After reading Linda’s last post, I did some investigating into the UN, the NEA, and their educational concerns that she highlighted. I’ve come to the conclusion that I must not be very bright. I’m probably one of those people Ron Schiller was thinking of when the NPR executive commented that “liberals today might be more educated, fair and balanced than conservatives.” So, I am calling on any liberal readers of this blog, or liberal friends of readers of this blog, to come to my aid and explain something to me. I thought I was a fairly well educated person. I thought that I knew about certain facts of life, those facts that in a kinder and gentler age were referred to as “the birds and the bees,” but are now referred to as standard MTV programming. I know what masturbation is. I know what an orgasm is. I know what oral sex is. I honestly do not know how masturbation, orgasm, and oral sex education (MOOSE) for sixth graders is going to help the United Nations achieve their Millennium Development Goals, but according to a panel at the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), teaching MOOSE to middle and high school students is “key” to solving many of the world’s ills.
The 2010 Millennium Goals are impressive. The UN would like to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, improve maternal health; combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; ensure environmental sustainability, and develop a global partnership for development. These aren’t bad ideas. I just don’t see the connection between teaching a sixth grader about MOOSE and achieving universal primary education. If a teacher explains the big M to a group of children in Japan, will that help a six-year-old learn to read in Bulgaria? If your sixth grade daughter learns about MOOSE, how will that combat the spread of malaria? Wouldn’t DDT be more effective? Will MOOSE develop a global partnership for development? Only in the early fall, and only in northern North America, Europe and Asia. Certainly not globally.
I do know that MOOSE over-population will affect environmental sustainability, but for some reason I don’t think either the UN or Diane Schneider of the National Education Association (NEA) agree. She spoke at the CSW about expanding sex education for middle and high school students to include comprehensive teachings about MOOSE. She made a point of mentioning that abstinence-only education was not a good idea, and that children should not be able to opt-out of MOOSE. It seems to me that if you want to guarantee a decrease in child mortality rates, improve maternal health, and combat HIV/AIDS, then abstinence would be a central theme in MOOSE instruction. You don’t have to pay if you don’t play. Unfortunately, learning about MOOSE will encourage naturally curious youth to want to try MOOSE activities, activities which do lead to the spread of HIV/AIDS and other diseases. Those diseases will make environmental sustainability unachievable. We need look no further than Africa to see that.
The truth behind the educational claims made by the NEA is that MOOSE has absolutely nothing to do with attaining UN Millennial Goals. Through a simple internet search using the terms “NEA” and “homosexuality,” you will find that the NEA is a secular, pro-homosexual organization. Choice is fine if you are choosing to end a life through abortion, but as Ms. Schneider made clear through her comments, it ends if you are a parent choosing to have your children opt-out of MOOSE studies. I have to agree with Linda’s comments in her last post. The NEA + the UN = wolves in wolves’ clothing, and I am not going to feed my children to the wolves.
