"John Garza responds to Allan Lichtman op ed"
Allan Lichtman wrote an op ed in the Gazette titled “Sex education, yes, ignorance, no.” Mr. Lichtman supports the “new” sex ed curriculum recently passed by the Montgomery County BOE. My question is, did he read the curriculum? For example, he complains that a sign held at recent protest by 50-75 parents said “NO UNISEX BATHROOMS.” Yet, this is exactly what the curriculum suggests. The curriculum presents the story of “Portia” the boy who becomes a girl. When Portia finally becomes a girl, “she” gets a key to the teachers’ unisex bathroom. When our children follow the curriculum and chop off body parts, take hormones and “reassign their gender,” won’t they expect the key to the bathroom like Portia?
Lichman wants to open the door to “sexual orientation.” But not all 30 orientations found in the DSM-IV-R such as Apotemnophilia - sexual arousal associated with the stump of an amputee; Coprophilia - sexual arousal associated with feces; Kleptophilia - obtaining sexual excitement from stealing; Sexual Sadism - the intentional infliction of pain or humiliation on another person in order to achieve sexual excitement; not to mention pedophila, necrophilia and many others are discussed, yet. When will we hear about these? We believe if you want to discuss orientation, put them all on the table. We don’t want our children to be ignorant. After all, Sexual Identity Disorder is celebrated in the curriculum by Portia.
The one orientation virtually absent from the curriculum is abstinence. Lichtman seems to hate abstinence because President Bush supports it. He is either ignorant of or ignores numerous studies showing abstinence at least delays the onset of sexual activity, thus saving many students from stds, unwanted pregnancies, and suicides.
He calls those opposed to the curriculum a small but vocal group showing their ignorance. Notwithstanding the fact that these groups, adduced a petition from 270 local physicians and 4000 parents and local citizens all opposed to the curriculum.
Lastly, Lichtman is very upset at the idea that students with unwanted homosexual desire should be told about ex-gays. He refuses to accept or tolerate the thousands of people leaving the gay lifestyle, some after as many as 20 years and having over 2000 sex partners. But, he is very much in favor of Gay Student Alliance Clubs already in the schools which promote homosexuality, telling students with heterosexual desires that they can change or are simply bisexual.
We believe its time to take politics out of the classroom, teach the truth, that anal sex IS more dangerous than vaginal sex, that gay men ARE at a much higher risk of stds and AIDS than heterosexuals, and that sex is not the same as playing basketball or swimming in a pool. Rather, sex is serious and emotional and physical consequences result from casual sex.
Lichtman’s solution to teen sex is condom distribution. But, for 30 years progressive sex education has pushed condom use and has failed our students. Std, abortion and suicide rates have only dropped as abstinence education has increased. There is no money in virtue, the big dollars flow to those who push a curriculum that leads to abortion, pornography, and the emotional trauma in the aftermath of teen sex.
Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum has appealed to the State Board of Education. Lets hope Nancy Grasmick and the State Board do good for the students and undo this tragedy.