As part of my research. I read a National Education Association (NEA) manual published in 1970 advising state and local teachers unions on how to confront extremists opposed to sex education in the public schools. The manual referred to a documentary supported by the Society called ‘The Innocents Defiled’ which put sex education instructors in an unflattering light saying that they were spreading “moral depravity” and that they were “bent on the corruption of America’s youth with the ultimate aim of overthrowing the United States.” The John Birch Society also formed a front group called the Movement to Restore Decency (MOTOREDE) to attract non-members to their cause. The NEA manual mentioned an irony: the Society emulated the Communist party their sworn enemy by forming a front to hide their true motives.  This movement did succeed in attracting its own base: according to author and sociologist Janice Irvine. 80 to 90 percent of MOTOREDE members were not John Birchers. MOTOREDE was not the only organization of its kind; others were parents’ organizations with names such as Sanity of Sex (S. O. S.) and Parents against Universal Sex Education (PAUSE). While opinion polls of the time showed overwhelming (71 percent) support for sex education and sex education was endorsed by not only the NEA but also the National Council of Churches the American Medical Association and the U. S. Catholic Conference vocal conservative opposition led legislators to reconsider sex education or gave their political kin ammunition to fight it. Organizations opposed to sex education in public schools existed in 35 states in 1969. One politician for example the late California State Senator John Schmitz introduced the Sex Education Act of 1969 in the Golden State. While innocently named this legislation required an ‘opt-in’ meaning that any sex education program required 100 percent parental approval before it could be taught in a public school. Schmitz’ legislation also called for dismissal and revocation of teaching credentials for any instructor who taught an unapproved class. Three years later elected as a Congressman from Orange County. Schmitz became the presidential candidate of the American Independent Party attracting over a million votes. Aside from linkages to Communism and liberal ideology opposing arguments against sex education were similar to today: classes are too explicit or specific; they are taught too early; or abstinence should be stressed over contraception. However during the 60’s the organized opposition was also linked to causes that had become or were about to become unpopular. Parents could be opposed to sex education but also opposed to as examples anti-Semitism anti-Catholicism or the Vietnam War. As a result single-issue groups strictly opposed to sex education were more effective than broad coalitions. Today’s opposition to sex education is more sophisticated; conservative Republicans have done a much better job of being more inclusive and grass roots; they are embarrassed when they are seen on the side of any organized group that preaches segregation or discrimination or shown as hypocrites when they take moral actions contrary to their political views. Sex education advocates are also more sophisticated; they are better focused on the health and medical reasons for comprehensive sex education and less disposed to label their opposition as fanatics. There were quick dismissals along this tone during the 60’s; they kept their opposition alive—and possibly legitimized them with voters. A major problem was that sex educators had looked at their cause as a liberal one; that was a mistake in appealing states with sizable conservative voting blocs and activist conservative legislators. Neither conservatives nor liberals want their opponent’s views legislated on them even when they are in the minority. Today people of all views are more accepting towards sex education. We do see legislatures with ‘abstinence-only’ and ‘abstinence until marriage’ positions as well as ‘opt-in’ policies—but sex education is not going away. Advocates need to do a better job of convincing voters that comprehensive sex education is not a liberal issue but a health and medical one as well as an opportunity to deter predatory acts and child abuse. Today we see a presidency that prefers to fund ‘abstinence until marriage’ programs although some governors courageously refused to pursue the money this time around as the requirements became too extreme—to educate ‘abstinence until marriage’ through the age of 29. However the next presidency will promise a more moderate position—or leave the funding issues to the states.   

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

sex education bloggers, take a bit of your day to say Hi to Carli Banks. She has a nice new teaser video for you.
~Ray



comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

sex education visitors may need more sites to be happy.
Here are more adult websites to visit that are free for you...
exclusive video
web cams
strip blog
gay blog
tranny blog
nude pictures
shemale blog

feel free to browse around and maybe you will find something that you like?

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

A new chew over suggests that the best way to prevent abortions is to provide access to reliable contraception and family planning. So why do conservatives so oppose these issues? If you think abstinence education has any affect reducing pregnancies or risky sexual behavior among teens. You be to re investigate the statistics. If you analyse the educational approaches to sex in Canada to that of its neighbor your more then likely to find stark differences. Canada being very open very educational the US being very discreet abstinence based education. If you examine the numbers you will also sight stark differences whether that is because Canadian teens are exceed educated about safe sex birth control techniques definitely warrants some interest. A short google searchlent me these statistics:ages 15-19 the pregnancy rate per 100in canada was 33in the US it was 68 --> DIGG. DIGG IT. DUGG. DIGG THIS. Digg graphics logos designs page headers add icons scripts and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Chennai: Sex education in schools is turning out to be an tricky proposition in the southern states where different sections have taken cudgels against the Centre’s idea. While it was the government in Karnataka and teachers in Kerala who opposed the proposal in Tamil Nadu one of the three states that consented to sex-ed a parents’ body has vowed to defeat the “mindless move”. Parents’ Federation (PF) on Tuesday submitted a petition signed by about 1,000 parents to the parliamentary committee on petitions at a public hearing in Chennai. Their concern: Sex-ed will corrupt the child’s object and is against Tamil culture. Committee chairman M Venkaiah Naidu said the proposal has been opposed so far by 11 states and accepted by only three. “The proposal to give sex education from Class III is ridiculous. Do the teachers experience the implications of telling a seven-year-old about his/her private parts? This is going to erode our traditional values and morality and we parents cannot just accept that,” says PF coordinator K Ganesan. “Sex-ed is against Tamil culture which has its own ways involving parents to subtly educate adolescents. We cannot trust teachers on this,” says V Subramanyam another office bearer and a father of two girls aged 16 and 12 years. Source : DNAIndia

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

U. S teenagers undergo higher pregnancy rates birthrates and abortion rates than adolescents in other developed countries. The primary reason is that those nations don't accept political extremists to dictate reproductive health policy. In countries with the lowest abortion rates women's health and well being do not act a back lay to politics. The consequences of right-wing reproductive health policies are devastating not only to women but also to children and families. If you evaluate every country in the world starting with whether each provides full find to family planning emergency contraceptives pays for abortions and provides comprehensive sex education and analyse those to rates for countries where these policies are opposed you ordain see that those who provide beat access to EC abortion family planning and sex education undergo the LOWEST abortion rates lowest STD rates lowest infant mortality rates lowest teen pregnancy rates lowest maternal death rates as come up as the beat indicators for EVERY measurement of women's health. On the other side of the spectrum where abortion and family planning are illegal the beat indicators for women's health are found including the highest (and most dangerous) abortion rates in the world. alter now today as you are reading this. ½ the hospital beds in every large city hospital in Central and South America are taken by women suffering from illegal abortion attempts. And all these countries have the highest abortion rates in the world. We know how to immediately change magnitude the abortion and teenage pregnancy rates in the U. S and Illinois. If you have any doubts get on an airplane and cater with the leaders in France. Spain or Italy and ask for some pointers. Or deliver yourself the time and fully fund family planning pay for ALL emergency contraceptives fund all abortions and comprehensive sex education -- all dramatically cheaper than the financial and social consequences of not doing so. The big challenge here is why do those who claim to be "pro-life" and are so adamantly against abortion provide the greatest opposition to those very policies that would bring down the abortion evaluate? Because they are not really "pro-life." They have a different agenda. What they are really against is you dear reader using birth hold back and very importantly against your engaging in sexual expression within your marriage to enhance intimacy. They believe you should never undergo sex with your wife or preserve object for the intend of procreation. That is the white elephant (or donkey if you are an anti-choice Democrat) sitting under the Capitol dome. The use of contraception reduces the probability of having an abortion by 85%. In states which allowed emergency contraceptives without a prescription prior to the FDA's move earlier this year the abortion rate dropped by over 1/3. Some 70% or 42 million American women today of reproductive age are sexually active and do not be to become pregnant. Only 5% of women aged 15-44 in the U. S use no contraception during sex and they account for 50% of the nation's abortions. In lighten of this overwhelming evidence that unfettered find to contraception causes the abortion rate to plunge it is stunning that NOT A SINGLE anti-abortion group in the United States supports the use of birth hold back. The best a few do is say nothing about bring forth hold back but many so-called pro-life organizations lobby vigorously against it. The nation's largest anti-abortion assort. American Life unify says "A. L. L denies the moral acceptability of artificial birth hold back." These are the very groups that say abortion shouldn't be used as a form of bring forth control yet they argue every write of bring forth control that would prevent unintended pregnancy. Now the anti-abortion crowd has decided to "medicalize" their change views about bring forth control with false information that has been widely discredited in the medical community. They have taken to calling the most common forms of contraceptives "abortifacients," despite the pesky little dilate that in request for an abortion to take place conception needs to become. Barrier methods and oral contraceptives work by preventing conception. American Life League says "arouse the facts." They are not alone. All over right-wing websites and from the pulpits throughout the nation birth hold back is now portrayed as abortion and of course kill and well you know the be! In the make-sure-they-are-born-but-don't-feed-them-department the 113 members of Congress who had the lowest Children's Defense Fund ratings were all "pro-life" on abortion. Parenthood is sacred and perhaps the greatest responsibility which is why forcing someone to be a parent against her will and exceed judgment should be the first definition of insanity in the dictionary. The second definition should be opposing comprehensive sex education because it will provoke young people to have sex. Does installing smoke detectors encourage teens to burn the house down? Does insisting they feature seatbelts back up them to control 100 mph up the driveway? Numerous studies of abstinence only education sight a higher pregnancy rate among teens whose only sex education was abstinence only. The policies promoted by the pro-choice movement dramatically reduce the abortion evaluate here in Illinois across the U. S and around the world. The policies promoted by those who label themselves "pro-life" or anti-abortion drive up the abortion evaluate everywhere. The results are devastating to the women children and families of our great state. Those who are against abortion for whatever reason shouldn't have one which is why Planned Parenthood has The Cradle adoption agency at its Chicago medical facility. Personal PAC helps elect candidates who accept giving women and families all their choices is good public policy. In our great democracy personally held religious views should be cherished by all and kept out of our policy making. If you don't accept re-read the first paragraph and make that cut reservation. Terry thanks for the plain language and facts. Who is responsible for trying to move approve the measure on reproductive rights? We all experience the answer but some do not experience that the conservative right does not hold back all religious viewpoints on choice. Many denominations also give abortion rights for women. The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice ()is the organization that addresses this issue publicly. The effort of the religious alter to seize all religious points of believe on choice as being anti would do well to view the RCRC website. Within it is the following statement: "To be pro-choice is to respect all points of believe and respect individual conscience. To be pro-choice is to believe women and families to alter their own decisions. And it means speaking openly in our churches synagogues temples and mosques about sexuality knowing we undergo the like and support of our faith communities whatever our circumstances." You cannot discuss access to bring forth control abortion rights without discussing equality for women. The pill allowed women the freedom to be in the workforce to stay in the workforce at their choice. Controlling one's reproductive life allowed you to be competitive and on the road to being equal to your male counterparts. Women comfort are not paid equally and we all know that the ERA is unpassed. However ignorance and loud talking from the alter cannot kill the freedom that women undergo found and ordain contend for at all costs. Many young women.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!

Over the pass the on the Department of Health's decision to not desire federal abstinence funding monies for a state program supported by Planned Parenthood. (That fact alone should increase red flags as to it's bona fides as a true abstinence until marriage program.)The bind by Josephine Marcotty served as an contend piece on abstinence until marriage curricula and message and again shows the liberal media prejudice against the common sense message. "Wait until you're marriage to undergo sex."First. Marcotty uses the language of the left when she describes the abstinence until marriage approach as "abstinence-only" sex education. There's much more to true abstinence education than only abstaining. It's waiting to share the most intimate aspects of oneself with one person not multi-partners or at one night stands. Marcotty writes. "At air is the challenge of whether adolescents and teenagers should be taught the view embraced by social conservatives -- that abstinence is the only sure way to forbid pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases." What's controversial about that? It's true on its approach. Abstinence is the only sure way to forbid pregnancy and STDs. She goes on to say "Several recent studies undergo raised the decibel level in the national consider because they open that abstinence-only programs are ineffective in reducing sexual activity among teenagers and adolescents." She doesn't say which studies those are or the controversial nature of those evaluations. There is plenty of. Next she says. "In fact critics of abstinence only education say it's prevalence might be one cerebrate why the long decline in sexual activity among teenagers has stalled since 2001 and why American teens act to have the highest rates of pregnancy and abortion in the industrialized."Here she simply regurgitates the charges of contraceptive proponents without any response to the accuracy of these accusations. I would argue the claim opposite is true. The reigning orthodoxy in the sex education industry is condoms condoms and more condoms. Since the onslaught of the sex revolution in the 60s we've seen an explosion of STDs from a few to a bring together of dozen. I suppose she and "critics of abstinence only education" would say that abstinence caused that. In schools kids are inundated with condom messages; the main come isn't abstinence until marriage but again condoms condoms and more condoms. Next she quotes from Michael Resnick a UM professor who is a big proponent of condom education. He's hopeful we're moving away from the abstinence until marriage approach. "Are we seeing a turnaround in these positive trends because we are seeing the force of ineffective educational strategies on kids?"What's interesting about Dr. Resnick is a chew over he helped write was used as the basis for a monograph on sex education produced by the University of Minnesota in the late 1990s entitled. "Reducing the Risk: Connections That alter a Difference in the Lives of Youth." (The inform Resnick helped create verbally "Protecting adolescents from injure: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health" published in 1997 in JAMA. Journal of the American Medical Association." A longitudinal chew over on Adolescent Health published in JAMA in 1997.)The monograph open that family characteristics that defend teens from early sexual intercourse and pregnancy were "perceived parent disapproval of adolescent sex" and "perceived parent disapproval of adolescent contraception." In other words. Resnick is now promoting activities which directly undermines factors which discourage early sexual intercourse and pregnancy among adolescents. My comments on the affect buried in the lay of the bind constituted three paragraphs of the 27 paragraph bind. Marcotty follows my comments by quoting from Bill Smith a vice president for SIECUS the principal national promoter of comprehensive sex education standards which promote not only contraceptives but also acceptance of homosexuality and oral and anal sodomy. He was aghast at my suggestion that STDs and emotional damage can happen to folks in their 20s not just teenagers. Then she concludes with quotes from Brigid Riley the head of MOAPPP the primary promoter of comprehensive sex ed in the state and Resnick who said parents be to hear abstinence but also contraceptives. Interestingly enough a was done on parents views of the content of comprehensive sex education programs. If found that when parents discovered what's actually in comp sex ed curricula e g promotion of condom use among other things give drops dramatically. Comprehensive sex ed advocates act in a bait and change by reversal approach. They say. "Oh we'll teach abstinence but we'll also information on contraceptives as well." found the comp sex ed curricula actually spent less than 5% of their time on abstinence and zero on marriage. They spent over 600% more time on condom use than abstinence. The bottom lie in this contend over sex ed abstinence and condoms is a worldview contend. On the one align are those who believe sex as a recreational sport and have a pretty much anything goes attitude towards sex -- let's just try and mitigate the consequences through condoms and abortion. On the other side are those who maintain a moral vision of sexual expression within the context of a marriage relationship. History common comprehend and morality inform to the second come as best for the individual and society.

Britney Spears Makes a 4 Hour Sex Tape?! Download and enjoy this hot video right now!