By Tom Prichard
With a little over four weeks until the legislature is required by the
state constitution to conclude it's work (May 22nd), most Capitol insiders
expect a special session. Governor Pawlenty has staked out a strong
position on not raising taxes and DFL leaders in the legislature have a lot
of special interest groups expecting more money and benefits. DFL Senate
has already voted to raise taxes by over $1.25 billion dollars.
So I don't expect things to be resolved by May 22. Often times governors
won't call the legislature back into session until a deal is struck. Or
Pawlenty could force them to keep working by immediately calling a special
session. The last time there was a government shutdown, the state
legislature took a lot of heat in the next election. If that were to happen
now, DFL legislators in the House could take a big hit in the 2008
elections. I think Pawlenty should hang tough. The state already has
budget surplus of over $2 billion and spending is projected to go up 9.3%
over the next two years under his budget. At a time when personal income
grew only 3.8% in the last reporting year, the legislature doesn't need to
double that in increased government spending.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
UK regulations on religion
By Tom Prichard
The increasingly aggressive and militant homosexual agenda is viewed for some observers as the greatest threat to religious liberties of Christians in the West. From the push for homosexual marriage to hate crimes laws reflect efforts to eliminate public disapproval and opposition to homosexuality. An excellent example is the United Kingdom’s new Sexual Orientation Regulations which would prohibit Christian schools, services and businesses from speaking or acting negatively towards homosexuality.
A couple of examples already illustrate what this means. First, Catholic adoption agencies in England will be forced to close their doors because of its policy of not placing adoptive children with homosexual couples. British government officials view this as discriminatory, and not as common sense. If Catholic agencies won’t change, then the government can shut down their Catholic adoptive services.
Then there’s the case of the Anglican bishop in Chester, England who said that homosexuals “could and should seek medical help to ‘reorient’ themselves”. For those comments the bishop was investigated by the local police. The local police chief “advised” him that, “civic leaders ought to promote diversity – including homosexuality… in a positive manner.”
Now with the new sexual orientation regulations, religious leaders of all faiths in England are concerned that the government will be aggressively going after speech or activities of those who believe homosexuality is wrong or unhealthy. This is of immediate concern to Christians in England, but it should also be of concern to Christians in the United States where the speech and behavior of people who believe homosexual behavior is wrong and harmful is also being targeted.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
MFC agrees with Rep. Greiling, sex ed curricula in public schools contains activities that are "obscene" and "bizarre"
Yesterday, Barb Anderson of MFC held a press conference that identified unhealthy sex activities contained in several sex education curricula used in public schools. In an article by Tim Budig of HometownSource, Rep. Mindy Greiling, DFL-Roseville, said, "Anderson and others bring an extreme voice to the sex education debate. The recent testimony of anti-comprehensive sex education activists before her House education committee was 'obscene' and 'bizarre.'"” “They’re way off base,” she said. Click Here to view testimony - and decide for yourself.
Well, we agree, some of the content contained in comprehensive sex ed curricula is extreme, obscene and bizarre.
We would also add - unhealthy. For example:
“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators," said Anderson, "as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus. This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”
“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.
Rep. Greiling, if Anderson's testimony is obscene it is because the material contained in the curriculum is obscene. MFC finds it "way off base" that you would resort to name-calling rather than protecting our school children from unhealthy sexual practices.
Well, we agree, some of the content contained in comprehensive sex ed curricula is extreme, obscene and bizarre.
We would also add - unhealthy. For example:
“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators," said Anderson, "as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus. This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”
“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.
Rep. Greiling, if Anderson's testimony is obscene it is because the material contained in the curriculum is obscene. MFC finds it "way off base" that you would resort to name-calling rather than protecting our school children from unhealthy sexual practices.
MFC and EdWatch call on legislators to reject unhealthy, anti-family, anti-parent provisions in the House K-12 education spending bill
Press Release
ST. PAUL – Two Minnesota groups jointly released a list of top reasons for legislators to reject unhealthy, anti-family, anti-parent provisions in the House K-12 education spending bill. The Minnesota Family Council and EdWatch today called on House members to reject the provisions which they call dangerous and an unwarranted government intrusion into parenting when the bill is up for a floor vote today.
Government intrusion into parenting unhealthy for families and children
Dr. Karen Effrem of EdWatch identified five different early childhood proposals that are highly objectionable. “These are nothing short of a government assault on the minds of our children and a massive takeover of parenting in the state of Minnesota,” she said. One example she listed was government setting norms for all children from birth to age five in areas like mental health, gender issues, diversity training, and environmentalism. “These have nothing to do with closing the achievement gap,” she stated.
Psychiatric screening is another area the groups highlighted. The controversial mental screening program, TeenScreen, has drawn intense public opposition. “HF6 simply hides TeenScreen by giving it a generic name to avoid the controversy,” stated Effrem, “but the author made it clear that TeenScreen is the program that will be funded. The language is intentionally misleading.”
Curricula used for comprehensive sex education unhealthy for children
Tom Prichard of Minnesota Family Council said that HF6 would force comprehensive sex education programs on all middle and high schools in the state. “This is an unhealthy proposal which will be foisted on Minnesota students in every grade from 7 through 12.”
“After reviewing several sex education curricula” added Chuck Darrell director of communications for MFC, “we are certain the instruction will lead to more teens engaging in unhealthy, dangerous forms of sexual activity like oral, anal, and even anal-oral sex. The content is graphic and offensive and even made legislators blush in legislative hearings on the bill.”
“A recent study showed an explosion in STD’s and STI’s including Chlamydia. The reason for the explosion is not abstinence. It is because children are being taught to engage in unhealthy sexual activity,” said Darrell.
“The discussion of abstinence in comprehensive sex education is merely window dressing, said Prichard. “The focus of the curriculum is use of contraceptives. In addition, marriage is not encouraged. We can’t ignore marriage when sexual activity is discussed,” he said. “No legislator should support such a program.”
“We are asking legislators to drop these intrusive provisions. If they are not dropped, legislators should reject the overall bill,” Prichard said. “Minnesota parents don’t want the state promoting programs that undermine our children’s health and well-being.”
ST. PAUL – Two Minnesota groups jointly released a list of top reasons for legislators to reject unhealthy, anti-family, anti-parent provisions in the House K-12 education spending bill. The Minnesota Family Council and EdWatch today called on House members to reject the provisions which they call dangerous and an unwarranted government intrusion into parenting when the bill is up for a floor vote today.
Government intrusion into parenting unhealthy for families and children
Dr. Karen Effrem of EdWatch identified five different early childhood proposals that are highly objectionable. “These are nothing short of a government assault on the minds of our children and a massive takeover of parenting in the state of Minnesota,” she said. One example she listed was government setting norms for all children from birth to age five in areas like mental health, gender issues, diversity training, and environmentalism. “These have nothing to do with closing the achievement gap,” she stated.
Psychiatric screening is another area the groups highlighted. The controversial mental screening program, TeenScreen, has drawn intense public opposition. “HF6 simply hides TeenScreen by giving it a generic name to avoid the controversy,” stated Effrem, “but the author made it clear that TeenScreen is the program that will be funded. The language is intentionally misleading.”
Curricula used for comprehensive sex education unhealthy for children
Tom Prichard of Minnesota Family Council said that HF6 would force comprehensive sex education programs on all middle and high schools in the state. “This is an unhealthy proposal which will be foisted on Minnesota students in every grade from 7 through 12.”
“After reviewing several sex education curricula” added Chuck Darrell director of communications for MFC, “we are certain the instruction will lead to more teens engaging in unhealthy, dangerous forms of sexual activity like oral, anal, and even anal-oral sex. The content is graphic and offensive and even made legislators blush in legislative hearings on the bill.”
“A recent study showed an explosion in STD’s and STI’s including Chlamydia. The reason for the explosion is not abstinence. It is because children are being taught to engage in unhealthy sexual activity,” said Darrell.
“The discussion of abstinence in comprehensive sex education is merely window dressing, said Prichard. “The focus of the curriculum is use of contraceptives. In addition, marriage is not encouraged. We can’t ignore marriage when sexual activity is discussed,” he said. “No legislator should support such a program.”
“We are asking legislators to drop these intrusive provisions. If they are not dropped, legislators should reject the overall bill,” Prichard said. “Minnesota parents don’t want the state promoting programs that undermine our children’s health and well-being.”
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
"Responsible family life and sexuality education" provisions in HF 6 unhealthy to children
MFC Press Release
Group exposes unhealthy implications of “Responsible family life and sexuality education” provisions in HF 6
Group says teaching children to use dental dams for anal-oral sex is just one of several unhealthy activities contributing to rise in STD’s.
MINNEAPOLIS – Drawing a parallel between a recent study citing a two-fold rise in Chlamydia and sex education curricula used in public schools, a group of parents and students exposed the unhealthy activities taught to students and called upon the legislature to remove the sex education provisions from House File 6.
Barb Anderson identified three sex education curricula used in public schools including Reducing the Risk, Safer Choices, and The Educators’ Guide to Reproductive Health by the Birds & Bees Project.
“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators, as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus,” said Anderson. “This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”
“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.
Gayla Bell, a parent in the Eden Prairie School District presented research that the unhealthy curricula was on display and promoted at the Minnesota School Health Education Conference. “The graphic and unhealthy detail of these curricula is harmful to our children, said Bell. “Giving multiple sexual options to kids, including oral, anal sex and ‘rimming,’ will further spread disease amongst our youth. Condoms and dental dams do not make oral and anal sex healthy or safe,” she said.
Group says teaching children to use dental dams for anal-oral sex is just one of several unhealthy activities contributing to rise in STD’s.
MINNEAPOLIS – Drawing a parallel between a recent study citing a two-fold rise in Chlamydia and sex education curricula used in public schools, a group of parents and students exposed the unhealthy activities taught to students and called upon the legislature to remove the sex education provisions from House File 6.
Barb Anderson identified three sex education curricula used in public schools including Reducing the Risk, Safer Choices, and The Educators’ Guide to Reproductive Health by the Birds & Bees Project.
“In the Birds & Bees Project guide for educators, as well as in their teen brochures, students ages 15 and up learn how to make dental dams “for oral sex on the vulva or the anus,” said Anderson. “This is unfit in a public school setting and is giving young people sexual options that are unhealthy and life threatening – opening more children up to disease.”
“Where is the scientific evidence that anal sex or oral-anal contact taught in comprehensive sex education materials is healthy? There is none. Kids who practice oral sex are now getting STDs in their mouth, throat and tonsils. Rimming and anal sex provide a vast opportunity for a whole host of sexually transmitted diseases. More and more children are being put at risk with this kind of teaching,” said Anderson.
Gayla Bell, a parent in the Eden Prairie School District presented research that the unhealthy curricula was on display and promoted at the Minnesota School Health Education Conference. “The graphic and unhealthy detail of these curricula is harmful to our children, said Bell. “Giving multiple sexual options to kids, including oral, anal sex and ‘rimming,’ will further spread disease amongst our youth. Condoms and dental dams do not make oral and anal sex healthy or safe,” she said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)