A Christian group opposes legislation that would teach grade school children how to protect themselves from sexual abuse.

[Lisa]

Center for Christian Virtue. Policy director David Mahan said the bill should allow parents to opt their children out of the curriculum altogether and argued it lacks a clear definition of what "age-appropriate" instruction means. These people are sick if they seek to block a law that protects children from sexual abusers. They are claiming that it is a violation of abstinence-only education but abstinence-only sex education has nothing to do with protecting children from sexual abusers. This is not about teaching sex education but about protecting vulnerable children from predators. It would seem that they know that there is sex abuse happening in churches and they didn't want kids to accuse those who are gaming them, people such as priests, ministers, and other religious types.

Every one of these parents who oppose this law should be investigated themselves because a rational parent would want their child to have the knowdlkge to protect themselves from abuse.

Fighting over abstinence, opt-out​

The bill in question, dubbed Erin's Law, mirrors legislation approved by three dozen other states. It's named for Erin Merryn, a child sexual assault survivor who is working to pass the law across the country after action in her home state of Illinois.

Lipps and Rep. Brigid Kelly, D-Cincinnati, have pushed the bill in Ohio's last two legislative sessions, and it was introduced multiple times before that.

Under the proposal:

• Child sex abuse prevention should include information about counseling and resources for children who have been sexually abused. No other content requirements are outlined in the bill.
• The Ohio Department of Education must provide free resources to help districts develop curricula on sexual violence, an all-encompassing term that includes sexual assault, incest and intimate partner violence.
• School districts would be required to notify parents and guardians about the lessons and let them review the materials if requested.
• Parental notification isn't enough for opponents at the Center for Christian Virtue. Policy director David Mahan said the bill should allow parents to opt their children out of the curriculum altogether and argued it lacks a clear definition of what "age-appropriate" instruction means.
  
  Mahan also contends the measure violates state law because it does not emphasize abstinence. Ohio currently requires educators to teach students that abstinence is the only guaranteed practice to avoid sexually-transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies.
  
  "If we’re going to do that in the state of Ohio, it’s got to be abstinence-related," he said. "It’s not opinion. It’s law."

Why a bill to educate kids about sex abuse prevention has stalled in the Ohio Legislature

The Center for Christian Virtue says the bill leaves parents in the dark and flies in the face of Ohio's abstinence-only sex education.

www.dispatch.com

 

[Patriotic Voter]

"Any effort to attach parental consent to this law is another layer of perpetuation of violence, removing power, control, agency and autonomy from the victim," said Rosa Beltré, president of the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence. "The vast majority of survivors of child sexual assault express that their victimization occurred at the hands of a caretaker, an adult they trusted, a parent."

So it is better not to notify the parents about sexually explicit information being taught? We are talking about kids who need a parent to help them do their homework. Somehow the parents will find out this stuff is in the curriculum. I don't know what to think of this.

 

[Lisa]

So it is better not to notify the parents about sexually explicit information being taught? We are talking about kids who need a parent to help them do their homework. Somehow the parents will find out this stuff is in the curriculum. I don't know what to think of this.

The only sexually explicit information being taught is to help the children protect themselves from sexual abusers. What kind of parents doesn't want their child to have that information and be able to protect themselves? These parents want their children to be able to opt-out of this education.

These kids are possibly being abused at home and at church and the parents don't want it stopped or reported. I hope that someone is taking notes of who these parents are and start talking to their kids to make sure that they are safe.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

The only sexually explicit information being taught is to help the children protect themselves from sexual abusers. What kind of parents doesn't want their child to have that information and be able to protect themselves? These parents want their children to be able to opt-out of this education.

These kids are possibly being abused at home and at church and the parents don't want it stopped or reported. I hope that someone is taking notes of who these parents are and start talking to their kids to make sure that they are safe.

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

 

[Lisa]

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

Protect the children from the parents and probably the church, because the parents are all religious, so I assume that they know that there is systemic sexual abuse in the church and they have chosen to protect the church over the safety of their own kids. I fear for the kids well being. I hope that CPS is keeping a list of these parents and watches their kids for signs of emotional abuse.

Many parents have children because they believe that their god tells them that they must reproduce. I could tell horror stories of what I experienced as a child. I don't remember any sexual abuse at the hands of nuns or priests, but the physical abuse and emotional abuse/neglect are why I have complex trauma(a severe form of PTSD) My mother was very religious and used religion to justify and rationalize what she did to me. No person should spend the rest of their life trying to recover from their childhood.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Protect the children from the parents and probably the church, because the parents are all religious, so I assume that they know that there is systemic sexual abuse in the church and they have chosen to protect the church over the safety of their own kids. I fear for the kids well being. I hope that CPS is keeping a list of these parents and watches their kids for signs of emotional abuse.

You can be super-religious and totally disagree with your church's teachings. For example, nobody can convince me homosexuality and bisexuality are sins without undeniable proof of a negative: the trait is not genetic. Unwilling to accept the fact negatives really can be proven, all Christians who hate science go crazy if I show any support for the LGBT community. But I care as much as they do about my Christian faith. The only problem is I cannot morally agree with things that are harmful to women and children.

 

[btthegreat]

'Age appropriate' sex education on any of these topics is a tricky matter to quantify and measure but its something that must be quantified and measured because educators and experts feel avoidance of age inappropriate sex education can do more harm than good. That being said, a vague standard can also become the Bermuda Triangle of all efforts to get any curriculum passed and implemented.

In the end, its not parents who decide what is or is not age appropriate, it's professional child development and education specialists employed to look at this sort of thing for a living. Let them look at the books, the curriculum and the material and provide the education districts with guidance.

 

[Maccabee]

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

I can't give an answer right off but the vast majority of abusers are those close to the child, whether it be family or friends.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

You're damn right, and it's high time the schools did. Four out of five kids that get molested are molested by a parent. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ost-sex-offenders-against-children-are-family

I'm willing to bet that you don't molest your kids, sure; most parents don't do that, and coincidentally, most kids don't get molested. But if you honestly want to help protect your kids' friends from child molesters, you have to come to terms with the idea that an outside influence needs to be trusted with educating kids about dangerous adults. I got something you might call a "sex education" when I was in elementary school, and it mostly boiled down to a video of a puppet telling me it was okay to say no if someone touched me places I didn't want them to, and to tell my parents or another adult if someone did that to me. Judging by the information in the OP and the link to the proposal, the bill doesn't go much further beyond that education besides opening up direct communication lines for children who report sexual abuse, and promoting a better legal understanding of this crime for districts' policy and curriculum. I can't think of a good reason to oppose that. Can you?

 

[Jredbaron96]

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The only sexually explicit information being taught is to help the children protect themselves from sexual abusers. What kind of parents doesn't want their child to have that information and be able to protect themselves? These parents want their children to be able to opt-out of this education.

These kids are possibly being abused at home and at church and the parents don't want it stopped or reported. I hope that someone is taking notes of who these parents are and start talking to their kids to make sure that they are safe.

Sexual abuse is over 100 times more likely in school than church and so why should the unionized workers who rape 100X as often be given an Avenue to groom?

 

[code1211]

Center for Christian Virtue. Policy director David Mahan said the bill should allow parents to opt their children out of the curriculum altogether and argued it lacks a clear definition of what "age-appropriate" instruction means. These people are sick if they seek to block a law that protects children from sexual abusers. They are claiming that it is a violation of abstinence-only education but abstinence-only sex education has nothing to do with protecting children from sexual abusers. This is not about teaching sex education but about protecting vulnerable children from predators. It would seem that they know that there is sex abuse happening in churches and they didn't want kids to accuse those who are gaming them, people such as priests, ministers, and other religious types.

Every one of these parents who oppose this law should be investigated themselves because a rational parent would want their child to have the knowdlkge to protect themselves from abuse.

Why a bill to educate kids about sex abuse prevention has stalled in the Ohio Legislature

The Center for Christian Virtue says the bill leaves parents in the dark and flies in the face of Ohio's abstinence-only sex education.

www.dispatch.com

The simple truth of the matter is that many children don't know enough to know what they are hearing.

Another facet of this is that the teachers doing the teachers may have some odd ideas of their own that might corrupt the curriculum.

Introducing odd ideas into the minds of kids that don't have sufficient context to understand the intention(s) is not a good idea.

 

[Gordy327]

So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

Depending on the state (if not required in all states) Schools do have a legal obligation to protect students from suspected or potential harm from adults, including the parents, via notifying the state's child protective services or law enforcement.
Let's face it, some people should not be parents. Especially if they willfully harm or abuse their kids. It's unfortunate such circumstances occur.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Depending on the state (if not required in all states) Schools do have a legal obligation to protect students from suspected or potential harm from adults, including the parents, via notifying the state's child protective services or law enforcement.

That mandate is not true in all states. I was not taught the first thing about protecting yourself from a full-ground child molester in health class at any grade level. Sex education in Ohio is still what it was during the late 20th century: abstain from sex, period. Not a word about how to abstain, why only spaying and neutering are 100 percent effective, or what to do with a sex abuser. That is why "abstinence only" education never works.

Let's face it, some people should not be parents. Especially if they willfully harm or abuse their kids. It's unfortunate such circumstances occur.

If I was a mom, my parenting style would be yelling at kids immediately if I hated what they were doing and teaching safety first according to my own standards. No way would I let any bad behavior slip by me or give my kid a second chance. But my mom always says that is the opposite of what parents should do despite the fact they are risking a kid's safety and allowing bad habits to develop. So I definitely do not have a maternal instinct. But no way would I think for one second about physically or sexually abusing kids or being mean to them when they are on good behavior.

Plain and simple: If you should not be a parent, you should not have sex. That is what kids are taught in health classes. But what if you think you can be a good parent before it is too late to have an abortion? Are you supposed to abstain from sex just because at the time you did not know about your potential parenting style? Uh, not really. Science says having sex is natural and healthy whether you want to have a kid or not. Scientists say you don't have to know whether you want kids or not to benefit from having sex.

 

[Gordy327]

That mandate is not true in all states. I was not taught the first thing about protecting yourself from a full-ground child molester in health class at any grade level. Sex education in Ohio is still what it was during the late 20th century: abstain from sex, period. Not a word about how to abstain, why only spaying and neutering are 100 percent effective, or what to do with a sex abuser. That is why "abstinence only" education never works.



If I was a mom, my parenting style would be yelling at kids immediately if I hated what they were doing and teaching safety first according to my own standards. No way would I let any bad behavior slip by me or give my kid a second chance. But my mom always says that is the opposite of what parents should do despite the fact they are risking a kid's safety and allowing bad habits to develop. So I definitely do not have a maternal instinct. But no way would I think for one second about physically or sexually abusing kids or being mean to them when they are on good behavior.

Plain and simple: If you should not be a parent, you should not have sex. That is what kids are taught in health classes. But what if you think you can be a good parent before it is too late to have an abortion? Are you supposed to abstain from sex just because at the time you did not know about your potential parenting style? Uh, not really. Science says having sex is natural and healthy whether you want to have a kid or not. Scientists say you don't have to know whether you want kids or not to benefit from having sex.

Sex Ed should be comprehensive and include what is considered inappropriate conduct, including what constitutes abuse. And I agree, abstinence only does not work and is not realistic either.

 

[Lloyd Christmas]

Of course a christian group opposes, they don't want to lose their prey

 

[Risky Thicket]

Ignoring the realities of the world does not render those realities non-existent.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Sex Ed should be comprehensive and include what is considered inappropriate conduct, including what constitutes abuse. And I agree, abstinence only does not work and is not realistic either.

One problem with abstinence only education is what my health teacher said. Instead of explaining the effectiveness percentages for each contraception method, he just told the class "human error" is why nothing else is 100% effective.

Why aren't all students being taught the specific human errors for each contraception method are, how to decide which one is the best for yourself, and directions for how to use them properly? I am sure if all that information was taught in health classes, only the male contraception methods would be less than 100% effective (and even their effectiveness rates would go up).

 

[Gordy327]

One problem with abstinence only education is what my health teacher said. Instead of explaining the effectiveness percentages for each contraception method, he just told the class "human error" is why nothing else is 100% effective.

Why aren't all students being taught the specific human errors for each contraception method are, how to decide which one is the best for yourself, and directions for how to use them properly? I am sure if all that information was taught in health classes, only the male contraception methods would be less than 100% effective (and even their effectiveness rates would go up).

Proper and comprehensive education is the best method of prevention.

 

[CaughtInThe]

man. this is gonna be a fascinating thread to read. maybe we should all bookmark it.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Proper and comprehensive education is the best method of prevention.

I will never understand why a lot of Christians think it should not be taught. What do they think 1 Corinthians 9 is about?

 

[Gordy327]

I will never understand why a lot of Christians think it should not be taught. What do they think 1 Corinthians 9 is about?

I have no idea either. I suspect they think it'll make kids curious and want to try it. Perhaps it's because of a prudish mentality coupled with willful ignorance?

 

[Patriotic Voter]

I have no idea either. I suspect they think it'll make kids curious and want to try it. Perhaps it's because of a prudish mentality coupled with willful ignorance?

"Because there is no much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman should have her own husband."

It cannot be more clear than that. If you are not married, don't have sex. period. If you are married, don't have sex with anyone else.

 

[Gordy327]

"Because there is no much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman should have her own husband."

It cannot be more clear than that. If you are not married, don't have sex. period. If you are married, don't have sex with anyone else.

That does not address the issue. It's like telling kids simply to not have sex. So of course kids are going to want to do it.

 

[j brown's body]

Center for Christian Virtue. Policy director David Mahan said the bill should allow parents to opt their children out of the curriculum altogether and argued it lacks a clear definition of what "age-appropriate" instruction means. These people are sick if they seek to block a law that protects children from sexual abusers. They are claiming that it is a violation of abstinence-only education but abstinence-only sex education has nothing to do with protecting children from sexual abusers. This is not about teaching sex education but about protecting vulnerable children from predators. It would seem that they know that there is sex abuse happening in churches and they didn't want kids to accuse those who are gaming them, people such as priests, ministers, and other religious types.

Every one of these parents who oppose this law should be investigated themselves because a rational parent would want their child to have the knowdlkge to protect themselves from abuse.

Why a bill to educate kids about sex abuse prevention has stalled in the Ohio Legislature

The Center for Christian Virtue says the bill leaves parents in the dark and flies in the face of Ohio's abstinence-only sex education.

www.dispatch.com

Not surprising, coming from people who would prohibit rape victims from having abortions.