Privacy   |    Financial   |    Current Events   |    Self Defense   |    Miscellaneous   |    Letters To Editor   |    About Off The Grid News   |    Off The Grid Videos   |    Weekly Radio Show

Who Is Protecting The Children?

Listen To The Article

When will our children be taught that true sexual freedom exists only when the right of refusal is respected?  Some people support the sexual exploitation of children under a misguided interpretation of sexual freedom. Modern Secular Humanists (MSH), the National Organization of Women (NOW), and Planned Parenthood claim to protect women and children, but their actions accomplish the opposite. The United Nations (UN), the American military, and the American educational system have established policies which limit parents’ ability to protect their children from predators. So who is really protecting our children?

Modern Secular Humanists have infiltrated our churches, government, and educational system. The fifth principle of the Humanist Manifesto II rejects all religious, ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual or suppress freedom, all the while forgetting that one person’s freedom must end where another person’s begins.  The sixth principle focuses on sexuality, claiming that “intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct” and “many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered ‘evil’.”

Secularists advocate permitting individuals to express their sexual proclivities as they desire, often showing no regard for children too young to make decisions they may later regret. When victims bring charges against an offender, it is sometimes implied that an adequate sex-ed program would have helped the victim to realize that sexual exploration is a natural process throughout one’s life.

The UN Declaration of Principles on Tolerance and the Humanist Manifestos encourage Western civilizations to be more tolerant of the value systems of other cultures. The UN defines tolerance as respect and acceptance. MSH, NOW, and Planned Parenthood claim to discourage treating people as sexual objects; however, their well-documented actions enable the exploitation of women and children.

New Book Reveals How To Win The Mental And Spiritual Side Of The Preparation Game!

Betty Friedan (founder of NOW) and Alan F. Guttmacher (a President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America) are signatories of the Humanist Manifesto II. Many of these organizations receive some level of federal funding.

When women’s groups ignore acts of incest by refusing to report a minor’s request for an abortion, aid pedophiles, and encourage parents to abort their girl babies because they wanted a boy instead, one has to believe that these groups are condoning forms of sexual exploitation.

Where do church leaders stand on issues that would protect women and children from sexual exploitation? Perhaps the failure of many church leaders to provide unyielding support for abstinence, for pro-life stances, and for traditional family values is the reason humanists claim that many within religious groups have humanist credentials. Our society needs churches to regain moral authority on the issue of sexual exploitation of one person by another. Working to eliminate reasons for abortions is a better solution than condoning abortions.

Absolute respect for the right of refusal is essential to give all persons leverage to protect themselves from sexual abuse. When political and social leaders undermine or ignore one person’s right to refusal, victimization becomes acceptable.

Some thought the United Nations would assume that role of protector, but the United Nations was organized by Alger Hiss, a Communist who shared more convictions with the secular humanist agenda than with the Judeo-Christian philosophy that shaped the American republic. Many directors of the United Nations are Modern Secular Humanists. Sir Julian Huxley, former head of UNESCO, is a signatory of the Humanist Manifesto II.

The UN Convention of the Rights of the Child was touted as a means of protecting children from abuse and exploitation. Signed by President Clinton in 1995 but never ratified, this treaty has significant influence on the American legal and educational systems. The phrases “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion” and “arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy” can be interpreted to strip parents of the right to raise their children without government interference. Many parents are concerned about the direction the government is taking on sexual and religious values and do not want a secular government imposing Modern Secular Humanist values upon their children.

An article by Duane Lester published in Today’s News, December 12, 2012, describes a new U.S. military handbook for troops deployed to the Middle East that will order soldiers to make no derogatory comments against pedophilia or the mistreatment of women. According to Lester, the new manual will explain that Western ignorance of Afghan culture is responsible for the increase in deadly attacks by Afghan soldiers against our military.

When a government embraces secular principles on morality and ethics, it assumes the privilege of defining what is acceptable for all. It requires Americans to abandon their value system and to accept the most barbaric and basic of behavioral standards. Our citizens or our soldiers who defend their values and traditions are being warned to expect retaliation.

Not only is our military forbidden to protect children from sexual abuse, but our educational system implements secular sex-education courses which require children in grade K-5 to identify “private parts” on the human body and discuss good touching and bad touching. One example of such a program is The Primary Program: Growing and Learning in the Heartland, Health and Well-Being. Advocates for Academic Freedom is experiencing an increasing number of concerns from parents and teachers that this approach taught in mixed groups strips children of their natural sense of modesty, a tool that often protects children from exploitation in some settings. Educators and parents are uncomfortable with the broad definitions of good and bad touching.

Many believe that objectionable changes to school health curricula result from the placement of Kevin Jennings as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Education in charge of “Safe and Drug-Free Schools.”  Mr. Jennings is the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a leading proponent of pro-homosexual curricula in public schools. According to many, Mr. Jennings interprets the phrase “safe” to mean safe for homosexual children. Overemphasis on alternative life choices makes heterosexual children feel excluded.

Citizens want their tax dollars spent to protect all children from any form of abuse and to respect the rights and values of every child. Parents may write a letter to school administrators demanding that their child “opt-out” of sex-education classes.

It is time to get the federal government out of education, reallocate those federal dollars to the states, and reinstate local control of schools. Local educators, taxpayers, and parents would protect their children from exposure to unintended consequences of these programs.

Karen Schroeder is the President of Advocates for Academic Freedom (AAF), which is a proponent for a return to fact-based curricula, accountability, and academic excellence in public education. Karen was appointed to the Governor’s Educational Communications Board on May 1, 2012.  She provides seminars designed to inform and motivate citizens to reclaim their responsibility to become involved in the decisions made at the local and state levels of the educational system. Karen is regularly interviewed by Wisconsin radio personalities. With a BA degree in education and a Master’s Degree in Special Education, Ms. Schroeder has taught in suburban public schools for thirty-six years. During her teaching career, she became a free-lance writer to provide citizens with information revealing the impact of social and political policies on the educational system. Her works are published in the Eau Claire Journal and numerous other newspapers across Wisconsin, Illinois, Alaska, and Massachusetts. As an education consultant, Ms. Schroeder provides seminars and campaign training programs to political candidates. Among other projects, AAF donates conservative current-events materials to libraries of public schools. Karen can be reached at [email protected] or by calling 715-234-5072.

© Copyright Off The Grid News