Vancouver resident Julia Dawn Seaver talks about the petition to repeal SB 5395, the bill requiring Comprehensive Sexual Education to be taught in all K-12 public schools
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
“Why are you against sex ed?” one mom asked, holding her young daughter’s hand. “Why don’t you want kids to know about their bodies?”
“We’re not against sex ed. We’re against this,” I replied, handing her a flyer with an excerpt from an OSPI sanctioned kindergarten lesson: “So a person with a vulva has three holes between their legs with a very sensitive area at the top called the clitoris.”
She read, slowly nodded as it registered, then looked up and reached to sign a petition to repeal SB 5395, the bill requiring Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE) to be taught in all K-12 public schools.
That lesson, in fact the entire 684-page, K-12 The 3 Rs curriculum, is available as a free download from a link on the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s (OSPI) site. But, it was never referred to in any mainstream news stories about SB 5395. No examples were. Neither was the fact CSE gives kids inaccurate and incomplete information. Instead, the media parroted supporters’ talking points: CSE is age-appropriate, medically accurate, and opponents are misinformed.
To understand what CSE is and where the influence comes from, look at those pushing for it: Planned Parenthood, who called SB 5395 “our bill;” The International Planned Parenthood Federation, who says, “ Our approach includes an emphasis on sexual expression, sexual fulfilment and pleasure, shifting away from focusing on the reproductive aspects of adolescent sexuality”; The World Health Organization, whose standards call for teaching masturbation to children under four; SIECUS, whose latest newsletter proclaimed “May is Masturbation Month” and proudly announced a portion of purchase proceeds from their three new corporate partners (all sex toy companies) would go to support their goal of “sex ed for social change.” These organizations and more were spawned from the “research” of Alfred Kinsey, who used data collected from a pedophile’s abuse of children as young as 5 months old. Read Kinsey’s Table 34 if you can stomach it. This is the basis for the idea that children are sexual from birth and the premise CSE is based on.
As soon as the referendum gets the required signatures, there will be a fresh round of attacks and misinformation lobbied against CSE opponents:
• Opponents are misinformed — hard to make that claim against people who have done their research on the bill and curricula, but they’ll do it anyway;
• That’s not what the bill says — the bill mandates CSE, you have to look at the curricula to know what’s going to be taught;
• Districts can choose their own curriculum — sure, from a list of curricula with the same objectionable elements;
• Parents can opt out — not from the culture change at school. Look up Shaw MS and “Molest Me Mondays;”
For the last six weeks, opponents have labored under difficult shutdown conditions to get the required signatures on Referendum 90 to get the issue before voters in November, without funds for advertising or paid signature gatherers, without promotion outside of a few conservative writers and radio hosts trying to get the word out in their local communities. This is truly a David vs. Goliath battle. The pro CSE group has all the money and the media. Opponents have the truth. The question is, will it be enough?
Julia Dawn Seaver