Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mixing HIV and ABCs? Not with my Child (Andrea Peyser says no to AIDS indoctrination)
New York Post ^ | March 19, 2006 | Andrea Peyser

Posted on 03/19/2006 6:23:35 AM PST by Liz

Edited on 03/19/2006 6:24:40 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

[snip Getty image]

HERE'S another reason to keep my precious daughter away from the public schools: Childless eggheads who dictate educational policy think it's high time kids her age were indoctrinated in the ways of AIDS. Like hell. My child is a first-grader, thriving in an outrageously expensive private school. There, she is learning about arctic puffins and can run faster than most boys. This child is still an innocent - unschooled in the intricacies of procreation, death and incurable disease.

It would not be that way in a public classroom.

Faceless activists there want to add these words to the vocabulary of children her age - Virus. HIV. AIDS. Even cancer. Under an updated curriculum, all public-school students - starting in kindergarten! - are required to learn about the disease that we know is spread through unsafe sex, intravenous drugs and tainted blood.

But the first-grade learning guide, of which I have a copy, dances around the issues of sex and drugs while needlessly scaring the heck out of little kids.

Who will explain what he or she is not ready to know? As always, parents may "opt out," in writing.

But parents should demand that those who want to be included should "opt in" to the program - so as not to subject their children to embarrassment.

My child will learn about AIDS when she is ready. That day will certainly come sooner than I'd like. She is not a guinea pig for people with an agenda. My only agenda is to let her grow up. And keep her away from that trash heap known as public school. andrea.peyser@nypost.com


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: aids; hivaids; homosexualagenda; jeffs47; preducators; recruiting; troll; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last
To: Liz

It's really a shame how the public schools are out of control. If I had kids in school now, I'd send them to a private school. It's only going to get worse because the liberals in charge.


21 posted on 03/19/2006 7:27:12 AM PST by Dr. Scarpetta (There's always a reason to choose life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Liz
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and a religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."--John Adams

Nuff said!

22 posted on 03/19/2006 7:41:15 AM PST by DirtyHarryY2K ("Ye shall know them by their fruits" ;-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: squarebarb

Exactly the premise of perverts over at the North American Man Boy Lovers Association (NAMBLA) that wants to legalize sex between children and adults.


23 posted on 03/19/2006 7:42:00 AM PST by Liz (Liberty consists in having the power to do that which is permitted by the law. Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Excellent article! And exactly the reason why one of my children was homeschooled, and her younger sister is in a private Christian school. And I believe that if you don't have kids in a public school, you shouldn't have to pay taxes for it.


24 posted on 03/19/2006 7:46:32 AM PST by Awestruck (All the usual suspects)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeffs47

The posting rules prevent my responding with anything but UGH.


25 posted on 03/19/2006 7:46:33 AM PST by Tax-chick (Welcome to my nightmare. It takes some getting used to!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck
And I believe that if you don't have kids in a public school, you shouldn't have to pay taxes for it.

I agree. This would turn the "public" schools into a system funded solely by its users ... and then they might find they cared a great deal about content, results, and cost-efficiency!

26 posted on 03/19/2006 7:48:38 AM PST by Tax-chick (Welcome to my nightmare. It takes some getting used to!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Crayons, snacks ... & HIV

Kindergartners will learn about virus come Monday

BY KATHLEEN LUCADAMO
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER


http://www.nydailynews.com/03-17-2006/news/local/story/400415p-339244c.html


27 posted on 03/19/2006 7:53:21 AM PST by jimbo123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

Damn right----why should Christians tax-subsidize these pervs?


28 posted on 03/19/2006 7:58:44 AM PST by Liz (Liberty consists in having the power to do that which is permitted by the law. Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

I encourage everyone to read the original article. The details demonstrate the ridiculousness--and danger--of their approach.


29 posted on 03/19/2006 8:00:15 AM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz

The chemical-AIDS hypothesis proposes that the AIDS

epidemics of the US and Europe are caused by recreational

drugs, alias lifestyle, and anti-HIV drugs (Duesberg

J. Biosci. | Vol. 28 | No. 4 | June 2003

Peter Duesberg, Claus Koehnlein and David Rasnick

390

Table 4. The HIV-AIDS hypothesis*: 17 predictions versus the facts.

No. Prediction Fact

1. Since HIV is “the sole cause of AIDS”, it must be abundant

in AIDS patients based on “exactly the same criteria as for

other viral diseases.”

But, only antibodies against HIV are found in most

patients (1–7)**. Therefore, “HIV infection is identified in

blood by detecting antibodies, gene sequences, or viral

isolation.” But, HIV can only be “isolated” from rare, latently

infected lymphocytes that have been cultured for

weeks in vitro – away from the antibodies of the human

host (8). Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus.

2. Since HIV is “the sole cause of AIDS”, there is no AIDS in

HIV-free people.

But, the AIDS literature has described at least 4621 HIVfree

AIDS cases according to one survey – irrespective of,

or in agreement with allowances made by the CDC for

HIV-free AIDS cases (55).

3. The retrovirus HIV causes immunodeficiency by killing

T-cells (1–3).

But, retroviruses do not kill cells because they depend on

viable cells for the replication of their RNA from viral

DNA integrated into cellular DNA (4, 25). Thus, T-cells

infected in vitro thrive, and those patented to mass-produce

HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diag nosis

of AIDS are immortal (9–15)!

4. Following “exactly the same criteria as for other viral diseases”,

HIV causes AIDS by killing more T-cells than the body

can replace. Thus T-cells or “CD4 lymphocytes . . . become

depleted in people with AIDS”.

But, even in patients dying from AIDS less than 1 in 500

of the T-cells “that become depleted” are ever infected by

HIV (16–20, 54). This rate of infection is the hallmark of

a latent passenger virus (21).

5. With an RNA of 9 kilobases, just like polio virus, HIV

should be able to cause one specific disease, or no disease if

it is a passenger (22).

But, HIV is said to be “the sole cause of AIDS”, or of 26

different immunodeficiency and non-immunodeficiency

diseases, all of which also occur without HIV (table 2).

Thus there is not one HIV-specific disease, which is the

definition of a passenger virus!

6. All viruses are most pathogenic prior to anti-viral immunity.

Therefore, preemptive immunization with Jennerian vaccines is

used to protect against all viral diseases since 1798.

But, AIDS is observed – by definition – only after anti-

HIV immunity is established, a positive HIV/AIDS test

(23). Thus HIV cannot cause AIDS by “the same criteria”

as conventional viruses.

7. HIV needs “5–10 years” from establishing antiviral immunity

to cause AIDS.

But, HIV replicates in 1 day, generating over 100 new HIVs

per cell (24, 25). Accordingly, HIV is immunogenic, i.e. biochemically

most active, within weeks after infection (26, 27).

Thus, based on conventional criteria “for other viral disea ses”,

HIV should also cause AIDS within weeks – if it could.

8. “Most people with HIV infection show signs of AIDS within

5–10 years” – the justification for prophylaxis of AIDS with

the DNA chain terminator AZT (§ 4).

But, of “34×3 million . . . with HIV worldwide” only 1×4%

[= 471,457 (obtained by substracting the WHO’s cumulative

total of 1999 from that of 2000)] developed AIDS in 2000,

and similarly low percentages prevailed in all previous years

(28). Likewise, in 1985, only 1×2% of the 1 million US citizens

with HIV developed AIDS (29, 30). Since an annual incidence

of 1×2–1×4% of all 26 AIDS defining diseases combined is no

more than the normal mortality in the US and Europe (life ex pectancy

of 75 years), HIV must be a passenger virus.

9. A vaccine against HIV should (“is hoped” to) prevent

AIDS – the reason why AIDS researchers try to develop an

AIDS vaccine since 1984 (31).

But, despite enormous efforts there is no such vaccine to

this day (31). Moreover, since AIDS occurs by definition

only in the presence of natural antibodies against HIV

(§ 3), and since natural antibodies are so effective that no

HIV is detectable in AIDS patients (see No. 1), even the

hopes for a vaccine are irrational.

10. HIV, like other viruses, survives by transmission from host

to host, which is said to be mediated “through sexual contact”.

But, only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits

HIV (32–34), and only 1 of 275 US citizens is HIV-infected

(29, 30), (figure 1b). Therefore, an average un-infected

US citizen needs 275,000 random “sexual contacts” to get

infected and spread HIV – an unlikely basis for an epidemic!

(Table 4. Cond.)

J. Biosci. | Vol. 28 | No. 4 | June 2003

The chemical bases of the various AIDS epidemics

391

Table 4.

No. Prediction Fact

11. “AIDS spreads by infection” of HIV. But, contrary to the spread of AIDS, there is no “spread”

of HIV in the US. In the US HIV infections have remained

constant at 1 million from 1985 (29) until now (30), (see

also The Durban Declaration and figure 1b). By contrast,

AIDS has increased from 1981 until 1992 and has declined

ever since (figure 1a).

12. Many of the 3 million people who annually receive blood transfusions

in the US for life-threatening diseases (51), should have

developed AIDS from HIV-infected blood donors prior to the

elimination of HIV from the blood supply in 1985.

But there was no increase in AIDS-defining diseases in

HIV-positive transfusion recipients in the AIDS era (52),

and no AIDS-defining Kaposi’s sarcoma has ever been

observed in millions of transfusion recipients (53).

13. Doctors are at high risk to contract AIDS from patients, HIV

researchers from virus preparations, wives of HIV-positive

hemophiliacs from husbands, and prostitutes from clients –

particularly since there is no HIV vaccine.

But, in the peer-reviewed literature there is not one doctor or

nurse who has ever contracted AIDS (not just HIV) from the

over 816,000 AIDS patients recorded in the US in 22 years

(30). Not one of over ten thousand HIV researchers has contracted

AIDS. Wives of hemophiliacs do not get AIDS (35).

And there is no AIDS-epidemic in prostitutes (36–38). Thus

AIDS is not contagious (39, 40).

14. Viral AIDS – like all viral/microbial epidemics in the past

(41–43) – should spread randomly in a population.

But, in the US and Europe AIDS is restricted since 1981

to two main risk groups, intravenous drug users and male

homosexual drug users (§ 1 and 4).

15. A viral AIDS epidemic should form a classical, bell-shaped

chronological curve (41–43), rising exponentially via virus

spread and declining exponentially via natural immunity,

within months (see figure 3a).

But, AIDS has been increasing slowly since 1981 for 12

years and is now declining since 1993 (figure 1a), just like

a lifestyle epidemic, as for example lung cancer from

smoking (figure 3b).

16. AIDS should be a pediatric epidemic now, because HIV is

transmitted “from mother to infant” at rates of 25–50% (44–

49), and because “34×3 million people worldwide” were already

infected in 2000. To reduce the high maternal transmission

rate HIV-antibody-positive pregnant mothers are

treated with AZT for up to 6 months prior to birth (§ 4).

But, less than 1% of AIDS in the US and Europe is pediatric

(30, 50). Thus HIV must be a passenger virus in newborns.

17. “HIV recognizes no social, political or geographic borders”

– just like all other viruses.

But, the presumably HIV-caused AIDS epidemics of

Africa and of the US and Europe differ both clinically and

epidemiologically (§ 1, table 2). The US/European epidemic

is highly nonrandom, 80% male and restricted to

abnormal risk groups, whereas the African epidemic is

random.


30 posted on 03/19/2006 8:12:08 AM PST by Doc Savage (Of all these things you can be sure, only love...will endure.......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doc Savage

If you want to see something eye opening and insidious about gay activism penetrating the public school system, check this out!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=GLSEN&btnG=Google+Search


31 posted on 03/19/2006 8:21:56 AM PST by Wristpin ("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: generally

Heck, I can't even think about teaching it to my first graders and I won't.


32 posted on 03/19/2006 9:40:46 AM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jeffs47
"Well, as far as I know, quite a few 11 and 12 year olds are sexually active. Stop by a local movie theater if you need "proof." To say that children don't need education on the realities of STD's, contraception, etc, BEFORE they start having sex is asking for trouble."

Actually, what is needed is for more parents to give the kids a moral foundation so they WON'T have sex. Mine certainly did that. I personally don't feel sexual topics should be addressed in the k-6 grade classrooms. We do have a sex-ed program for fifth and sixth graders that is NOT taught be teachers, but by others/parents. I for one, am glad that I don't have to "teach" it to my first grade class or that any of us teachers have to. Grade school teachers shouldn't be teaching the crap.

I'm sorry, I've just never gotten the "they're going to have sex anyways, so we might as well tell them about 'stuff." My mother's five minute lesson on sex was enough--that it was a beautiful thing to share between husband and wife.

And yes, I went through both the abstinence type programs and the contraceptive based sex-ed programs as did my siblings in junior high and high school. Neither one affected us too much as we ALREADY knew what our values were and how to deal with things. One thing my parents did was that they attended the preview sessions EVERY time. Sometimes they allowed us to participate, sometimes they didn't. It wasn't any big deal either way.

For what it's worth, here the 5th/6th grade boys had only about half the parents show up with the kids while almost ALL of the girls had a parent with them.

Frankly, I just wish the whole thing would go away, as it gives more ammunition to the bashers.

33 posted on 03/19/2006 9:51:29 AM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

As I shouldn't have to pay taxes for someone's personal choice of alternative education as well, especially having no children.


34 posted on 03/19/2006 9:52:45 AM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

However, that could be applied to pretty much the majority of taxes I pay.


35 posted on 03/19/2006 9:54:03 AM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk

I would agree with you. And I AM a first grade teacher.


36 posted on 03/19/2006 9:56:08 AM PST by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Anyone who wants to know why children aren't being taught how to read, write, and do math are invited to look at this curriculum - and the heaps of other curricula that teachers are obligated to teach on self-esteem, harassment, preventing racism, condemning bullying, balancing the needs of girls and boys, making sure that all races and ethnic groups are equally represented, drug education, tobacco education, driver education, and looking for the signs of sexual and physical abuse. (I'm in a classroom and I can show you the material, if you have a wheelbarrow and are willing to take it out of my room.) Where does a teacher fit reading, writing, math, history, and science in among all that?

By good fortune I work in a place where I can teach students how to read and write and they don't bother me about the superfluous stuff. In New York, however, I'll bet there's an administrator peeking into every kindergarten room making sure the new AIDS curriculum is put into place. And their test scores show how successful they are, too.


37 posted on 03/19/2006 10:16:44 AM PST by redpoll (redpoll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moog
that could be applied to pretty much the majority of taxes I pay

That is true. There are practical considerations regarding which government functions could realistically be converted to fee-for-service, as well as philosophical differences about whether something *should* be a private enterprise.

38 posted on 03/19/2006 10:43:38 AM PST by Tax-chick (Welcome to my nightmare. It takes some getting used to!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: jeffs47; redpoll; moog; Wristpin; Ouderkirk; Paleo Conservative; NaughtiusMaximus; freekitty; ...
.......quite a few 11 and 12 year olds are sexually active. Stop by a local movie theater if you need "proof".....

Oh, please. Operating in a vacuum is not allowed on FR.

Examine their motives----Hollywarped's craven proselytizing is so very obvious. They knew they are deliberately offending believers.

For years, Hollywarped's busy entertainment industry has chipped away at Western civilzation under the guise of "artistic expression." Politically correct Hollywarped films, TV and music are loaded up with gratuitous sex and violence, then Follywood types get thoughtful and start talking about "artistic meaning."

"Artistic meaning," my Aunt Tilly.

Hollywarped's MO includes endless poselytizing, continuous brainwashing of audiences into Christian-hating and American-hating, and subtle and not-so-subtle left-leaning social commentaries.

Follywood firmly believes that 24/7 of their sexually salacious and violent TV, movies and music are not harming kids and the culture.

OTOH, Hollywarped also believes----with the religious fervor of Tammy Faye Baker---- that a single 15-sec commercial will compel tens of millions of Americans into thousands of stores to buy billions of dollars worth of soap, soup, breakfast cereal and cars.

They can't have it both ways.

39 posted on 03/19/2006 10:52:07 AM PST by Liz (Liberty consists in having the power to do that which is permitted by the law. Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: moog

I think it's great that a five minute conversation was enough for you to see sex as the beautiful thing it is. THe problem is that everyone is not like you. Everyone has their own childhoods. Some kids dont even have parents to have that conversation with them. Knowledge is power. What's wrong with kids having knowledge?


40 posted on 03/19/2006 11:42:46 AM PST by jeffs47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson