Posted on 05/28/2002 12:12:31 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
This month, I've received many faxes and letters from people concerned about the American government's allocation of resources to UNICEF and UNFPA – divisions of the United Nations that address children's issues and population issues, respectively. The recent concern was primarily directed at UNFPA because Congress was discussing the allocation of $34 million for that group, with a deadline of July 1. People from United Families International urged me to take to my microphone and ask people to contact their elected representatives and tell them to vote "no."
There wasn't time for me to research the matter sufficiently to develop a call to action for my listeners, but I have subsequently read through the materials they sent. It seems clear to me that many of the same issues we face here at home, regarding the premature sexualization of our children, are now spreading worldwide into every corner of the globe under the auspices of the United Nations and in the same guise used here by the Center for Disease Control.
The guise is HIV-AIDS prevention – certainly a worthy goal in and of itself – but that end does not justify stripping prevention education for children of any and all moral and ethical considerations.
Last year, I was in the midst of the same clamor from listeners about a homegrown version of an "educational" program for children, developed by the CDC for use as a sexual-health curriculum in U.S. public schools. Like the booklets published with UNICEF and UNFPA funds in other countries, the CDC curriculum went into some detail about a wide variety of sexual practices that young children, in my view, should not be learning about in a public, taxpayer-supported classroom – or any other place for that matter. This curriculum was particularly grievous because it had the imprimatur of a quasi-government office – the CDC – and its use was also tied to funding opportunities for the schools.
I did jump into the fray on that one and was joined by the governor of Illinois in urging the state legislature to prevent the use of the curriculum. I'm happy to say, because of some truly committed, well-organized parents, my national nagging and the courage of the governor, the CDC curriculum was not made mandatory in the Illinois school system.
Because AIDS prevention education is so vital, especially in poorer Third World countries, the topic is used as an opportunity to deliver propaganda, primarily about gender, homosexuality, bisexuality and masturbation. How ironic that prevention education about a fatal disease primarily transmitted by unprotected anal intercourse offers, at the very least, a benign presentation about the "lifestyle" that promotes that sexual practice.
In most of these materials designed for children, no distinction is made about the disparate prevalence of HIV-AIDS in populations of heterosexuals and homosexuals. They also continue to propagate the myth that sex is "safe" with condom use, when the CDC knows as well as I do that condoms do not prevent the spread of many sexually transmitted diseases.
Do HIV-AIDS prevention agencies turn to homosexuals for advice and guidance about producing materials, because HIV-AIDS does affect homosexuals so disproportionately? It would make sense that they do so. And, if that is true, it may explain why so much of the worldwide prevention education is so morally neutral on the issue and so vague about the disease-lifestyle relationship.
Whatever the reason, it is unacceptable that, in order to teach children about sexual health, we end up encouraging them (however inadvertently) to experiment with many different sexual techniques and partners, thereby exposing them to the very dangers we are trying to forestall. I am perplexed that HIV-AIDS prevention tells kids about all kinds of other things, but doesn't really tell them how not to get infected. Without a doubt, the only surefire way for children to stay healthy is abstinence.
And it's not only disease-prevention initiatives that are guilty of this. UNICEF's funding of "loveLife" – a South African organization – is very reminiscent of the American Library Association's and Planned Parenthood's support for a website called "Go Ask Alice" here at home.
Both "loveLife" and "Go Ask Alice" provide information about sex with objects, sex with animals and sadomasochism. They also provide information about abortion stripped of any data concerning its potential long-term physical and emotional affects.
UNICEF's response to queries about their support of this website said, "Young people have a right to be given all the information they need about HIV, the ways in which it is transmitted, and how to avoid the infection."
This is uniformly used as a rationale for providing graphic and pornographic information to "children" – a word the purveyors avoid in favor of "young people," suggesting that visitors to their websites and readers of their literature are nearly adults.
The entire HIV-AIDS prevention landscape – both national and international – is littered with casualties of the political correctness wars. Is it really necessary to brainwash children into becoming new recruits?
I have been using my list to ping freepers on
UN, University, Public School and Homeschool articles,
as I feel these dots connect.
Thanks
UNICEF sex book remains in print
First AIDS Education, Then "Safe Schools," Then Gay Advocacy
Planned Parenthood: Corrupting Teens is a Fun Game! (PP Barf Alert)
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.