In a world gone mad the solution to our 50-year grossly failed social experiment of comprehensive sex and widespread contraception distribution is to up the ante.
So we see the Provincetown, MA, public school system launching a program next year to distribute condoms to kids as young as 6, specifically overriding parental involvement. According to NYDailyNews.com on June 22:
[T]he school committee has unanimously adopted a condom distribution policy beginning as early as first grade....
The committee also directed school leaders not to honor demands from parents who object to their kids receiving protection....
More from the Boston Globe:
Superintendent Beth Singer, who wrote the policy... insists that if an especially young child requests a condom, the nurse will ask the student's motive and act accordingly.
"If that were to happen, we would deal with it in a professional and appropriate way," she said. "I don't anticipate that this policy is going to affect youngsters. It's there for adolescents.... We do know from research" that children now have sex at a younger age.
See Singer's arrogant self in a MyFoxBoston.com news report:Meanwhile I'm realizing Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is really into visuals. First it devised telemed RU-486 abortions, and then one of its sex ed instructors got carried away with sexually explicit photos and anatomical demonstrations to teens as young as 14. According to Fox:
Parent[ ]... Colleen Dostal... was most upset over the instructor simulating sexual acts using stuffed animals designed to resemble STD's.
"I do not understand why any adult with a classroom of children would show them sexual positions," she told Fox News Radio. "I think that's horribly inappropriate."
As for the photographs, "I believe some of those photos were pornographic," she said....
"I understand it's a state law that sex education be taught but it is also state mandated that parents be told that this is going to happen and we were not told."...
Scott Gray, whose 16-year-old son was in the class [said], "As far as we were concerned, it wasn't sex ed, it was sex demonstration...."
PP instructor Jennifer Horner followed her company's playbook and denied denied denied. According to lexch.com:
... Horner... who instructed the week-long sex education class, said the bulk of the allegations levied at that meeting were simply not true.
"I understand that things get turned around and twisted," said Horner....
Horner also responded to some specific allegations, such as the fact that she was attributed as saying PP is proud to be the #1 provider of abortions in America
"Not even close. I would never say that," she said....
According to parents... Horner also taught students the idea that "another definition of abstinence means using a condom."
Horner said that too is not accurate....
She said it is important in a mix-gender class for students to understand about one another's bodies....
"Things can get turned around, ideas can get turned around," she said....
Yet another reason to homeschool...
Seriously though, do we really need sex to be demonstrated to our kids with stuffed animals? I mean, the entire human race has figured it out without such "education."Posted by: Lauren at June 23, 2010 8:59 PM
"Superintendent Beth Singer, who wrote the policy... insists that if an especially young child requests a condom, the nurse will ask the student's motive and act accordingly."
Can an especially young child have a good, healthy motive for asking for a condom?
Seriously, schools should just stay out of sex ed except for the scientific facts. Here's what I want to know - how many of these kids who are getting extensive sex ed in school can name twenty US presidents?Posted by: Marauder at June 23, 2010 9:00 PM
I have a feeling that this will disgust my pro-choice friends as well. Why would a 5 yr old know to ask for a condom? LET OUR KIDS BE KIDS!Posted by: Jen at June 23, 2010 9:14 PM
children need to be children, not inundated with inappropriate sexual material!
5 year olds should be learning to read and write and do simple math. They don't need to be given condoms........this is disgusting!Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 23, 2010 9:48 PM
The kids will want the condoms for water balloons. Woo hoo!
They need to record the teacher's sex lessons too.
This is definitey a form of brainwashing children.
How can they even suggest that parents have no say? Who is this lady and why does she still have a job?
If a 6 year old asks for a condom, somebody probably needs to call CPS.Posted by: JJ at June 23, 2010 10:04 PM
When will society see PP for what it really is?!?!? They are getting more and more brazen and ignoring parental rights with the school's support (and then denial after the fact!). No surprise! Please Lord, open this country's eyes and ears to the TRUTH about PP!Posted by: Nicole at June 23, 2010 10:04 PM
"We do know from research that children now have sex at a younger age."
And yet none of these educators go so far as to ask ...
why is that?Posted by: Cranky Catholic at June 23, 2010 10:31 PM
Horner also responded to some specific allegations, such as the fact that she was attributed as saying PP is proud to be the #1 provider of abortions in America
"Not even close. I would never say that," she said....
Posted by: carla
at June 23, 2010 10:35 PM
Why would she not say that? It is the truth isn't it?
I don't have kids yet, but my future children will NOT be a part of these classes. Actually, it's things like this that make me seriously consider homeschool, or at least private school, for when I do have kids.
I will take the time to teach them about sex, which gives me more control over what they learn and when they learn it (granted I cannot control what they'll learn from their friends). I will emphasize not only the idea of abstinence until marriage, but why abstinence is God's plan for them.Posted by: Caitlin at June 23, 2010 11:44 PM
YUCK!Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 23, 2010 11:52 PM
This is absolutely preposterous and should be criminal! This is morally bankrupt and couldn't be farther from the education this institution is supposed to be giving its children. This act is pure child abuse. It is a warped and twisted view of sexuality, privacy and authority wrapped up with age compression at its worst!
Yet again we have a public institution making moral decisions....yes..MORAL decisions for a child...all in the name of "protecting the privacy of that child" while usurping that child's parents/guardians (who pay for and entrust their children to the school for an academic education) out of the conversation and ultimate decision in regard to such personal and non-educational matters.
This school district is making the final decision about the MOST important aspects of raising a child; his/her well being, moral, psychological, and physical education which is a parent's ultimate right and duty to form in a child. Children are minors, in need of guidance and protection from outside influences that will harm them. Compressing a hyper-sexualized view of life on to any child, most especially a very young one, all the while disregarding parental authority and standing behind the premise to do so as "privacy protection" while teaching children to go behind the backs of their parents as an acceptable decision, is shameful and criminal to the core!
Our world has gone mad when it subscribes to allowing an institution to explain sex and hand out condoms to children...especially 5 & 6 year olds.
A worldview that people, or children, are to engage in sexual acts without meaning, purpose or consequence in the name of freedom is not free. That is NOT freedom at all and it is no kind of real, valid or good education! Freedom is not free to do anything...that by definition is license! The action of this school district does not teach anything but moral bankruptcy. It has now gotten itself into the business of promoting and aiding the sexual abuse of children by other children and by adults.
As a former resident of Massachusetts I am not all together surprised that this is taking place not only in Massachusetts, which is one of the most, if not THE most liberal strongholds in the country but that it is taking place in Province Town, MA (NOT "Providence, MA" as Jill has written)...the mecca for homosexuality in Massachusetts and the entire East Coast. Moral depravity doesn't happen in a vacuum it has roots, real and deep and ever spreading..."P-Town", as it is called, is a "good" place for that depravity to start and spread!
Watch out America....this is the future of sexual education policy in public institutions across our land.
God help us and save us from such a moral depravity and evil against our children.Posted by: Protect Our Children at June 23, 2010 11:59 PM
The more out of hand things get, the crazier we become. I've been around schools long enough to know that most adminstrators are political Pillsbury Doughboys who would burst with a single pin prick of common sense. The teachers in the trenches are forced to do the dirty work, most of whom would rather present the three R's. Thanks, Jill, for a great website.Posted by: Lynne at June 24, 2010 12:31 AM
A Brave New World anyone?
I'm off topic here, but another goal seems to be an androgynous society where children are encouraged at a young age to determine what sex they are most comfortable with, regardless of their anatomy. I've read about this but don't have the specifics. Still on the whacko drawing board?Posted by: Lynne at June 24, 2010 1:10 AM
That was my first thought as well. :(
Not only no, but HECK no. Disgusting!
My oldest is getting ready to enter Kindergarten. When the issue of "sex ed" is raised, we'll be saying "no, thanks!". I'm the parent and it's MY job to teach my kid the "basics of life" and the right way to handle these things.
Whatever happened to waiting until middle school for sex ed, anyway? I would venture to say that even kids in middle school don't need this type of "sex ed". Positions? Really?? Ugh. Even high school kids don't need porn and positions taught to them.Posted by: army_wife at June 24, 2010 5:38 AM
Oh army wife,
You know this is totally going to bring the abortion rate down. We need MORE condoms and porn and positions across the land. Then we sit back and watch the rates of STD's and promiscuity and teenage pregnancy drop!!!! :P
I believe the definition of insanity is doing the same thing you've always done and expecting different results.Posted by: carla at June 24, 2010 5:47 AM
and people were asking me how my niece could be a mother of two boys at seventeen years of age.....I wonder.
The sad thing is you could ask her how she made the boys and she could say in great detail but don't ask her or her sister to write a paper they couldn't stay on topic for more then a line.Posted by: sickedwoman at June 24, 2010 6:05 AM
Not to be inappropriate, just practical, but...but is a five year old's physical development even capable of wearing a condom??? They haven't hit puberty yet. Obviously, at birth the male anatomy is such that they can have "moments" early on, but at five they are just babies yet! A condom wouldn't even fit! What next- a new line of Trojan's for the younger set??? This is complete child abuse and neglect. I would sue if my child asked for one and was given one. People have lost their minds.Posted by: KM at June 24, 2010 7:19 AM
Jill, it's Provincetown, not Providence.Posted by: LS at June 24, 2010 7:44 AM
Ditto KMPosted by: truthseeker at June 24, 2010 8:12 AM
To be clear, child to me would mean unemancipated minor of any age. There should be NO sex education in schools. Schools should teach biology and human anatomy and developement...NOT SEX.Posted by: truthseeker at June 24, 2010 8:15 AM
Jill did a post on that. In Europe they have smaller sized condoms for the younger set. They are so more advanced than we are of course. ::eyeroll::
Cranky Catholic, that is exactly what I thought. They said "We know children are having sex at a younger age" and WHY IS THAT? How is that GOOD? How do you say sex ed works and then admit that children are having sex at younger and younger ages!!!Posted by: Sydney M. at June 24, 2010 9:33 AM
This is complete child abuse and neglect. I would sue if my child asked for one and was given one. People have lost their minds.
I agree, after learning where Perverted Planned Parenthood gets their sex science from this NOT surprising to me at all. It may even get worse because in the ObamaCare bill is School-Based Health Clinic (SBHC) that PP maybe able to apply for grants for.
The truth about PP,why they cover up for sexual predators that prey on young girls & fight for sexual 4 little kids:
The links below are definitely not for children to read or watch. Kinsey was a very sick individual & Planned Parenthood uses his perverted ‘sex science’. I learned about Alfred Kinsey while reading Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, by Michael Savage. In Mr Savage’s book he wrote about Kinsey’s sick experiments and how Hollywood is aggrandizing Alfred Kinsey. While reading about Kinsey I thought of Planned Parenthood & there is a connection. I’m sharing the links so we can be more informed to fight it.
Salvo History of Sex Ed Laws
Sex Abused Kinsey’s Lies Shaped American Law, So Now what?
Rotten Apple Award~ Sex Ed Based on Lies is Child Abuse
From Kinsey to SEICUS Pernicious Guidelines
Upsurge in STDs
The Man Who Mainstreamed Perversion
The Kinsey Corruption: An Expose on the Most Influential “Scientist” of Our Time
Alfred Kinsey’s THE CHILD EXPERIMENTS http://bit.ly/cmuMqM
Learn more about Alfred Kinsey http://bit.ly/9c4jc2
The Horror! The Horror!
Oh Hal. Oh Hal.
Al Gore A "Crazed Sex Poodle?"
Harris: Obama knew of Blagojevich plot
Blago calls Obama ‘hen-pecked’ by Michelle
Pelosi asks for donations to fend off potential GOP investigationsPosted by: yor bro ken at June 24, 2010 11:37 AM
It is horrifying.
So you are ok with a 1st grader getting a condom? Of course he will get an abstinence message first.....all without parental consent. Sweet.Posted by: carla at June 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Posted by: carla at June 24, 2010 5:47 AM
LOL yeah, no doubt.
Re: Kinsey. He was a fraud and has no place influencing law. Once it was discovered what he was doing, he should have spent the remainder of his life in a nice, padded room somewhere... somewhere far, far away from children. His study sample was biased and corrupted, not a representative sample of the entire U.S. population. He drew his sample from a group of sex offenders and the like.
His study methods should be used to teach aspiring researchers what NOT to do. Kinsey was a disgusting creep.Posted by: army_wife at June 24, 2010 12:44 PM
I have to believe God is talking to me.
My oldest is only 22 months, but I'm starting to find myself hammered by schooling choices and possibilities in the last couple of weeks. To be honest, the more /i learn, the more I realize that homeschooling is a very real option and public schooling just doesn't teach what I consider most important. It seems to focus too heavily on memorization and to fail to effectively teach HOW to learn. Beyond that, the fact that someone else would be allowed to give my child a condom/teach my child sex ed without my permission is absolutely unacceptable.
I am trying to continue opening my mind to God and listening to what He has to say; as things stand, I find myself amazed at the fact that in a few short weeks, I have gone from feeling confident about a traditional form of schooling to feeling like homeschooling is likely to be the best potential option.
Many thanks to you, Jill, for alerting us to this situation.Posted by: MaryRose at June 24, 2010 1:36 PM
I can't believe what i've just read! if you let Rockefellers' with their depopulation plans to ahead, they would put on a condoms on newborns too once they weren't aborted!!Posted by: Lis at June 24, 2010 1:56 PM
Carla, has a single first grader received a condom? When that happens, let the overreactions begin. Until then, my advice is to encourage everyone to "chill out."Posted by: Hal at June 24, 2010 2:13 PM
Hal, that's an absurd stance to take. The policy already exists. Why wait for someone to be hurt by it before we respond.
That would be akin to saying we should wait to be offendend until after someone dies when we read that a government is planning on killing civilians. You don't wait til after it happens to speak up, you say something when you learn of their plans.Posted by: lauren at June 24, 2010 2:17 PM
Since childrens brains aren't fully developed (ie the dorsal lateral pre-frontal cortex), is pushing them to have sex younger and younger going to increase sexual harrassment among classmates, and even sexual assault? I hate to imagine, but I'm afraid it could. How many young girls are pressured into sex because "oh I have a condom" and "everyone else is doing it?" Go on some blogs and you'll see that even 20 year olds are so woefully mislead they think menstruation is a monthly abortion. This is child abuse.Posted by: ninek at June 24, 2010 2:18 PM
Lauren, my point is that it just isn't going to happen. Not once. Really. Trust me. Go find something real to be outraged about.Posted by: Hal at June 24, 2010 2:22 PM
Do you have small children? If you do, I would hope you'd be as horrified as the rest of us.
These days kids are learning things they are too YOUNG to comprehend in a mature manner. Granted, age doesn't always mean maturity, but in the case of a first grader, I think it's safe to say they don't need to be learning about sexual positions, condoms or even doing anything sexually.
(I don't know of any girls or know any girls personally that are in the first grade that have started their menstrational cycles, but there could be girls that have, but I don't know of any; in that case they should be learning from their parents what is going on with their bodies and appropriate behavior regarding all that).Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 24, 2010 2:29 PM
Hal, their policy specifically allows for it to happen. As far as I know you aren't a soothsayer and can't actually predict that no child will be negatively effected by this policy.
Posted by: lauren
at June 24, 2010 2:32 PM
Do you remember being a kid? I remember talking about sex with my 5 year old friends at a sleepover before I even knew what it was. Her mother overheard our converstation and alerted our parents. I'm sure we weren't the only 5 year olds to be curious about sex. If older kids at the elementary are getting condoms, you can bet that the younger ones will know about it.
Mother in Texas, I have two daughters, but they're a late teens at this point. I'm not horrified. I'm not even concerned. No first grader is going to get a condom from this school. This is just general unfocused overreaction to a non issue.
Did you miss this part:
"According to the Provincetown Banner, the program requires that students speak to a school nurse or trained counselor before receiving condoms."Posted by: Hal at June 24, 2010 2:43 PM
I'm one of eight children (6 girls, 2 boys, all of us are adult age, and me and my sisters are all married with child[ren]). (Yes, as my name suggests, I am a mother as are all 5 of my sisters).
I talked to my Dad about it and he pronounced it "an abomination". Not only is he the father of 8 children, but he's also Grandfather of 15 grandkids. I think he knows what is an abomination as far as children are concerned.
Oh and yes, for your information I DID tell him about the part about the whole "counseling" part. I don't think it changed anything.
I guess you wouldn't have cared if your daughters came home with condoms at the age of 6. No big deal, huh, as long as that "counseling" is there?Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 24, 2010 3:05 PM
The committee also directed school leaders not to honor demands from parents who object to their kids receiving protection....
This is one reason why we need to push for the Parental Rights Amendment because the Government keeps going farther and farther in usurping our parental rights.
"According to the Provincetown Banner, the program requires that students speak to a school nurse or trained counselor before receiving condoms." Posted by: Hal at June 24, 2010 2:43 PM
What about this part, Hal?
"The policy does not require schools to alert parents if their children receive condoms and prohibits schools from denying students whose parents object."
Is this not undermining parental authority and placing it in the hands of administrators and staff? I'm willing to bet that when your girls were school age, you didn't want their school's administrators and staff going against your wishes in their interactions with your kids.
Betcha if the school nurse handed out a Bible against the wishes of the parents, there'd be a huge uproar about parental rights and the school would be forced to comply with parental wishes. Why do Christian parents not have the same right when secular agendas are thrust against their wishes on their children?Posted by: Fed Up at June 24, 2010 3:38 PM
Despite the media's constant hammering at the reputation of priests, statistically the largest number of sexual predators operate in the public schools. Some of you are very optimistic about what happens in schools, but the rest of us are very concerned. Already teachers give out condoms to students in schools (yes I have proof: the firsthand confession of an offending teacher), and already there has been at least two cases in the news in which minors were taken out of school, by school staff during school hours, and taken to get abortions, WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. There is also a documentary called "Blood Money" which I urge you to look into.Posted by: ninek at June 24, 2010 3:51 PM
Case Against Condoms: Death by Latex http://bit.ly/9NrEo8Posted by: RooForLife at June 24, 2010 4:01 PM
Protect your kids from Comprehensive Sex Ed Programs & SBCs ~ Facts of Life: Ch 17: Sex Ed & School-Based Clinics: What Parents Can Do About Comprehensive Sex Ed Programs & SBCs http://bit.ly/cJ9Kld
The Facts of Life
by Brian Clowes, PhD
At the risk of revealing myself to be an idiot here, there's something that doesn't make sense in the article. How exactly can a stuffed animal be designed to resemble an STD? A sexually-transmitted disease?
Help me out?Posted by: Jennifer at June 24, 2010 6:30 PM
If parents were giving out this info/supplies/demos at home...CPS would be called by the school & the children would be removed from the home. Why is it OK for the school nurse/counselor/Planned PeopleKILLERS to do this type of "instruction"? As POLICY! no less!Posted by: Rebecca M. Brooks at June 24, 2010 7:57 PM
I guess you wouldn't have cared if your daughters came home with condoms at the age of 6. No big deal, huh, as long as that "counseling" is there?
Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 24, 2010 3:05 PM
I wouldn't have freaked out. That's for sure.
Plus, as I pointed out, no 6 year old in Province town is going to come home with a condom. I promise.Posted by: Hal at June 24, 2010 8:05 PM
Gov. Patrick of MA has asked this school district to clarify their policy.
The people behind this should be asked to resign. How irresponsible can people be?Posted by: Janet at June 24, 2010 8:09 PM
"exactly can a stuffed animal be designed to resemble an STD? A sexually-transmitted disease?"
I don't understand it either.Posted by: Jasper at June 24, 2010 8:14 PM
Perhaps? They're pretty cute. ;)Posted by: Alexandra at June 24, 2010 8:29 PM
Hi all - Just to also put this in it's proper perspective - I am from Connecticut and Provincetown is on the tip of Cape Cod. While it's an artsy place, this town is know far and wide for it's perversion. People come from all over to participate in it's sin. This has been going on there for at least 25+ years... So I can imagine that it is much worse now.
So it does not surprise me in the least that this is from that area.
Hal - to be sure, even here in Illinois we have seen many things - and don't get complacent that a 'school nurse or counselor' will have your children's best interest at heart...
For example - giving a girl the patch contraceptive. I met her when she was 16. She was given this starting at age 13 - under the age of consent for sex. That patch was found to have health hazards .... that the delivery system was too effective, and the hormones were being delivered at such a huge rate that young girls in their teens and early twenties were having strokes and heart attacks.
Did they advise her of this? no. Make sure she was not smoking? Having high blood pressure or any other increasing risk factors? No.
Did they tell her any of this? No.
THAT is what some of the school nurses do - especially when they are fully supportive of PP.
Terrible. Putting our children at risk - and again - being true to the cause, instead of protecting the children.
A betrayal. An outrage.
Where has our society gone so wrong?
But we have to still uncover the betrayals, the insanity - and maybe our parents and society will wake up!
Jesus have mercy on us - and wake us from our complacency!Posted by: joyfromillinois at June 24, 2010 9:12 PM
Maybe it is just me, but this reminds me SO MUCH of the Southpark episode... where they are taught about sex... and Mr. Garison is traching kindergardeners how to put on condoms and sex positions...
Seriously, how can ANYONE think that giving minors (and extermely young minors at that) condoms is going to work out well??
I don't understand. I was in high school about 6 years ago, and it was public, and in Canada, and the nurse wasn't allowed to give out ANY kind of contraception... pamphlets only. And advise to talk to our parents.Posted by: jodes at June 24, 2010 9:30 PM
Just great. What's next? PP churning out finger sized condoms for finger sized vaginas?? And the first teacher who tries to teach some sort of MORALS will be sued by the ACLU. What is this (politically correct) Country coming to? They prosecute adults for sexual abuse to children and turn around and give our children all the knowledge and effects to abuse themselves sexually? Is nothing sacred any more? What a sick and twisted mind we have allowed to take the helm of our education system! This is an outrage. Our children are our FUTURE. Are we going to let these perverted dolts rot the minds of our children? When will Americans stand up and fight this kind of corruption? When it's too late? I fear for all children schooled in the public system. Thank God I home schooled both of my wonderful boys. Both of whom are virgins and firm in the faith they were brought up in. I'm proud of the morals my children have displayed in the face of criticism from their peers. Honor still exists among some circles of people. Clearly not anyone tainted by "Planned Parenthood". Our future will reflect what we have allowed to happen to our children. Morally corrupt children will produce a morally corrupt nation. This has to STOP! And no one else but we, the parents, have this on our shoulders.
THIS IS UNADULTERATED CHILD ABUSE.
I don't see anyone freaking out. I am reading outrage! As a former teacher, a parent of young ones and someone who is completely against the promotion of promiscuity I am angry! As well we all should be.
Your lack of outrage is rather disturbing actually.
Maybe we should hand out booze and smokes and needles and acid. After all, kiddoes are going to do that anyway too. Might as well tell them not to and then provide them with the goods. Without parental consent of course. Why bother the parents?
So true CarlaPosted by: RooForLife at June 25, 2010 9:45 AM
One word......."SICK".Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at June 25, 2010 10:13 AM
I guess I really wonder what it would take to make liberals outraged??
A Bible distribution? An abstinence only curriculum?
An abortion video shown in school? Me telling students about my abortion? Picketing by prolifers with graphic abortion signs? Christmas trees? Away in a Manger? Saying God bless you when someone sneezes?
I love ya Hal. :) You know that.
Carla, I love you too. I think telling students about your abortion in school (high school--not first grade) would be a great idea. I would, however, be outraged by Bible distribution in the public schools. It would be considered furthering the establishment of religion. Yikes. Holiday trees wouldn't bother me. ;)
Posted by: Hal
at June 25, 2010 11:12 AM
Hal, how is condom distribution against the wishes of Christian parents NOT a violation of parents' rights to religious freedom in the raising of their children?Posted by: Fed Up at June 25, 2010 11:14 AM
Fed Up, the parents can instruct their children any way they want regarding religion. A school, however, could offer non-kosher food to an Orthodox Jew and not be violating anyone's rights. The young Jewish child could politely decline the food, and your child could decline to accept the condom.Posted by: Hal at June 25, 2010 12:21 PM
Hi Hal. What if the Jewish parents have informed the school that they do not want a non-kosher meal provided to their child if he should request one? Is the school bound to honor their wishes?
If not, is the school liable for damages if the child suffers harm as a result of eating a diet that was provided against the parents' wishes? Say he has an allergic reaction to something in the non-kosher meal and requires immediate medical attention. Is the school culpable?Posted by: Fed Up at June 25, 2010 1:06 PM
So, nobody really knows what the heck the article means by stuffed animals designed to resemble STD's??
Surely this is a typo/error...Posted by: Jennifer at June 25, 2010 4:08 PM
Hal, your kids could decline to accept the Bible.Posted by: Sydney M. at June 25, 2010 5:15 PM
Sydney, good point.
I'm sure they would
Posted by: carla at June 25, 2010 9:50 PM
A kid like yours might come with a condom. One of the mini sized ones cause you asked him to. Just in case any young sexually active girls come over you know....so you could be a responsible adult in charge and be prepared to offer a condom. You are sick.
"Lauren, my point is that it just isn't going to happen. Not once. Really. Trust me. Go find something real to be outraged about."
I'm starting my third year of law school in the fall, and if there's one thing you learn really fast in law school, it's that nothing is too outrageous to have happened. No lawsuit is too ridiculous, no criminal is too dumb, no murder is too far-fetched, no law is too nonsensical, no policy is too jaw-dropping. Anything you can conceive of happening has probably happened or been attempted somewhere at some point in history. Anything.Posted by: Marauder at June 26, 2010 6:59 AM
Is it legal for a minor to have sex with another minor in MA?Posted by: Janet at June 26, 2010 2:35 PM
Marauder, although you may be right (and I agree with you generally), two years of law school hardly makes one an expert.
I still maintain that there is not a school nurse in that district that would ever give a condom to a first grader.Posted by: Hal at June 26, 2010 6:39 PM
Actually I wouldn't be too quick to say that. Things we thought people wouldn't do have happened...and the fact that it says that the schools could go against parental wishes says a lot MORE than the whole suggestion that there would be "counseling" (I have my doubts that this counseling would be as informative as it ought).
6 year olds aren't always going to "just say no" either. Sometimes they just take something because it's a person they view as an authority figure and afraid to say no.
There are people, even in the school systems who have no moral compass, no sense of ethics, no sense of boundaries. So, don't be too sure that "no person is going to give a 6 year old a condom" because, based on what has been said about this town (and what I've seen in today's society), you just never know. Don't take it for granted that it won't happen.
And it's more than just the outrage, it's about protecting kids' innocence and their boundaries. We have enough problems in today's world without this.Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 27, 2010 12:49 AM
The age of consent in MA is 16. But maybe they are working around the clock to get that changed to 6.
If anyone would like to help EDUCATE the public on the lies of Planned Parenthood there is an excellent publication that I have ordered and hand out when I speak.Posted by: carla at June 27, 2010 12:50 PM
Mother in Texas, why would a 6 year old even want a condom and what would he or she do with it if they had one? Finally, what harm would come from it, even in the very unlikely event a 6 year old got a condom? I really fail to see what the outrage is about?
Not wanting high school students to have condoms is something I understand. Worrying about 6 year olds with condoms is a bit over the top.Posted by: Hal at June 27, 2010 6:09 PM
"Worrying about 6 year olds with condoms is a bit over the top."
Lawyers thought it wasn't likely that a baby could be born alive and killed shortly thereafter by her abortionist in order to preserve a woman's right to her abortion. Look how well that went...
How about if a six year old child brought a condom home in his backpack and a toddler found it and choked on it and died.... choking accidents happen every day.
Mother in Texas,
Every time I see your name, I see "Mother Teresa" and have to take a double-take. :)
LOL Oh, I'd love to be as loving and giving and gentle as Mother Teresa, however, I have a long way to go! God is still working on me!Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 27, 2010 11:39 PM
It so would NOT surprise me if it came to pass that they'd give a six year old a condom. Society has gotten so warped...so yeah, I'm outraged.
But, your failure to see it shan't make a difference on my understanding of how truly outrageous and warped it is that they'd even suggest--or that they'd even consider--giving a six year old a condom!Posted by: Mother In Texas at June 27, 2010 11:42 PM
The information being reported here is 100 % wrong. People do research for yourself.Posted by: frank at July 6, 2010 6:44 PM
The information being reported here is 100 % wrong. People do research for yourself.Posted by: frank at July 6, 2010 6:50 PM