Chicago School Board Approves Sex Education Program For Kindergarten Children, page 1

Well, I believe this makes no sense whatsoever. The Govt. is now telling us at what age we should or should not talk to our children about sex.

As a parent, if you decided that you wanted to broach the topic at a certain age...7,8,9,10 yrs old or even 11 or 12, you are not going to have that moment or right because the Govt. is going to do it for you at 5 yrs old.

Many will say that's ok because it should be taught at a young age. Of course it should. But why is it that the parents don't get to decide what that age should be? And let's face it, not all kids mature at the same time either. So while one may be ready (I highly doubt it at 5 years old) many will not be ready.

So does this force the parents to take on the task first? Even when they have decided that it isn't time for their child? I tried to look for something saying that it wouldn't be mandatory but can't find anything of the sort...yet.

Remember that currently the beginning of Sex Ed classes are in Grade 5 (For that area) and now they just shave 5 yrs off the age.

So if you believe that you should be the one to teach your child Sex Ed, better start doing it at 4 yrs old...or the Govt. is going to do it for you.

Why does Nanny State keep ringing in my ears?

Chicago School Board approves sex education program for kindergarten

CHICAGO - Kindergarteners in Chicago public schools will soon be given sex education. The Chicago Board of Education approved the program, which includes discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity. According to CNN, kindergarten and first grade students would learn about anatomy, healthy relationships and personal safety. - See more at: www.10news.com...

Peace

reply to post by jude11

---

wow that's an awfully thin article
however, if the premise is correct ...

According to CNN, kindergarten and first grade students would learn about anatomy, healthy relationships and personal safety

where's the problem ?

most kids are already inquiring about those things and many who are gender confused, are so at that age so why not ?

anatomy should already be well known by kindergarten.
healthy relationships should be a no-brainer at any age.
and personal safety ?? like what - don't use someone else's comb/brush ?
that's a good lesson to learn.

the article is too vague to comment further as i can see this easily exceeding the boundaries presented.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by jude11

---

wow that's an awfully thin article
however, if the premise is correct ...

According to CNN, kindergarten and first grade students would learn about anatomy, healthy relationships and personal safety

where's the problem ?

most kids are already inquiring about those things and many who are gender confused, are so at that age so why not ?

anatomy should already be well known by kindergarten.
healthy relationships should be a no-brainer at any age.
and personal safety ?? like what - don't use someone else's comb/brush ?
that's a good lesson to learn.

the article is too vague to comment further as i can see this easily exceeding the boundaries presented.

Correct, the article is very brief and I wonder why it is so?

It's a very important topic and the only thing that stands out is "Sex Education"

I believe that sums it up but to be fair I'm still trying to find any info on the actual curriculum. Nada...

Peace

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by jude11

---

wow that's an awfully thin article
however, if the premise is correct ...

According to CNN, kindergarten and first grade students would learn about anatomy, healthy relationships and personal safety

where's the problem ?

most kids are already inquiring about those things and many who are gender confused, are so at that age so why not ?

anatomy should already be well known by kindergarten.
healthy relationships should be a no-brainer at any age.
and personal safety ?? like what - don't use someone else's comb/brush ?
that's a good lesson to learn.

the article is too vague to comment further as i can see this easily exceeding the boundaries presented.

Personal safety IMO would cover safe sex, condoms, birth control, STD's etc.

Anatomy will cover actual diagrams of the male and female bodies.

But again, the point I was trying to stress is that what makes the Govt. believe that they have the right to dictate at what age this topic should be brought forward? And if I want to be the one to do it, I now have to it at an earlier age?

My kid...My rules.

Bye-Bye Stork.

Peace

reply to post by jude11

---

Considering that predators often use a child's ignorance about what is good touch and what is bad touch to molest them, and they use a child's ignorance about what is happening to them, and whether it is right or not, against them, I think this will equip children to protect themselves.

Knowledge will give them more self assurance and probably inspire children to understand and speak up if someone is taking advantage of them in a sexual way. Until a certain age, children do not know the difference between sexual touch and appropriate touch or affection. They might seem similar to them. Predator adults and older children often take advantage this ignorance. In too many instances people are against this "education" because they are afraid their child will speak up and say this is happening at home.

I doubt they are showing kids this young how to have sex and prevent pregnancy or even how babies are made. They are talking about age appropriate information like good touch and bad touch. If the curriculum for these lessons is age appropriate, how can knowledge harm? Deny ignorance.

reply to post by jude11

---

It's a very important topic and the only thing that stands out is "Sex Education"

agreed and it certainly doesn't sound like it by the description either.

what ever happened to "health" class ??
we learned those things but not in kindergarten and not in a class deemed Sex Education.

man, if my mother had seen such on a class schedule
well, let's just say her response would have been news worthy

I believe that sums it up but to be fair I'm still trying to find any info on the actual curriculum.

can't say i'm not curious.
nothing about public education is 'benign', regardless how it's presented.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by jude11

---

It's a very important topic and the only thing that stands out is "Sex Education"

agreed and it certainly doesn't sound like it by the description either.

what ever happened to "health" class ??
we learned those things but not in kindergarten and not in a class deemed Sex Education.

man, if my mother had seen such on a class schedule
well, let's just say her response would have been news worthy

I believe that sums it up but to be fair I'm still trying to find any info on the actual curriculum.

can't say i'm not curious.
nothing about public education is 'benign', regardless how it's presented.

I remember "Health" class!

Brush your teeth, comb your hair, wash your hands...Nothing about looking for sores on your fuzzy parts...

Ah, the good 'ol days.

Peace

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by jude11

---

Considering that predators often use a child's ignorance about what is good touch and what is bad touch to molest them and they use a child's ignorance about what is happening to them and whether it is right or not against them, I think this will equip children to protect themselves.

I doubt they are showing how to have sex and prevent pregnancy or even how babies are made. They are talking about age appropriate information like good touch and bad touch. If the curriculum for these lessons is age appropriate, how can knowledge harm? Deny ignorance.

edit on 1-3-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)

Yup, it's always "Won't someone please think of the children!" to get anything passed these days.

And to be honest once again, you don't know the curriculum and neither do I. It's the article that states "Sex Education"

Hard to deny ignorance when they don't tell us what is happening. But by then, it's too late if no one questions it now isn't it?

Question before they put anything into play...that's how to deny ignorance.

Peace

reply to post by jude11

---

for 5yr olds ?? i sure hope not.
sorry, but i just cannot make that leap without confirmation.

why would any 5-6yr old need to know about safe sex, condoms, bc or stds ??

i could see proper vs improper touching.
don't touch 'blood'/body fluids, others' injuries, even CPR ... but what more beyond that is necessary for a 5yr old ?

anatomy should be common knowledge by then.
if it isn't then it should be.

i cannot offer an opinion on such questions as i don't know the curriculum and from what you say here, neither do you.

as for 'learning', why would you want to hold back your own children until YOU are ready ?? that seems counterintuitive.

haven't they 'taught' you things already ?
if so, then why should such a give and take experience change to suit your desires ??

i think you are reading far too much into it at this point but i do see a clear path for abuse that is equally concerning.

however, without details regarding curriculum, my question for you would be (if this school system applies to you) did you vote on the curriculum or object if given the opportunity ??
and, if you didn't voice your opinion then, why now ?

reply to post by jude11

---

Nothing about looking for sores on your fuzzy parts

wait just a minute ... which 5yr olds had fuzzy parts

reply to post by Honor93

---

as for 'learning', why would you want to hold back your own children until YOU are ready ?? that seems counterintuitive.

Not until the parent is ready but rather when the parent KNOWS the child is ready. Who knows the child more than their parents?

And no, it's not my area but I have to question how far this will spread once it's in play? Always a testing ground and then it becomes the accepted norm.

Peace

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by jude11

---

Nothing about looking for sores on your fuzzy parts

wait just a minute ... which 5yr olds had fuzzy parts

And there's my point...

Peace

reply to post by jude11

---

I can tell you from working with survivors groups that this is why they keep pushing these classes and educations on children at young ages. To try and prevent children from being victims. I used to live in a world where it seemed far from the truth to me also, but it is reality. You might not want to acknowledge it. Nobody does but there is a need. You can always say send my child to the library when the classes are held. I think generally they should have these courses but the parents should be able to opt out. I like what another poster mentioned that years ago we called these classes Health classes.

A Really Sad Picture That I Saw Today, Left Me Speechless
  Posted 12 days ago with 148 member flags

Fact Check: First Lady\'s False Fairy Tale of Struggle
  Posted 6 days ago with 81 member flags

Mitt Romney Accidentally Confronts A Gay Veteran; Awesomeness Ensues
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags

Coal miners say they were forced to attend Romney event and donate
  Posted 14 days ago with 71 member flags

Stephen King\'s Message
  Posted 10 days ago with 71 member flags

The United States has collapsed economically, socially, politically, legally, constitutionally, and
  Posted 15 days ago with 44 member flags

A Perfect Example Of How America Is Turning Into A Police State? Look At Tampa Bay
  Posted 18 days ago with 41 member flags

Paul Ryan Exposes Elite Agenda, "Shut Up" Says Banker
  Posted 10 days ago with 40 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: