The effort to cast parents as roadblocks to education continues. An expressive example is the recent furor raised by Attorney General Merrick Garland when he turned the FBI loose on parents that he labeled as potential “domestic terrorists.”
Privacy and Parents
Nowhere are these roadblocks more evident than the efforts of some educators to hide sex education materials from parents.
Education Week, the “trade journal” for school administrators, recently ran an article titled “Privacy, Porn, and Parents in the Room: Sex Education’s Pandemic Challenges.” It begins with a sentence that should concern all parents. “Sex education involves delicate discussions at the best of times, but the last year has brought unprecedented challenges for students and teachers alike.”
Indeed, the “delicate” discussions involve students sharing their most intimate feelings with a classroom full of their peers. However, this article implies that the “really safe space” is parent-free. The “pandemic challenge” is that parents often had access to lessons taught in the educational pretense known as “distance learning.”
The article cites other “experts,” who all make the same point. Discussions about abortion, homosexuality and the rest of the radical sexual agenda are far less successful when those pesky parents loiter about.
“Advocates for Youth”
One of the article’s sources is Brittany McBride, the Associate Director of Sex Education for Advocates for Youth. “[T]hese young people have to have the ability to be centered in their education and have robust conversations in a really safe space to really learn from those experiences.”
Advocates for Youth does not conceal the connection between sex education and the overall “woke” revolution. They declare, “Young people understand that reproductive and sexual health and rights are inextricably tied to social justice and the fight for liberation. Join thousands of youth activists and adult allies as we build a better and more equitable world.”
The Advocates for Youth web site is every moral parent’s nightmare. The organization promotes several “campaigns.” Among them are “Abortion Out Loud,” the “Free The Pill Youth Council,” “Amaze” (“Real info in fun, animated videos that give young people all the answers they actually want to know about sex, their bodies and relationships”), an LGBTQ section called “My Story Out Loud” and “The Condom Collective.”
Are These “Standards” Really “National?”
The Education Week article also cites a document titled National Sex Education Standards—seventy-six pages of educational jargon. The whole document puts a professional gloss on the primary goal—promoting promiscuity.
The first lie in the document is the title. When casual onlookers hear the term “National,” they assume that the document was prepared by the Federal Department of Education, some collection of state departments of education, or a national organization of teachers—like the National Council of Teachers of English. The implication is that a qualified national organization assembled an objective set of guidelines for teachers.
Purveyors of Propaganda
However, the National Sex Education Standards are the product of FoSE, an acronym for “Future of Sex Education.” FoSE is apparently an organization composed of three other groups, Advocates for Youth, SIECUS and Answer.
SIECUS is short for the “Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.” Their web site lists their “values” in this manner: “SIECUS advances comprehensive sexuality education as a means of building a foundation for a long-term culture shift that will positively impact all levels of society, particularly issues of gender and racial equity, sexuality, sexual and reproductive health, consent, personal safety, and autonomy.”
Answer is a project of Rutgers (The State University of New Jersey). Their mission is very similar to the other organizations.
“Answer is a national organization that provides and promotes unfettered access to comprehensive sexuality education for young people and the adults who teach them.
“We believe in young people. We are dedicated to ensuring young people have the knowledge and skills they need to be happy, healthy and safe well into the future. This means they should be able to access age–appropriate and medically–accurate information about sexuality directly, and without interference.” (Emphases in the original.)
Answer also connects itself to other radical movements. “A Message From Answer’s Executive Director” states, “Two years ago, we launched an initiative to increase our understanding of how racial bias intersects with sexual and reproductive health. We have spent time together learning and unlearning to build a foundation in which we would center racial and reproductive justice in our work.”
National Sex Education Standards.
Thus, these “National” standards are only national in the desire to subject all America’s children to this radical vision. So-called sex education is only the “hook” to separate the kids from their “repressive” parents. Once freed, they are ready to receive the entire “woke” package.
The “Background and Vision” section of the Standards is more circumspect than their creators’ web sites. Here, there is no linkage with radical campaigns and projects. Since a wider audience might view this document, the message speaks of freedom and opportunity.
“Quality sex education goes beyond delivering information. It provides young people with opportunities to explore their own identities and values along with the values and beliefs of their families and communities. It also allows young people to practice the communication, negotiation, decision-making, and assertiveness skills they need to create healthy relationships—both sexual and nonsexual—throughout their lives.”
Page three of the Standards lists the “Contributors and Reviewers.” Indeed, no one claims a connection to the U.S. Department of Education. Only two are employees of state departments of education, and one of them is retired. Six are college professors; three are “consultants.” There is one local official from the District of Columbia Public Schools, and the only grade school teacher works in a private school in a Philadelphia suburb.
The other twenty-three contributors represent various foundations. These read like a list of the usual suspects, including Planned Parenthood, Gender Spectrum, the American Sexual Health Association and the three organizations discussed above.
Parents Need to Know
Notice the absence of anyone who might bring a more traditional moral tone. Anti-abortion organizations are absent. There are no ties to organizations connected to religious groups. No one represents a parents’ organization—even usually liberal ones like the National PTA.
The standards reflect the people who wrote them. A typical example states that “By the end of the 2nd Grade, Students Should Be Able to… Explain why it is important to show respect for different kinds of families (e.g., nuclear, single parent, blended, intergenerational, adoptive, same-gender, interracial.)” There are also numerous mentions of “intersecting identities” as well as gaining and withholding “consent.”
The “contributors” did pay lip service to the idea of refraining from sexual activity, and parents were listed as possibly “trusted adults.” Such language gives school administrators a little “cover” from inquiring parents. Perhaps there would be less cynicism if Advocates for Youth’s “campaigns” included “Communicating with Parents” or “Modesty and Abstinence.”
The COVID crisis opened the eyes of many parents who were unaware of what their children were taught. Now that most students are back in school, parents should be very skeptical when “educators” tell them that “Our program is in line with national standards.” Always ask for a copy of the standards, and examine them closely. Despite the Attorney General’s assertions, parents have the God-given right to know what schools are teaching their children.
Photo Credit: © LIGHTFIELD STUDIOS — stock.adobe.com