Off Base on Sex Ed

factcheck.org

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Jeff1963 @ 09/14/2008 12:05:59 AM

    Give me a break, Mimi13. Did YOU even bother to read the bill? It CLEARLY says "such courses of instruction shall include the teaching of prevention of unintended pregnancy and all options related to unintended pregnancy" and "courses also shall include age appropriate instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV." What is an age appropriate discussion for 5 year olds?

  • Posted By: trapstar @ 09/13/2008 1:34:26 PM

    If you would look at the SYLLABUS that is referenced by the Obama campaign and has been APPROVED by Obama teaching would include for children 5-8,
    Level 1 Sex Education Includes:
    ??? ???Both Boys And Girls Have Body Parts That Feel Good When Touched.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 25, 2004)
    ??? ???A Boy/Man Has Nipples, A Penis, A ***, And Testicles.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 25, 2004)
    ??? ???A Girl/Woman Has Breasts, Nipples, A Vulva, A Clitoris, A Vagina, A Uterus, And Ovaries.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 25, 2004)
    ??? ???Some Sexual Or Reproductive Organs, Such As Penises And Vulvas, Are External Or On The Outside Of The Body While Others, Such As Ovaries And Testicles, Are Internal Or Inside The Body.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 25, 2004)
    ??? ???Some People Are Homosexual, Which Means They Can Be Attracted To And Fall In Love With Someone Of The Same Gender.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 29, 2004)
    ??? ???Vaginal Intercourse ??? When A Penis Is Placed Inside A Vagina ??? Is The Most Common Way For A Sperm And Egg To Join.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 26, 2004)
    ??? ???Two People Of The Same Gender Can Live In Loving, Lifetime Committed Relationships.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 39, 2004)
    ??????Homosexual Men And Women Are Also Known As Gay Men And Lesbians.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 29, 2004)
    Level 1 Sex Education Teaches Students Ages 5-8 About Masturbation:
    ???Touching And Rubbing One???s Own Genitals To Feel Good Is Called Masturbation.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 51, 2004)
    ???Some Boys And Girls Masturbate And Others Do Not.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And Education Council Of The United States, www.siecus.org, p. 52, 2004)
    ???Masturbation Should Be Done In A Private Place.??? (???Guidelines For Comprehensive Sexuality Education,??? The Sexuality Information And

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/13/2008 5:13:16 PM

      You know, anyone who is truly concerned about Obama's position on sex education in the primary grades and just scroll down to about the 8th paragraph in this story, click on the link for Illinois SB 99 (the bill the Obama actually supported ) and read it in its entirity as it was presented to the Illinois state legislature. No spin, No interpretation. Just he actual verbage of the bill. Anyone who did that would easily see that the bill in question has nothing to do with the garbage you are presenting here. I really don't understand the arrogance of lying about something that is so easily referenced and checked. Of course, people who don't like to get thier brains all sweaty actually thinking for themselves may just take your word for what Obama supports. But, I'd like to believe that they are a distinct minority. SB 99 -- the bill that Obama supported and the bill for which there is a convenient link in the story -- has nothing to do with the nitty-gritty of the sex act. It is about defneding against sexual predators. Don't know where this supposed syllubus comes from -- -but it certainly IS NOT Illinois SB 99 -- the bill the Obama supported. .

  • Posted By: faminchin @ 09/12/2008 8:21:06 AM

    This whole election makes me sick to my stomach! What concerns me even more is reading all the posts of the people here with their heads stuck up either an elephant or donkeys butt! I see the major threat we face in this country as those people iggnorant enough to believe either one of these canidates is better than the other, when the reality of the situation is that once again we are forced to choose the lessor of two evils.

    Wake up America! There is no difference between these two party's. All of our politicians live the lifestyle of the Rich and Famous, flying around the world in private jets eating steak and lobster tail.......on our tax dollar! While the average working class American is left eating beans. Neither of these two parties give a rats behind about you or me. Both are willing to do what ever it takes for power. Both have as an objective to keep our country split into donkeys and elephants. Both continue to rob us blind with taxes and pat each other on the back, laughing, all the way to the bank.

    So pull your head out of that donkey and elephant butt, clean the dung out of your ears and listen to what I am telling you. It is the most honest and truthful thing you will hear this entire election!

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/12/2008 11:48:35 PM

      So, is it better to bury your head in the sand? There is nothing constructive in your comment. You can chose to "turn on, tune in, and drop out" or you can work to make the system better. Maybe the work is slow and progress is slower -- but I never heard of anything that got accomplished by dropping out.

  • Posted By: k@chicago @ 09/12/2008 5:24:53 PM

    Everyone wants to protecting children from predators. But I believe parents should talk to children about this and decide on what tone and verbage should be used. It shouldn't be left to the school for such a young age. I also don't agree w/a verbage used for K -2 that was approved by Obama. e.g. men and women love each other, same sex couples ... why does it matter? it's their business, not yours or not your child's. Knowledge is power yes, but to what extent? Too much knowledge is robbing them of their innocence, YOU as parents control what's appropriate, not the school. Children have the rest of their lives to worry about the sickos of this world, teach them what you feel is right, then keep your eyes open. I appreciate teachers, but this is something I would rather discuss w/my child by myself. Don't agree w/Obama's verbage on his "age appropriate" sex education. Read them... they're not appropriate.

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/12/2008 11:41:04 PM

      The problem is that experiement after experiment shows that young children (even those who have been talked to by their parents) will follow a stranger who says he has lost a puppy, will follow a stranger dressed as a clown, will play a game of hide-and-seek with a stranger. The great majority of children do not understand who is a stranger and what constitutes danger. Moreover, it's not usually a stranger who molests children. It's nice to talk about the innocence of children, but the fact of the matter is that child abuse is rampant -- and most of it happens within the family. Children need to know that they have a safe haven in school. The mindset that parents should have all control over their own children has allowed some very demented people from all walks of life and socio-economic levels to destroy their children. Personally, I'm for anything that tips the scales in favor of the child.

      AS for any discussion of same sex relationships -- they're here. Why exclude the children who are being raised by two mommies or two daddies. Their homes may be just as loving as your. I remember when my son first start school back in the mid-90s, the big controversial book was Heather has Two Moms. This was in Virginia, not exactly a wild-eyed liberal state. The book appeared on the state's approved list. People protested. There was a hearing. The book stayed on the list. As far as I know, lesbians have not taken over Virginia. But maybe a few kids got to start school feeling that they were an accepted part of society. Why would you want to make those children feel bad about their home life?

  • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 09/12/2008 11:15:19 PM

    I don't think John McCain knows the difference betweena lie and the truth any longer. He's lost his ethics, his integrity and any believablity he may have had. He lies about Palin's position on that bridge, when her support is documented all over the place. He lies about her position on earmarks when she has requested for Alaska and gotten the highest dollar values of earmarks per person -- more than 10 times all the earmarks received by Illinois (Obama's included). He lies about lobbiests on his own staff. He lies about the tenor of his campaign. He lies about his positions on education, veterans affairs, health care, job creation and just about everything else -- except Iraq (and then he's just plain wrong). And then he misrepresents Obama's positions on taxes, energy policy, and his commitment to equal rights. ENOUGH already. Wussies in the media need to grow a pair and call McCain on his misstatments, mistakes and outright LIES.

  • Posted By: stormhit @ 09/12/2008 10:12:00 PM

    gemini14, the first link you provided certainly does mention age appropriate. Sec. 27-9.1 § c(2): "All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate." Or Sec. 27-9.2 § b(2) "All course material and instruction in classes that teach sex education and discuss behavior shall be age and developmentally appropriate."

    Those subsections make it clear that they pertain to the rest of the bill. The amendment just makes this point in the opening language. You shouldn't be so quick to label things incompetence, I think.

  • Posted By: trazer @ 09/12/2008 9:50:05 PM

    Obama went to Harvard - but if you look at the Harvard President - he mocked women faculty and had to be put on corrective action. Obama seemed to have learned that part well - given his mocking and not selecting Hillary Clinton.
    I can't understand why this inexperienced candidate main job has been running for office. Many college graduates go into public service - I know many Peace Corp Volunteers. They valued their time there and did a lot, but don't feel ready to run to be president only on that experience. Obama should realize he is nothing special except he loves Howard Dean.

  • Posted By: faminchin @ 09/12/2008 8:20:33 AM

    This whole election makes me sick to my stomach! What concerns me even more is reading all the posts of the people here with their heads stuck up either an elephant or donkeys butt! I see the major threat we face in this country as those people iggnorant enough to believe either one of these canidates is better than the other, when the reality of the situation is that once again we are forced to choose the lessor of two evils.

    Wake up America! There is no difference between these two party's. All of our politicians live the lifestyle of the Rich and Famous, flying around the world in private jets eating steak and lobster tail.......on our tax dollar! While the average working class American is left eating beans. Neither of these two parties give a rats behind about you or me. Both are willing to do what ever it takes for power. Both have as an objective to keep our country split into donkeys and elephants. Both continue to rob us blind with taxes and pat each other on the back, laughing, all the way to the bank.

    So pull your head out of that donkey and elephant butt, clean the dung out of your ears and listen to what I am telling you. It is the most honest and truthful thing you will hear this entire election!

  • Posted By: glimps @ 09/12/2008 2:28:34 AM

    14 characteristics that are nation is becomming Fasicist (by Dr. Lawrence Britt political scientist)
    1. Powerful and Continuing nationalism
    2. Disdain for the recognition of human rights
    3.Identification of enemies/scapegoates as a unifying Cause
    4.Supremacy of the Military
    5. Rampant Sexism
    6. Controlled Mass Media
    7. Obessission with National Security
    8. Religion and government are interwined
    9. Corporate power is procted
    10. Labor power is Suppressed
    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and Arts
    12.Obession with Crime and Punishment
    13. Ramant Cronyism and Corruption
    14. Fraudulent Elections

    this was wrote by Dr. Britt, political scientist, about "Fascism" ( 2003 pg.20) incase some bloggers want to look it up...

    McCain /Palin is Danger...... no party is perfect but this is the wrong ticket.

  • Posted By: trazer @ 09/12/2008 1:14:00 AM

    I think you need to read the bill. The bill makes it so that teachers need to give 5 year olds the clinical definition of sex including describing the sexual organs. I'm sorry - but children age 5 - this is something that the parents shoudl address with their children. What a waste of government $. Obama keeps on promoting BIG BROTHER and the only thing that will work is TAX Us to death and promote huge government. Shame on Obama and confuisng 5 year olds.

  • Posted By: Read It for Yourself @ 09/11/2008 11:11:47 PM

    the text of the bill is here - i'd think that spending 5 minutes to read through it would suggest that the McCain ad is seemingly well founded? http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=99&GAID=3&LegID=734&SpecSess=&Session

  • Posted By: bladesteel @ 09/11/2008 6:44:10 PM

    It's all designed to demoralize and desensitize our children and take away their innocense. Parents should be aware if a five year old is sexually active and frankly it's disturbing that this degenerate, Obama, would even think of such a thing. Children of that age cannot understand the complexities of sexual activity whether physical or emotional, and they most certainly do not naturally think of sex on their own. So this would put confusing ideas in their heads, and now something they might never have considered sounds like something they might want to try out. And these officials always push the "S.T.D" angle. If a child is raped or it's congenital that's one thing but we're not teaching about cancer and such. There is a religious factor as well. Some parents would like to share sexual information with their children in their own way, maybe including (oh no, the g word!) what Gods word has to offer on the subject. But once again, when they are old enough to comprehend. Some parents aren't big advocates of the modern "have sex with whoever you like, just wear a condom" way of thinking. It's sad that I have a nine year old niece who asked my wife if the reason she doesn't wear loads of make up is because she's not looking for a "new man" Only twenty years ago "sluts" were an oddity and looked down on as outcast or undesirable. Now its a new fashion trend. Sorry for rambling on and on but watching the world fall to pieces seems to cause me the need to "vent" Thanks for listening

  • Posted By: jolio1212 @ 09/11/2008 5:18:10 PM

    Eight previous years, people have two chances to vote for pres. and now they blame for the present
    failure. The result is not coming from this admin. but from people 's intelligient choosing. Now is the time
    American will show how intelligient they are.

  • Posted By: revhank @ 09/11/2008 4:03:00 PM

    independentthinker2: It's apparent you've read the bill. It would be instructive to the rest of us if you could provide a link or other information on finding the text.

    • Posted By: independentthinker2 @ 09/11/2008 4:10:32 PM

      http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09300SB0099lv&SessionID=3&GA=93&DocTypeID=SB&DocNum=0099&print=true

      I linked to it from the factcheck.org article.

  • Posted By: independentthinker2 @ 09/11/2008 3:46:31 PM

    The bias of our media continues to amaze me. This bill is clearly about comprehensive sex education. Yet, "fact" check is not objectively looking at this & I just heard Contessa on MSNBC make a declarative statement to a Republican strategist that the bill was not about sex education to kindergarteners, but rather about sexual predator prevention. I challenge her or anyone to show us the actual language in the bill that states this "limit" to what will be taught to kindergarteners & elementary students. It is not there. Oh is it the "unwanted" or "nonconsensual" sexual advances they are going to be taught about? I had no idea a 5 year old could consent or want sexual advances!!! This bill provides a free pass for the school district to teach about sexual activity to BABIES. My husband & I will teach our children about sex when & how WE see fit. What happened to personal responsibility in this country? We are handing over our responsiblities to the government & undercutting the very character that made this country great. Why can't we recognize that? This only reminds me why we choose to homeschool.

  • Posted By: gqlawyer1970 @ 09/11/2008 2:55:47 PM

    Believe what you want, but the truth is that the bill required those in kindergarten to learn about prevention of STDs. See for yourself. Here is an excerpt, from the very first section of the bill: "Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV."
    I understand teaching of "bad touching" to young children, but can you explain to me exactly why a 5 year old child needs to learn about the prevention of STDs? Sorry, that is just wrong. I don't care whether it is "age appropriate" or not, and I don't care whether there is an opt out provision. It is ridiculous to even consider mentioning STDs to 5 year old children. That goes way beyond any legitimate concerns of government.

  • Posted By: gqlawyer1970 @ 09/11/2008 2:55:36 PM

    Believe what you want, but the truth is that the bill required those in kindergarten to learn about prevention of STDs. See for yourself. Here is an excerpt, from the very first section of the bill: "Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV."
    I understand teaching of "bad touching" to young children, but can you explain to me exactly why a 5 year old child needs to learn about the prevention of STDs? Sorry, that is just wrong. I don't care whether it is "age appropriate" or not, and I don't care whether there is an opt out provision. It is ridiculous to even consider mentioning STDs to 5 year old children. That goes way beyond any legitimate concerns of government.

  • Posted By: AZJUDY @ 09/11/2008 1:57:15 PM

    TO SUMMER 4077 THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I DON'T LIKE JOHN MCCAIN . THANK YOU, MOST PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF AZ DON'T KNOW HOW HE CHEATED ON HIS WIFE F, AND THIS IS AFTER SSHE WAITED FOR HIM ALL THOSE YEARS. HE DUMPED HIS FAMILY AND MARRIED CINDY 4 WEEKS LATER , THEY HAD BEEN DATING
    THEN HE WAS ALSO ONE OF THE KEATING 5 ONE OF CHARLIE KEATINGS BOYS BECAUSE OF JOHN MCCAIN THIS COST OUR GOVERNMENT ALMOST 200 BILLION ,AND A LOT OF LITTLE INVESTORS LOST THEIR LIFE SAVINGS , MCCAIN TOOK PLENTY OF FAVORS FROM KEATING . AND WOW IF HE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT EARMARKS , SOMEONE SHOULD REMIND HIM OF THIS HE IS NOT A NICE GUY
    HIS WIFE ALSO IN THE MID 90S WAS STEALING DRUGS FROM HER CHAIRITY SHE ALSO WAS FORGING PERSCRIPTIONS , IF IT WASN'T FOR THE MILLIONAIRE PARENTS ,AND SENATOR HUSBAND , SHE WOULD STILL BE IN PRISON

    • Posted By: summer4077 @ 09/11/2008 2:36:44 PM

      Yeah but we're not supposed to talk about private, family matters. Unless it's to accuse Obama of not taking care of his half brother in Africa (when McCain wouldn't even take care of Cindy after a stroke!), or Michelle not being proud of the country (which the Repubs didn't have the nerve to actually release the WHOLE sentence they took it from!).

  • Posted By: Debunked! @ 09/11/2008 8:45:57 AM

    The reality is that the McCain camp AND the Obama camp are playing the same game-------the difference is that THUS FAR the McCain camp is playing it BETTER than Obama's!!!

    McCain allowed Obama to sling mud for a long time. Obama AND the Dems took many shots at McCain during the primaries, McCain let MANY things slide. Even after the primaries, Obama was still taking many shots! However, once McCain began taking shots that were BETTER RECEIVED than Obama shots, that's when he and his supporters want to complain and all of a sudden turn the conversation into issues. Obama is CURRENTLY taking shots YET at the same time saying the focus should be on the issues! This is really HILARIOUS!

    Obama is off his game with McCain throwing " niblets" at him. The ads thus far have been light weight. If Obama can't take this------------there is no way that he will be able to take it when the heavy duty shots come at him.

    I've said it once and I will say it again--THE DEMS SELECTED THE WRONG PERSON!!!!!

    • Posted By: summer4077 @ 09/11/2008 1:34:19 PM

      The difference is that Obama's shots were based in truth. McCain's shots are misleading or blatantly false.

      • Posted By: Debunked! @ 09/11/2008 2:32:20 PM

        Apparently, you have refused to read the many factchecks about Obama's misleading statements and blatant lies about McCain!

  • Posted By: captbilly @ 09/11/2008 2:28:48 PM

    Of course McCain will try and compare this with something that Obama has said that was misleading and say that he's just doing what Obama is doing. The bottom line is that there is certainly no straight talk comming out of McCain anymore. That McCain seems to have died sometime around 2000, when Bush/Rove did the same thing to him that he is now doing to Obama. I guess that's McCain's idea of political experience.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse