California’s New and Improved Sex-Ed for your Kids

“The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink” – George Orwell, 1984

In that same spirit of Orwellian doublethink comes now the California Legislature’s “Healthy Youth Act” and its implementing “Positive Prevention Plus” sex-ed curriculum to a school near you.  As if encouraging early and varied sexual experimentation by children promotes “healthy youth.”  As if abstinence until marriage is “negative.”

Proponents of such programs regard abstinence as unrealistic.  They argue that programs with volumes on “how-to-fornicate-more-safely” with a passing nod to abstinence is “comprehensive.”  Of course the problem with “comprehensive” sex education is that it is not comprehensive, in that it excludes the spiritual and moral aspects of human sexuality.

Not satisfied with replacing abstinence based teaching with “comprehensive” sex-ed, the new and improved version goes further requiring (1) affirmative teaching concerning homosexuality and transgenderism, (2) non-promotion of any religious doctrine or associated moral teaching, (3) information on how to get an abortion, and on and on.
The law and curriculum are full of nice sounding phrases like “age appropriate,” and “medically accurate,” but leaves open the question “according to whom?”  A clue is found in a list of the law’s supporters which include the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.

Although this is mandated by the one party state in Sacramento, local districts still have the ability to resist the same way cities and counties are resisting California’s Sanctuary State law SB 54.  Local residents can pressure their school boards to do so.  Examples of resistance include: (1) public statements of disagreement, (2) lawsuits, (3) minimal compliance, (4) exposing the most objectionable material to the public, (5) maximizing notice and opportunity for parents to opt-out, and many other steps.  Call your local school boards and demand public comment opportunities.

Questions for your school/school board
The program content seems to contradict our family’s faith and morals.  Do you support that?  If not, what have you done, or what will you do to oppose this?

The law requires this indoctrination to be given “at least once.”  How often do you intend to give it?

The law requires parental notification with an option to opt-out, but only in writing.  How do you notify parents and how do you assist them in doing so?

What measures are you taking to ensure students whose parents opt-out are not singled out and embarrassed?

Do you include similar shaming of traditional and religious views and promotion of sex outside marriage in other parts of the overall curriculum?

​When are each of you up for reelection?

Links to further information
ACLU FAQ, ACLU Fact Sheet, Text of Law