Letter: ‘It was clear the Democratic majority pushing this bill does not want to hear from the people they represent’

Clark County resident Gary Wilson shares his thoughts about recent hearing on House Bill 2184 (Comprehensive Sexual Health Education)

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com

On Thursday morning, Jan. 15, the Washington State House of Representatives Education Committee held a hearing on HB2184 in Olympia. An estimated 200 people came from hundreds of miles across the state. An overwhelmingly majority (at least 75 percent) were there opposed to this mandated teaching in all public schools of the highly controversial Comprehensive Sex Education.

Gary Wilson
Gary Wilson

The 8 a.m. meeting was over by 9:45 a.m. and allowed for less than 30 minutes of public testimony. Ninety-four people signed up to speak and only 16 were given the opportunity. An equal amount of Pro and Opposed speakers were allowed (8) although the number of people who showed up in opposition far outweighed the number of those in favor, though many of those opposed were unaware of how to sign up on-line for public comment. 

It was clear the Democratic majority pushing this bill does not want to hear from the people they represent. This was obstruction of public testimony. They have an agenda, and community input is restricted when the majority is not in favor of their controversial bill. It is time for legislators to serve the people and not silence them. 

Case in point, the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) had a state-wide survey where the far majority of respondents (of over 10,000) said they were opposed to all or parts of the Comprehensive Sex Education curriculum. Sadly, the curriculum is almost impossible for parents to view (only two days in the year). I was told by the Evergreen School District a date of Oct. 15, which I could not make, and the next date to view was March 15 (a full five months later). I’m still waiting for that date to roll around, only two more months now. 

Why is it so hard for parents to view the material taught to our children? It appears that is by design. They do not want concerned parents to know what is in this material because they know the vast majority would reject major portions of it. The pieces I have been able to reconstruct through other groups sharing information bares that out. 

The CSE/FLASH curriculum, I’m told, includes teaching anal and oral sex without the risks involved.  There is an explicit description of an orgasm with step-by-step details. The list goes on. Why is the parent not the first teacher of this information? And on their time table, not a time table determined by bureaucrats and politicians.  

Below are excerpts from workbooks titled “Get real: Comprehensive Sex Education that works,’’ published by Planned Parenthood and adopted just this past week by the state of Massachusetts House of Representatives for public school instruction.  

• Grade 6 workbook: “Eric’s parents are out late, and he has some friends over. Eric’s friend Greg tells Eric that if they get drunk, maybe the girl Eric likes will make out with him.’’ (Lesson 6.3) 

• Grade 7 workbook: “Brittany’s girlfriend wants to have oral sex with her. Brittany really likes her girlfriend, and her friends say that having oral sex will bring them closer together.’’ (Lesson 7.9)   

As a parent or grandparent you can decide if this goes beyond what you believe the public school should be teaching our children. They are our children, not the state’s. My daughter’s elementary school (where Monica Stonier spends part of her year when she is not in session) has a saying on the wall ending with “… and are our kids, not yours, not mine, ours.’’ That concerned me before I found out about Comprehensive Sex Ed, now it scares me into action. 

A week ago last Saturday I attended Monica Stonier’s (Vancouver’s 49th Legislative District Representative) town hall meeting. I assumed we were going to be able to ask questions via an open mic the way Vicki Kraft (17th legislative District Representative) ran her town hall last May as well as Vicki’s town hall held just this past Saturday. 

Sadly, at Monica Stonier’s town hall all the questions had to be pre-submitted. She then decided which one’s she wanted to answer. By her own admission at the time, she had more questions about Comprehensive Sex Ed than any other topic. At least 30 people in attendance were there for that very reason, however, only two questions were read and they were easier ones at that. Only nine minutes of a 90-minute meeting was spent on the topic with the most concern and no feedback to the canned answers was allowed, democracy in action. 

I applaud Vicki for her transparency and bravery for answering hard questions on the fly, and even harder follow-up questions. I expose Monica for her obvious lack of transparency and cowardice in hand selecting only the questions she wanted to answer, let alone allow for any follow up questions to her answers. Their difference in style and substance was quantitative as well as the difference in integrity. 

Gary Wilson
Vancouver

Advertisement

About The Author

Related posts