Minnesota's Department of Indoctrination and Perversion
Then Wardlow gets specific, saying "take kindergarteners—five- and six-year-olds—who would be required to use 'medically accurate terms for body parts, including genitals.' Children will be compelled to discuss these sensitive matters in a classroom setting under the instruction of an authority figure who might be a member of the opposite sex. That’s not education; it’s an age-inappropriate intrusion that overrides parents’ careful choices about when and how to broach these topics.
The problems compound in third grade, where eight- and nine-year-olds must “describe internal and external reproductive body parts using medically accurate terms in a gender-neutral way.” But human biology obviously isn’t gender-neutral—male and female reproductive systems are fundamentally different. How can a benchmark demand something that’s biologically impossible while claiming to be objective?Fox9 News's report: Dr. Meg Bartlett-Chase offered her opinion, saying "Sex education isn't something that we need to be scared of. It's not something that we need to have shame about." That's a subjective opinion. That's hardly objective. Dr. Bartlett-Chase is the founder and executive director of Honest Sex Ed. She's offering her opinion on a subject she wants her company to teach. If she might benefit financially from the class getting taught, that's definitely a conflict of interest.
It's time for Gov. Walz and the DFL to stop pushing age-inappropriate material, especially to children this young. This isn't objective. It's ideological. Period. Further, it's inappropriate to teach material that doesn't have a solid scientific base to it. If Dr. Chase-Bartlett thinks that people born with 2 X chromosomes is the same as a person born with 1 X chromosome and 1 Y chromosome, then she isn't a scientist. She's an activist.
Let parents teach their kids about these things. At minimum, parents should have the initial and the final say in these matters.
Comments
Post a Comment