Search

ROPE Report

Tag

Oklahoma State Department of Health

Sex Education – An Asset, Or A Liability, To Oklahoma Students?

In September (2022), Senator David Bullard asked me to do some research on Sex Education in Oklahoma for an Oklahoma House of Representatives Common Education Committee Interim Study on Sex Education created by himself and Representatives Sherrie Conley and Danny Williams. Senator Bullard didn’t provide instruction as to what the research should say, just to perform the research.

Candidly, though no scientific researcher worth their salt should, I began the project believing that Sex Education was a liability to Oklahoma students simply because of my history.

I am Oklahoma born (1962) and bred; the child of a public school English teacher and a student of public education throughout the 1970’s, graduating one of the largest, Oklahoma City high schools (John Marshall) in 1981. I remember all 6th grade girls (it couldn’t have been 5th grade because we were all bussed clear across town to provide Oklahoma students ‘equity’ that year) being drug into a darkened room and shown a film about the basic anatomy of a girl which included a bit about puberty and menstruation. I remember nothing similar over my entire public school career.

I’m not a spring chicken. Growing up, we didn’t have the internet and our TV screens went dark after a round of the Star Spangled Banner at midnight each day, playing nothing but the call sign and white noise until 5 am the next morning.

Sex, however, was on the mind of most every student I knew after 7th grade in one way or another. Yet for my girlfriends and I, discussions about ‘sex’ were mostly confined to what guy was the cutest or could be the best kisser and who would we marry – at least until high school. Even then, between what parents had actually told one or two of us and what had been passed around at school from other sources, by 10th grade we’d figured out nearly every gory detail about sex whether we were interested or not, or whether or not we would – or could – bring ourselves to actually do anything about what we’d found out. Even if we’d wanted to try, most all our mothers were at home during the day, so finding someplace to go where we wouldn’t be found out was gross and not a risk any of us were willing to take.

Yes, I did know a girl who got pregnant in high school, but there was never a ‘rash of pregnancies’ in any of my grades. No, though there was always scuttlebutt in the halls, I never knew anyone who admitted to being gay while in high school. In fact, the vast majority of us had no idea what a ‘transgender’ person was – nor any of the other gender categories identified today – and all our school ‘clubs’ were related to either sports, academics, or the arts. Most kids were NOT having sex and those who were, were branded a ‘slut’, or ‘easy’ behind their back and just the idea of having one of those nouns attached to your name was not okay with even the wildest child . (During my high school career, the rural guys all carried shotguns or rifles in racks on their back window and school shootings were exactly ZERO, FYI.)

Today, life is massively different for kids in every single way; nearly all children are exposed to non-stop media across all levels of technology – be it a computer, a computer pad or a cell phone – on a daily, minute-to-minute basis. Most kids are ‘latch key’ kids whose parents both work and are – on some level – raising themselves. Gone are the days of kids getting information from kids – who more than likely got it from a parent or an older sibling. If parents aren’t using really great software filters – and sometimes even if they are – the internet and computer apps are flooding kids with messaging, pictures and ideas meant to be way beyond their abilities to decode at their developmental states in attempt to destroy their innocence and create little sexualized automatons who feel more than think and have minimal attachment to their parents (and certainly none to Jesus).

Meanwhile public school, administrators – many of whom live on their woke-sy hatred of the idea of ‘shame’ as a motivator (probably because it’s actually worked for hundreds of years and produced many times less suicides than gender transition surgery) – are dutifully marching the Marxist line of pushing and accepting every form of behavior known to man, with, or without the knowledge of a parent or guardian, in order to most effectively sever the tie between parent and child while inserting the state into that role.

Consequently, who could really determine how or where young people are influenced by sex most today – technology, or the state (through public education).

HERE’S WHAT WE KNOW

According to the Oklahoma State Department of Health Adolescent Sexual Health in Oklahoma report for 2021, STD rates are climbing at an alarming rate while pregnancy rates are falling.

On a side note, there is a HUGE difference between pregnancy rates and percentage of pregnancy. A pregnancy ‘rate’ is a function of time – the number of pregnancies per the population number studied across a span of time usually multiplied by 1000. Pregnancy percentage is simply the number of pregnancies in an age rage divided by the total number in the age range multiplied by 100. Pregnancy RATES are MUCH LARGER than pregnancy percentages which is VERY MISLEADING. For example; for 1991 the teen birth RATE in the age group 15-17 is 41. The percentage of pregnant girls between 15 and 17 for 1991 is 5.7% or 0.057 of the entire 15-17 population of young women in Oklahoma during 1991. What sounds scarier? The first or the second?

Additionally, when you look at that page on the Oklahoma State Department of Health website, you’ll notice that the date across which birth rates are compared becomes more recent in time. Where are the stats across more than one decade? Where are the stats from MY era? Why continue to move up the date for comparison to current time? Do you suppose it suits the needs of Health Department programming NOT to have to show linear, historical data from previous decades?

Public health officials (I was an Epidemiologist for the Oklahoma Health Department from 1990-1992 so I have a bit of a clue) are often in the business of pushing PROGRAMMING to justify taxpayer dollars, not protecting individual rights – we should keep that in mind.

https://oklahoma.gov/health/health-education/children—family-health/maternal-and-child-health-service/data-and-evaluation/teen-birth-statistics.html
https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/health/health2/documents/teenbirthreport-2016-revsed-8-2017.pdf

We know that the ‘evidence based’ sex ed programs being used in Oklahoma, Making a Difference!, Making Proud Choices!, Love Notes and Positive Prevention PLUS are being provided by the Oklahoma State Department of Health thanks to a grant provided by PREP (Personal Responsibility Education Program) via the US Department of Health and Human Services, Family and Youth Services Bureau (an Office of the Administration for Children & Families) – did you get all that? In other words, the federal government is subsidizing Oklahoma sex ed through the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

We know that ETR provides these – and other – sex ed curricula.


https://www.etr.org/

We also know that etr advocates engaging in sex with HIV-infected persons.


https://www.etr.org/blog/get-prepped-tips-for-giving-your-sexual-health-toolbox-a-glow-up/

We know that Planned Parenthood teaches that abstinence can include “outercourse” which is everything but vaginal sex and that kids should try and ‘avoid’ sexually transmitted diseases.



We know that an organization called “Amplify” out of Tulsa also provides all of these programs – and more – to Tulsa area public schools. According to their website, “Evidence-Based Sexual Health education is being taught to every student enrolled in 7th-grade science and high school biology at Tulsa Public Schools unless a parent opts their student out.”

We know that Amplify partners with Planned Parenthood and PREP. We know that PREP is an activist organization which pushes abortion and contraception.



We know that the PREP website prominently provides access to a newsletter called “The Bedsider” and the “Abortion Finder”.




Family Watch International has created a website against Comprehensive Sex Education that provides many valuable resources for parents concerned about sex education in their child’s school.

One of their handouts lists numerous harmful effects of sex education on children under 18, many of which were covered in my research and discussed during my presentation to the Interim Study Committee. Here is the list: it sexualizes children, teaches children to consent to sex, normalizes anal and oral sex, promotes homosexual/bisexual behavior, teaches children sexual pleasure, promotes solo or mutual masturbation, eroticizes condom use, promotes early sexual independence, fails to establish abstinence as the goal, promotes gender confusion, teaches abortion/contraception, promotes peer-to-peer sex ed/sexual rights advocacy, undermines traditional values and beliefs, violates or undermines parental rights and refers children to harmful resources.

Sex Education in Oklahoma schools should be stopped IMMEDIATELY. Parents must be allowed to parent their own children without interference from the state, and state-promoted sex education puts the state between a child and their parent. Yes, parents in Oklahoma may ‘opt out’ of sex education, however, just like opting out of dirty literature, students feel intense peer pressure from having been excluded and are often targeted for bullying by teachers and school administrators. Please look through the citations provided and like and share our video and slide presentation as well.




You may also find these – and other videos – on our Rumble and YouTube channels as well.



CITATIONS

PARENTS – Be Informed About Any Sex Ed Curricula Your Child May Be Getting At School! State Laws Included For Reference.

Frequently, we receive questions from parents as to whether or not their children may be opted out of Sex Ed courses – the answer is YES.

Because Sex Ed curricula is being bombarded onto your child in different ways through public school programs, I thought it might be nice to publish the state laws regarding Sex Ed in order to be clear about what IS and ISN’T to be taught.

First of all, please know, that as a parent, you have the right and responsibility to remove your child from ANY teaching that you believe undermines your rights as a parent to educate your child within your family’s values.  Write a note to your child’s teacher, the Principal and the Superintendent simply saying something like; 

“I reserve my right as a parent to remove _____ from ____ class for the reason that it undermines my family’s values, Signed _____”

You can do the same thing for a class assignment or book reading – YOU are the PARENT, not the state.  It is of absolute importance that you take this right seriously and assert your rights when necessary.

Next, please also know that Oklahoma schools are not mandated to teach Sex Ed programming and where it is, it must be taught with ABSTINENCE as the PRIMARY GOAL.  This is important because organizations like SEICUS (Sex Ed For Social Change) are working to make the most graphic Sex Ed programs available to your child – especially within state schools.



This year, the Oklahoma Health Department (OSDH) has received funding from PREP (Personal Responsibility Education Program), a 501c3 non-profit somehow affiliated with the federal government, of a bit over $600,000.  According to the OSDH website, they are providing schools with four separate ‘evidence-based’ sexual education programs – all produced by a company called ETR (Education, Training and Research); Making a Difference, Making Proud Choices, Love Notes and Positive Prevention Plus. 



Above is the PREP website homepage.  Please note the ‘abortionfinder’ in the upper right corner next to the ‘bedsider’.  The Bedsider is an online magazine that only deals with sex issues.  Mind you, this ‘magazine’ is linked to a YOUTH SEX EDUCATION provider.  Here’s a screenshot from down further on the page.



Because what parent doesn’t want their child subscribing to ‘Frisky Fridays‘ and  learning about sex toys?


A group in Tulsa, Amplify – whose mission and vision are; “Advancing youth sexual health and well-being through collaboration, education and advocacy”, “Informed Youth, Equitable Access, Vibrant Communities” – provides all four programs found on the OSDH website along with training and support.

I was unable to find anything about these programs but brochures – which appear nearly harmless.  The descriptions posted on the Amplify website also set off no alarm bells at all.  I was only able to find them on the ETR website for PURCHASE.  There were no samples to see but the Table of Contents.

Family Watch International apparently ordered  facilitator guides for several of the curricula, however, and posted a PDF of several pictures from two of the guides.

The one for Making Proud Choices (provided by Amplify and the OKDH) is alarming.  Here is the page on the ETR website.  Below is a screenshot of the FWI PDF.



Not very ‘ABSTINENCE’-friendly at all.

This is exactly why parents need to get involved and ASK TO SEE WHAT THE SCHOOL IS TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN – and make sure to ask to see the FACILITATOR’S GUIDE, not just the lessons – which, beyond making 12-year-olds fully aware of sexual issues they are not developmentally ready for – are relatively tame.

In closing, PARENTS are the people who should be informing their children about every issue they encounter – even if you need an ‘easy button’ because they’re uncomfortable.  Get a book from Amazon to help you – or carefully check one out of the library – that might give you a start, but don’t leave this very important job up to Kaiser-funded non-profits and state schools that don’t have the same investment in your children you do.

Check out this website for more information.  It provides a long list of the harmful effects sex education can have on children – one of which reminds us that the ‘consent’ portion added to the sex ed curricula in Oklahoma (proposed by Kay Floyd – a Democrat – but was passed by a Republican legislature), teaches children to consent to sex.

PLEASE NOTE! Your school MUST “conduct for the parents and guardians of the students involved during weekend and evening hours at least one presentation concerning the curriculum and materials that will be used for such education”, in terms of AIDS Education – AND – your school Superintendent (or designee of the school district) MUST “provide prior written notification to the parents or guardians of the students involved of their right to inspect the curriculum and material and of their obligation to notify the school in writing if they do not want their child to participate in the class, program, test, survey or questionnaire.”

If your school/Superintendent does not do either of these things, you can SUE the school for breech of duty and not following the law.


OKLAHOMA LAW

AIDS PREVENTION EDUCATION: OS 70 Section 11-103.3

A. Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) prevention education shall be taught in the public schools of this state. AIDS prevention education shall be limited to the discussion of the disease AIDS and its spread and prevention. Students shall receive such education:

1. at the option of the local school district, a minimum of once during the period from grade five through grade six;

2. a minimum of once during the period from grade seven through grade nine; and

3. a minimum of once during the period from grade ten through grade twelve.

B. The State Department of Education shall develop curriculum and materials for AIDS prevention education in conjunction with the State Department of Health. A school district may also develop its own AIDS prevention education curriculum and materials. Any curriculum and materials developed for use in the public schools shall be approved for medical accuracy by the State Department of Health. A school district may use any curriculum and materials which have been developed and approved pursuant to this subsection.

C. School districts shall make the curriculum and materials that will be used to teach AIDS prevention education available for inspection by the parents and guardians of the students that will be involved with the curriculum and materials. Furthermore, the curriculum must be limited in time frame to deal only with factual medical information for AIDS prevention. The school districts, at least one (1) month prior to teaching AIDS prevention education in any classroom, shall conduct for the parents and guardians of the students involved during weekend and evening hours at least one presentation concerning the curriculum and materials that will be used for such education. No student shall be required to participate in AIDS prevention education if a parent or guardian of the student objects in writing to such participation.

D. AIDS prevention education shall specifically teach students that:

1. engaging in homosexual activity, promiscuous sexual activity, intravenous drug use or contact with contaminated blood products is now known to be primarily responsible for contact with the AIDS virus;

2. avoiding the activities specified in paragraph 1 of this subsection is the only method of preventing the spread of the virus;

3. sexual intercourse, with or without condoms, with any person testing positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibodies, or any other person infected with HIV, places that individual in a high risk category for developing AIDS.

E. The program of AIDS prevention education shall teach that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain means for the prevention of the spread or contraction of the AIDS virus through sexual contact. It shall also teach that artificial means of birth control are not a certain means of preventing the spread of the AIDS virus and reliance on such methods puts a person at risk for exposure to the disease.

F. The State Department of Health and the State Department of Education shall update AIDS education curriculum material as newly discovered medical facts make it necessary.


CURRICULUM AND MATERIALS USED IN SEX EDUCATION CLASS: OS70 Section 11-105.1

1. A. All curriculum and materials including supplementary materials which will be used to teach or will be used for or in connection with a sex education class or program which is designed for the exclusive purpose of discussing sexual behavior or attitudes, or any test, survey or questionnaire whose primary purpose is to elicit responses on sexual behavior or attitudes shall be available through the superintendent or a designee of the school district for inspection by parents and guardians of the student who will be involved with the class, program or test, survey or questionnaire. Such curriculum, materials, classes, programs, tests, surveys or questionnaires shall include information about consent and shall have as one of its primary purposes the teaching of or informing students about the practice of abstinence. For the purposes of this section, “consent” shall have the same meaning as that provided by Section 113 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes. The superintendent or a designee of the school district shall provide prior written notification to the parents or guardians of the students involved of their right to inspect the curriculum and material and of their obligation to notify the school in writing if they do not want their child to participate in the class, program, test, survey or questionnaire. Each local board of education shall determine the means of providing written notification to the parents and guardian which will ensure effective notice in an efficient and appropriate manner. No student shall be required to participate in a sex education class or program which discusses sexual behavior or attitudes if a parent or guardian of the student objects in writing to such participation. If the type of program referred to in this section is a part of or is taught during a credit course, a student may be required to enroll in the course but shall not be required to receive instruction in or participate in the program if a parent or guardian objects in writing.

B. The superintendent or a designee of a school district in which sex education is taught or a program is offered which is designed for the exclusive purpose of discussing sexual behavior or attitudes shall approve all curriculum and materials which will be used for such education and any test, survey or questionnaire whose primary purpose is to elicit responses on sexual behavior or attitudes used in the school prior to their use in the classroom or school. The teacher involved in the class, program, testing or survey shall submit the curriculum, materials, tests or surveys to the superintendent or a designee for approval prior to their use in the classroom or school. This section shall not apply to those students enrolled in classes, programs, testings or surveys offered through an alternative education program.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑