2 thoughts on “I Heard It On The NARN

  1. “comprehensive”.

    Would love to know how the rally went. I remember about 2005, seeing an “evaluation” of abstinence based sex ed that (a) addressed a program that wasn’t quite abstinence based to begin with, (b) had no attempt at a control, and (c) attempted no statistical test. The “study” or “evaluation” nonetheless concluded that abstinence based sex ed didn’t work. So the fix was in.

    When I contrived an approximate control, I found about 95% + confidence that the method–partial abstinence–was working quite well, within the limitations that I believe parents who enrolled their kids in abstinence based sex ed at school were also likely to have done something about the matter at home.

    Personally, I don’t have a problem with comprehensive sex ed as long as they teach the uncomfortable facts like HIV infection rates among homosexuals, suicidal ideation pre and post op among transsexuals, the explosion of STDs as we’ve jettisoned Judeo-Christian sexual mores, etc.. As far as I can tell, however, that’s not what they’re presenting. I remember being taught in health class about 35 years back about the relative effectiveness of various forms of birth control vs. pregnancy and STDs.

    Doesn’t seem to be what the comprehensive sex ed crowd wants, though.

  2. The biggest problem I saw was that it promoted the more than two genders theory that has only recently become a cause celeb for the left. I dont want kids exposed to this stuff but a lot of things they covered I do believer kids should eventually learn. If you are teaching CSE to kids below 11-12 though I believe that is legitmately a form of child abuse. But the Left wants to sexualize children at such a yonh age that its creepy.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.