Posted on 11/07/2013 5:53:33 PM PST by Morgana
AUCKLAND, New Zealand, November 7, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The New Zealand Family Planning Association is trying to save face after public backlash over the Association’s plan to release a sexuality resource for children aged 5 to 8 later this month.
The resource has drawn attention to the fact that “sexuality” is already included right through each year level of the health curriculum. Even in Catholic schools “sexuality” education is compulsory, although parents do have the right to be informed and are given the option of removing their children from these classes.
The Ministry of Education’s 2002 document “Sexuality Education – Revised Guide for Principals, Boards of Trustees, and Teachers” states that “sexuality education” actually “emphasises the holistic nature of sexuality education (which has physical, social, mental and emotional, and spiritual aspects) and defines 'sex education' as relating only to the physical dimension of sexuality education.”
In an effort to calm the waters, Family Planning’s Health Promotion Director, Frances Bird hasstated that “sexuality education is not sex education”. According to 3 News, Bird said “We’re not talking about sex – the act of sex – at all.”
Family Planning’s website explains to parents and caregivers that “because sexuality education is much more than ‘the birds and the bees’ it should start young.”
It is the Association’s belief that through “normalizing conversations about bodies, good and bad feelings, families and relationships and learning communication skills from a young age,” children will be confident to ask questions and “build on their understanding” as they grow.
Earlier this week the content of the Year One (age 5) resource produced by Family Planning was revealed by the NZ Herald:
Working together as a class to create a safe classroom environment; Discussing the meaning of respect and showing respect for others; Describing themselves and their relationships with others, including similarities and differences; Describing themselves in relation to their gender; Exploring and sharing ideas about friends and classmates; Using ‘I’ statements to express ideas and feelings; Identifying body parts, including sexual parts; and Discussing changes to the body and ways to care for the body.
Frances Bird has given two explanations as to why this resource for young children is needed. The first was that “young people are being exposed to more media and materials.”
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
This was followed by the reasoning that “if you start to build the foundation knowledge for them, by the time they do learn about it [sex], they’re less likely to have early sex, they have fewer partners, they have less sex as well.”
Critics believe that both of these reasons are flawed. The more sexuality education has permeated New Zealand schools, the more the sexual and general behavior of young people has increased.
Parents, teachers, priests, ministers, and all people of good will are being asked to work together to keep organisations like Family Planning out of schools, youth programmes, and out of families so that the innocence of children is protected for as long as possible.
hin their right mind would want the public schools teaching their children about the “mental and emotional, and spiritual aspects” of marital relations?
They are perverts, pedophiles if you ask me, that is all it is.
Leftists are pushing a pro-sex agenda on kids
Send every kid out to a farm for a summer...they’ll ‘get it.’
In some ways I do think our kids need to learn about the birds and the bees, since they do not even know where their hamburger comes from ...a summer out on a farm might be all the education that they need in those sorts of ideas.
“We’re not raping children, we’re just letting them express themselves!”
Sexuality education=teaching that THE most important aspect of your existence is SEX and how and with whom you want to have it. You gender is whatever you want to be this minute. A family is whatever you say it is. The abnormal is the norm.
Sex Ed is a Cultural Marxist construct. It is literally to destroy the innocence of the Latency period which is crucial for normal sexual identity formation.
Group “Sex” instruction removes privacy and intimacy from the sex act-—which makes sex moral-—and not just an animal act.
Removing that dignity and respect-—by making a “group” discussion with immature children who can’t understand the emotions behind the acts-—removes respect of the act—and their parents-—puts unnatural ideas in their heads because in Latency the sex drive is deliberately sublimated because it is when boys and girls prefer their own sex.
Giving young children “Sex Ed” will fixate them on sex organs in an unnatural way-—make them despise the opposite sex—make fun of them—because by nature immature children hate differences.
There is a lot of psychology on Sex Ed-—since the 1940’s===”Family Planning” was the first sexualization of children in public schools. Catholic schools put it into their curricula-—a little in the 60s and by the 70s there was Sex Ed in all school curricula-—designed by the Lukacs and Adornos-—to deliberately corrupt and warp the minds of little children-—fixate them in the Limbic area of the brain-—excite emotions-—to destroy intellectual pursuits and normal awe and mystery which is needed for proper development for giving the opposite sex dignity.
Sex Ed is evil. It is destructive to normal childhood development. It strips sex of morality-—it is why we have Miley Cyruses all around-—no respect for themselves or the dignity of others....they reduce themselves to rutting dogs—just objects to be used for recreation—no meaning to the sex act—none-—because that is the result of sexualization of children which warps the whole concept of the sex act in an unnatural setting. There is no awe—respect or beauty or interest in the opposite sex.
Even Rousseau—the proto-Marxist knew that innocence of children until after puberty was essential. And after puberty the parents or another individual that the parent respects, is the only person who should “discuss” any aspect of sex with children-—it is never a “group” thing.....and that awe and mystery is essential in the dignity of human beings.
Discussions among peers is fine——if the peers have not been absorbing porn or being molested-—then they will warp your child’s understanding of sex also.....like a rotten apple.
You have to protect the minds of your children-—it is actually as important as physical protection. Raping the mind with vile ideas will warp the worldview of children.
Public Schools are intentionally designed by the Marxist Billy Ayers-types to destroy Christian Ethics and reduce your kids to godless animals-—to be slaves for the State. Sex Education is their easiest way to corrupt children—esp. the boys.
Very well said!
bump
SIECUS is Planned Parenthood’s “sex education” organization and has been pushing the sex positive (and ANTI-abstinence) worldview in schools and hospitals since 1964.
As with abortion being "safe, legal, and RARE".
Their above statement is a LIE. They WANT people sexually active at every age. Sex positive proponents see orgasm as a birthright to be enjoyed ASAP and seek an end to all moral judgments regarding sexual pairings (regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partners).
Why should sex educators be seeking to see MONOGAMOUS couples having "less sex as well"?
It's as big a lie that homosexuals and crossdressers are "born that way". They don't CARE about the origin. If someone WANTS to do it, it should be permitted. End of argument. Saying it is genetic is just to sell it to the mushy middle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.