Pajamas Media

82 Comments

1. Ed Wallis:

“I really doubt he wanted the condom-banana demo.”

No doubt, it rarely starts off that way…

…just ends up with that and – ahem – more through “enhancing” the curriculum.

Sep 12, 2008 - 1:36 am 2. Suzi:

“Age Appropriate” sex ed for Kindergarteners? From what I’ve heard, it deals with alot more than I would want MY children to hear from an outsider. Talking about ’stranger danger’ should NOT even be included in ’sex ed’…that should be under ’safety’. These sex ed classes are dealing with homosexuality and other issues that should be talked about in the home. When the parents deem their child the appropriate age.

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:36 am 3. George Clarke:

“Palin is an evangelical Christian . . . ”

Please indulge me. Where is the evidence for that? She certainly never announced she was and I see no evidence of it. Evangelical Christians are proselytizers first and foremost. Running for mayor, and then state office, when did Palin ever have time for that?

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:59 am 4. More reax to Palin/ABC (running updates) | The Anchoress:

[...] O/T: Pajamas has a good piece on Where Palin really stands on Sex Ed. Hint: it’s not in the extreme spot most [...]

Sep 12, 2008 - 5:10 am 5. HRPKathy:

The “age appropriate” caveat is no where in the law. Find that section for me, will ya, Ms. Jacobs?

I’m weary already of the Article VI offenders who think there is a religious test for President. Evangelical Chistians are not first and foremost proselytizers, George. First and foremost they are striving to fulfill God’s purpose in their lives. That whole Romans 12 thing about people having differing purposes is there for a reason.

But she’s not a pit bull on social issues, or even a lipsticked pig. She sounds like … well, like a politician.

Sarah Palin has ‘nuanced views on abortion’? Are you kidding me? The fact that she acknowledges that the people NOT JUDGES should make cultural decisions? That is nuanced to you? That’s sounding like a ‘politician’ to you? Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. It sounds like someone who respects the Constitution and the people to me. A politician says “I’m for choice” with absolutely no specifics and with some sort of lip service to the value of human life.

Please take that turn of phrase “lipsticked pig” and stow it. It’s no less offensive when you say it.

The only one who looks like a ’sex-addled nut’ is Joanne Jacobs. Ms. Jacobs, I won’t hold my breath for you to cite the place in that law where it says ‘age appropriate’, because it isn’t in that law. Your argument is built on a house of cards.

Sep 12, 2008 - 5:49 am 6. Valerie:

“I really doubt he wanted the condom-banana demo.”

Maybe you ought to find out about that one. Barack Obama also said that he never heard anything extraordinary in Rev. Wright’s speeches, or, apparently, in the bulletin from Trinity Church. Obviously, his idea of “extraordinary” and mine are very different. It follows that his idea of “age appropriate” and mine might be different. I think five-year-olds should be learning about “puppies and guppies” in school. I’ve been led to believe that the curriculum the good Senator would mandate for five-year-olds delves into all the physiological details of the Adult Conspiracy, and for a bonus, discusses variants such as homosexuality. Maybe he thinks this is age-appropriate, maybe he just wasn’t listening and didn’t read the bulletin, and maybe the curriculum has been mischaracterized. I don’t know, because I haven’t seen a copy of the description of the curriculum.

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:05 am 7. RE:

‘Age appropriate’ is about as well defined as the concept of ‘fairness’. It can mean very different things to different people.

It’s another Trojan Horse.

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:08 am 8. Boris:

“The fact that she acknowledges that the people NOT JUDGES should make cultural decisions?”

So she would have been against Brown v Board of Education?

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:08 am 9. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Joanne Jacobs, et al.
RE: The Christian Perspective

It’s estimated 90 percent of parents choose abortion rather than raise a child with Down Syndrome. — Joanne Jacobs

That’s a shame. And perhaps something considerably worse.

Consider this….

But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. — Mark 10:14-15

There could be a deeper meaning than the face-value of that passage.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[We find a delight in the beauty and happiness of children, that makes the heart too big for the body. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:10 am 10. ZEITGEIST:

[...] JOANNE JACOBS: “War in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Russia’s invasion of Georgia, the fragile economy, health insurance … Who knew the 2008 election would center on sex education?” [...]

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:15 am 11. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Boris v. the Law

“The fact that she acknowledges that the people NOT JUDGES should make cultural decisions?”

So she would have been against Brown v Board of Education? — Boris [Bad Enough]

Boris doesn’t QUITE understand the difference between parsing the Constitution of the United States and activist judges making up the law as they go along.

Case in Point #1: Brown v. Board of Education…

Obviously, people were not being treated equally, as the Constitution of the United States calls for. So the justices parsed it properly.

Case in Point #2: Reynolds v. Simms….

Activist justices destroyed the balance of legislative power between metropolitan and rural areas in every state that had a two-chamber legislative body.

Case in Point #3: Roe v. Wade….

I wonder if Boris can point out in the Constitution where it says women have the ‘right’ to kill their children.

I doubt it.

I could go on and on….but….I’ve gotta make breakfast….

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Evil men understand not judgment... -- Proverbs]

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:19 am 12. Wildmonk:

She sounded like a pretty typical right-center parent to me with a pretty good grasp of the realities of the issue. I really cannot think of a single parent that I know or a single politician who doesn’t believe that A) waiting until you are older is better for kids and B) kids will likely want to play around anyway.

What is really weird here is simply how many people want to paint her as an extremist. Seriously, don’t they recognize that everyone knows that they are just making stuff up for political advantage?

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:19 am 13. ronbo:

I never thought I’d see a sex ed program I’d disapprove of, but when my son was in third grade in NYC he brought home a booklet that described intercourse and masturbation and was illustrated with line drawings – including a drawing that showed how to put on a condom. But no exploitation of fruit in the classroom! Although, if they remember what they saw most of the boys in that class will grow up feeling inadequate – think cucumber not banana.

There was actually quite a bit of discontent with that curriculum – which was billed as “experimental” – even among the very liberal parents in his school. I believe the experiment was not repeated.

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:32 am 14. Dave E.:

“I really doubt he wanted the condom-banana demo.”

I agree, but there is also a lot more to the curriculum that some consider age appropriate for kindergartners. One of Obama’s campaign staff cited the Sexuality Information And Education Council of the United States curriculum when this came up last year. You can read their guidelines for sexuality education at their website:

http://www.siecus.org/_data/global/images/guidelines.pdf

There is much more in that curriculum for ages five to eight than just “bad touches” and “stranger danger”. I’m open to a debate on if that curriculum is or is not appropriate for a five year old, but let’s talk about the real curriculum and not cover it up as this phony “good touch, bad touch” stuff.

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:50 am 15. Self-hating boomer:

I’m weary already of the Article VI offenders who think there is a religious test for President. Evangelical Christians are not first and foremost proselytizers, George.

Similarly, Republicans are by far not the most likely to inject religion into politics. The most smugly sanctimonious “born again” Christian president in history, hands down, was Carter. Obama’s trying to give him a run for his money however, with his pseudo-Christian black liberation junk theology.

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:04 am 16. Boris:

Embryos aren’t children. Unless you think it’s possible to freeze children for a few years.

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:04 am 17. elHombre:

Boris wrote: ““The fact that she acknowledges that the people NOT JUDGES should make cultural decisions?”

So she would have been against Brown v Board of Education?”

Read your history before doing the troll bit, Boris.

Brown overruled Plessy, which was the “separate but equal” case. I don’t think the Supremes were making social policy when they pointed out that “separate but equal” is not supported by the Constitution.

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:18 am 18. Chuck Pelto:

TO: elHombre
RE: Additionally….

I don’t think the Supremes were making social policy when they pointed out that “separate but equal” is not supported by the Constitution. — elHombre

….the case was brought forward when it was obvious that despite the misnomer of ’separate by equal’ was not really ‘equal’ at all.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. -- Abraham Lincoln]

P.S. Boris is the prime example of the truth in that axiom….

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:28 am 19. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Joanne Jacobs
RE: Who Decides?

As a state senator, Obama voted for a law authorizing “age-appropriate” sex education in kindergarten through 12th grade. — Joanne Jacobs

Who would decide what is “age-appropriate” sex education in kindergarten?

How about the sort of fine folks who run some ’strange’ and ‘perverse’ street fair in San Fran? Or, as someone else here commented whoever came up with the explicit sex-education for a 3d grader?

Attacked earlier for his vote, he said he wanted schools to warn kindergartners about “bad touches” and “stranger danger.” — Joanne Jacobs

Was that in writing in the bill he supported? If not, as the saying goes, ‘talk is cheap’.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The field behind rhetoric is oft mined with equivocation.]

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:36 am 20. elHombre:

Boris wrote: “Embryos aren’t children. Unless you think it’s possible to freeze children for a few years.”

The victims of partial birth abortion and Obamacide, children born alive after induced labor abortion, aren’t embryos, unless you think a viable fetus or a child born prematurely is an embryo.

Although unless you profess to think that, you have to offer a moral or ethical defense for these killings. It’s probably better to look ignorant than immoral, so just keep talkin’, Boris.

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:40 am 21. Jay:

Joanne Jacobs wrote: “What wouldn’t she support? … Not clear”

How about maybe she doesn’t support school-based clinics (STD/pregency) and the distribution of contraceptives in schools (comdoms and birth control pills)?

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:45 am 22. wumhenry:

Don’t kid yourself: *Brown* was an activist decision, too. There’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution that clearly prohibits racially segregated public schools, and the *Plessy* precedent had been “good law” for something like 80 years when the Warren court overturned it. I’m sure that public-school racial segregation would have been abolished long before now even if *Brown* had upheld *Plessy*, and I also think the country would’ve been better off that way.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:01 am 23. jvon:

Poor liberals, their brains must be shorting out. As far as I can tell Palin’s position on abortion (for practical purposes) is exactly the same as mine, and I am ambivalent about it. She’s hardly a pro-life crusader.

As for her religious views, why are they suddenly an issue? Has Alaska tried to teach creationism in schools or something when I wasn’t paying attention? Or is the problem that she attended a church that actually taught, you know, religion, as opposed to some bizarre racially tinged brand of Marxism?

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:07 am 24. HRPKathy:

Similarly, Republicans are by far not the most likely to inject religion into politics. The most smugly sanctimonious “born again” Christian president in history, hands down, was Carter. Obama’s trying to give him a run for his money however, with his pseudo-Christian black liberation junk theology.

~boomer

You’ve got a good point there, Boomer, it just needs a bit of fine tuning. Although Carter and Obama have religious ‘issues’, it was Bill Clinton who called on such stalwarts of the ‘faith’ as Rev. Jesse Jackson to help him “overcome his sexual predilections”. Democrats notoriously cloak themselves with phony reverends (Rev. ‘Tawana Brawley’ Al Sharpton, anyone?) when they need to score a point under piety or redemption.

Republicans generally refer to bedrock foundations of faith common to the judeo-christian traditions. The sanctity of life has become more of a scientific dilemma as advances enable viability and understanding the anatomy of unborn children, however religion has held it’s opinion steady on the issue for generations. As a scientist, I’m often pleased when science catches up to religion.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:20 am 25. TheOldMan:

A big point in favor of abstinence sex-ed is that it teaches kids that they are not animals, they do not have to give in to their urges. This teaches self-control, self-discipline. If you can control your sexual urges which are probably the strongest hormone induced desires, then you will be way ahead of those who cannot. And not just wrt sex but in many areas of life.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:36 am 26. Trish Phillips:

The liberals want everyone to be “pro choice”….Sarah Palin and her family are “pro choice”……they made their choice for Sarah to have and love their down syndrome child and Bristol made a choice to not abort, but to marry her boyfriend and become a family with her soon to be new husband and child.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:38 am 27. neoneo:

Fornication with unclean spirits is graver sin compared to adultery, abortion and even sodomism. Palin is a cocky wacko from Pentecostal church which indulges in orgies with unclean spirits. If she is elected you need to put carpets all over White House, lest she fall down in religious convulsions being possessed by a spirit, as Pentacostals do in their churches.

Worst thing that may happen if unclean spirit will take control of US military and then our people will be lunching nukes without questioning from whom they get their orders.

God damn all unclean spirits with whom Pentacostals fornicate!

God save America from this unclean woman, she may get us all killed!

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:42 am 28. ADF Alliance Alert » Joanne Jacobs: Where Sarah Palin Really Stands on Sex Education:

[...] Jacobs, writing at Pajamas Media: Running for governor of Alaska in 2006, Sarah Palin filled out a questionnaire [...]

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:44 am 29. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Joanne Jacobs
RE: Out?

Teen pregnancy happens in every sort of family, but it’s uncommon these days for a middle-class girl to reject abortion and get married while still in high school. Again, the Palins were out of the mainstream. — Joanne Jacobs

And what makes you think that this is a ‘bad’ think? I can point out more indications that it’s a good think than you can it’s a ‘bad’ one. However, there’s probably a crucial difference in world-view that prevents YOU from seeing it with the vision Palin and I share.

On the one hand, it supports serving Life over Death.

On the other hand, it supports serving others over serving ones self[ishness].

On the third hand, it supports serving the powerless [the children] over the powerful.

So….tell US….

…what is wrong with any of those principles?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes. -- Andrew Jackson]

P.S. Think Roe v. Wade…..

…then think of all the money the abortionists make passing out understrength ‘birth-control’ pills and performing the ‘necessary’ abortions resulting therefrom….

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:46 am 30. Chuck Pelto:

TO: wumhenry
RE: Another Boris

Don’t kid yourself: *Brown* was an activist decision, too. There’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution that clearly prohibits racially segregated public schools, and the *Plessy* precedent had been “good law” for something like 80 years when the Warren court overturned it. — wumhenry

I’m not kidding myself. And I think I’m a better student of the Law than you are.

How many cases have you argued before a judge or a military tribunal?

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:51 am 31. Chuck Pelto:

TO: neoneo
RE: Soooo….

Fornication with unclean spirits is graver sin compared to adultery, abortion and even sodomism. Palin is a cocky wacko from Pentecostal church which indulges in orgies with unclean spirits. — neoneo

….what variety of ‘christian’ are you?

And, answer me this…

Has the Christ come in the flesh?

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:54 am 32. Sheila:

Trish Phillips – the Liberals want everyone to be “Pro-Choice” provided it’s the one choice of which they approve – ie abortion. Ergo, Liberals are actually Pro-Death. Doesn’t sound so Right-On when it’s stated like that…..

Before any Liberals have a go at me, if the above analysis is untrue, then why the public outcry because (a) Sarah Palin and her husband did not consider abortion and (b)neither did her daughter?

Sep 12, 2008 - 10:13 am 33. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Trish Phillips
RE: Pro-What?

the Liberals want everyone to be “Pro-Choice” provided it’s the one choice of which they approve – ie abortion. Ergo, Liberals are actually Pro-Death. — Trish Phillips

Sounds accurate to me.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Socialism [American 'Progressive' Liberalism] is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. — Winston Churchill]

P.S. Their form of ‘death’ is misery at its worst.

Sep 12, 2008 - 10:17 am 34. Boris:

“Before any Liberals have a go at me, if the above analysis is untrue, then why the public outcry because (a) Sarah Palin and her husband did not consider abortion and (b)neither did her daughter?”

Can you not see the difference between questioning someone’s decision and depriving them of the right to make a decision?

Sep 12, 2008 - 10:55 am 35. Herb:

Joanne, I’m so glad that I read your piece all the way to the end. Your fairness to Obama was commendable. You don’t see much of that on this site.

Sep 12, 2008 - 10:58 am 36. Joanne Jacobs:

You can read SB 99, the bill Obama voted for, at http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=99&GAID=3&LegID=734&SpecSess=&Session=

The relevant section is this:

“All course material and instruction in classes that teach sex education and discuss sexual activity or behavior shall be age and developmentally appropriate.”

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:02 am 37. Palin on sex education at Joanne Jacobs:

[...] Pajamas Media column on Sarah Palin and sex education argues that she’s not an anti-contraception extremist, but some commenters see everything as [...]

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:10 am 38. elHombre:

Boris wrote: “Can you not see the difference between questioning someone’s decision and depriving them of the right to make a decision?”

Can you and the other libs not see that the decision not to have an abortion is a personal, not a political, decision. There is no moral, ethical or political basis from which to argue that it was/is wrong for the Palin family members to choose life over abortion.

O-o-o-h, unless you’re talking eugenics here. Is that what you folks are talking, Boris? Well, of course it is!

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:10 am 39. Herb:

“Before any Liberals have a go at me, if the above analysis is untrue, then why the public outcry because (a) Sarah Palin and her husband did not consider abortion and (b)neither did her daughter?”

Was there even an outcry about the Palin women deciding to carry their children to term? I don’t think there was…

There was an outcry about why Palin decided to give a speech, fly to Alaska, and go to some far off hospital when her water broke…But I haven’t seen anyone actually questioning her decision to have Trig.

Can you provide even a single example of what you’re talking about?

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:15 am 40. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Joanne Jacobs
RE: Uuuuuuhhhh…

“All course material and instruction in classes that teach sex education and discuss sexual activity or behavior shall be age and developmentally appropriate.” — Joanne Jacobs

Where did you learn English? I mean, vis-a-vis my query of WHO decides what is ‘appropriate’?

Sakes…..

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:27 am 41. Chuck Pelto:

P.S. Thanks for providing the text of the legislation.

Allow me to say this…

[1] It IS an example of Obama wanting sex education taught to children before they can even read.

[2] The idea of a child of ≤ 5 years of age being able to comprehend legal ramifications of something like ‘inappropriate intimate touching’ would require some proof that they understand such.

[3] Again, I ask who decides what is the ‘appropriate’ level of education for some age-group. As someone else mentioned here (above), they were dismayed to discover what ‘educators’ thought was an ‘appropriate’ level of education in sex for a 3d grader. Obviously someone slipped through the ’system’ with regards to THAT incident. Then again there are such educational materials as “Daddy’s Roomate” and “Heather Has Two Mommies”.

[4] Then again we get to the business about why you think Palin and family are not ‘mainstream’. That is as if the ‘mainstream’ was the best course of action.

After all….

….didn’t your mother ever say to you….

If everyone else were jumping off a cliff, would you do it too?

0

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:41 am 42. elHombre:

Herb wrote: Was there even an outcry about the Palin women deciding to carry their children to term? I don’t think there was…
Can you provide even a single example of what you’re talking about?”

Here are couple. They are legion — and easy to find.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/sarah-palin-dow.html

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/SC_Dem_chair_Palin_primary_qualification_is_she_hasnt_had_an_abortion_.html?showall

Of course, eugenics isn’t an “official” part of the Democratic Party Platform, but it’s right up there unofficially.

Sep 12, 2008 - 1:21 pm 43. Heather:

Was there even an outcry about the Palin women deciding to carry their children to term? I don’t think there was…

In addition to ElHombre’s links, check any feminist website (Feministing, anything they link).

Sep 12, 2008 - 2:30 pm 44. Herb:

To” Chuck Pelto
Re: The mainstream.

You wrote: “Then again we get to the business about why you think Palin and family are not ‘mainstream’. That is as if the ‘mainstream’ was the best course of action.”

Chuck, you seem to be confused about what mainstream is. The mainstream is the comfortable middle where most people truly live and think. Mainstream is political moderation, cultural ubiquity, and consensus opinion.

Apparently you view “mainstream” pejoratively and prefer, what? Someone who’s more fringe than mainstream?

Also, elHombre, do you have better examples? The first one is about a Canadian doctor, which is all fine and dandy but hardly relevant to most Americans. And the second one is obviously sarcasm. More please.

Sep 12, 2008 - 2:32 pm 45. 101 Articles » Blog Archive » Where Palin Really Stands on Sex Education:

[...] Originally posted here: Where Palin Really Stands on Sex Education [...]

Sep 12, 2008 - 3:05 pm 46. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Herb
RE: Missing the Point…Eh?

Apparently you view “mainstream” pejoratively and prefer, what? Someone who’s more fringe than mainstream? — Herb

Riddle me this….

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Who said it?

What does it mean?

How does it relate to the ‘mainstream’?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. As I asked of Joanne…

….but more appropriately restate it here….

If all your friends were jumping off a cliff, would you join them?

Sep 12, 2008 - 3:12 pm 47. Herb:

That’s John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim’s Progress. Great story. Decidedly non-canon though.

Also, we’re not talking theology. We’re talking about society and what’s best for it. A consensus approach focusing on the common good? How can that be bad?

That’s mainstream, bud. I’ll take the dullest mainstream candidate over the fieriest fringe one any day.

Sep 12, 2008 - 3:44 pm 48. neoneo:

To:Chuck Pelto
Re: denomination

Chuck>And, answer me this…

Has the Christ come in the flesh?

neoneo>yes, St John says so.

Regarding the position on Penetecostals I expressed: it is shared by Catholics, Orthodoxs and Adventists. I heared a lot about Pentecostals from Adventists.
I am not denominational, but it all makes sense to me.

Name me any Jewish prophet who would fall down on his back with lost consciousness and being posessed by spirit? Who was that?
I will tell you. All their prophetic experiences are very close to the prophetic experience of Mo-Ham-Mad. Read hadits, my American friend.

Regards,
neoneo (Sergey, VT when bloging in humanevents.com)

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:03 pm 49. Von:

The Illnois bill Obama voted for is online and can be read and NOWHERE in the bill is “age appropriate” or wording that equals it mentioned. Read it for yourself as this article misrepresents what the bill states.

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:04 pm 50. Tim:

Palin also has nuanced/muddled views on banning abortion. During the 2006 campaign, the Anchorage Daily News asked: “If Roe v. Wade were overturned and states could once again prohibit abortion … should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?” Palin answered: ”Under this hypothetical scenario, it would not be up to the governor to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values.”

There’s nothing muddled about Palin’s abortion stance. She just respects the separation of powers. If Roe is overturned, the decision goes to state legislatures, not governors. (The leftists have long tried to make it seem that overturning Roe would somehow outlaw abortions nationwide…)

At the time, Obama’s daughters were three and six years old. I really doubt he wanted the condom-banana demo.

Well, the text of the bill requires that the kindergarteners receive “instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV.” It also requires that they be taught that abstinence is an effective method of prevention — how do you teach abstinence without teaching what is being abstained from?

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:16 pm 51. Chuck Pelto:

TO: neoneo
RE: Stop Evading

neoneo>yes, St John says so. — neoneo

I KNOW what John said.

I want to know what YOU say.

Has the Christ come in the flesh?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Prevaricator, n., liar in the larval form of development.]

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:46 pm 52. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Herb
RE: Stop Evading the Question

What is meant by that citation I gave you?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Same tag-line as to neoneo....]

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:48 pm 53. mariner:

Ms. Jacobs, have you seen the actual sex education curriculum that Obama supported?

Are you sure you know what is in it?

My view is that there is no “age-appropriate” sex education for kindergartners.

Teaching young children to be careful around strangers or to report inappropriate touching is not sex education.

Sep 12, 2008 - 5:21 pm 54. Herb:

Chuck,

Within the context of the allegory, it speaks to redemption by Jesus. Within a discussion of the mainstream, it probably speaks to how the mainstream sucks and it’s better to be a hipster brooding in the corner by yourself. No?

The mainstream flows right or left depending on the moment, but nevertheless that’s where most people are by definition.

Also, I enjoy your amusing non sequiturs, like “Has the Christ come in the flesh?” That’s the kind of question you can ponder all day and never come close to answering.

Sep 12, 2008 - 5:53 pm 55. Herb:

mariner, so you oppose the label, not the actual proposal…

Good to know.

Sep 12, 2008 - 5:54 pm 56. Dave E.:

Joanne Jacobs-I think that you are missing the bigger picture here. Going beyond the specific bill you link to, it is clear that:

1. Sen. Obama has gone on the record in the past as being for “age appropriate” sex education that includes kindergartners.
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3386492

2. When asked to clarify his comments then, a spokesman “issued a document showing that the Oregon Department of Education has guidelines for sex education for children in grades K-3 (which includes understanding the difference between a good touch and a bad touch), and that the Sexuality Information And Education Council of the United States has curriculum for those in kindergarten.”
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/19/277886.aspx

3. The SIECUS guideline defines as age appropriate for children five to eight years old:

a. Teaching the medically correct names of the male and female sex organs.
b. That “Vaginal intercourse – when a penis is placed inside a vagina – is the most common way for a sperm and egg to join.”
c. The general concept that there are herosexual and homosexual people.
d. Some boys and girls masturbate and others do not.
http://www.siecus.org/_data/global/images/guidelines.pdf

There is much more to those guidelines and in some ways much of it is not objectionable to me, except in the sense that I wonder if the topic should be discussed at all, in this kind detail, at the age of five or six. What some people consider “age appropriate” goes far beyond the “bad touch” stuff, and we deserve to know what Sen. Obama means in detail when he talks about “age appropriate” sex education to kindergartners. Perhaps he agrees with the SIECUS guidelines and perhaps he doesn’t agree, in all or part.

You can do a great service to your readers by delving deeper into this and I hope you do.

Regards,
Dave

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:01 pm 57. neoneo:

To: Chuck
Re: Evading?
Chuck>I want to know what YOU say.

Has the Christ come in the flesh?

neoneo>I trust St. John and I say yes. Obviously.

Do you think that I can be a wakco like one atheist in Italy who tried to proof in court that Jesus Christ had never existed for real?

So, Chuck, do you have any problem with my positive answer to your question? Are you yourself Pentecostal by any chance? (perhaps that may explain some of you previous stuns, but I hope you are not a Pentecostal.)

May God deliver you from evil.

Love,
neoneo

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:36 pm 58. nick:

wumhenry – you are a bloody MORON

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:42 pm 59. nick:

of course the GOP and catholic priest perverts dont want age approriated education so they can continue their predatory ways

Sep 12, 2008 - 6:43 pm 60. Sharon Johnson:

You know I want someone who understands what it is to be a parent and to experience what we everyday working men and women experience. When I hear Obama and Biden talk about being out of touch I believe it is them that are out of touch. If we want to get on the subject of pro-choice let’s talk about Obama not voting to protect babies who survive abortion. I believe that for a baby to survive and abortion and then set aside and not given medical treatment is murder. This is a human being who is breathing and they are allowed to die. So I would rather see someone who has made the choice to keep their child than someone who thinks it is ok to put a baby aside to die because it is an inconvience.

Sep 12, 2008 - 7:11 pm 61. nlcatter:

pro choice says a woman cant go to full term if that is HER Chocie, not the rapists choice, not the incestous father choice (as in Austria), and not the GOP government when her health is threatened.

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:27 pm 62. Morris:

Sorry, but Obama did vote for this sex ed for kindergarteners bill

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-voted-for-sex-ed-for-kindergartners

Sep 12, 2008 - 8:45 pm 63. Javelin:

The federal govenment, based on the traditions of federalism, should have little or no say on education issues. Don’t hold your breathe for anyone to put that into practice. This sounds like just election year pandering, saying Obama wants to teach toddlers oral sex while assuring everyone else that she isn’t some abstinence only shrew.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:02 pm 64. Javelin:

Oh no, please spare me the hype on both ends, we all know Obama is pro-abortion while McCain and Palin are anti-abortion. I could care less about all the moralizing from both sides, I’ve heard it all a thousand times in the last 30 years

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:04 pm 65. nw:

yes Obama pushed education – informing K grade about inappropriate touching, you know, to keep them safer from pedophile priests and GOP congressmen who whine about abortion while diddling little boys!

so we know where Mccain stands – he favors stem cell research.

Sep 12, 2008 - 9:21 pm 66. nw:

bye, im going to mccain blogs,

Palin has proved to be good at recalling cue cards with no analytical ability.

Sep 12, 2008 - 10:56 pm 67. nw:

pro choice is not pro abortion

I know many who do not want abortions to take place but dont want GOVENRMENT to rule their lives even more.

Sep 12, 2008 - 11:00 pm 68. lee:

@NW

“yes Obama pushed education – informing K grade about inappropriate touching”

You really believe this is a selling point for Obama?

Yeah, let’s make an educational video about predatory priests and boy loving GOP congressmen (because pedophiles can’t be liberals *snicker*)and show it to kindergarteners during sex ed courses. Why not teach them about condoms and self defense techniques? Fool, there’s a reason why we wait until they reach a mature age to discuss sex ed.

I’ve taught preshcoolers and first graders. Sure well tell them to avoid strangers and exercise caution. But sex ed for kindergarteners, what kind of drug are you on?

Sep 13, 2008 - 2:54 am 69. Chuck Pelto:

TO: neoneo
RE: Still Evading…Eh….

neoneo>I trust St. John and I say yes. Obviously. — neoneo

Obviously….you are not a christian. So none of your report is to be considered accurate.

Good-bye.

Chuck(le)
[Every violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]

Sep 13, 2008 - 4:47 am 70. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Herb
RE: The Allegory

Within the context of the allegory, it speaks to redemption by Jesus. Within a discussion of the mainstream, it probably speaks to how the mainstream sucks and it’s better to be a hipster brooding in the corner by yourself. No? — Herb

Yes and no. Yes in the first two sentences. No to everything after “….and it’s better….”

After all. I’m hardly what any reasonably prudent individual would call ‘brooding in the corner by myself’.

The mainstream flows right or left depending on the moment, but nevertheless that’s where most people are by definition. — Herb

As I commented, if all those people were jumping off a cliff, i.e., doing something that means death, would you join them? I suspect you would. After all. All those people can’t be wrong. Right?

On the other hand, maybe they are. And if you join them, unthinkingly because they are the majority…..

It all boils down to your world-view. And part and parcel of that is what is the basis for your moral and ethical code of conduct.

RE: That Non Sequitur Question

Also, I enjoy your amusing non sequiturs, like “Has the Christ come in the flesh?” That’s the kind of question you can ponder all day and never come close to answering. — Herb

Real Christians know better than that.

You apparently haven’t studied your enemy very much. Otherwise, you’d understand the question and my rejection of the alleged answer provided by neoneo.

He’s being evasive. He knows it. And he knows why he’s doing it. Christians who understand the reason for the question will recognize his evasions for what they are.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Know your enemy and know yourself and you shall never be defeated. -- Sun Tzu, The Art of War]

Sep 13, 2008 - 5:04 am 71. Valerie:

Dave E

Thank you for posting the link to the Sexuality Information And Education Council of the United States curriculum cited by Obama’s campaign staff, which is repeated below.

http://www.siecus.org/_data/global/images/guidelines.pdf

No wonder people object to it.

To be fair to Barack Obama, this document should be submitted to him, and he should be asked if he thinks the guidelines in this document for 5-year-olds are appropriate.

Sep 13, 2008 - 8:52 am 72. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Valerie
RE: Not Just Obama

I want to know if Joanne Jacobs agrees with it.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Sep 13, 2008 - 9:36 am 73. neoneo:

TO: Chuck
RE: and what about you?

St John 1:14. “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.”

If you think that my belief in this statement disqulifies me from being a Christian you must be a wacko or a cult member.

Chuck, what kind of Christian you are? You seems not a Catholic or Adventist. So what you are? Please state what is your denomination?

Take care,
neoneo

Sep 13, 2008 - 9:47 am 74. Chuck Pelto:

TO: neoneo
RE: What Kind?

Chuck, what kind of Christian you are? You seems not a Catholic or Adventist. So what you are? Please state what is your denomination? — neoneo

There are no such things as ‘denomination’. There is only Christ.

RE: Is That All You Have to Offer?

St John 1:14. “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.” — neoneo

Mere Evasions? As with all of your other non-answers?

Why am I not surprised. It is as I expected.

You’re merely evading my simple question. Hoping that I’ll ‘assume’ you’ve given me the proper answer to that question. When, looking at your answers in a logical manner, you have not. All you’ve done is obfuscate.

It’s as if your fingers would break off if you were to type the simple answer to that question that would prove you were a REAL christian. Either that or your true allegiance would be exposed.

If you think that my belief in this statement disqulifies me from being a Christian you must be a wacko or a cult member. — neoneo

Yes. I’m a wacko ‘cult member’. Someone/Something outside the realm of denominationalism.

You call yourself ‘neoneo’. And it’s rather interesting that you are not. You’re just more of the samesame I’ve encountered over the last 18 years, after becoming a real follower of Christ.

As I said earlier, “Good-bye….”. There will be no further communications between us from my end in this venue. As I think I’ve explained the situation sufficiently for others to appreciate. Let them decide for themselves…..

Regards,

Chuck(le)

P.S. If you wish to address the nature of your malfunction in greater depth, please contact me by clicking on my name at the top of this comment. Otherwise…….

Sep 13, 2008 - 11:02 am 75. neoneo:

Chuck,
Every Christian aspire to be a real Christian. To claim that you are real and others are not without showing any evidences is preposterous. You asked me a specific question, I gave you affirmative answer “yes”. I asked you a question and you gave me a load of non answers.

Chuck> Yes. I’m a wacko ‘cult member’.

neoneo> You saith.

Chuck>…Someone/Something outside the realm of denominationalism.

neoneo>We both are outside of the realm of denominationalism, but our beliefs are different. I still believe in St Johns Gospel you seems do not.

It seems that you are not a Pentecostal/member of Assembly of God. I still wonder what happened 18 years ago when you became “a real follower of Christ.”

Good bye, my impenetrable, inscrutable and perplexing friend. Let us see how others will appreciate your (non) answers

Sep 13, 2008 - 5:46 pm 76. dustbury.com » Something of a misfire:

[...] Jacobs considers Sarah Palin’s sex-education stance — let’s say it’s not all that wide — and tosses a barb at that other guy on [...]

Sep 13, 2008 - 8:07 pm 77. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: neoneo….

….seems to have problems understanding English.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of [all] the people who don’t do anything about it. — Albert Einstein]

Sep 13, 2008 - 10:37 pm 78. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Joanne Jacobs
RE: Waiting….

….on your reply to the question about whether or not it is appropriate to teach kindergarteners about sex before they know how to read.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[It is easier to denature plutonium of its radioactivity than to denature men of their evil. -- Albert Einstein]

Sep 14, 2008 - 9:40 am 79. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: [OT] The Plight of neoneo

Anyone who wishes to discuss this off-topic matter is welcome to participate, or just observe and learn.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil. -- Proverbs]

Sep 14, 2008 - 10:10 am 80. Chuck Pelto:

P.S. Just click on my name….

Sep 14, 2008 - 10:21 am 81. bmc:

Sarah Palin is clearly an anomaly in our political world! She has her own personal convictions, yet doesn’t consider them defacto national policy! How refreshing!

Sep 15, 2008 - 7:33 am 82. jms2qc:

Joe Biden’s opinion: “He thinks life starts at conception but wouldn’t impose his beliefs on others. (He’s voted to maintain abortion rights.)” could easily be reversed and used to oppose pro-life views. Biden is one example of the many contradictions going on in the political arena today. So grey is this area, it’s a wonder why it is one of the main platforms in this election.

Sep 15, 2008 - 5:09 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: