This Brings a Whole New Meaning to the Word Sexting// do you know who’s texting your child?


Text messages: Enabling privacy for sex ed

As if parents don’t have enough to worry about these days, now states are sending sexually explicit text messages straight to your kid’s cell phone. So the cute football player is not allowed to send sex messages to your teenage girl, but the state can? Interesting….

Here’s just another way the government is trying to take control of America’s children and deprive parents of their rights to parent and teach their children according to their beliefs. Check this out:

“If you take a shower before you have sex, are you less likely to get pregnant?” asks one.

Another: “Does a normal penis have wrinkles?”

A young girl types: “If my BF doesn’t like me to be loud during sex but I can’t help it, what am I supposed to do?”

Within 24 hours, each will receive a cautious, nonjudgmental reply, texted directly to their cellphones, from a nameless, faceless adult at the Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Campaign of North Carolina, based in Durham.

And might I interject, with out the knowledge, or consent of these kids’ parents.

A few universities and hospitals set up blunt Web sites for young people, like Columbia’s Go Ask Alice! and Atlantic Health’s, allowing them to post questions online. More recently, researchers have explored how to reach teenagers through social networking sites like MySpace and YouTube.

Now, health experts say, intimate, private and crucial information can be delivered to teenagers on the device that holds millions captive: their cellphones.

Programs in Washington, D.C.; Chicago, Toronto and San Francisco allow young people to text a number, select from a menu of frequently asked questions (“What 2 do if the condom broke”) and receive automated replies, with addresses of free clinics. Last month, California started HookUp 365247, a statewide text-messaging service. The texter can type a ZIP code and get a local clinic referral, as well as weekly health tips.

And here goes their argument:

“Technology reduces the shame and embarrassment,” said Deb Levine, executive director of ISIS, a nonprofit organization that began many technology-based reproductive health programs. “It’s the perceived privacy that people have when they’re typing into a computer or a cellphone. And it’s culturally appropriate for young people: they don’t learn about this from adults lecturing them.”

Oh really? They think that children shouldn’t learn about sex from their parents? Why do they assume it’s always “from adults lecturing them.” First of all, from a responsible and concerned parents, it probably wouldn’t be a lecture. It is imperative and also appropriate for a parent to teach their child about sex in the home, and to teach them that sex has a place only with in the bonds of marriage. Parents don’t need the state’s agenda, disguised as helpful and responsible sex education, to undermine their efforts and authority when it comes to teaching their own children. For the unfortunate kids who don’t have conscientious and responsible parents, they know how to use the internet and the library, if they want privacy concerning their sex questions. They know where to get the info. Parent’s don’t need the state marketing sex to, and teaching, their children.

That lack of oversight is what galls Bill Brooks, president of the North Carolina Family Policy Council. “If I couldn’t control access to this information, I’d turn off the texting service,” he said. “When it comes to the Internet, parents are advised to put blockers on their computer and keep it in a central place in the home. But kids can have access to this on their cellphones when they’re away from parental influence — and it can’t be controlled.”

Just what the states want, an avenue to contact your children, indoctrinate them, and do it all behind your back. Clever. We have the ACLU or some other crazed organization to thank for the fact that people can access porn on public library computers, so if kids want unfiltered sex-ed info, they can also get it there, out of their parents control.

While some would argue that such programs augment what students learn in health class, Mr. Brooks believes that they circumvent an abstinence-until-marriage curriculum. “It doesn’t make sense to fund a program that is different than the state standards,” he said. (The State Legislature is now considering a bill permitting comprehensive sex education.)

I think these texting programs are offensive and completely unnecessary. If the states wanted to be so involved in a responsible sex education program, then they should focus more on the basics in classroom sex-ed, and less on gay day, homosexual and gender issues and everything else the GLBT community has gotten them to teach. It seems that public school sex ed programs have gotten so far off track that these kids are left with so  many questions, basic sex education questions that could easily be answered in a decent sex-ed program.

What’s wrong with caring teachers being allowed to really teach biology,  and parents being able to teach their own children without being sidelined by the state? Real teaching and parenting has done the trick for hundreds of years. I remember my high school biology class, and our reproductive unit. We had the coolest biology teacher, and one of the best, if not the best, teachers in the entire school. We knew she cared about us and she really wanted us to learn. She is an amazing teacher! After our reproduction/sex-ed unit, she devoted an entire class to our questions. Students got to write them down anonymously and put them in a box. She pulled them out and answered them. I still to this day remember some of the things she said in class that day. Thanks Miss O’Brien!

Although as disgusting as this government-advocated-sexting is, unfortunately it’s probably not any worse then the homosexuality,  gay days and other trash that is taught in public schools these days.  These texting programs are just more private, but their intent to indoctrinate and undermine parents is the same. Sounds like the states are just adding to their repertoire. {Click here to read the entire NY Times article}

What do you all make of this? How would you feel if these were your kids? What else don’t you know about your kids? Let’s hope that these state-employed-so-called-sex-educator-texters aren’t actually pedophiles in disguise…..

Thanks for reading. Comments are always welcome!

{p.s.} I am aware that the current definition of “sexting” doesn’t exactly include government forced sex-ed, however, doesn’t it seem like they are trying to get in on the action too?


4 thoughts on “This Brings a Whole New Meaning to the Word Sexting// do you know who’s texting your child?

  1. OK, am I the only one who thinks that getting pre-teens and teens a cell phone with texting is a bad idea? These kids can’t put their phones down for a minute. Unplug your kids before their brains rot!

  2. I totally agree. My husband and I have already agreed that our kids will not have cell phones. If someone wants to speak to our children, they can call the house, their father and I can answer and decided if our child needs to speak to that person or not. Too many parents have “checked out” and have no clue what their kids our up to, hence all of the recent seating scandals. There is no reason that anyone should be calling or texting a child (and that’s what teenagers are, children) without their parents’ knowledge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s