Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Sex Manual" for 12 Year Old School Children has Nova Scotia Parents Riled
Lifesite ^ | September 17, 2004

Posted on 09/20/2004 5:49:16 AM PDT by NYer

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, September 17, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A sex manual, aimed at Nova Scotia school children from grade seven and older, has many parents fuming. The manual -- Sex? A Healthy Sexuality Resource -- contains subject materials totally inappropriate for children, according to a parents group, Parent Advocates for Accountability Group (PAAG).

As a result of parental concern, the proposed deadline for the release of the booklet has been extended from September 9 to the end of the month, giving parents time to review the 124 page document which tells children (among other things) that being 12 years old is a fine time to have sex with a 13 year old friend.

In a rhetorical question on the PAAG web-site, a parent asks: "Is it appropriate for Public Health and School Boards to dictate to parents when and how their children be introduced to some of the topics contained in 'Sex?' Are you prepared to sit down with your child and discuss all of the topics contained in the resource ( i.e. all forms of sexual intercourse, the low age of legal consent, what a vibrator is and the 'morning after' pill)?"

The manual authors suggest 12 years old may be an appropriate age for children to begin consensual sexual relations: ". . . a person who is 12 or 13 can consent to sexual activity but only with a person who is less than 2 years older than he or she is."

The authors also provide information on how to obtain contraceptives, as well as the "necessity" for a child to be carrying them at all times: "In many communities there are places where you can get inexpensive or free condoms and oral dams. For example: Planned Parenthood . . . Be prepared! Carry condoms and oral dams with you. If you don't need them, a friend might."

The manual also suggests abortion and abortifacient morning-after pills as acceptable options in case of unexpected pregnancy: "If your partner gets pregnant she has to make some difficult decisions-Adoption? Raising the baby? Abortion?" They also recommend that children can access this without parental consent: "You do not need your parents' permission to get ECP."

Read the parental concern web page at: http://www.paag.ca

Read the document itself (PDF) at: http://www.gov.ns.ca/ohp/publications/Se
x_A_Healthy_Sexuality_Resource.pdf


The PAAG is recommending parents contact officials to voice your concerns:
Jim Gunn, Annapolis Valley Regional School Board (AVRSB) Superintendent of Schools: (902) 538-4606
Nancy Pynch-Worthylake, AVRSB Director of Programs & Services (902) 538-4611

Rodney MacDonald, Minister Responsible for Office of Health Promotion: macdonr@gov.ns.ca

Also, for a list of Nova Scotian MLA's, go to: http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/MEMBERS
/directory/constituencies.html


Related Stories:
COLUMNIST EXPOSES DANGERS AND ABUSES OF SEX EDUCATION
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/feb/030
21306.html

Scotland's Cardinal Criticizes School Sex Ed Programs as "State-Sponsored Sexual Abuse"
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/sep/040
90205.html

UK Sex-Ed Backfire: Survey Reveals Increased Pregnancy Rates in Teens Subjected to Program
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/040
31505.html



(c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: ageofconsent; ageofconsentlaws; brainwashing; canada; canadafreespeech; canadiankids; comeforyourchildren; culturewar; downourthroats; hedonism; homosexual; homosexualagenda; ifitfeelsgooddoit; indoctrination; inourfaces; itsjustsex; libertines; novascotia; promiscuity; publiceducation; publicschools; reeducationcenter; sexeducation; sexpositiveagenda; sexualizingchildren; stds; teensex; teensexisokay; waragainstparents
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 last
To: old and tired
That said, I'd watch that 5 year old like a hawk around my daughter.

Yeah, the family is pretty screwy.

61 posted on 09/20/2004 6:45:41 PM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Ugh. Whenever I hear about this stuff, it reminds me of Huxley's Brave New World.
62 posted on 09/20/2004 6:48:28 PM PDT by William Martel (Anyone But Kerry in 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darknessbreaks

There are book length studies both from the left and right that would dispute your claim that Hollygoof is not leftist by nature and inclination.


63 posted on 10/07/2004 8:52:13 AM PDT by eleni121 (Take back the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: eleni121
i don't disagree that the majority of hollywood has left leanings. that wasn't the point of my statement at all. my point was that i don't believe that the content of their films and television is based on some subversive plan. they want money. when people talk about something it makes others curious, and those others go out and buy the same product.
it is especially true when people boycott something. look at ice-t and his song about killing cops. no one noticed it and he was a nobody until somebody started talking about it. now he's a tv star and rich beyond belief.
64 posted on 10/07/2004 9:08:11 AM PDT by darknessbreaks (lower case letters do not a troll make.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: darknessbreaks

Again, I think you are trying hard to avoid the facts.

Given what we know about the mega producers and business interests that control Hollygoof, it is rather obvious that there exists the readiness and willingness to fund film projects that promote a certain leftist liberal ideology...and that is not the ideology of conservative values and hasn't been for years.


65 posted on 10/07/2004 9:46:17 AM PDT by eleni121 (Take back the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson