See my shocked face? That’s right, I don’t have one.
Methinks I’m looking a bit prophetic to some, right now. I’ve had many email exchanges over the past couple days on the Diocese of Nashville debacle found here: https://onemadmomblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/03/can-i-be-blunt/. In the course of those exchanges, I pointed to what was coming next. How did I know? Because this is the same tactic that liberals take every single time. Here’s what I said to one reader:
My guess is they are about to paint them all as naive people who live in the bunker and don’t have a real view of what kids are up against these days.
Not so surprisingly, it only took until Monday: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/09/05/a-nashville-catholic-school-is-under-fire-for-teaching-basic-facts-about-sex-and-birth-control/.
A Nashville Catholic School is Under Fire for Teaching Basic Facts About Sex and Birth Control
September 5, 2016 by Hemant Mehta
Wrong! Let’s take a few minutes to explain to the folks at “The Friendly Atheist” a little about “the real world” shall we? First, it isn’t “basic facts” about sex education. Next, parents want to opt their kids out, which is their canonical right. The parents asked for changes, didn’t get them, asked to opt out and were denied. The school didn’t leave them much choice. I’m the one who’s asking for this to be banished from the Catholic planet and to heck with opting out.
If I told you a Catholic high school in Nashville, Tennessee had a controversy involving basic sex education, you might brace for the worst. But Father Ryan High School is actually doing something downright sensible.
Nope, I’d say that you are an idiot who is not Catholic (The Friendly Atheist was a giveaway), that you probably have no teens, and that you have no adult children. Yep, the dude has reached the ripe old age of 33. Yeah, he’s obviously an expert in the area of raising teens with a healthy view of sex and marriage and in the Catholic context. By all means, feel free to comment, Mr. Mehta.
As part of a theology course that freshmen and sophomores are required to take, the curriculum includes a discussion about basic human anatomy, how it all operates when it comes to sex, and how birth control works.
Sorry, Hemant. Basic human anatomy is basic. This went far beyond basic and, interestingly enough, spent a whole lot of time on how to “get the job done” rather than the results of getting the job done. Also, if you bothered to read through it, and you are familiar with the various methods of birth-control, you’d find that the information presented was quite inadequate. Oh, and how about the various STDs? Don’t you think, as long as you’re providing them with “basic” information, that you provide them with the “basic” facts about those, considering that their very lives are at stake?
But I digress. You’re missing the bigger picture, which is that parents don’t think this is the school’s place. It is their job to teach their kids this subject in a far more appropriate setting.
That’s not to say they’re encouraging pre-marital sex or the use of birth control in any circumstance, but when you’re teaching kids about a faith that condemns contraception and has strong stances on sex outside of marriage, the students better know damn well what those controversies are all about.
Said by the naive atheist. This is a “Don’t do it but when you do…” type of course. That’s exactly what they’re going to get too – a whole lot of teens trying to have sex without consequences.
So here’s what they’re teaching, according to parents who are very unhappy with the decision:
Students are taught that the male and female “mature genitalia will react to sexual stimulus in a similar way.
They are shown a picture of a spread-eagle vagina with names for every part. The picture is shown again in a test question where children have to label all the parts.
At one point the sex-ed states: “Like the scrotum, the outer lips swell slightly with stimulation; in their stimulated state they pull back and expose the Inner Lips.”
Students are taught about “erotic nerve endings” on both the male and female reproductive organs that react with “sexual stimulus.” They learn about an “aroused” clitoris and average penis lengths during erection.
Students learn 10 different forms of contraception, including withdrawal, the condom, the diaphragm, spermicides, the birth control pill, the intrauterine device, birth control implant, depo-provera, tubal ligation, and vasectomy. A test question asks children to name and compare all the different methods as to how they function.
I’m not seeing a problem.
Uh, that might be because you do not have teens or single adult children, Hemant. Do you know what a teen thinks about when you are telling them which parts of the body get stimulated and what happens when they get stimulated? Might it be the parts of the body that get stimulated and what happens when they do? Get a clue.
When are these kids expected to learn this material, if not in high school? This is basic, factual material. The only people who shouldn’t be able to handle this are those who can’t say the word “clitoris” without giggling.
Let me just ask you a couple of things. First, why do you think they need to learn this in high school? We all agree that the Church’s teaching is no sex before marriage (although you have also seriously missed the teachings on chastity, purity, etc.). If that is the case, why do you want them to take a class to help them visualize it so vividly?
Now , before you throw out “She’s a prude, too!” I’ll just stop you right there. I know the info that they are presenting to the students. In fact, I know far more than the info presented. How do I know this? Try I’M MARRIED AND I HAVE A BUNCH OF KIDS. I know exactly how birth control works. I know exactly how babies are made. I know how men and women react to stimuli. And guess what? I didn’t take this course, Hemant! How did I ever do acquire such information without Fr. Ryan’s Human Sexuality course???
Next, do you think teens don’t know how their bodies react to stimuli? Please. Did you need to take a course to figure that out, Hemant?
Still, again, you miss the parents’ point, which is they believe THEY should teach their teen kids about sex, reproduction, birth control, marriage, health (there’s something not covered at all), and their bodies in general, and not in a co-ed classroom setting of 30? I mean, I would at least think you could agree that is the best idea. What’s your beef with that? Are these teachers somehow magically more prepared than a parent could be? You know, someone who was a teen, has teens, is married, is having sex in the context of a Catholic marriage, etc.?
Quite frankly, I would submit to you, Hemant, that the parents who think they should pawn this job off to anyone but themselves are the immature parents, hiding in the bunker, who are somehow so completely and utterly embarrassed about the topic that they can’t even discuss it with the people who should be their top priority in life. Think about it. You are passing judgment on the real grown-ups of this story.
That group apparently includes a lot of parents, who are calling this material “salacious” and demanding that the Diocese of Nashville stop making this a required course.
“We feel like the sex-ed curriculum basically amounts to a ‘wink and a nod’ to student sexual activity, especially when the curriculum gives them an exhaustive contraception list and tests the students to make sure they know how all of them function,” one parent said.
“There are so many aspects of the school that we love, but they shouldn’t teach this to our kids. It’s the parents’ right to teach their kids about such sensitive matters. We don’t want our kids seeing images of penises and vaginas. This will only corrupt them. We want the program gone,” states the group of parents.
Just wait till these parents hear about the internet. Minds will be blown…
Grow up, Hemant. Most of those parents were the first Facebook users and some are bloggers. They’re only about 5 to 10 year older than you. They’re hardly using a cane. In short, they are the internet generation. Yet they have one thing you seriously lack – experience.
Are you for showing them “50 Shades of Grey” too, Hemant? Should we present it to them just because “it’s out there?” How about some hardcore porn too why we’re at it?
Here’s an idea for you. How about parents present a lesson on sex and marriage that teaches them about the beauty of it? Maybe a lesson that portrays the Church’s message about it? What an idea!
They also explain what the curriculum is lacking:
At no point in the entire sex-ed supplement does the word “sin” appear nor are there condemnations of the grave sexual sins of masturbation, fornication, and other sins against the virtues of chastity and modesty. Abstinence is given a passing glance and children are directed to external resources for more information on the practice.
Students are not taught how willed sexual sins cut off the life of God’s grace in the soul and jeopardizes one’s eternal salvation.
All of those are value judgments — and the Church agrees with them — but the purpose of this material in the theology course is to give students the facts before they begin talking about the Catholic faith’s stance on everything.
It’s meaningless to have a discussion about why masturbation is bad and chastity is good when the students don’t even have a working knowledge about how their own bodies work.
Oh, this is rich. Why, Hermant? Because people taking this class don’t know what masturbation is without it? That kind of proves their point. You, apparently, think that people are clueless if they don’t take this class. Guess again. Again, bring on the porn. The kids should know darn well everything before we discuss the “Catholic faith’s stance.” (Insert rolling eyes.) I mean, really, do you really think that you need to know the ins and outs of arousing someone before you can talk about chastity? Please.
Besides that, there isn’t a parent complaining about this course that doesn’t want their children to know how they’re bodies work. As I’ve said before, they’re the parents who are willing to do the “heavy lifting” to teach their own kids in a manner they deem appropriate and at the time they deem appropriate. Don’t think they could possibly have a clue to when that is because they are not credentialed teachers? Can I point out that they are 1) Catholics 2) married 3) have teens, so they have apparently had sex at least once 4) love their kids enough to gain the knowledge to teach them via one of the fabulous programs already on the books, 5) etc., etc., etc. You, Hemant, were a high school math teacher. How is it again you are an expert in the field?
It’s the same reason that, in my high school health class, we learned about different kinds of drugs and what they did to our bodies. It didn’t make me want to run out and try them. The point was that we couldn’t reasonably talk about, for example, whether marijuana should be legalized without understanding its effects on our bodies and minds.
And? Nobody is debating that. These parents want their kids to know how their bodies work at the appropriate times, by the appropriate means, and by the appropriate manner and appropriate to the child.
I do love your drug class analogy though. I’m sure you didn’t mean to but you made the point again for me. Let me ask you, Hemant. Were you taught how to tap the vein so you could shoot heroin more efficiently? We you taught that you could shoot it between your toes so your tracks wouldn’t be obvious? Were you taught how to avoid an overdose? If you’d like to use that analogy, you might want to understand that’s basically what this class does for sex. Did you really need to know how to shoot crystal meth or did you need to know the outcome of doing so?
If these Catholic parents really want their kids to learn Catholic values, they should realize that keeping them in a bubble is the worst possible way to do it. If anything, exposing them to the facts should make it easier to indoctrinate them.
Thanks for telling me how I should parent with your vast knowledge of parenting. Thanks also for presuming something about which you clearly know nothing. We don’t live in a bubble and I’m pretty sure the parents at Fr. Ryan don’t either – well, maybe the ones who cannot foresee a negative outcome of a course in front of them.
The Diocese, to its credit, isn’t budging. If the parents don’t want their kids to take the course, the only option right now is to leave the school.
Parents don’t always know what’s best for their kids. This is perfect example of it.
Catholic parents who truly care about their kids and the Faith study up, Hemant. I guarantee I have more knowledge about the body, the reproductive system, having children, STDs, abortion, birth control, health, the teachings of the Church, teaching sex education, helping teens to remain chaste, etc., than you will ever have. In fact, my single, adult children likely know more than you in most of these areas. I’m reasonably sure that the parents fighting this program also likely know about raising teens just a tad bit better than you. When we want to know how to be a good atheist, we’ll come to you. Until then, shove off.
What’s next in the liberal tackle box? We’ll probably be hearing about how devout Catholics hate sex.
P.S. If you haven’t done so already, please sign and share. https://www.lifesitenews.com/petitions/petition-to-nashville-diocese