Sex ed teaching 8,000 metro students "there is no right or wrong, and no good or bad choices"

By Barb Anderson

Once again the Minnesota School Health Education Conference rates an "F" in its advice to teens about sex education.

The Birds & Bees Project presenter, Amanda Danzeisen, led the session entitled "Teaching Teens about Pregnancy Options." Danzeisen stated that when speaking to teens you must tell them, "there is no right or wrong, and no good or bad choices." Students must make "the decision that is best for them."

The 187-page "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health" was available to educators. This educator;'s guide is nothing more than a how-to manual for teaching homosexual sex and a range of sexual options to teens.

The "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health" emphasizes the importance of using "inclusive language when discussing abstinence," and says to define sex as "oral, anal, and vaginal rather that just vaginal." This "...Will help to create a respectful and inclusive classroom environment." According to the educator's guide, defining sex only as "penile-vaginal" excludes gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (GLBTQ) youth and will "reinforce stereotypes about gender and sexual orientation."

Moral relativism is paramount in this guidebook as all decisions for teens are to be respected about whether "to be, or not to be, sexually active." Students must figure it out on their own as they learn to "develop their own values" apart from their parents.

Lesson one instructs students to discuss what they feel is OK for them to do as they learn the importance of "defining 'abstinence' for themselves." The behaviors that are listed include: cuddling without clothes on, giving oral sex, having anal intercourse, having vaginal intercourse, rubbing bodies together with clothes on, masturbating with a partner, touching a partner's genitals etc.

Lesson plans for this same age group include how to make a dental dam in case your child should choose to participate in "cunnilingus, analingus or rimming."

After all, the guide states, "People who are questioning their sexual orientation many experiment in an effort to determine their sexual identity."

Amanda assured attendees that all of their information is presented in a "non-biased format." When questioned from the audience as to why one classroom scenario refers to pregnant Kendra as pro-choice, but does not describe her boyfriend (who does not want her to have an abortion) as pro-life, Ms. Danzeisen replied, "The Birds & Bees Project uses the term anti-choice - not pro-life." So much for being non-biased!

Amanda also claimed that The Birds & Bees Project was not political. Students, however, are asked to discuss the following:"Why do you think people protest outside of abortion clinics? Do people protest other surgical procedures that are legal? Do you think it should be legal to protest outside of abortion clinics or do you think this is a form of harassment?"

Students are also told "There is no scientific evidence for the so-called "post-abortion trauma syndrome," and "The most common feelings women report after having an abortion are relief and happiness."

Youth ages 12 and up are taught the ABC plan for sex education. "A" stands for abstinence. Teachers, however, are instructed, "Tell your students that 99.9% of the population will stop practicing abstinence at some point in their lives." A sexual health back-up plan is the next step for students. The letter "B" stands for birth control and also Plan B - the brand mane for emergency contraception. The letter "C" stands for choice.

The Birds & Bees Project claims to "educate more than 8,000 young people in the Twin Cities metro area each year." After reviewing the guide, I believe the best choice parents can make is to pull their kids out of these classes! Find out what your child is learning in sex education this year. Ask your school district to reject The Birds & Bees Project and the "Educator's Guide to Reproductive Health."

Reporters guilty of incremental reporting

By Chuck Darrell

So far the local press has covered only half of OutFront's campaign for same-sex marriage via incremental, legislative steps. In today's Pioneer Press, Jason Hoppin focused on one bill - allowing local municipalities the option to offer benefits - while ignoring the second, which mandates that the state redefine marriage (domestic partnership) and allow benefits to those persons. How can the reader discern the overall plan when they only get half the story?

T. Budig, EMC capitol reporter repeats OutFront's talking point - "local control" - yet ignores the second bills state-wide mandate.

To his credit, Budig reports that Ann DeGroot, president of OutFront, admits there is no secret that the legislation is part on an attempt to achieve equal (same-sex marriage) rights for gays. But he fails to discuss OutFront's Summary of Legislative Proposals that lists nine objectives for the 2007 session.

I encourage Hoppin and Budig to report the whole story, not just selected increments.

"Fair minded common sense" understands OutFront will never compromise

By Chuck Darrell

OutFront begs the question whether it's the "Minnesota way" to draw attention to their Summary of Legislative Proposals. Apparently, "fair minded common sense" is keeping the voter clueless while legislators mandate state government to redefine marriage (domestic partnership) as two persons of the same-sex.

Would it be "fair minded" to question if their proposals pass, will OutFront demand more?

After the "no compromise" strategies in CT, VT and New Jersey, "common sense" says, no.

One small "incremental step" for OutFront - huge leap for state of Minnesota

By Chuck Darrell

According to the New York Daily news, the same day New Jersey legalized civil unions, Garden State Equality Chairman Steven Goldstein said "Civil unions are not marriage," and outlined a plan to legalize gay marriage in two years.

This same, no compromise, incremental strategy is well underway in Minnesota. In one week, OutFront Minnesota introduced two bills that escalated their benefits campaign from a local government option, to a statewide mandate that would also redefine family, (domestic partner) to include an adult of the same sex.

This may be one small, "incremental step" for OutFront, but it's a huge leap for the state of Minnesota.

Call your representatives and tell them you don't want to redefine family in Minnesota.

2nd benefits bill "requires" state to redefine domestic partner to include another adult of same-sex

By Chuck Darrell

Just days after introducing a bill that would allow municipalities the option of extending benefits to same-sex couples, a new bill has been introduced that would "require" state government to provide same. The bill would also redefine domestic partner as person of same sex.

This new bill is one of nine legislative proposals being pushed by OutFront this session.

So much for local control, now OutFront is requiring taxpayer funded benefits for same-sex couples state-wide. Excerpts from the bill indicate an aggressive attempt to redefine family state-wide.

"A bill for an act relating to state employees; requiring that health insurance benefits be made available to domestic partners of state employees..."

"'Domestic partner' means a person who has entered into a committed interdependent relationship with another adult of the same sex,..."

This is why Minnesota needs a marriage amendment. Last year legislators assured voters that our laws were sufficient to protect marriage and denied Minnesotan's the right to vote. We now call upon those legislators to assurethat these bills never make it out of committee - and begin efforts to pass the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment.