It seems that Barack Obama is good with “age-appropriate sex education” for kindergartners, according to this heads up found here at Michelle Malkin’s blog. Michelle notes, “If you don’t believe the social engineers hide behind the mantra of ‘age-appropriate sex ed,’ you are living in fantasy-land.”
Other sources on this: John Hawkins, Robert Bluey, Jim Hoft
Of course, Obama, like John Edwards, wants their universal healthcare idea to cover abortions too.
So, let’s recap. Obama wants to start as young as kindergarten teaching kids about sex, so that they can go get an abortion when the baby is created, so they can get socialist healthcare to pay for it. Hmmm? Does that about sum it up?
Do you think the Obama Girl video is going to his head or something and he just can’t think straight?
Volunteer Opinion Journal 
July 19, 2007 at 4:25 pm |
Did you even read the full quote? He talked about “age appropriate sex education.” Not everything is about fornication Mr. Church Lady. Sex education covers the differences between what makes a boy a boy and a girl a girl. Its about teaching bounderies such as no touching. Its about giving kids the information they need so everything doesnt become this massive toilet joke when they are older.
And with regard to the funding of planned parenthood type programs. Go for it. If not I want you to give a listing of what and what you wont provide for that unwanted child. Money. Healthcare. Education. Safe home. Loving family. Safe neighborhood.
And seriously, unless you have a womb hiding under that scrotum of yours I really think you need to take the classic republican stance and say “stay out of my business.”
July 19, 2007 at 9:36 pm |
Yes. I did read the ‘full quote”, Robert. And, I did quote precisely what you did, “age appropriate sex education.” Good luck on preventing the toilet jokes with kids.
Sorry, you haven’t swayed me to your pro-abortion side. My wife and I were confronted with the possibility that our last child might have Down’s Syndrome and not able to live a “normal” life. Being the “Mr. Church Lady” that I am and my wife the Mrs. Church Lady that she is, we prayed and talked about it.
And, do you know what? We decided that we would not end his short life in the womb, because we were so self-centered that we worry only about ourselves. Can you guess what else? You might want to sit down for this one. We were prepared to give him everything he needed to live as full a life as any child with Down’s possibly could, including the “money”, “healthcare”, “education”, “safe home” and “loving family” that you cited. As circumstances would have it, our son was born completely healthy with no abnormalities. And, guess what. He got all the same stuff we were prepared to give him anyhow.
As for me and others of my ilk, we see adoption as an option. There are a host of people out there that would happily adopt a child conceived but not wanted by his/her parents and provide them with all of the things you have mentioned. As for my wife, the one with the womb, and me, the one with the scrotum, we have reached our quota and make sure that we do not have more children than those for which we are capable of providing everything they deserve.
I do not subscribe to abortion, tax dollar funded or otherwise, as a means of birth control for reckless behavior. Please don’t waste your time or mine citing the incest and rape clause of your argument. The statistics of that are so terribly miniscule that it doesn’t even register without using decimal points to get to it. And, more and more studies of women who have given into the idea of aborting a child go on to suffer post-traumatic stress and other related disorders, like depression, etc., from finally realizing what they did to the child’s life that they helped come to pass prematurely. So, obviously, as I see it, you and I disagree on the issue of abortion.
I hold the position that abortion is an avenue to avoid personal responsibility, a “stance” on which I am very big, by the way. As far as being “Republican”, I don’t classify myself by partisan labels. I am a staunch Conservative. Obviously, you don’t find too many of those in the Democratic Party. But, that is not my fault. I have met and known of a couple that were conservative and with whom I am good friends. Apparently, you and I do not have to worry about sharing that type of camaraderie. I do not suspect that either of us will be losing sleep over the prospect of that, now will we?
If you read more of my posts, you would notice that I have no problem calling Republicans to task on their shortcomings too. But, you couldn’t see past your own agenda to notice that, could you? Too bad. I understand that blind leftist fury is a hard thing with which to live. Not that I would know about that.
Press forward with your agenda, my good man. But, you are the one wanting in “my business” and that of other pro-life Americans, because you want us to help subsidize the taking of innocent lives with our tax dollars through a Socialist healthcare system pressed as part of the campaign platform of what, obviously, is your party, the Democrats. Of course, there is the issue of your side wanting to prep school-age children with “age appropriate sex education” from kindergarten forward to be ready for it.
In parting, please know that “Mr. Church Lady” will be praying for you. God bless! *wink*
August 1, 2007 at 1:48 pm |
[…] fits with Barack Obama’s great idea of sex-ed for kindergarteners that have been posted on here, here, here and here? Hmmmm? Could there be a conspiracy afoot? Nah! There goes my […]