 |
Posted on 02/07/2003 4:24:38 AM PST by kattracks
That explains a lot.
The term "workshop" implies more "hands on" involvement than mere Q & A, and it WAS a school sponsored event. I had some teaching on sex and sexuality in high school too. It had to do with how pregnancy occurred and various methods of birth control that could be used and how they worked. Of course, this information was geared towards preparing young people for marriage and was not done in mixed clesses. Big difference. I didn't actually know what "fisting" was until today. I'm just not sure how I survived this long without that vital information. Actually, I think I could have gotten along quite nicely without EVER knowing.
No, this isn't about about educating kids about sex because they have a need to know. It is about educating and recruiting them in perversion and it is an outrage and crime.
You're right, sweetliberty. This was child abuse of the most horrific sort.
Silly FReeper. That's an easy one. You wouldn't want kids to have access to right wing political sites or religious sites now would you? Why, that would be the same thing as indoctrinating them in hate speech. < /sarcasm >
Actually, that isn't far off. I had an experience a couple of years ago where a friend and I went into a library and she was unable to do a search on their filtered computers using either "catholic" or "Jesus". When we questioned this, the librarian said that the filters blocked access to material that might be deemed unsuitable for children. My question is; "who designs this software? Who is making the decision of what is and is not appropriate for children?" We should be very concerned outraged to action on this kind of hypocrisy. It isn't that hard to see what is happening for one who has eyes to see.
They are evil - and evil brought to bear against children is the worst form of evil. And of course, all in a state where in the Boston Diocese, almost 100 Catholic priests (I am Catholic.) have been credibly accused of homosexually abusing and raping teenage boys. Obviously, this form of evil has even infected my Church. Massachusetts is a homosexual filth pit.
More like "non-reproductive sexual misinformation" or "how unhealthy and risky behavior can be fun". This really makes me sick that our culture has degenerated to such an extreme. I am especially concerned for those who are young enough not to have ever known a more innocent time.
Sounds like a not-so-slow insidious invasion...
Of course, then you get a whole group of folks standing up and stomping out, "that's IT, we're HOMESCHOOLING!" Well that's what my folks did, actually. If I ever have anklebiters (bwahaha, tremble and pray, all ye who knowest me), that is not the way I'll have 'em educated. Everybody's entitled to their lifestyle preferences but there is a finely-defined medium between the two extremes of laissez-faire and the Amish, for example... Life ain't candy-coated or black-and-white, and kids should be taught to deal with that instead of being 1) left to their own devices OR 2) cloistered in bubble-wrap. The truth is always somewhere in between.
What kids need these days is good logical sense. Teach 'em early what you think "sense" is, and let 'em loose. Kids have a pretty good intrinsic bullsh!t detection system.
The point being made is, does evidence exist to charge the workshop presenters and sponsors under sections 28 and 29 of Chapter 272 of M.G.L.? Driscoll's statement that "the workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational" confirms that the workshop material met the criteria of being obscene and harmful to minors as defined in section 31. The fact that the presenters and sponsors admit that they acted as private individuals and as a private organization, at a private conference and not as a "bona fide school, museum or library, or acting in the course of his employment as an employee of such organization," would imply that they have no defense under sections 28 and 29.
Dricoll's opinion is not a legal one, but neither is it simply a personal one. As the highest ranking state education official, his is an expert opinion and that makes him qualified to judge the nature of the material and whether it was educational or not .
The DA had a complaint, including documentation, and a qualified, expert opinion to back up that complaint, and yet chose to ignore it. Why?
"When a complaint is filed with the DA, and the DA does not press charges, most reasonable people would presume that the allegations are without merit… "
If this weren't Massachusetts, I might agree with you.
(Sorry, but I have to leave for meetings - back late this afternoon or this evening)
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.