Planned Parenthood claims to be on a mission to reduce unplanned pregnancy and has sought to target high school teenagers in Roosevelt Field High, of Los Angeles.

I choose to regard Planned Parenthood based on what they advocate for most loudly, abortion.  Not only does this organization (which operates as not-for-profit) target the young people of this country, but it does so by setting up shop in schools, where young people will be interacting with the organization and becoming accustomed to the mentality that abortion is somehow acceptable.  (Bryan Kemper of Stand True gives his reaction here).

The United Nations, in league with International Planned Parenthood (IPPF), has called for “sexual and reproductive health and rights” for children as young as ten years old.  Planned Parenthood has advocated for the sexual freedom of preteens right here in the United States by offering sex education curricula in teaching students as young as – yup, you guessed it – ten years old.

Personally, I am not the biggest proponent of sex education, but having gone to a public school in the state of New York, I see it as a sort of necessary evil. I certainly do see the merits of abstinence-only education, and I wish that such teachings would not have such a negative connotation. I also am a firm believer in parents’ rights (Planned Parenthood, not so much). If a school teaches sex education, there should also be an opt-out measure for parents who would rather their children learn about sex strictly from home or a church. Parents should know what kind of curriculum is being used, Planned Parenthood model-based or no, and if the parents want Planned Parenthood out of their schools, then Planned Parenthood should pack up and leave.

The American Life League has documented the ways that they believe Planned Parenthood is “hooking kids on sex.” While these videos start with a warning of a graphic nature, which children should not be allowed to watch, the reality is that what is warned about is what children may already be seeing in school.

At ten years old, I was not learning about oral sex or anal sex. I don’t even think I fully understood what sex was, and yet I was a perfectly content child. I didn’t feel like I was at risk or being denied any kind of rights. At ten years old I was learning what a period was. When we learned about sex in 7th and 10th grade, it was just like any other unit in health. There was no fuss with condoms being handed out or graphic demonstrations or anything like that. You were told how they worked and the benefits of having protected sex. I am also pleased to say that it was reaffirmed, multiple times, that the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and the spread of STDs was by abstinence. Those who wished to learn about sex did, and those who knew they would remain abstinent were not offended by any graphic descriptions or displays.

As I mentioned, though, students in school, as young as ten years old, are learning about oral and anal sex. At ten years old, I was still in elementary school. I don’t think it is ever appropriate for any school curricula to involve explanations of oral and anal sex, much less to ten year olds. The children of an elementary school in Onalaska, Washington, however, were subjected to just that. And their parents didn’t find out about that until they questioned their seemingly traumatized children. When confronted, though, the superintendent defended the principal, saying she “stuck to the curriculum.”

This curriculum includes F.L.A.S.H., which is the state-approved curriculum for Washington and is highly recommended on Planned Parenthood’s website, as are lesson plans from the SIECUS Sex Ed Library. And recommended for teacher training and staff development is Answer.

I’d like to give such programs and plans some small benefit of the doubt in that I am sure they have some thoughtful goals as to how to really help sexually active young people avoid unintended pregnancy and STDs. Like my high school did, I would try to stress abstinence, but Planned Parenthood will quickly tell you that abstinence education programs do not work.  Such plans also teach about homosexuality, but offer overly-explicit explanations on how to partake in certain activities – something that starts to become less beneficial, is not needed when teaching how to avoid pregnancies, and starts to concern parents. And what is not beneficial at all is how the involvement of Planned Parenthood becomes increasingly obvious, as included in such plans is talking about sex that may be immoral or disapproved of by parents, abortion rights information, and information on gay sex. Videos also mention how “parents obviously don’t have the answers, and teenagers still need them. That’s where honest sex ed comes in.” Again, since Planned Parenthood is the expert on sex, I guess that the organization makes the final call on when “honest sex” comes in, regardless of whether parents consent.

Whether or not sexual education is more harmful or beneficial is up to debate and a matter of an opinion. But the way in which Planned Parenthood becomes involved in such sexual education is not so much up for debate, but rather can be described as subversive, immoral, and corrupting. That’s not what proper sexual education should be. I’m not all-out against sex education- only when Planned Parenthood is involved.

Such is the curriculum orchestrated by Planned Parenthood and a host of other pro-abortion organizations or organizations whose members had once worked with Planned Parenthood. Even if Planned Parenthood may not be setting up shop in elementary schools (yet), like they do in high schools, their continued influence is wrong for children, teens, and ultimately the family. It is good only for the sake of the organization as it spreads so-called helpful information that hooks an entire culture on sex and gains a new customer when the birth control ultimately fails.

Planned Parenthood claims to be on a mission to reduce unplanned pregnancy and has sought to target high school teenagers in Roosevelt Field High, of Los Angeles.

I choose to regard Planned Parenthood based on what they advocate for most loudly, abortion.  Not only does this organization (which operates as not-for-profit) target the young people of this country, but it does so by setting up shop in schools, where young people will be interacting with the organization and becoming accustomed to the mentality that abortion is somehow acceptable.  (Bryan Kemper of Stand True gives his reaction here).

The United Nations, in league with International Planned Parenthood (IPPF), has called for “sexual and reproductive health and rights” for children as young as ten years old.  Planned Parenthood has advocated for the sexual freedom of preteens right here in the United States by offering sex education curricula in teaching students as young as – yup, you guessed it – ten years old.

Personally, I am not the biggest proponent of sex education, but having gone to a public school in the state of New York, I see it as a sort of necessary evil. I certainly do see the merits of abstinence-only education, and I wish that such teachings would not have such a negative connotation. I also am a firm believer in parents’ rights (Planned Parenthood, not so much). If a school teaches sex education, there should also be an opt-out measure for parents who would rather their children learn about sex strictly from home or a church. Parents should know what kind of curriculum is being used, Planned Parenthood model-based or no, and if the parents want Planned Parenthood out of their schools, then Planned Parenthood should pack up and leave.

The American Life League has documented the ways that they believe Planned Parenthood is “hooking kids on sex.” While these videos start with a warning of a graphic nature, which children should not be allowed to watch, the reality is that what is warned about is what children may already be seeing in school.

At ten years old, I was not learning about oral sex or anal sex. I don’t even think I fully understood what sex was, and yet I was a perfectly content child. I didn’t feel like I was at risk or being denied any kind of rights. At ten years old I was learning what a period was. When we learned about sex in 7th and 10th grade, it was just like any other unit in health. There was no fuss with condoms being handed out or graphic demonstrations or anything like that. You were told how they worked and the benefits of having protected sex. I am also pleased to say that it was reaffirmed, multiple times, that the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and the spread of STDs was by abstinence. Those who wished to learn about sex did, and those who knew they would remain abstinent were not offended by any graphic descriptions or displays.

As I mentioned, though, students in school, as young as ten years old, are learning about oral and anal sex. At ten years old, I was still in elementary school. I don’t think it is ever appropriate for any school curricula to involve explanations of oral and anal sex, much less to ten year olds. The children of an elementary school in Onalaska, Washington, however, were subjected to just that. And their parents didn’t find out about that until they questioned their seemingly traumatized children. When confronted, though, the superintendent defended the principal, saying she “stuck to the curriculum.”

This curriculum includes F.L.A.S.H., which is the state-approved curriculum for Washington and is highly recommended on Planned Parenthood’s website, as are lesson plans from the SIECUS Sex Ed Library. And recommended for teacher training and staff development is Answer.

I’d like to give such programs and plans some small benefit of the doubt in that I am sure they have some thoughtful goals as to how to really help sexually active young people avoid unintended pregnancy and STDs. Like my high school did, I would try to stress abstinence, but Planned Parenthood will quickly tell you that abstinence education programs do not work.  Such plans also teach about homosexuality, but offer overly-explicit explanations on how to partake in certain activities – something that starts to become less beneficial, is not needed when teaching how to avoid pregnancies, and starts to concern parents. And what is not beneficial at all is how the involvement of Planned Parenthood becomes increasingly obvious, as included in such plans is talking about sex that may be immoral or disapproved of by parents, abortion rights information, and information on gay sex. Videos also mention how “parents obviously don’t have the answers, and teenagers still need them. That’s where honest sex ed comes in.” Again, since Planned Parenthood is the expert on sex, I guess that the organization makes the final call on when “honest sex” comes in, regardless of whether parents consent.

Whether or not sexual education is more harmful or beneficial is up to debate and a matter of an opinion. But the way in which Planned Parenthood becomes involved in such sexual education is not so much up for debate, but rather can be described as subversive, immoral, and corrupting. That’s not what proper sexual education should be. I’m not all-out against sex education- only when Planned Parenthood is involved.

Such is the curriculum orchestrated by Planned Parenthood and a host of other pro-abortion organizations or organizations whose members had once worked with Planned Parenthood. Even if Planned Parenthood may not be setting up shop in elementary schools (yet), like they do in high schools, their continued influence is wrong for children, teens, and ultimately the family. It is good only for the sake of the organization as it spreads so-called helpful information that hooks an entire culture on sex and gains a new customer when the birth control ultimately fails.