by Ed Vitagliano | Journal News Editor
They just don’t teach sex like they used to, but for a lot of parents, that’s the problem. Controversy was stirred in Texas this past January when the Leander Independent School District considered adding to its sex education curriculum discussions about oral and anal sex. The curriculum is used beginning in the eighth grade.

It seems clear that a tidal wave of hedonism and lewdness has hit this culture with a wallop, leaving behind sexed-up flotsam and jetsam that has drifted into every facet of public life.

The cultural earthquake that generated this latest tidal wave – and promises more thunderous surges to come – is the sexual revolution. Despite its name, however, it is hardly anything innovative. It is, in fact, the latest reincarnation of the pagan sexuality that has smoldered and sulked jealously under the restraining influence of Judeo-Christian morality – the latter of which links human sexuality to marriage.

Coming unglued
However, as our culture moves firmly into a postmodern phase, it is leaving those Judeo-Christian foundations behind. As more people begin to view sex as merely another form of recreational activity, the religious restraints against the pagan sexual tendencies of unregenerate men are coming unglued.

This battle of intrinsic viewpoints boils over in countless places, but none is so ferocious – nor so critical – as the fight to control what our children are taught about human sexuality.

Naturally, those who are faithful to the Judeo-Christian worldview advocate abstinence until marriage – because that is where they believe sexual activity belongs. But hammering against this foundational principle are those postmodernists who claim that virtually all forms of consensual sexual participation are valid and healthy, and should be enthusiastically endorsed, even to children.

Last year U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell drew the ire of pro-family conservatives when he told an MTV-sponsored global forum of young people to ignore religious instruction and the moral values of their parents when it comes to sex.

“It’s important that the whole international community come together, speak candidly about [teenage sexual activity], forget about taboos, forget about conservative ideas with respect to what you shouldn’t tell young people,” he said. Powell pushed his audience to remember to use condoms when they have sex.

Ground zero
Some of the most grim battles over sexuality are taking place in public school systems like Leander, Texas. The nation’s public schools have become ground zero, and it is there that the two distinct, mutually-exclusive sex viewpoints highlight the ongoing struggle for cultural supremacy being played out elsewhere.

Organizations such as the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) and Planned Parenthood Federation of America insist on a fairly simple public school approach to sex education. Like the sentiments expressed by Secretary Powell, these groups do not think that teen sexual experimentation is wrong, only that it is potentially unsafe.

Moreover, the almost feverish revulsion to abstinence instruction in schools by SIECUS and Planned Parenthood leadership is actually rooted in antagonism toward morality-based sex education. For example, in a press release about federal funding for abstinence-based sex education in public schools, SIECUS President Tamara Kreinin repudiated such an approach as “shame- and fear-based.”

Why does SIECUS consider abstinence-only sex education programs to be anathema? Such groups view all forms of human sexuality outside any traditional moral paradigm. Except for issues such as rape, incest, or child exploitation, all other sexual expression is deemed appropriate, as long as young people see themselves as “ready” for sexual experimentation and take adequate precautions against unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

Entrenching the revolution
SIECUS and its ilk have been busily entrenching the sexual revolution paradigm for some time. To create a uniform approach to teaching children the ABCs of sex, SIECUS convened a task force in 1990 to establish national guidelines that would help sex educators decide what to teach kids about human sexuality.

According to the Coalition for Adolescent Sexual Health, the guidelines are endorsed by the more than 140 member organizations of the National Coalition to Support Sexuality Education (NCSSE). The NCSSE represents a veritable Who’s Who list of radical organizations like Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the National Education Association, American Civil Liberties Union, and People for the American Way; the major homosexual rights organizations; pro-abortion groups; and the spectrum of mainstream medical and mental health organizations – which long ago abandoned considerations of traditional morality when it comes to sexuality.

SIECUS believes that all people have the right to comprehensive sexuality education, including children. But who should do the teaching? On its Web site, SIECUS pays lip service to the idea that “[p]arents are – and ought to be – their children’s primary sexuality educators.” But in practice the truth is very different. For example, one of the programs of which SIECUS approves is called Becoming A Responsible Teen (BART). That curriculum requires participating students to sign a confidentiality agreement, saying they will not discuss what is said and done in sex class – even with their parents.

“While it is generally desirable for parents to be involved in their children’s contraceptive decisions, the right of each person to confidentiality and privacy in receiving contraceptive information, counseling and services is paramount,” SIECUS says in its online position statement. In its 1990 report, “A Call to Action,” SIECUS said it “opposes any legislative or governmental attempts to infringe on this basic right” of minors having access to contraception even without parental permission.

SIECUS seems to believe that parents cannot accomplish the goal of sex education on their own, and that the real heavy lifting should be done by the schools. “Comprehensive school-based sexuality education that is appropriate to students’ age, developmental level, and cultural background should be an important part of the education program at every grade,” the group says.

Of course, most parents probably believe that the public schools have an important part to play in educating children about sex. But parents are often the first to be shocked and angered when they discover just what groups like SIECUS think is “appropriate” sex education for students. In fact, as long as it is used “in a manner appropriate” for children, SIECUS says “sexually explicit visual, printed, or on-line material can be valuable educational or personal aids, helping to reduce ignorance and confusion and contributing to a wholesome concept of sexuality.”

“Wholesome,” it turns out, is in the eye of the beholder. The Minnesota Family Institute, for example, criticized some school districts in its own state for using four explicit sex education books for kids as young as 10. The books teach public school children about “mutual masturbation” between sex partners, as well as oral, vaginal and anal sex. The books are published by Capstone Press, which was the key sponsor of the 2003 Minnesota Health Education Conference.

On the other hand, the books often give the impression that abstinence is unrealistic. “Abstinence does have possible problems. People may find it hard to stay abstinent for long periods of time,” says author Judith Peacock in her book, Abstinence: Postponing Sexual Involvement. She adds later, “Teens experience a surge of sexual energy that can make abstinence difficult.”

While the book’s title makes it appear that Peacock favors abstinence, her definition of abstinence demonstrates something different. “Teens who choose abstinence do not have sexual intercourse. They may or may not choose to have outercourse. This is a way of achieving sexual pleasure without penetration of the penis into the vagina, mouth, or anus,” she says. “It includes mutual masturbation, which means rubbing a partner’s sex organs or rubbing your own genitals in the presence of a partner.”

Electrocuted on the Teenwire
Planned Parenthood’s Web site for teenagers, Teenwire (www.teenwire.com), is a bold, in-your-face attempt to infect a whole new generation with the sexual revolution virus, although young people visiting the site are greeted by a confident banner which says, “Sexuality and relationship info you can trust.”

Alert parents may discover how much they disagree with that assessment. For teens who come to Teenwire for sexual advice, Planned Parenthood greenlights premarital sex while undercutting parental and religious authority. “Frankly, a Web page can’t decide for you if you’re ready [for sex] or not,” said the Web site when it was first launched. “Neither can your best friend, boyfriend, girlfriend, parent, brother, teacher, minister, counselor, rabbi – well, you get the idea. The only person who can know when the time’s right is you.”

In its question-and-answer section, teens ask any and all sexual questions, many of which are answered online by Planned Parenthood’s panel of “experts.” The entire spectrum of sex practices is covered by Teenwire; mutual masturbation, oral and anal sex, the use of sex toys, homosexual practices are all topics that are discussed and advocated. Teenwire even gives a thumbs up to sadomasochistic “sex play,” as long as the sex is “mutually agreed upon.”

When a teen raises the issue of promiscuity, Teenwire’s experts answer: “Deciding to have sex and deciding how many times we want it and how many sex partners we want is a personal decision.”

Some parents might disagree that sexual promiscuity is merely a personal decision for a teenager. However, Planned Parenthood’s only concern toes the postmodernist line: “teens who are having sex need to make decisions about protection.”

This simplistic view frequently comes through on Teenwire. The pagan mantra is always the same: “If you’re ready for it, do it and enjoy it; If you’re going to do and enjoy it, just make sure you use protection.”

As many parents are finding out the hard way, the real question is who will protect our children from the likes of SIECUS and Planned Parenthood?