Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed


  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    NEWS TIPS!

    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!


    RightMichigan.com

    Buzz

    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    UNESCO Strikes Again!


    By The Wizard of Laws, Section Multimedia
    Posted on Thu Sep 03, 2009 at 08:05:16 AM EST
    Tags: UNESCO, children (all tags)

    Cross-posted in The Wizard of Laws

    We're Americans. We're generous and forgiving and tolerant. I get all that. But why do we feel it necessary to fund every lunatic organization on Earth?

    Okay, that may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it galls me when I read that the U.S. is giving hundreds of millions of dollars to UNESCO, which advocates teaching 5- to 8-year olds about masturbation!

    UNESCO is the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. In 1984, President Reagan cut off U.S. funding for UNESCO. The State Department said, "UNESCO has extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press, and it has demonstrated unrestrained budgetary expansion."

    The ban on funding remained in place until 2004, when it was restored by W. (See, not a partisan post!). Even Clinton refused to fund these nuts.

    Since 2002, however, the U.S. has thrown $536 million down the UNESCO hole, and The One wants to send them another $78 million.

    So what's wrong with education, science, and culture? Depends on your definition and its application. In UNESCO's case, everything is wrong. In June of this year, UNESCO published a report recommending that sex education begin at five (that's 5) years old. From CNS News:

    The report, called International Guidelines on Sexual Education, was released in June in conjunction with the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), an organization which works for universal access to "reproductive health care."

    In its rationale for creating the guidelines, the UNESCO report said it is "essential to recognize the need and entitlement of all young people to sexuality education." An appendix backed that claim by pointing to a 2008 report from the International Planned Parenthood Federation that argued governments "are obligated to guarantee sexual rights," and that "sexuality education is an integral component to human rights." The guidelines are designed, according to the report, to be "age-appropriate" and break down the suggested curriculum into four age groups: 5- to 8-year-olds, 9- to 12-year-olds, 12- to 15-year-olds and 15- to 18-year-olds.

    For those aged 5 to 8, some key concepts to be discussed are:

    -- "Touching and rubbing one's genitals is called masturbation" and that "girls and boys have private body parts that can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself."
    -- That "people receive messages about sex, gender, and sexuality from their cultures and religions."
    -- That "all people regardless of their health status, religion, origin, race or sexual status can raise a child and give it the love it deserves."
    -- "Gender inequality," "examples of gender stereotypes," and "gender-based violence."
    -- Description of fertilization, conception, pregnancy, and delivery.

    Sharp-eyed readers will note not only the integral role of Planned Parenthood, but also the reference to a child as "it."

    To take just one aspect of the guidelines, what does it mean to say that all people, "regardless of their health status . . . can raise a child and give [him or her] the love [he or she] deserves"? (Hey, wait -- is the use of him, her, he, and she "gender stereotyping?") To what "health status" is UNESCO referring?

    And why are we supporting an organization that recommends 5-year olds be taught about masturbation, and "sexual status?" It might be nice if we occasionally tried reading, writing, and arithmetic before we jumped into sex toys and cross-dressing.

    We're Americans. We want to be loved. Do we have to be so stupid about it?

    < Watch your language! | That's "Seeking Pleasant Peninsulas" to You Pal! >


    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit


    Display: Sort:
    Funding increased detachment... (none / 0) (#1)
    by sailingconservatively on Thu Sep 03, 2009 at 09:33:12 AM EST
    Where have all the parents gone?

    It would seem that our "leadership" lacks the actual ability and(character) to do just that.  For the record, I mean we the parents of these children, NOT our president, governor, senator or city council.  We continue to  lap up the nonsense that is placed before us with ravenous delight and then(and only then) step back, slap our forehead in disgust to announce that this isn't right!

    Clearly this is yet (another) very well thought out method of distracting our society and focusing upon the symptom rather that the problem.  We are the problem. Have all the parents abdicated their sacred role as sole provider, primary educator and parent(not friend, buddy, room mate or pal)?

    The metaphoric ship which needs to be turned about rings hollow, it is turning-in circles, because the compass was jettisoned. Generations have now fed at this trough of bile which is filled by self serving individuals and the resulting behavior(s) speak volumes.

    As a society, a nation(under God) and human beings, we must stop passing the responsibility to the right and left and grasp it ourselves.  Only then will parents reappear and children retain the innocence that has been ripped from them prematurely  by a world that clearly does not care.   Need facts and proof?  

    I wrote comment on sending 78 Million Dollars to something called UNESCO...   (forehead slap here)

    Parental abdication of responsibilities (none / 0) (#2)
    by Rougman on Thu Sep 03, 2009 at 11:37:37 AM EST
    It used to be that most of America thought that there were some things too important to be left to strangers.  Not any more.

    Now we live in a society that generally believes that government is the great benefactor and there is not one function of parenting that the government has not contrived an ineffective replacement for.  

    Parents have abdicated too many of the parenting responsibilities to government.  Now we are too busy working to pay the necessary taxes needed to support the programs to be able to easily wrest those responsibilities back.  Government as a provider is a very easy person to rely on.  Government as a wielder of power is tough to fight.

    Doesn't it take a village? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Theblogprof on Fri Sep 04, 2009 at 12:17:42 AM EST
    Like a really, really big village all governed by the U.N? Here's an idea - how about we get out of the U.N. and start over minus the kooks. It's just getting absolutely nuts out there these days, and our kids are under attack. The treaty of the rights of the child is coming down the pike still. Ugh...

    Display: Sort:

    Login

    Make a new account

    Username:
    Password:
    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!
    create account | faq | search