Ew, gross! NY Times, Washington Post reject ad showing Planned Parenthood sex ed images
Last week American Life League tried to run a full page ad in the New York Times and Washington Post that showed images from actual Planned Parenthood sex education materials for kids as young as 10 years old.
Both newspapers rejected the ad as “too graphic” and “shocking” for their adult readers to see. But the images are okay for kids in the classroom to see – at taxpayer expense.
I have ALL’s ad posted on page 2. WARNING: It’s too vulgar to run on page 1.
The backstory from ALL:
To raise public awareness about Planned Parenthood’s controversial sex education – more accurately described as sexual indoctrination – ALL planned a series of advertisements revealing what and how children are really taught in PP’S so-called “comprehensive sex education.” These are programs that are already in many schools and will reach all public schools as currently mandated in Obamacare.
The Washington Post rejected the advertisement simply saying that, without disguising the pictures, it was “too graphic.” The only images in the ad are from Planned Parenthood-endorsed sources. If they are too graphic for adults reading the Washington Post, then they certainly should not be in elementary school classrooms.
Likewise, the New York Times offered to run the ad only if ALL would agree to blur the pictures. Its staff suggested that they could run a disclaimer saying, “Image too shocking for the New York Times audience. To see actual image and for more information, please visit: http://www.all.org/pdf/PP_HookingKids.pdf.”
ALL is asking concerned citizens to demand that all federal funding for Planned Parenthood be cut. Visit StopPlannedParenthood.com for more information.
“Planned Parenthood is not in the healthcare business, it is in the sex industry,” added Brown. “More than half of its $1 billion budget comes from tax dollars, and the organization stands to gain another billion dollars through Obamacare. It must end.”
Click to enlarge. Get pdf here.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Too graphic for adults but OK for kids. That is the first time I’ve heard this rationale. Apparently the adults at the New York Times and the New York Post don’t care about kids.
I didn’t *know anything* before I got married and we did just fine: happily together after 23 years with 7 kids!
Hey Jill, these images are not being distributed by Planned Parenthood. They’re copywritten in a 2009 book called “It’s Perfectly Normal” by Robie Harris. http://www.amazon.com/Its-Perfectly-Normal-Changing-Growing/dp/0763644846
If you believe that Planned Parenthood is perpetrating evil, please be accurate about that evil. Getting caught spreading convenient misinformation makes it harder for people to trust your advocacy in the future!
Maybe I’m jaded but these don’t seem to be graphic at all. The masturbation one is a little off, and the anthropomorphic penis and vagina is just dumb, but the other two are just showing anatomy basically. I don’t see how that’s inappropriate for sex ed, to show female reproductive anatomy.
Wow, all around….
Oh, how charming, a cartoon of Kermit Gosnell, sitting on a stoop, checking out his future “client.” And isn’t it something how some grown women found the “sex organ costume” cartoon inspirational enough to make their own and wear them around town. Your tax dollars at work, Americans. No wonder other kids are better at math, geography, and more.
Right ninek, like the kiddos in Texas learning that the Earth was made 7,000 years ago because the Bible. Science!
Too graphic has nothing to do with it. The NY Times and Washington Post just don’t want the general public to see what Planned Parenthood is teaching their children using their tax dollars.
They probably just feel that there are more valid and valuable ads to be run than anti-sex education ads.
I doubt they’d be any more amenable to running ads complaining about tax dollars being spent indoctrinating kids into fables rather than facts either. Fair enough.
I wonder if they’d run ads displaying defenestrated fetuses.
At least the sex-ed pics aren’t lining the streets.
Who pushes fetuses out of windows?
Oh I’m sure someone will supply an answer to that question Jack. Or at least they’ll think they can.
Lol well you were the one who brought up defenestrated fetuses, I was wondering what you were talking about. I was trying and failing to be funny. :/
I thought you were funny Jack. As well as intelligent enough to know what was meant.
Bonus points ;-)
Totally agree Victor!
I thought that the Washington Post tended conservative? Don’t they usually support conservative policies in their editorials and usually endorse Republican candidates? I don’t think that they would be so gung-ho to defend PP as the Times. Maybe they had different reasoning to not show the ads.
And Reality defenestrate is like the most weirdly specific word in the english language, lol.
I just can’t see serious MSM choosing to run nutty ads. That’s more the realm of the WorldNutDaily.
Probably why I like it Jack.
I totally agree with Victor as well!
“I just can’t see serious MSM choosing to run nutty ads. That’s more the realm of the WorldNutDaily.”
I don’t think that parents seeing what their kids are being taught in classes is “nutty”. It might be more appropriate to shows these at the PTA meeting, and might do more good, but I don’t see that it’s WND worthy.
“It might be more appropriate to shows these at the PTA meeting, and might do more good” – I agree Jack. An accurate, relevant and contextual presentation of what is being taught.
Misrepresentative anti-sex education ads being run for the specific purpose of attempting to malign a legitimate group is nutty.
Just like when the WND ran never-ending birther articles – with yet another new book to be flogged behind every one.
Jack:
You are thinking about the Washington Times.
” Misrepresentative anti-sex education ads being run for the specific purpose of attempting to malign a legitimate group is nutty.”
It may be anti-sex ed the way you would like sex ed to be, but many people have different ideas of how sex ed should be. So it’s not really anti-sex ed as it is anti- a specific sex ed.
“Malign”… it’s only maligning if it isn’t true. That link that Colin posted seems to say that these images are from some book, not from PP, but I don’t know if PP is using them or not. I would like to know that. But if it’s something they actually do use, I don’t see how it’s maligning to show what they are actually doing.
” You are thinking about the Washington Times.”
Yeah I remember that the Washington Times is the very conservative one, but I thought that the Washington Post was too. I looked it up on Wiki and apparently they usually endorse Repub candidates and it seems most of their editorials take a conservative viewpoint. They certainly aren’t as conservative as the Washington Times though, you are right.
The paragraph at the bottom of the ad is the maligning Jack. The ad isn’t even really about sex-ed, that’s just a convenient hobby-horse. It’s aimed at attacking PP.
Jack says:
… but I don’t know if PP is using them or not. I would like to know that.
PP has been using the images of the sex organs for years as we saw literature on this quite some time ago. Maybe something would show up on You Tube or on the PP site if you really care to know how dated these are.
Live Action has some information about all this in an article from 4/13/2013.
It’s one thing to teach anatomy to kids going through puberty to understand how the reproductive system works, it’s another thing to sell sex toys and go on and on about sexual pleasure zones and stuff. Planned Parenthood’s website has some information on abstinence, but it’s VERY generalized and not as in-depth as the other stuff. The word “chastity” is never mentioned from what I could see. A lot of people use 2 of the definitions of “chastity” (as presented by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) but they forget one of the other ones, which talks about purity of thought and action.
P.S. It’s not exactly EASY to find Abstinence information on PP’s website. It’s not as obvious as some of the other topics.
Colin Smith – before you make accusations about inaccuracies – go do your own research.
You can clearly see the teenwire.com reference in the bottom corner of one of the pictures ALL posted. If you google teenwire.com, you’ll find it covers precisely what/why ALL is accusing PPA.
As a side note – when ALL first broke this story a few years ago, I followed the links – yes, those images were on teenwire. It also had some disgusting cartoon video clips. Again – something that wouldn’t be put on regular TV, but shown to kids.
Megan, have you written any governmental representatives in Texas or are you just tossing that out because you don’t really have a point?
Colin Smith, that book is used by PP in the classroom. Start watching video (warning: vulgar) at 1:20: http://youtu.be/j7XR9yH2ETk
The top two images come from that book, the bottom two from PP’sTeenWire, as Chris indicated.
Reality: “ It’s aimed at attacking PP.”
Well, yeah. Duh. What do you expect? How does your astute observation stand as some criticism of the ad?
Maybe you don’t get the PR point here — the ad is more powerful when refused by the papers, and then portrayed in social media as being “too vile for adults but PP thinks it’s fine for your kids.” It’s a win/win for the group promoting the ad.
“How does your astute observation stand as some criticism of the ad?” – because the ad is not accurate.
“It’s a win/win for the group promoting the ad.” – wishful thinking. It’ll be little more than preaching to the converted.
Actually it’s stupid pointless and unnecessary. I mean its like reading a little perverted little cartoon. I was able to figure out my body without such material. Much like urination menstrual cycles and things like that. It all came naturally to me. I don’t blame anyone for not publishing it. What next? Homosexual cartoons? The TV has been airing the story about the basketball player for coming out. I don’t need to know who you’re in bed with nor do I care. I wonder how many people would get behind me if I came out of the closet and said I was having sex with married men?? I’m not but that’s my point. How is all of this exposure about being gay empowering?
I mean if you’re gay keep it to yourself. Wt fudge would I personally care who you sleep with? I don’t go around telling people I’m straight so why do gay people want to keep shoving this down everyones throats? Do me a favor and please keep your sex life to yourself.
As stated about these are from “It’s Perfectly Normal” http://www.amazon.com/Its-Perfectly-Normal-Changing-Growing/dp/0763644846
I have used planned parenthood in the past when I didn’t have any type of health insurance so I could get female check ups to keep me healthy and birth control so i wasn’t having babies that the state or country would have to pay for. Planned parenthood is probably one of the best things that have ever happened for people. They have a safe place where women / teenagers can go and get checkups, birth control, information when they have no family they can talk to or feel that they can’t talk to their family. Everyone give PP a bad rep and they are like “all they do is abort babies” so you all think that YOU are better because you stand outside of PP building holding GIANT posters of DEAD FETUSES that MY CHILDREN have to see? That just makes you sick and disgusting as well and I could be JUST as close minded as you and when my children ask tell them how EVIL PRO LIFE people are. But instead, I make excuses and tell that that they are a group of people who are using the 1st amendment to voice their opinions. So why is ok for YOU to voice your opinions, but no one else?
It’s close minded naive comments like a lot of the ones I read above that make me feel sad for children of today. I raise my children to NOT be close minded. To let them know they can talk to me about anything, to let them know that they can love whomever they want to love and that people in the world should be able to love whomever they want to love and not be judged for it. CONGRATS! to the Basketball player being so comfortable with who he is that he can come out to the world. MORE people should be like that.
Don’t be Hippocrates, don’t judge, and PLEASE get all your facts together before you start blasting untrue information all over the place.
Hi Melody,
You make good points IF it is not the case that abortion is the taking of the life of an innocent human being. The question is- does abortion kill a human being? If yes, it is difficult to see how an organization like Planned Parenthood, despite it doing things that may be good, can be defended. If abortion does not kill an innocent human being, then no justification for abortion or PP is necessary. If abortion does kill a human being, no justification is sufficient.
“Planned parenthood is probably one of the best things that have ever happened for people. They have a safe place… ”
It certainly isn’t the best place for an unborn human to be, nor is it safe for the unborn. Again, these kinds of claims simply beg the question as to whether or not abortion is morally justified.
“so you all think that YOU are better because you stand outside of PP building holding GIANT posters of DEAD FETUSES that MY CHILDREN have to see?”
No. We are claiming that the action of abortion is objectively wrong. No one has to believe they are “better” than anyone else because they claim a certain action is wrong.
“So why is ok for YOU to voice your opinions, but no one else?”
I’m not sure where anyone said this.
“That just makes you sick and disgusting as well and I could be JUST as close minded as you and when my children ask tell them how EVIL PRO LIFE people are.”
This is probably the most judgmental statement on this thread.
“Don’t be Hippocrates, don’t judge, and PLEASE get all your facts together before you start blasting untrue information all over the place.”
Again, I would be cautious about pulling out the “judgmental hippocrates” card. Denouncing a certain action as morally reprehensible is not judging a person’s motivation or the state of their soul, but rather, the action itself. Evil actions must be condemned, just as you believe you are doing by condemning the actions that you believe are evil of pro-lifers. Also, I am not sure what you are claiming the “untrue” information that we are “blasting all over the place” is.
Melody,
So you’re saying that prolifers are evil for showing a picture of what Planned Parenthood does, but Planned Parenthood is not evil for actually doing it? I suppose the Boston marathon bombers are innocent and the media is so evil for showing those nasty pictures, eh?
Ever hear the phrase “shooting the messenger?”
While we’re talking about the bombers, why is everyone so bent out of shape about that *one* thing they did? I mean, they probably did nice things for 99.9999% of their lives, and everyone just keeps focusing on that 0.0001% of bad stuff. Why can’t they be more open minded?
The main untrue information is these supposed PP pictures posted above that do not even COME from PP. The above photos come from a book, as listed in the link that someone else even stated above.
Andrew, it’s not ok for planned parenthood to provide abortions to people for whatever their reasons are, because it’s hurting a life? But it’s ok for you to show these images to young children of aborted fetuses that can SCAR their lives? I don’t see how that can be justified. It’s abuse of a living human being that is brought into this world in innocence. And then to compare what PP does to the Boston Bombers is just ridiculous. And I for one have not allowed my children to see that news footage of any of it, because they are young and innocent. Yes they know bad people do bad things, but I’m not going to shove images of traumatic amputees into their faces.
Have any of you ever sat and talked with someone who HAD an abortion? Have any one of you actually had a conversation on a non judgmental basis to see why they did what they did? I find it hard to believe that any one of you have.
It’s interesting to me that you call ripping a child into tiny pieces “hurting a life,” but showing a picture of the act is “scar[ring] lives.”
It’s abuse of a living human being that is brought into this world in innocence.
The ultimate abuse, yes. That’s why I’m against abortion.
And I for one have not allowed my children to see that news footage of any of it, because they are young and innocent.
That’s probably a good choice. Yes, it’s regrettable for children to see pictures of dead children. But what’s worse is that children are being killed. I’d rather a few children be upset than several more killed. Wouldn’t you agree?
Anyway, you’re talking about Planned Parenthood. It is certainly no place for children, born or unborn.
Have any of you ever sat and talked with someone who HAD an abortion? Have any one of you actually had a conversation on a non judgmental basis to see why they did what they did? I find it hard to believe that any one of you have.
Whether you believe it or not, I have; on several occasions. There’s a big difference between condemning an act and condemning the person. It’s a testament to your close-mindedness that you fail to see the distinction.
And see, where as I can respect your opinion, although not like it. It is indeed your opinion.
So all I ask is that you can respect the opinion of a pro choicer. Not saying you have to agree it.
But I saw someone up above saying they are straight and not want the homosexuals to shove their life down their throats. Practice what you preach. Listen, do not try to shove, or judge. If you are pro life, that is your choice and you should be thankful you have the ability to make that choice.
I have the ability to make the choice to be pro choice. That is my choice.
Homosexuals on the other hand don’t have a choice, it’s how they are born, it’s who they are meant to be. (And if you don’t agree with that, that is fine, it is your opinion) But you cannot make someone change who or what they are. It’s one of the most important and amazing things about us human beings.
Hi Melody,
I am the lead moderator here. And post abortive.
I talk to commenters here ALL THE TIME. :)
How does that have anything to do with the fact that abortion ends the life of an innocent human being?
So you’re saying that prolifers are evil for showing a picture of what Planned Parenthood does, but Planned Parenthood is not evil for actually doing it?
LIKE!! Thank you Andrew!
So all I ask is that you can respect the opinion of a pro choicer….But you cannot make someone change who or what they are.
Sorry, even though I used to be pro-choice, I can no longer respect the opinion that it’s okay to kill an innocent human being just because that human being’s parent wants them dead. I’m not asking anyone to change who or what they are, I’m asking them to change their actions, specifically the action that kills an innocent person…abortion.
And see, where as I can respect your opinion, although not like it. It is indeed your opinion.
Which part was my opinion? Ripping children into tiny pieces? Like it or not, there are concrete facts as to what abortion is and does. There are concrete facts as to what the unborn are. Stating (or showing) those directly is not an opinion.
Melody, it’s never ok to kill the unborn. Never ever ever. Our protests outside a clinic with pictures of aborted children are a way to bear witness to this senseless, indefensible slaughter. So next time your child asks, “Mommy, why are those people holding up those awful pictures?,” please save your breath if all you can tell them is that it’s an exercise in the !st Ammendment. Tell her or him the truth: “because those awful things happen in that building, sweetie, and those folks are giving voice to children who have none.”
Yeah, that sounds”evil” to me. Let me ask you one more question: when did your kid(s) become human?
Yes, the first two images are from “It’s Perfectly Normal” by Robie Harris. It is a book used by Planned Parenthood as part of their sex-ed for kids. See this video that goes more in depth on the topic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=j7XR9yH2ETk
I am a pro-lifer and the pictures of dead babies DO make me uncomfortable and I DON’T want my kid to see it, but the thing is, it IS the reality of abortion. So I’m really on the fence about the pictures–I hate being a fence-sitter because as I say “Not taking a stand ,and sitting on the fence just gives you a sore butt.” However, I see both sides of the issue on that and I agree with both sides.
As I’ve said, (and many of the commenters on here already know), I’m already pro-life. What the pictures do is reaffirm my position. No, I don’t want young children to get traumatized by them, but I can understand why they’re used.
Sometimes shock value is the only way to wake up a person. Why are you shocked? Because it’s vivid or because deep down there’s something wrong with what was done?
Whatever one does can’t change facts. A mother who decides to give birth is pregnant from the get-go and likewise someone who decides to have an abortion. Because the fact of the matter is human egg joining with human sperm can’t equal anything but human being. Now if conception does NOT occur then the woman isn’t pregnant.
I mean what is a fetus? Is it not human tissues and organs developing into a more recognizable human shape? (And aren’t we who are already born made up of that same human “fabric”?) If you stop that development then and “terminate” you end the existence of that human being because human egg + human sperm joining together can’t render anything BUT a human being.
I can tell you right now from the moment I conceived offspring I wasn’t pregnant with anything but human being. After all, I’m not married to a cat or a dog or anything else, I’m married to a male human being. Likewise, given that I’m a female human being my eggs are human being eggs and not some other species. So how can what a human egg and human sperm coming together be anything else but human?
Since that’s the case, ending the existence of said human being–an innocent one at that (whose only so-called “crime” is existing) it only makes sense that that’s wrong.
Whether you agree or disagree with the photos, you can’t argue with Scientific Biological Fact. Human egg + human sperm joining together can’t equal anything but human being NO MATTER WHAT it looks like NO MATTER WHAT stage of development said being is in.
I used to be pro-choice. Now I’m not. I have much more peace of mind since I admitted to myself my own part in the demise of my own child. Yes, I can tell a very dramatic story, and you might listen to me, about the diagnosis, the referral, etc. But none of those details will bring an innocent child back to life. Showing people what Planned Parenthood really uses to indoctrinate the next generation of children is important. If you support them, stop looking away and blaming us for your own discomfort. Teaching children that sex is just for fun and Planned Parenthood can make those babies go away is BAD for humanity.
Children should get their biological information alongside the other biological material that we teach them. Remember the plant kingdom and the animal kingdome? Phylum? Species? Sperm and egg creates baby in all mammals, and it wouldn’t hurt to teach them about the birds and the bees too. Remember context? It’s not a new concept.
Sorry for typo, but editing feature won’t work on my computer.
If I were a cartoonist, I’d make a cartoon for grown ups (since we’re the ones who need it) and I’s show them how sexual reproduction is common among plants and animals. Among animals, those who didn’t find sex pleasant probably didn’t procreate as much and didn’t pass on as much as their DNA. So, it makes sense that sex is so pleasant, mammals are sure to procreate! (If food tasted bad, for example, all animals would starve to death).
Now, treating sex as if it were ONLY for pleasure, and trying to remove from the action it’s innate PROCREATIVE nature could be argued as ABUSE of one’s own DNA! That’s right, just because food tastes good, you should never eat so much that you kill yourself, and sex should not be abused to the point where you are KILLING your children. That’s what kind of funny cartoon I would make.
” So all I ask is that you can respect the opinion of a pro choicer. Not saying you have to agree it.
But I saw someone up above saying they are straight and not want the homosexuals to shove their life down their throats. Practice what you preach. Listen, do not try to shove, or judge. If you are pro life, that is your choice and you should be thankful you have the ability to make that choice. ”
Pro-life vs pro-choice =/= the gay rights debate, not even close. It’s like comparing apples and oranges. I don’t know how this one even got turned into a argument about being gay, it literally had nothing to do with it.
And it depends on what you mean by “respect” and by “not shoving it down people’s throats”. I respect the right of pro-choicers to be pro-choice if they choose to, but I sure as heck don’t respect that opinion no more than I respect other opinions that cause harm to non-consenting parties. It’s a free country, I can’t stop people from expressing their opinion nor would I want to, but there’s no obligation to respect the actual opinion, no more than I’m obligated to respect racist or sexist opinions.
As for shoving it down people’s throats, that all depends on where you are standing. Since we consider the human fetus a human being, pro-choicers are definitely shoving their beliefs down those humans throats in the worst possible way. Whether or not you agree with graphic photos of aborted babies (I don’t in general, but there are some circumstances I think it’s appropriate), that’s nothing compared to the loss of life caused by pro-choice laws and opinions.
First – I was just thinking that I hadn’t seen Rasqual around here in a while!
“Andrew, it’s not ok for planned parenthood to provide abortions to people for whatever their reasons are, because it’s hurting a life? But it’s ok for you to show these images to young children of aborted fetuses that can SCAR their lives? I don’t see how that can be justified.”
It’s ok for PP to kill children by the hundreds of thousands a year, but not ok for people to see what they do?
“And then to compare what PP does to the Boston Bombers is just ridiculous.”
Only if you assume that unborn children are not human lives.
”but I’m not going to shove images of traumatic amputees into their faces.”
What if groups of people were arguing that it should be legal to set off bombs in crowds b/c it wasn’t really that bad and human beings weren’t really being hurt. Wouldn’t you show pictures of the horrible reality so that people could see that it’s a lie? And wouldn’t you think it was pretty silly to be angry at the person holding the picture instead of the person who caused the harm shown in the picture?
“Have any of you ever sat and talked with someone who HAD an abortion? Have any one of you actually had a conversation on a non judgmental basis to see why they did what they did? I find it hard to believe that any one of you have.”
You are clearly quite new here. There are many post-abortive women (and men) on this blog. And most people here seem to have had personal, direct experience with abortion through a friend or family member (just based on comments over the years).
Hey Melody …my daughters name BTW. I am a former pro choice woman myself and I will be out in front of abortion clinics with my graphic signs. My tax $$ killing babies my choice. MY POINT about homosexuality is why are these people coming out of the closet and in some cases being rewarded for it? As I’ve stated would you support a woman who sleeps with married men because that’s how they were born? I just said it’s too much. Who cares who your choice of gender is to sleep with?
I’ve spoken to plenty of post abortive women and until they repent of their abortions they are fractured.
” MY POINT about homosexuality is why are these people coming out of the closet and in some cases being rewarded for it? As I’ve stated would you support a woman who sleeps with married men because that’s how they were born? I just said it’s too much. Who cares who your choice of gender is to sleep with?”
People “come out” to lessen stigma and counteract the rhetoric like “gay people shouldn’t raise children” (when there are tons of LGBT people, “practicing” or not, who are raising children just fine, whether it’s their biological child or not). There’s no need for straight people to “come out” in the same way because there aren’t all the stereotypes and stigmas attached to being straight that there are to being LGBT.
Jack i understand as I’m pretty sure we all have gay friends or somewhere somehow we know them. All I was saying is haven’t they been coming out? Now Obama is saying this is a step forward for our country. Idk how. I’m just puzzled and yes I get the stigma. Idk maybe people in OH just aren’t afraid to come out. Even when they do I usually shrug and go “That’s it?”
I’m just saying I don’t need to know who anyone sleeping with. Its none of my business really. I know a woman who has been having an affair on her husband for years. I don’t ask about it cuz I really don’t want to know. She was the woman Id mentioned who was sexually abused as a child . Her counselor condones her affair. IDK about that.
Imo she’s recycling the abuse pattern and I think the counselor should talk her out of this affair. BTW she’s in her 70s but you would never know. Oh well just my 2 cents.
“I’m just saying I don’t need to know who anyone sleeping with. Its none of my business really. I know a woman who has been having an affair on her husband for years. I don’t ask about it cuz I really don’t want to know. She was the woman Id mentioned who was sexually abused as a child . Her counselor condones her affair. IDK about that.”
I don’t think you can compare someone having an affair to someone simply coming out as gay. I mean, it’s not all about sex when someone is gay. If someone was like “Hey Heather I’m John, this is my boyfriend Gary” that’s not letting you know about their sex life, it’s just introducing you to their partner. I guess I don’t see how that’s being more aggressive about their sexuality than straight people holding hands in public or introducing you to their spouse.
Imo she’s recycling the abuse pattern and I think the counselor should talk her out of this affair.
If you friend becomes healthy, she will no longer need the counselor and the counselor will not be making the $$$. Church and repentance are free.
MY POINT about homosexuality is why are these people coming out of the closet and in some cases being rewarded for it
Students like to use the phrase “that’s so gay”. I don’t think they even think about what they are saying most of the time but I always call them on it and ask them, “What could you say instead?” instead of making a big production.
I work with a young teacher who gives the whole spiel (to the point of bragging) about how she has a sister who is gay and how offending it is to her to hear “that’s gay” and on and on about gay rights.
Homosexuals on the other hand don’t have a choice
Except for those homosexuals who have admitted that they do.
Abortion is CHILD ABUSE, Melody.
And you could have gone to a Community Health center for your well woman checkups.
Banned Parenthood uses that book. I remember reading that a few years back, they handed out the book at some sort of conference in Waco Texas. These images are disgusting. There are better more age appropriate books for children to tell them about their changing bodies. This book is NOT one of them.
What we are seeing here is intentional trivialization of sex. Planned Parenthood, the author of It’s Perfectly Normal, and others of this mindset are purposefully making light of a very serious subject so to make it more approachable to young children. However, while the information about biology, specifically human biology, and sex, should be accessible to children of an appropriate age (around 5th grade to start), the idea of actually engaging in the act of sex should not be accessible to children. Period.
Making cartoons and humorous videos, talking about how pleasurable these behaviors are, etc. are all ways of encouraging deviant behavior in our children. Deviant behavior specifically because they are children. It is very possible to explain the act of sex, the importance of sex, the significance of a committed married relationship, and the wonders of procreation and childbirth without making it seem like an endorsement to go have sex now. This material, these books and videos, are designed with the expressed intent of removing any stigma attached to sex, and whether by design or as a byproduct, the result is that they remove the stigma attached to sex for and/or with a minor.
In making sex more accessible to children to understand, we also make it more accessible to children to engage in sexual activities before they would otherwise do so. The fact of the matter is, the fact that sex is pleasurable isn’t enough. This is clearly evident in the way that those engaging in sex without meaning tend to escalate their behaviors over time. Sex isn’t just pleasurable. Sex is beautiful. It is the act of creation. It is the way in which God most fully enters into the marital union, granting for a moment His creatures the ability to create. And this is why it should be treated with great care, great reverence, great respect. This is why such education courses as are offered in schoolrooms are a faint shadow of what they must be.
” If you friend becomes healthy, she will no longer need the counselor and the counselor will not be making the $$$. Church and repentance are free.”
Well this counselor that Heather’s friend is seeing may be bad, but I think that counseling and therapy is a complete necessity for some people.
” Except for those homosexuals who have admitted that they do.”
There are far, far more “ex-gays” and non-practicing gays who admit they still struggle with attraction to the same gender every day. It’s possible to choose what behaviors you want to engage in and what relationships you want to have, but those feelings of attraction don’t disappear.
“Sex isn’t just pleasurable. Sex is beautiful. It is the act of creation. It is the way in which God most fully enters into the marital union, granting for a moment His creatures the ability to create. And this is why it should be treated with great care, great reverence, great respect. This is why such education courses as are offered in schoolrooms are a faint shadow of what they must be.”
I can see that our sex ed programs really, really need to focus on the consequences of promiscuity (preferably without making people feel terrible about themselves if they’ve been promiscuous though). I don’t agree with a public school teaching about sex this way at all though. I don’t want someone teaching my kids the way that you’re talking about, probably as much as you don’t want this book that PP is using taught to yours. I don’t know, it seems like this is impossible to reconcile. Maybe the schools could focus on mechanics and facts to the best of their abilities. I don’t think it’s a public sex ed program’s place to be teaching sexual morality and religious ideas about sex.
Honest question though, if you don’t think that your kids should know anything about sex at all until fifth grade (is that like eleven years old?), how would they know if someone (god forbid) attempts or does sexually abuse them? How do they know what’s going on and that it’s wrong? I am just wondering how people explain that to their kids if they don’t want them to have any information about sex at all. I haven’t decided really what I’ll tell mine, though I did tell them about “bad touches”.
Church and repentance are free.
I think that’s why some people feel that you get what you pay for. Free certainly doesn’t always equal good. My secular psychiatrist has done so much more to straighten out all the bent places. Church was what bent them in the first place. She’s not free, but she does accept what my insurance pays and doesn’t charge me more than that. When I began seeing her, she said, “All my patients get better.” At that point in time I didn’t believe that was possible for me. But here I sit, a whole and healthy person for the first time in my life. All those years of praying, of crying out, but things just got worse and worse. Until the day I decided to take it into my own hands and seek out some real help.
I’m not putting down faith, because I don’t doubt it’s very strong and very real for some. It’s just so far outside my experience. I can’t imagine that it would ever fix anything, or anybody. I would suggest to anyone who’s out there right now who IS faithful, but still really struggling – don’t dismiss psychology or psychiatry out of hand. I’m not sure I’d even still be here if I hadn’t found my doctor.
It’s possible to choose what behaviors you want to engage in and what relationships you want to have, but those feelings of attraction don’t disappear.
I didn’t say they always do. I occasionally want a cigarette. Doesn’t mean I should have one.
Your behavior. Your choice.
Jack,
Let me clarify: the details of how a baby is made shouldn’t be taught until a child is older (5th grade is indeed my preference); however, stranger danger is easily taught to young kids. So is the basic foundation of bodily differences. My 3 year old understands that boys have penises and girls have vaginas, that’s simply a fact. And he understands that Mommy and Daddy love each other very much and are going to have a baby, who is growing in Mommy’s tummy.
Both of my children also understand that if anyone touches them in a way they don’t like, they should tell Mom and Dad. And that there are personal areas on all people where it is not okay for someone else to touch. These concepts don’t have to immediately lead to the sex talk.
Regarding sex ed, it’s an awful system. If the schools must get involved with teaching sex ed (since when are parents incapable of teaching their own children, anyway?), it should be a very basic course. I was taught anatomy and human biology without these ridiculous cartoons and this lightening of the subject. There are all sorts of books that talk about the facts, and that give informational images, without needing to draw a cartoon girl checking herself out with a mirror, or a giant vagina girl. I’m simply pointing out that making fun of sex doesn’t teach our children the gravity of the act.
I can’t imagine that it would ever fix anything, or anybody. I would suggest to anyone who’s out there right now who IS faithful, but still really struggling – don’t dismiss psychology or psychiatry out of hand. I’m not sure I’d even still be here if I hadn’t found my doctor.
I agree. I’ve been to counseling myself. You just need to be careful because there are good and bad ones just like in any profession. Same goes for religious leaders.
Faith has fixed many things in my life, but that’s because I allowed it to. If it wasn’t for my faith most of the things I’ve done in my life I wouldn’t have. I trusted in God, and I met my husband. I was nervous about getting married because I believe in marriage being for life and I wanted to make sure I was making a good decision. I prayed a lot, attended marriage preparation classes sponsored by my parish, learned NFP, talked to the priest, talked to my husband, learned from my parents (who this year are celebrating over 45 years of marriage and have lots of experience teaching marriage prep, etc.).
I believe like in most things, you get out of faith what you put into it. If you put nothing into faith, you probably won’t get very much because you’re not open to it. The more open you are to faith, the more room you have in your heart and life for its gifts and graces. You have to be open to it, though.
I have gone to counseling, more than once. I’ve been to a Christian psychologist who was more secular, and I’ve been to a Catholic psychologist who used faith and other counseling methods. While the first psychologist helped some of what I was going through, it wasn’t until I got to the second one that I really started understanding certain things about myself better. The first one was great for several years, but then I “outgrew” her.
So I think it depends on the person and the counselor.
Stay classy, Planned Parenthood.
(it had to be said)