If Minors Cannot Consent To Sex... They are Victims

Mary McLellan
March 14, 2012
Reproduced with Permission

What would happen if your neighbor, a middle school health teacher, spent an hour a day with your 13 year old son? You know about this teacher and he seems nice enough and is well respected. He's concerned about youth and especially about the life choices they will make. You know they will talk about sexual choices but you really do not know the content because you will not be there. Your fear that your son will become sexually active overrules any concerns and so you feel good about this relationship.

Later you find out that this teacher did not discourage your son from having sex, but instead assured him that teen sex is normal and expected and that he must know how to protect himself, just in case. He instructs your son in the correct and consistent use of condoms and explains how they will reduce the risks of getting some girl pregnant or catching an STD. He explains other ways of protection for oral and anal sex, which will not cause pregnancy but might increase the risks of getting an STD.

The goal is to increase your son's use of condoms because some protection is better than none. The teacher has broken no laws and has not had any sexual contact with your son.

This is exactly what millions of parents face when they send their minor children to many public schools and community after-school programs. Parental consent, which is rarely required, is useless, unless you take it upon yourself to study the sex education material yourself and ask the teachers what their philosophy is about teen sex. Otherwise, you have no idea what your child will learn and accept into their value system.

Comprehensive Sex Education does not train teachers to instruct your child about the compelling benefits of delaying sexual activity (abstinence) until they are in a life-long mutually faithful monogamous relationship such as marriage. Many Comprehensive Sex Education programs will state that they have an abstinence approach or they are abstinence first or abstinence plus or abstinence-based.

Don't fall for it! It is just a way to get more of your tax dollars.

"Safe Sex"-perts neither believe that abstinence is possible nor even preferred by almost 75% of US teens, 17 and younger. They believe sex is a right, an entitlement, regardless of age or even HIV/STD status.

I am not making this up! Read Dr. Miriam Grossman's article: It's Not Healthy, Happy and Hot! It's Deadly!

If it says it is Comprehensive Sex Education, it is a contraception-based "Safe Sex" approach. Abstinence may be mentioned as a disclaimer, but the goal of Comprehensive Sex Education is to reduce, not avoid, the risks of pregnancy and disease by persuading minors, 'who will have sex anyway', to use condoms and birth control.

All this, with your tax dollars, which will then demand more and more of your tax dollars to cover life-long consequences of sex without boundaries.

Unfortunately, thanks to the National Health Standards and many State Health Standards, marriage between a man and a woman is no longer taught in the schools as a standard for future family formation because it is politically incorrect. Without marriage, there are no boundaries for sex.

And, the definition of abstinence is omitted or at least no longer clear in these Standards. Abstinence until when? Next weekend? Under the new definition, abstinence could mean no intercourse, but oral and anal sex is OK! Abstinence could be equal to intercourse with a condom, because it is 'responsible' sex.

With this new definition of abstinence, the contraception-based programs can claim that they are promoting abstinence, but it isn't the same "abstinence" that you and I think of - they don't define abstinence as not participating in any sexual activity, including vaginal, oral or anal sex. That would be too high of a standard!

Health Education class is not the only venue for "Safe Sex" instruction.

Safer Choices (which does not increase abstinence and was found only effective with Hispanic youth-particularly boys-not girls) trains all faculty and staff how to talk to students about Safe Sex, regardless of their subject area. Therefore, math and art teachers may now be talking to your adolescents about sex.

In these "Safe Sex" programs and so many more, increasing condom use and birth control is the goal, not abstinence. Read about the exciting ways your tax money is being used to increased condom use and Safe Sex: Condom Fashion Shows and Project Condom Upstate promoted by Tell Them SC and The New Morning Foundation.

As parents, leaders and taxpayers you must come to grips with the fact that "Safe Sex" Education leads to more sex, not less sex. And more sex leads to more babies even with birth control which means more, not less, demand for abortions. More sex means more chaotic family formation, poverty, health care and uneducated, unemployed people on welfare.

How about those entitlements? They've only skyrocketed over the past 40-plus years of Family Planning Services and Planned Parenthood Sex Education. Weren't they supposed to decrease the need for welfare and increase quality of life and women's health? It has failed. This is not sustainable.

When are minors really going to be protected from adult exploitation so that they can grow up healthy and pursue their dreams?

It's long overdue.

Top