Skip to comments.Onalaska parents say sex ed is too racy for 5th graders
Posted on 06/12/2012 9:54:54 AM PDT by Sopater
ONALASKA, Wash. - You can tell Onalaska is old fashioned just by looking.
"We're in the country, we're small town, we like it that way, said parent Kadra Gilliland.
But something at the elementary school last week has folks in this quiet town making noise.
"What gives this woman the right to come down here and go above our authority, is the way I look at it, said parent Curt Pannkuk.
"I was one pissed off cowboy," said parent James Gilliland.
These parents are upset about a sex education class for the fifth graders last week.
"She learned oral sex and anal sex, things 10- and 11-year-olds do not need to know, said Kadra.
When the school's principal, who was teaching the course, was asked what oral and anal sex were, she told the students.
James Gilliland couldn't believe it.
"It's basically the same as raping a kids mind and taking their innocence, he said.
"I think the principal handled it appropriately at the time; she only gave factual information, no demonstrations, said Onalaska Superintendent Scott Fenter.
Fenter says state law requires fifth graders to learn about sexually transmitted diseases.
Parents can review the curriculum, which does mention oral and anal sex, and can have their child excused.
But Fenter does not think the lesson goes too far.
"Because in 6th grade they start becoming sexually aware and you've got to teach them ahead of time, he said.
"There are some questions you just don't answer or you answer them politically correctly; she was not politically correct, said parent Jean Pannkuk.
School ends Friday, but these parents won't let their kids go back unless the curriculum is changed.
"Might as well give the kids a Kama Sutra book and teach 'em the same thing, said James Gilliland.
Since 1988, state law has required some sort of sex education beginning at fifth grade. A state spokesperson says the curriculum has only generated limited complaints since then.
The Greeks made Socrates drink Hemlock for less than this!
How about this for 5th graders..... Keep your hands to yourself and your private parts private. (would work also for adults)
I grew up in a large mid-western city and we did not get sex education outside of our homes until the 8th grade. Through school I knew of only two girs who got pregnant and STDs were unherd of.
But back then our mamas made us wear those Playtex rubber panty girldles too! They were more effective than a chastity belt or a 5th grade course in sex ed would have been!
Everyone can be positively joyous about their PS. They can do happy dances about how things like this could never happen.
Personally, I’m not taking that chance. One shot, I have one shot with my kids innocence. All it takes is one gung ho educator and it’s all gone.
And you my FRiend!
This used to be called corrupting a minor. A morals charge that would result in jail time.
Now it is considered proper guidance and edumacation to get kids sexually active before they graduate all in the name of advancing the sex positive agenda which sees orgasm to be a birthright that should be enjoyed (and exploited) at every age with no concept of morality in the number or type of partner(s) you choose. Free love is back, from the same socialist scum who pushed it generations ago.
They’ve come for your children and get to tell them their parents are WRONG and so is their church.
Moral Absolutes PING
I _hated_ those things!
The mind boggles at how anyone could get up in front of a bunch of 10 year olds and tell them about anal sex.
Oral, they’ll learn in American History class, when they get to the Clinton Era...
My measure of what is acceptable to be taught in schools is that if the same information was presented to a child somewhere else by someone who was not a teacher would that person be prosecuted for doing so?
My point being is that if you teach your kids at home about oral and anal sex the police will come throw you in jail. Why should the schools be allowed to do this?
The real question is “Why do all these so-called ‘conservatives’ have their children in government schools?”
Answer: They’re a bunch of middle-class welfare queens. “Free” government stuff is more important than the welfare of their children.
Basically, we should all be grateful that there were no "demonstrations" of anal and oral sex. Does that mean, that at some places there are "demonstrations". Is this an option for the teacher?
The curriculum HAS to become encompassing for them. Plus they need to learn proper cleaning of dildos (which are illegal to sell to minors even though Amazon does it).
This is not the job of a school. It is taken on by design as the job of RE-EDUCATION centers that seek to undermine other lessons learned.
They may not be able to get direct access to everyone's child, but they can turn the tide on the issue of same-sex marriage and whether or not teens SHOULD be engaging in pre-marital sex.
This is a parody, right? Paging John Semmens ...
The subject is state-mandated. The topics are identified in advance. The principal, one assumes, had the parents’ “support” up until just recently. And yet the parents are shocked and upset that a question on-topic was asked and answered?
My favorite is the one who said the principal should have given a “politically correct” answer. What is a “politically correct” answer to “What is meant by oral or anal sex?”
“These are gross, disease-transmitting practices in which decent human beings do not engage.”
“I’m not going to tell you. Ask your parents.”
“Oral sex was preferred by a Democratic former president, while anal sex is the focus of ‘Gay Pride Month,’ promoted by our current Democratic president.”
“This educational program is not intended to provide you with factual information about how sexually transmitted diseases are sexually transmitted.”
“.....these parents won’t let their kids go back unless the curriculum is changed.”
The principal should be fired, period.
Schools have no business, that is absolutely NO business, is sex education.
End of paragraph.
They may learn about both in history, the first when talking about Clinton, the second when the history books look back on the Obama Presidency and talk about what he did to the country.
——Schools have no business, that is absolutely NO business, is sex education.——
If parents agree to send their children to a “place of education” that proscribes the simplest worship of God, Who is the beginning and end of all things, then they have no logical complaint. Anything goes.
We asked for a “God-free zone,” and God is allowing it.
-—. Free love is back, from the same socialist scum who pushed it generations ago.——
Desensitization. That’s all it is. Break down the moral order. Replace the voluntary, free society with the leviathan State.
This ping list is for the other articles of interest to homeschoolers about education and public school. This can occasionally be a fairly high volume list. Articles pinged to the Another Reason to Homeschool List will be given the keyword of ARTH. (If I remember. If I forget, please feel free to add it yourself)
The main Homeschool Ping List handles the homeschool-specific articles. I hold both the Homeschool Ping List and the Another Reason to Homeschool Ping list. Please freepmail me to let me know if you would like to be added to or removed from either list, or both.
While there is no harm in some basic education on the facts of life -(I had it in 5th grade. They had a girls only talk about the changes to expect growing up and a similar boys only talk for them but NOT sex ed)- at that age, IMO, they should still be encouraged to think that the other still has cooties.
For as long as possible.
“I think the principal handled it appropriately at the time; she only gave factual information, no demonstrations, said Onalaska Superintendent Scott Fenter.”
Well, thank God for that.
What a brainless putz.
Seriously? Demonstrations were a "considered" option? As a School Psychologist I am completely appalled by this story.
For as long as possible.
You mean that was just a fib?
Now they tell me?!
WTH?!?!?!"ONLY" factual information?!?!?! No demonstrations??????
Like somebody would even think that that was a possibility?????
So it's OK to mentally rape these kids as long as they didn't have to see it acted out in front of them????????
God help us.
Yeah, and if you or I did it to a kid down the street, we'd be brought up on charges so fast our heads would spin.
That Scott Fenter is a jackass, let me tell you. snort! They didn’t demonstrate it indeed! good thing, that!
I’m sure the transmission of sexually-transmitted diseases is demonstrated at some schools in the state: in the bathrooms, on the bus, in a vacant classroom or closet ...
One has to wonder, though, how they would be to convey any useful information about preventing STDs without going into graphic detail about sex acts. The alternative is to leave students thinking that they might contract HIV or gonorrhea from a handshake or a water fountain.
Thinking this through, one might deduce that the “safety” aspect of this mandated curriculum is simply a cover for graphically discussing sexual practices with pre-teen children.
Like somebody would even think that that was a possibility?????
All in good time, all in good time...
Here’s an insider’s secret that I learned about the ‘just answering the kiddos’ questions game. The pervs plant the questions so they can introduce the age inappropriate subjects to the children.
If these parents are serious about this offense, they have to fire the slut.
Yeah. Brave New World, here we come.
I agree tax chick... and ALL who are here...did you see where the parents could have opted out their children?
This was not just something that the principal decided to do on their own...it was mandated by the state(sex-ed) to start in the fifth grade...the class could have been opted out of by the parents of the children...and face it moms and dads...middle school kids can and do have sex... that’s why the sex-ed starts in the 5th grade so they can be at least somewhat prepared...just because something is discussed does not mean it is condoned.
I think it's very unlikely that the principal discussed oral and anal (or any other) sex acts in terms of categorical moral condemnation. (e.g., my first "politically correct" statement on the topic.)
However, that was not my main point. My point was that the parents should have known what was going to be taught. If they don't think this is suitable information for 5th graders, they need to be addressing it at the state level. I suspect that, if these people were asked if the school should teach the students about STDs, they would have said, "Of course!" without ever thinking it through.