Statesville, North Carolina: Making Proud Choices?

MPC CurriculumThis is another Reading Lesson from Making Proud Choices! 4th Edition. Page 149:

Facilitators are told to teach your 13 year old daughters, AND THE BOYS IN THE SAME CLASSROOM, how they can be involved in “stimulating positive attitudes towards condom use” by “sexual arousal, rolling condom on, intercourse, orgasm, holding onto rim, removing condom, and relaxation.”

[She] can also buy condoms and have them ready.”

If the male/boy “loses his erection after putting on a condom, and before intercourse, what could the couple do?” Couple?

Your 13 year old daughters, and their boyfriends, are instructed to, “take off condom, continue playing and stimulating one another, relax, and enjoy the fun. After awhile, put a new condom on as part of the play.”

TELL ME HOW THIS SEXUAL ACTIVITY IS NOT SUPPOSED TO SPREAD STDS?OR, GET YOUR DAUGHTERs PREGNANT, IF THEY ARE NOT ON HORMONAL BIRTH CONTROL?

THIS IS SEXUAL FOREPLAY, BY DEFINITION. Miriam-Webster: “sexual stimulation of one’s partner usually as a prelude to sexual intercourse” and “mutual sexual stimulation preceding intercourse.”

Making Proud Choices! does not just teach students about methods of contraception, pros and cons, as most parents believe. Making Proud Choices! is all about teaching minors how to engage in sexual activity that really could get them pregnant and increase their risks of STD/HIV!

If you live in North Carolina, be alert and aware that Making Proud Choices! will be on the docket for Monday night in Statesville. See news here…!

The Iredell-Statesville School Board will decide whether to pass this Sexual Foreplay Education program for all 9th grade students. Over the past few years, Making Proud Choices! has been provided only on a voluntary basis for after school or weekend programs. Students have received $100 incentives to participate. This $100 is your federal tax money. Plus, the district received $4 Million in Federal Funding to agree to the program.

Monday night, Statesville, NC. Show UP! Speak Out! against this SEXUAL FOREPLAY program. Even if you don’t speak, show up. Numbers count.

The Planned Parenthood/SIECUS Network in NC is saying that they are willing to accept an OPT IN compromise in order to pass it. Will parents OPT IN their children for the $100 incentive?

Even if it is passed as only an OPT IN (students must have parent’s written permission to take it), those students will be talking/sexting? with students who’s parents do not want their children in the program. It will set up a steamy sexual climate in the schools and sexual climate is a major predictor of teen sexual activity.

Don’t let school districts get away with telling you that you can just OPT OUT  OR OPT IN your child from these kinds of programs. Your child and their peer group would have to be opted out to protect them, at all.

Why not OPT OUT the entire school district?

Stop_Sign

Real Sex Ed Debate: “Contraception” is Sexual Foreplay

Featured

Stop_SignYear 2014 will usher in new Sex Ed Laws in many states, requiring that “contraception” be taught in middle and high school. But, is it “contraception” or sexual foreplay?

Most mandated Sex Ed today reads more like steamy sex therapy sessions than teen pregnancy and STD prevention education. Under the guise of “safe sex,” many curricula teach that as long as condoms are used, consensual sex is the “new standard” for sexual activity, not marriage.  

Sex Ed curricula, such as Making A Difference!, Making Proud Choices!, Be Proud! Be Responsible!, Safer Choices, Teen Outreach Program (TOP), Wise Guys! and others can be found on the Planned Parenthood and SIECUS websites. They have very little verbiage, if any, about the benefits of abstaining from sexual activity and do not mention marriage as the ideal context for sexual activity.

Consensual sex is the “new norm.”

These curricula teach students how to engage in “safe” sexual foreplay including oral sex and intercourse, how to experience the pleasures of sex, and about ways to eroticize sex, all while purportedly teaching condom skills to prevent STD transmission. 

Sex, and more sex, is the goal and “safety” is the Trojan Horse.

The problem is, sex outside of marriage can never be as safe as sex within a healthy, faithful marriage. This vital message is being censored from our teens.

The current Sex Ed debate is no longer about whether to teach Abstinence or Contraception. It is about whether to explain about methods of “contraception” or to teach “hands on” sexual foreplay skills under the guise of “contraception” education. 

Unlike Abstinence-until-Marriage education, so-called “Safer Sex” programs are not strictly regulated by the federal government. They are given free rein to teach anything they can get away with.

“Safer Sex” programs are designed to make teens feel “proud,” “responsible,” and more comfortable about having consensual sex as long as they use condoms or dental dams. But, are “Safe Sex” programs safe? Unfortunately, many STDs, such as HPV, Herpes, and Syphilis are transmitted outside of the “protection” of condoms and dental dams. And, since condoms cannot be used unless the male is sexually stimulated, it is reasonable to think that there is a lot of skin-to-skin (STD transmission) contact prior to using a condom or dental dam.

Do “Safe Sex” programs delay sex initiation, as they claim? Under the influence of sexual stimulation, it is counter intuitive to expect sex to be delayed and for condoms to be used correctly and consistently even by adults, much less impulsive teens.

The most respected researcher in the field of teen sexual activity is Stan Weed, PhD of the Institute for Research and Evaluation. Weed’s report on Teen Pregnancy Prevention programs in 2010 revealed that very few “Safe Sex” condom programs were effective at increasing abstinence or condom use for any length of time. In “Federally Funded Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs: Not What They Claim to Be.”, Weed states that out of 28 programs approved in 2010,

“Only 2 TPP [Teen Pregnancy Prevention] programs demonstrated the ability to increase adolescents’ rate of consistent condom use for at least one year. Neither was a school-based program.”

Weed’s critique also calls out these TPP programs for their sexually explicit content, teaching “safe” alternative sexual behaviors (sexual foreplay), and that “Abstaining from sex is not a primary focus in the majority of TPP programs.”

Parents and elected officials need to study the Sex Ed Laws of their state, as well as all Sex Ed curricula approved under that Law. Afterwards, they may want to provide their own reading lessons for Legislators and School Board members.

In preparation, consider the following questions and decide whether instruction is being required or if, by default, “Safe(r) Sex” is allowed to slip in through the loopholes.

1.  Does your state’s Sex Ed Law include verbiage requiring the teaching of  “contraception” and/or “Safer Sex” for middle and high schools?

  • Does the Law define “contraception” or is “contraception” used broadly to include “birth control” hormones (Plan B, Emergency Contraception) and devices (Emergency IUDs) along with referrals to Planned Parenthood/Family Planning Clinics?
  • Does the Law define “Safe(r) Sex?”
  • Does the Law require that approved Sex Ed programs fulfill the Pregnancy Prevention Education and Reproductive Education requirements to be used in the schools? Programs like Making a Difference! and Making Proud Choices! do not fulfill all requirements of most state laws for Pregnancy Prevention or Reproductive Education, therefore other programs must be supplemented.

2. Does your Sex Ed Law include any verbiage requiring the teaching of sexual foreplay techniques including the use of dental dams for oral sex, eroticizing condom use with lubricants and detailed instructions for regaining erections? If not, is there any language to prevent such teaching?

3. Does your Sex Ed Law include any verbiage requiring teachers to use visual imagery or sexual fantasies to help students pretend they are somewhere else, or the opposite gender, or with someone else while engaging in sexual activity? Wouldn’t this require a license to practice psychotherapy in the classroom?

4. Does your Sex Ed Law require that abstinence until marriage be taught as the standard for all school age students? Does it loosely define abstinence, which allows “safe sex” curricula to claim that they are  abstinence-based or abstinence-first? If marriage is omitted as a cultural norm from the Law and also from the approved Sex Ed curricula, then there are no boundaries for sexual activity.

5. Who is in charge of making sure that all approved Sex Ed curricula comply with the state Sex Ed Law? Unaccountable bureaucrats?

6. Are there any approved Sex Ed curricula that have “Safe(r) Sex” in their title, on their cover, or part of their content? THIS IS A RED FLAG!

7. Are all approved Sex Ed curricula used in the schools the original evidence-based version evaluated for program effectiveness and listed on the US HHS website? Or, are they “adaptations” of the approved curricula, in order to gain approval? 

8. What are the behavioral outcomes for each approved Sex Ed curriculum used in your state?

  • Is each approved Sex Ed curriculum listed on the US HHS website as being proven effective and evidence-based for Teen Pregnancy Prevention?
    • If the curriculum is an abstinence-until-marriage program, does it significantly increase abstinent behaviors among participants, compared with non-program participants, as measured a year after the program?
    • If the curriculum is an abstinence-based “safer sex” program, does it significantly increase abstinent behaviors among participants, compared with non-program participants, as measured a year after the program?
    • If the curriculum is a “Safe Sex” condom program, does it significantly increase correct and consistent condom use for sexually active students, compared with sexually active non-program participants, as measured a year after the program?

9. Who trains the educators to teach approved Sex Ed curricula in your state?

10. Are there any abstinence-until-marriage curricula approved in your state/district that are listed on the US HHS website as being proven effective and evidence-based for Teen Pregnancy Prevention? If not, why not?

Getting answers to all of these questions will provide a much clearer picture of the sexual climate in your school, school district and state. Our schools should be promoting behaviors that are conducive to learning and achieving academic success. If this is not the case, then much work needs to be done quickly to protect children from sexual influences that can derail their futures.

Get busy!