STOP the War on Children

June 12, 2011

June, No Longer the Month of Brides?

Dr. Karen Gushta

The month of June used to be associated with brides and weddings. Now President Obama has proclaimed it “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.”

 

Obama is not the first president to make such a proclamation. In 1999 and 2000, President Clinton marked June as “Gay and Lesbian Pride Month.” Ten years later, more categories of “proud” gender types have been added.   

President George W. Bush declined to bow to pressure from homosexual activists to make similar declarations. His Justice Department also barred a group of federal employees from celebrating the month with this appellation.

Why designate June as “LGBT Pride Month?” As The Daily Caller points out, “June was chosen in honor of the 1969 Greenwich Village riots at the Stonewall Inn where gay rights advocates clashed with New York City police over alleged discrimination.”

It was more than a “clash.” At one point police barricaded themselves inside the bar while the angry mob outside tried to set the bar on fire and used a parking meter as a battering ram in an effort to break down the door to get at the policemen inside.

 

The event, which took place in the early hours of June 28, 1969, is marked as the beginning of the “gay rights” movement. Soon after, the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) was formed. The GLF was short-lived, but it introduced the term “gay” to Americans, most of whom would not imagine calling the homosexual lifestyle “gay.”

For 20 years, homosexual activists made modest impact on American culture at large. Then, in 1989, two Harvard homosexual intellectuals, Hunter Madsen and Marshall Kirk, teamed up to write After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s.   

 

Jonathan Kirsch wrote at the time in The Los Angeles Times that “the essential message of the book is an urgent demand for a fundamental change in the very nature of gay activism. The gay community, Kirk and Madsen argue, has resorted to the wrong arguments, the wrong symbols, and the wrong acts of protest. And the authors of ‘After the Ball’ think that they have a better idea.”

Their “better idea” was to exchange the tools of violent protests and barricades exemplified by the Stonewall Riots for “the story boards and 30-second spots of Madison Avenue, a kind of sanitized upscale media radicalism that finds mass demonstrations to be ‘ghastly freak shows’ and prefers highway billboards that ‘earnestly propound appealing truisms, the safer and more platitudinous, the better.’”

Kirk and Madsen said it themselves, “We’re talking about propaganda.”

Rather than protesting with “all the screamers, stompers, gender-benders, sadomasochists, and pederasts, and confirm America’s worst fears and hates” Kirk and Madsen advocated a “continuous flood of gay-related advertising.” Such advertising would depict gays “in the least offensive fashion possible.” And, more significantly, it would make “homo-hating beliefs and actions look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from them.”

As Kirsch observes, “This is pure propaganda, of course, but it is propaganda on the highest levels of insight and calculation.”

It is also propaganda that in a large part succeeded during the 1990s in changing the thinking of many Americans. In his June 1999 proclamation, President Clinton claimed that “gay and lesbian Americans” were serving “openly and proudly” in the federal government. In his 2000 proclamation, he bragged that “more openly gay and lesbian individuals serve in senior posts throughout the Federal Government than during any other Administration.”

President Obama’s proclamation tried to best Clinton’s record by listing all of his administration’s activities, such as the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and the appointment of openly homosexual individuals to executive branch and judicial positions.  

 

According to one commentator, efforts like these could qualify President Obama to be called “the first gay president.” Writing in TheVoiceMagazine.com, Brian Burke observed that in this administration we’re seeing more being done “to promote the gay agenda than in any other American presidency in the history of the United States of America.”  

 

Burke concludes, “Christians should never forget that homosexuality is sinful behavior …. it doesn’t matter what law is passed or what proclamation is made, sin can’t be legalized either, no matter how many people agree. Throughout the Bible Scripture is clear that homosexuality will always be a sin. The President … is wrong to celebrate the lifestyle as if that’s OK.”

 

Nevertheless, celebration of the homosexual lifestyle was part of the U.S. Department of Education’s first LGBT Youth Summit held in Washington D.C. on June 6 and 7.  Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius addressed the group, telling them that they have a “strong voice” and the Obama administration is hearing it. “I want to tell you, you have a friend in this administration who will stand beside you each and every step along the way,” Sebelius said.

 

The administration’s friendship was affirmed by a reporter for the homosexual activist Human Rights Campaign who wrote that “In addition to Assistant Deputy Secretary Kevin Jennings and many of his DOE staff members, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the Department of Justice, and other federal agencies were well represented.  Many of the federal agency representatives ‘came out’ as LGBT while speaking at the two-day meeting.”

 

But how is the example of government employees “coming out” going to help homosexual youth who, according to conference presenters, “are more prone to exhibit high-risk behaviors such as substance abuse, sexual risk-taking, and running away from home?”

 

Conferences sponsored by the Education Department and proclamations that encourage “pride” in their homosexual lifestyles will not help these youth. Christians must “graciously yet urgently speak the truth in love to young people who are hurting themselves with the ‘LGBT’ lifestyle,” as a recent Family Research Council prayer letter urged.

 

Those who believe in the power of Jesus Christ to forgive, heal, and restore must determine to stand together in opposition to our government’s efforts to promote harmful and sinful sexual practices among our youth. Let our proclamation be of Jesus Christ and His willingness to receive all who would come to Him.

 

And then, maybe we can get back to June as the month of brides.

 

~~

Dr. Karen Gushta is research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk. Dr. Gushta is a career educator who has taught at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate level teacher education, in both public and Christian schools in America and overseas. Dr. Gushta served as the first international director of Kid’s Evangelism Explosion. She has a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education from Indiana University and Masters degrees in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico and in Christianity and Culture from Knox Theological Seminary.

June 3, 2011

He’s Gone, But Not Forgotten

By Dr. Karen Gushta

When homosexual activist Kevin Jennings quietly left his post as “safe schools czar” at the Department of Education, the news barely made a ripple. Although pro-family advocates can rejoice, they should not underestimate Jennings’ ability to influence America’s children in his new post as CEO of non-profit group, Be the Change, Inc. The organization works closely with AmeriCorps, the government agency that funds community works and public sector programs in education, health, public safety, and the environment.

When Jennings was appointed by President Obama, Jim Hoft correctly noted at Gateway Pundit that his appointment was primarily due to the fact that he had founded the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in 1990.  By 2007, Jennings was pulling down a salary of more than $270,000 as GLSEN’s executive director. But his goal was more than personal enrichment. His homosexual activist organization led the way in getting government schools to introduce programs intended to promote acceptance of homosexuality through anti-bullying curricula that teach tolerance of homosexual students.  

One of GLSEN’s tools is a “recommended reading list.” As Hoft reported, “GLSEN maintains a recommended reading list of books that it claims ‘furthers our mission to ensure safe schools for all students.’” The books are hardly ones that “all students” should read, however.

Purportedly the books help “gay kids” by raising their self-esteem, and “straight kids” who read them are supposed to become more aware and tolerant of homosexual kids and stop bullying them. In fact, these books expose young people to homosexual behaviors and lifestyles in a graphic and sexually explicit way.

According to Hoft, “Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren’t merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air.”

In his book, Radical Rulers, Robert Knight notes that while Jennings was the leader of GLSEN, it established “gay/straight” alliances in schools, developed a “heterosexism questionnaire” that encouraged kids to question their sexuality, and established events such as “Day of Silence,” and “No Name-Calling Week.” According to Knight, these events are promoted “under the guise of discouraging bullying,” but in reality, “kids are taught to promote homosexuality and accuse anyone who thinks it is immoral of being a bigot and hater.”

While he was safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings met several times with the executive director of Christian Educators Association International, Finn Laursen. Nevertheless, in the past he has been vocal in dismissing the views of Christians.  

Robert Knight wrote that Jennings spoke to a conference at a church in 2000 where he called Moral Majority and Liberty University founder Jerry Falwell a “terrorist,” and said, “We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit—I’m trying to find a way to say this—I’m trying not to say, ‘[F—] ‘em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think! [audience laughter] Drop dead!”

So given his track record, is it time to breathe a sigh of relief that children in America’s schools are now safe from Kevin Jennings’ influence?

That might be premature.

Given Jennings’ track record and his avowed dedication to the cause of normalizing homosexuality in America, it might be wiser to assume that Jennings’ move to Be the Change is based on his belief that it will give him a wider platform to promote the causes that are near and dear to him.

Founded by Alan Khazei in 2008, Be the Change states that its goal is to create “national issue-based campaigns by organizing coalitions of non-profits, social entrepreneurs, policymakers, private sector and civic leaders, academics, and citizens.” The first campaign it launched was ServiceNation, a lobbying effort that gathered over 270 organizations in support of the Kennedy Serve America Act, touted as “the greatest expansion of national service in our country in 60 years.”

Addressing the Service Nation Summit, Khazei said, “We believe that the idea of America is ennobled and the future of America is strengthened when Americans come together to serve our country.”

Perhaps Jennings hopes he can have a hand in shaping the direction of that service. He’s taking charge at a very propitious time. In 2011 the second campaign, Opportunity Nation, was launched as the website proclaimed that children in America have less of a chance for improving their economic situation than those born into low-income households in the United Kingdom, France, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Canada, or Germany.

How Jennings will shape this effort remains to be seen. After 20 years leading the homosexual cause, it seems safe to say that he will find ways to infuse the goals of the homosexual agenda into the new campaign.

Be the Change, Inc. is not alone in its efforts to rally America’s citizens to bring change to their communities. Samaritan’s Purse is training tens of thousands of volunteers to bring relief and assistance in the name of Christ to those whose lives have been ravaged by the recent floods and tornadoes. Glenn Beck is encouraging people to seek “Enlightenment, Education, Empowerment and Entrepreneurship” so our nation will be prepared for the impending world crisis that radical Islamists and Leftists are fomenting in the Middle East.  

America is at a crossroads. And there are many options for those who want to be “part of the solution and not part of the problem.” Coral Ridge Ministries is now offering a new option in its ongoing effort to inspire believers in their daily lives with the power of a biblical worldview. Community in Action is a new grassroots outreach that equips and encourages believers to find God’s call on their lives and connect their passions and abilities to that call in order to transform the culture and their communities for Christ.

It’s clear that activists like Kevin Jennings are not going to stop their efforts to transform the culture according to a vision that distorts God’s design for sexuality and human relationships.

The question is—will Christians take up the challenge to work with the same degree of zeal?

Dr. Karen Gushta is research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk. Dr. Gushta is a career educator who has taught at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate level teacher education, in both public and Christian schools in America and overseas. Dr. Gushta served as the first international director of Kid’s Evangelism Explosion. She has a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education from Indiana University and Masters degrees in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico and in Christianity and Culture from Knox Theological Seminary.

June 2, 2011

Think Your Child’s School is OK? Think Again!

By Dr. Karen Gushta

 

When will parents wake up to the fact that the public schools their children attend are not teaching the values that they and the majority in their community hold?

 

While history books give scant attention to the impact of Christianity on Western Civilization, Islam is presented in a favorable light. Capitalists are portrayed as evil and mercenary, but the murder of millions by the Communist regimes of Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung is glossed over. Environmentalism is taught with evangelistic fervor, but not a whiff of the concept of “American Exceptionalism” can be detected in the majority of schools across America.  

 

In spite of these “oversights” and distortions in the curricula, the majority of public school parents believe that their kids’ school is fine. The 2010 PDK poll of public school parents showed that 77% of parents gave their own child’s school a grade of A or B. This was the highest percentage since PDK started polling parents in 1975. One can only conclude that the majority of parents have no idea what’s going on in their own kids’ schools. All the key indicators are showing that public schools across the country have not improved since 1975; achievement scores have remained flat and schools have become more violent.

 

The problems, however, goes deeper than poor reading and math scores or even the distorted view of American history most students are getting. There is a “hidden curriculum” being taught through sex education classes and “anti-bullying” curriculum. This curriculum is intended to break loose students’ ties to Christian morality and their family. 

 

According to Frank York and Jan LaRue, authors of Protecting Your Child in an X-Rated World, sex education classes contain materials that are designed to “desensitize” children and youth to sex talk. “Much of the teaching done in sex ed classes is designed to break down the natural inhibitions of children toward sexual matters,” write York and LaRue.

 

Groups such as Planned Parenthood and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (aka SIECUS) are behind this. Both these organizations are rooted in the warped thinking of the so-called sex researcher Alfred Kinsey. Kinsey’s materials are the foundation for sex education programs that promote a radical agenda of “anything goes” in the realm of sexual experiences.  

 

Through the influence of GLSEN (the Gay Lesbian Straight Educational Network) and other pro-homosexual groups, pro-homosexual indoctrination is now well-entrenched as a part of the hidden curriculum in public schools. Where the 10 Commandments once hung, schools now have rainbow displays supporting Gay Pride and homosexual marriage. In many high schools students participate in “Days of Silence” to show their support of homosexual students.

 

Chicago journalist and talk-show host Sandy Rios reported in a Townhall.com article that a high school in Deerfield, Illinois, required its freshmen to attend an orientation which featured gay, straight, lesbian, and bi-sexual students describing the practices of homosexual sex. The freshmen were then instructed not to tell their parents about this event.

 

In Helena, Montana, the school district was going to require teachers to teach first graders that they can have sex with anyone in any combination until parents filed a lawsuit and the school board withdrew the curriculum.

 

Many schools are aggressively introducing compulsory LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) curricula through anti-bullying programs promoted by the Obama administration. Until he resigned as the “Safe Schools Czar,” avowed homosexual activist and former head of GLSEN, Kevin Jennings, was in charge of seeing that schools implement such programs.  

 

As the recent film, The Agenda: Grinding America Down, shows, the hidden curriculum in America’s schools is not there by accident. It is all a part of the plan of the radical Left to break down the family structure and Christian morality in our nation. In Ten Truths About Socialism, (available at www.coralridge.org), I noted that Karl Marx considered the church and the family to be the greatest obstacles to the destruction of capitalism. Therefore, he taught that the younger generation must be loosened from its moorings in Christian morality and family loyalty.

 

David Horowitz, a former communist who is now dedicated to exposing the radical Left’s agenda, explains that “cultural Marxism” was brought into universities by the radical activists of the 60s.  Since universities train journalists, lawyers, judges, and future political candidates, they identified universities as the “fulcrum” to bring about a “radical transformation” of society.  

The hallmark of cultural Marxism is the politics of race, class, and gender. Multicultural curricula and political correctness are effective tools in schools and universities to promote this ideology. But the result is anything but benign. As Elizabeth Powers wrote in The Weekly Standard, “Multiculturalism is the smiley face of totalitarianism.” The Tucson students who chained themselves to chairs at a scheduled school board meeting are evidence of it. The students shut down the meeting, shouting “fight back” for hours in protest of the governing board’s proposed plan to make a course that teaches history from a Mexican-American perspective optional rather than mandatory in Tucson schools.

In reality, it’s time for parents to fight back. It’s time for parents to find out what’s really happening inside their children’s schools. It’s time for parents to take control away from the “educationists”—bureaucrats, administrators, academics, and heads of teacher unions—who now control their children’s schools.

After all, whose children are they?

 

 

 

Dr. Karen Gushta is research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk. Dr. Gushta is a career educator who has taught at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate level teacher education, in both public and Christian schools in America and overseas. Dr. Gushta served as the first international director of Kid’s Evangelism Explosion. She has a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education from Indiana University and Masters degrees in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico and in Christianity and Culture from Knox Theological Seminary.

April 8, 2011

Protect Parents’ Rights—Support Senate Resolution 99!

By Dr. Karen Gushta


The United States is the only member of the United Nations that has not ratified a treaty called the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). That troubles the Obama administration and transnationalists who want to place family law in America under the control of international courts.

The provisions of the UNCRC are so egregious that a constitutional amendment to stop it has been submitted in Congress. The Parental Rights Amendment would protect the right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children. It also declares that “No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.”

So what’s the problem with the UN treaty? Should the U.S. continue to hold out against it?

As OneNewsNow reported, “The treaty would control virtually all political decisions about parents and children in America.”  That’s because our Constitution requires that any treaty ratified by the Senate supersedes or replaces in power and authority all state and federal laws on the matter. If ratified, the UNCRC would virtually become the supreme law of the land governing family policies.

In The War on Children, I discussed the dangers of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. “As our federal government is enlarging itself by gaining control of more and more sectors of society, we face threats to our children not imaginable a generation ago. Of all the initiatives on the horizon, the most serious threat to families is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.”

 

Attorney Michael P. Farris has posted a legal analysis of the treaty’s provisions at ParentalRights.org. Here are some of the UNCRC’s most offensive provisions:

 

  • Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
  • Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.
  • A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
  • The “best interest of the child principle” would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.

 

As an example of how the “best interest of the child principle” would impact court decisions in settling family disputes, one has only to look to a recent New Hampshire Supreme Court decision. The court decided that it was in the “best interests” of a homeschooled girl to attend a “public” school so that she would be exposed to a greater diversity of viewpoints than her mother’s homeschool instruction provided her.

 

Mr. Farris points out that the “best interest” principle is one of the most significant parts of the treaty. Article 3(1) of the treaty states: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” [emphasis added]

 

The insidious assumption of this article is that public agencies, courts, and legislatures have a better grasp of what is in the “best interests of the child” than do the child’s parents. The proposed Parental Rights Amendment counters this assumption, stating in Section 1: “The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.”

 

In addition, ratification of the treaty would impact Christian schools all across our nation. According to the American Bar Association’s Center on Children and the Law publication: Children’s Rights in America: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Compared with United States Law, Christian schools that refuse to teach “alternative worldviews” and teach that Christianity is the only true religion “fly in the face of article 29” of the treaty.

 

Getting a constitutional amendment passed is, with good reason, a slow and tedious process. If it weren’t, we’d have even more misguided amendments than the ones we now have—such as the 16th amendment, which gave us the income tax.

 

With this in view, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced Senate Resolution 99 on March 10, 2011. The resolution urges the President not to send the UNCRC treaty to the Senate to be ratified. So far 34 Senators have signed on to this resolution. This is the required number to block the treaty, since treaties require 67 Senate votes for ratification.

 

Nevertheless, as ParentalRights.org, which is keeping tally of the co-signers, has pointed out, given the nature of politics, this does not ensure that none of the co-signers will not be turned by the opposition.

Liberal-progressives like Hillary Clinton have pushed for Senate ratification of the UNCRC since it was signed in 1995 by Madeline Albright, then Ambassador to the United Nations. The Bush administration was opposed to ratification of the treaty, but the Obama administration supports it.

 

In June of 2009, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice stated that the Obama administration was discussing “when and how it might be possible to join” other nations in ratifying the treaty. She declared that it was a disgrace to stand with Somalia as the only two nations still opposed to the treaty. Since then, Somalia too has signed the treaty, leaving the United States as the only hold-out.

 

As noted above, if ratified, the UNCRC treaty would supercede all United States federal and state laws now governing family policy. In contrast, the majority of those nations that have signed the UNCRC are not bound by such constitutional requirements. Many have chosen to ignore sections or have simply failed to implement them.

 

Thus, the importance of Senate Resolution 99 cannot be overstated. If both your Senators have not signed on to co-sponsor the resolution urging President Obama not to press for ratification of this reprehensible treaty, call them and tell them, “Support Senate Resolution 99!”

Dr. Karen Gushta is research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk. Dr. Gushta is a career educator who has taught at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate level teacher education, in both public and Christian schools in America and overseas. Dr. Gushta served as the first international director of Kid’s Evangelism Explosion. She has a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education from Indiana University and Masters degrees in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico and in Christianity and Culture from Knox Theological Seminary.

Request The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk, by Dr. Karen Gushta.

February 22, 2011

The “Deviant Psuedo-Scientist” Who Gave Us Sex Education

By Dr. Karen Gushta

When Dr. Judith Reisman spoke at the recent Educational Policy Conference in St. Louis, she soon had us laughing at her wit and self-deprecating humor. Her subject, however, is no laughing matter.

In her most recent book, Sexual Sabotage, Dr. Reisman, explains how America’s traditional sexual morality was subverted by Dr. Alfred Kinsey, author of the infamous Kinsey Reports. According to Reisman, Kinsey was a “deviant pseudo-scientist” who fabricated data that he used “to legitimize his own manic sexual perversions.”

In her previous books, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, and “Soft Porn” Plays Hardball, Reisman blew the cover on Kinsey’s human sexuality research, which he carried on at Indiana University until his death in 1956. She exposed his biased and unscientific methods and Kinsey’s abusive exploitation of his subjects, some of whom were just infants.

As horrifying as some of the material presented in her books is, every parent whose child is required to take sex education classes in a government school should know about Kinsey’s work and the way it has shaped sex education curriculums in America’s public schools.

Laura Linney, who was nominated for an Academy Award for her role as Mrs. Kinsey in the 2004 film Kinsey, goes so far as to say, “Any sort of sexual education that anybody has had in the past 50 years came right from the [Kinsey] Institute….When Kinsey published that information, he changed our culture completely.” The movie portrays Alfred Kinsey as “the ‘tragic hero’ who overcame the religious rigidity of his strict Methodist father to pave the way for sexual freedom for everyone.”

The truth is quite different, as Dr. Reisman, who has been researching Kinsey and his work for more than two decades, shows. In an interview with World Net Daily, Reisman faulted Kinsey for conducting fraudulent science and using pedophiles, noting that his 1948 book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, contains a record of “unfathomable sexual human experiments” conducted by men on hundreds, and perhaps even thousands, of children.

Nevertheless, Kinsey’s study is generally agreed to be the key book that launched the sexual revolution, and sex educators use it to support the claim that sexual activity in children is natural and healthy and should not be repressed.

Among the data that Kinsey used in his book were the diaries of 63-year-old pedophile Rex King, who meticulously recorded his sexual encounters with boys.  According to Kinsey biographer James H. Jones, on Nov. 24, 1944, Kinsey wrote to King, “I rejoice at everything you send, for I am then assured that much more of your material is saved for scientific publication.”

King’s “material” appears in a table in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male that summarized his attempts to bring to orgasm boys between the ages of 2 months and 15 years—in some cases over a period as long as 24 hours.

Similarly, The Times of London reported that Kinsey also relied on data from a Nazi pedophile, Fritz von Balluseck, who was tried in 1956 for the rape and murder of a 10-year-old girl. According to The Times, Kinsey wrote to warn von Balluseck to “watch out,” so that he wouldn’t be caught.

Dr. Reisman’s campaign to expose Kinsey has not made her popular with the “eager Ivy League professors,” Reisman describes in Sexual Sabotage, who “began teaching Kinsey’s books to millions of students.” Based on Kinsey’s so-called research, “sex education” soon became a legitimate academic field. In 1955 the National Association of Secondary School Principles established training standards for “separate degrees for those qualified as sex educators.” As Reisman documents, those who adhered to Kinsey’s research were, by 1957, “organizing to credential one another as ‘sexologists.’ Wardell Pomeroy (one of Kinsey’s many lovers) founded the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex (SSSS), which claimed to be the first organization dedicated to the systematic study of sexuality.”

Once the floodgates were opened, it didn’t take long for the pseudo-science of Kinsey and his followers to take hold in academic circles. Reisman observes, “In 1960, the Conference on Children and Youth, staffed with Kinseyans, advocated bringing such ‘education’ into all our educational institutions. For its scientific ‘authority,’ the field…would rely on Kinsey’s data.”

“One after another, year after year,” Reisman says, “‘experts’ emerged debunking moral and marital traditions and justifying, with their ‘science,’ greater and more dangerous perversions.”  As the “sexperts” took over, “they answered questions children never asked, creating their liberated sexual paradise. Little did the Greatest Generation know that Kinsey and these ‘experts’ were sexual saboteurs, hijacking their children and grandchildren, steering them away from traditional healthy parenthood and values and advocating Kinsey’s preposterous idée fixe: that children are sexual from birth.”

This idea pervades sex education literature and materials from the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), Planned Parenthood, and Advocates for Youth. All seek to indoctrinate children with the view that their identity is based in their sexuality.

“Child sexuality” is also promoted by UN organizations such as UNESCO (United Nations Economic, Social and Cultural Organization) and UNFPA (UN Population Fund.) A report they released in 2009 declared that all children are entitled to sexual and reproductive education—beginning at age five. Included in the report are curriculum guidelines for children aged 5 to 8 that advocate discussing masturbation and providing descriptions of fertilization, conception, pregnancy and delivery.

When it comes to sex education in government schools, parents should declare their right to protect their children’s purity and guard them from materials that are based in the pseudo research of pedophiles and perverts, whose only goal was to promote the same kind of promiscuous lifestyle that they themselves practiced.

Dr. Karen Gushta is research coordinator at Coral Ridge Ministries and author of The War on Children: How Pop Culture and Public Schools Put Our Kids at Risk. Dr. Gushta is a career educator who has taught at all levels, from kindergarten to graduate level teacher education, in both public and Christian schools in America and overseas. Dr. Gushta served as the first international director of Kid’s Evangelism Explosion. She has a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Education from Indiana University and Masters degrees in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico and in Christianity and Culture from Knox Theological Seminary.

Blog at WordPress.com.