schools claim they have no connection to Planned Parenthood, yet they operate within the same networks. If the origins are Alfred Kinsey and SIECUS, then they are all the same. Beware.

Saynsumthn's Blog

In a leaked under cover tape, an abortion clinic chain is exposed using similar dehumanizing fetal research methods a Planned Parenthood.

The video was secretly recorded at a National Abortion Federation Conference by the Center for Medical Progress and was leaked to GotNews.com by a hacker last week. In part one, of the Fetal Disposition series you hear a representative from a Washington State abortion clinic describe their fetal tissue research program. In an eerily similar way that the Center for Medical Progress caught Planned Parenthood describing their ghoulish method of procuring tissue from babies they aborted, the Cedar River abortion clinic chain employee brags they are doing the same thing.

Although the staffer identified only as “Connie” does not specify which University they have their research program through, she does indicate that Cedar River abortion clinics collaborate with some of the same private medical research facilities as Planned Parenthood…

View original post 824 more words

Making Proud Choices!…Still a Problem for Parents

Featured

By Debbie Jones – Charleston, South Carolina

MPC pg 87 Condoms
Revised version of Making Proud Choices! in Charleston, SC. Page 87

Making Proud Choices! is still under consideration by the Charleston County School District for middle and high school. Over the summer, a group of parents reviewed the revised Making Proud Choices! to determine if there was anything of concern contained in it. 

Public protests forced the proponents of Making Proud Choices! to “sanitize” the Facilitator Manual of some content that parents found vulgar and offensive. While we are sure they did their best, the parents found that the messaging remains the same in the revised version. The DVDs, posters, activities, and student workbooks, and handouts, which will also be used, were not edited and remain the same. 

The parents conclude that Making Proud Choices! is still unacceptable, and even harmful for students. It is the mindset of the authors, proponents, and teachers, who would tell these things to our children that bothers us the most.

WHO thinks that teaching sexual foreplay to adolescents and teens is a smart way to prevent pregnancies and disease?

“Abstinence” should never be taught as “avoiding unprotected sex.”

Any information about sex should stick to the facts as the SC Law instructs. Making Proud Choices! violates the Law by not teaching abstinence from all sexual activity, does not emphasize abstinence until marriage, does not teach the benefits of marriage, and does not inform students about the risks and limitations of contraception.  

Following are some of the comments from parents about their findings:  

  • The lessons are designed to be interactive…Imagine self-conscious adolescents and teens participating in these activities:

    • One lesson has students talking one-on-one to brainstorm endings to these kinds of sentences. “A person can make condoms less awkward by…”

    • In one lesson students have to stand under a sign that says if they agree or disagree about attitude statements such as, “Abstinence is an easy choice to make” and “It would be easy to talk about contraception with my friends including boyfriend/girlfriend.”  What kinds of message does this send to peers?

    • Students brainstorm the names of condom brands and are taught about types and flavors of condoms, including condoms designed for little boys called Easy Rider. (page 87)

    • During the condom practice demonstrations where condoms, lubrication and a penis model are provided to each student pair, the facilitator is supposed to say, “Some religions and individuals do not believe in using condoms. Your beliefs will become an important part of your decision making.” (page 86) Teen sex and how sex and reproduction are  taught is a public health issue, not just a religious issue. 

    • The condom use activities break down natural inhibitions that children have at their age regarding sexual activity. Facilitator note, “There may be lots of giggling and nervous behavior. The participants will have lots of fun.” (page 90)

  • Overall, it [Making Proud Choices! revised version] still just pays lip-service to abstinence.

    • “Marriage” was only mentioned once. “At some point most people transition from abstinence to being sexually active…” [as in marriage] (page 42) This is not true. According to the CDC, most students surveyed nationally (17 and under) have not had sex. Why tell 11-17 year old students that most of their peers will have sex, except to normalize it? 

    • Making Proud Choices! glorifies condom use. One scenario had a girl saying, “I’m glad you agreed to use condoms. I feel like you really care about me.” (page 178)

    • In the lesson on negotiating and refusing sex when you don’t have a condom, one acceptable response was, “Let’s go buy some condoms right now.” None of the responses considered recommitting to abstinence. (page 180)

    • It normalizes sexual behavior for young teens. The Facilitator’s guide discusses the scenario of two 14 year-olds who have been dating for a year and both want to have sex. The ultimate solution is condoms and “Safe Sex.” (page 122) Why are they not told that they are minors incapable of legally consenting to sex with anyone

    • It redefines “intimacy” as just sex. A note to the facilitator says, “Main points to cover: Other things can lead to intimacy and orgasm without risking getting pregnant or infected with an STD or HIV.” (page 124) Sex affects the whole person and should be much more than keeping the genitals safe. 

    • Making Proud Choices! is just a sex program for minors and teens. It teaches how to have sex and how to have protected sex with condoms. It is not about reproduction or how to form a family within marriage. (pages 2, 4, 10, 60-66)

    • Where is the research to support the following statement? Adolescents “struggle with issues of self-esteem, and self-pride. Due to this, it is extremely important that they learn to feel good about themselves and their decision to practice safe sex.” (pages 13, 81 #10)

    • Making Proud Choices! in no way teaches teens the skills to say no to sex, only how to say no to “unprotected sex.” And, it fails to teach students that condoms are not 100% protective. Students should be reminded about this often throughout the course.

    • It fails to teach students that some STDs do not have symptoms. It states that anyone can get STDs, and that condoms are the only way to prevent the transmission of STDs. That is medically inaccurate information. What about abstinence? Students who abstain do not get STDs and several STDs are spread outside the protection of a condom. (pages 73-77)

    • Sexually active teens are not encouraged to return to an abstinent lifestyle. It is assumed that sexually active teens will continue having sex.

    • Redefines what it means to be “Proud and Responsible” within a sexual context, regardless of the values they have learned from their parents. Rationale: “The emphasis on being proud and responsible provides motivation for engaging in health-protective behavior and for encouraging others to do the same.” (page 40)

    • It teaches students to always use condoms when having vaginal, oral, and anal sex. This assumes they will have vaginal, oral and anal sex. Adolescents are concrete in their thinking and take instruction at face value. Therefore, this is not age appropriate. It also normalizes all types of sexual acts.

    • Students are not taught that infatuation and/or sexual activity can affect their judgment. Yet, during the condom lessons they are told, “Refrain from using alcohol or other drugs because they affect your judgment.” (page 92)

    • In the lesson on Risk Behaviors for HIV, students are taught Green Light, Yellow Light, and Red Light activities. The lesson is about HIV transmission, but is that what teens will remember? The immaturity and impulsiveness of adolescents and teens is not considered when labeling sexual behaviors as Yellow Lights. Many teens will take the challenge, take the hit, and might think that these activities are what they can “get away with.” Yellow Light activities are:

      • “Touching your partner’s body parts”

      • “Vaginal sex using a condom”

      • “Oral sex on a female using a dental dam or condom” and

      • “Having sex with only one partner using a condom.” (page 108)

  • In the activity “Condoms are the Proud and Responsible Thing to Do!” students are told that:

    • “If you use condoms, it will be easier to reach your goals and dreams” “You will feel better about yourself (higher self-esteem)” and “You can do more for your family and community.” (page 150) Where is the research to support this? 

    • Students are also told that “Condoms don’t have to be embarrassing if…You have a supply of them ready to use.” (page 150-153)  

    • This lesson is one that was “cleaned up” by the proponents. It use to be called, “How To Make Condoms Fun and Pleasurable!” The verbiage about how condoms can be used as a method of foreplay, sexual fantasy, sexy/sensual, teasing, hiding condoms on your body, and how condoms make erections last longer have been removed. The intent of the revised lesson is the same.

  • None of the material as presented in the videos is age appropriate in my estimation. There seemed to be a nominal suggestion of abstinence, and then immediate reference back to the use of condoms. There was nothing about abstinence until marriage.

    • One of the DVDs to be shown in class describes how to use condoms during sex, by talking about the female’s role, sexual arousal, rolling condom on, intercourse, orgasm, holding onto the rim, removing the condom and relaxation. Videos (visual images) will be remembered longer than words.

    • Another DVD called “Nicole’s Choice” was difficult for me to watch. The video opens and closes with scenes of heavy foreplay and intercourse. There is talk about having unprotected sex. Nicole now wants her partner to use a condom. Another scene shows Nicole at a doctor visit. The doctor talks about STDs, including HPV, prior to the exam. Nicole finds out that she has an STD from a previous boyfriend. Her girlfriend shuns her only to find out that she, too, had sex with that same boy and is infected as well. There is talk about how condoms can be fun by using different kinds of condoms. Abstinence is mentioned at the end, but there seems to be laughing and mocking about it. Then more talk about the pleasures of condoms, putting them on, lubricating, etc. Contracting an STD is no longer the problem. The problem to be solved becomes making sex with condoms fun, so that they will be used. If HPV is the STD contracted, nothing is said about HPV being transmitted skin-to-skin outside of the protection of a condom. Condoms do not make sex 100% safe.

    • A DVD called “Wrap It Up” Teen Condom Use…” revolves around a boy not wanting to use a condom. He says he will protect his partner by “pulling out.” His partner encourages him salaciously by talking about types, colors, flavors of condoms, putting them on, etc. There really is no talk about abstinence as to what it really is, the healthiest choice, but is spoken of by the girl as a THREAT, if the condom is not used. This was terribly disturbing to me.

The revised version of Making Proud Choices! is still unacceptable. It sends unhealthy, even dangerous messages to adolescents and teens about the appropriateness of sexual activity at their age and outside of marriage.

Making Proud Choices! omits “medically accurate information” about the risks and side effects of hormonal contraception and the limitations of condoms. It censors healthy messages such as abstinence and marriage, and promotes sensuality. It teaches immature students how to reach orgasm by using condoms, as part of STD prevention, and it gives students false assurances that if they use condoms, they will have a happy future. Where is the research to support that?

If academic achievement is the goal of our schools, how can students learn anything when the school and students’ minds are saturated with sexual information?

If this concerns you, as it did the parents who spent hours reviewing the revised edition of Making Proud Choices!, contact your School Board Trustees. Consider sending these comments to the Trustees.

Our children deserve better.