"Teen Convinces Her High School To Drop Abstinence-Only Education Class"

[Skidmore]

Wonder if this approach could be taken here.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/07/14/3459632/teen-abstinence-education-class/

After a Canadian high school student filed a human rights complaint against her school district, saying that her rights as a nonbeliever were violated by being required to attend a course on sexual purity taught by a conservative Christian group, school officials agreed to reconsider the curriculum. The anti-abortion group that taught that abstinence education course, Pregnancy Care Centre, won’t be invited back next year.

Emily Dawson and her mother, Kathy, lodged a formal complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission after Emily was required to attend a two-day abstinence class in order to graduate. The complaint alleges that the Pregnancy Care Centre’s course used scare tactics, like misleading information about STDs and negative stereotypes about single parent homes, to dissuade students from having sex. The Dawsons identify as agnostics and were offended that they had no option to opt out of a course taught by a conservative religious organization with an explicit agenda.

snip

Kathy Dawson told CBC News that she will continue to pursue to pursue the human rights complaint, despite the school board’s decision. She believes that other public schools across the province may be using similar religious speakers for their own abstinence assemblies; she hopes to bring more attention to the issue and perhaps get legislators involved.

The Pregnancy Care Centre is affiliated with a network of right-wing “crisis pregnancy centers” in the United States called Care-Net. Both groups are opposed to abortion and advocate for sexual abstinence until marriage. In an interview with CBC News, a researcher at the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada said it’s somewhat surprising that a Canadian public school would use a sexual health curriculum from a U.S. group, since Canada has been “far ahead of the U.S. when it comes to teaching about sexual health free of ideology or religion.”

more

[betterdemsonly]

1. Canada doesn't even have a no establishment clause like the USA

The religious right in this country gets away with far too much.

[progressoid]

2. Sorry Canada!

[Scuba]

3. Here in the US she'd be burned as a witch.

[Thinkingabout]

4. I had read where Elizabeth Smart did not think abstinence should be taught because

The teachers may not know which student may be getting sexually abused and telling them a husband would not like "used" woman. Sometimes it is out of the control of the victim and they do not deserve further abuse.

[factsarenotfair]

10. She also said she was taught that if you weren't a virgin you were like a piece of chewed gum.

And that is what she was thinking as she was being raped--that no one would want here because she was just "chewed gum."

[AtheistCrusader]

13. It astounds me that people don't see the logical outcome of that sort of statement.

One can be sure those teachers didn't impart similar thoughts on the boys.

Because yanno, boys will be boys. Right?

[factsarenotfair]

14. Maybe they also taught the BOYS that girls were "chewed gum" if they weren't virgins. :(

I wouldn't be surprised.

[AtheistCrusader]

15. I'm sure that's part of it.

Dehumanizing, however you look at it.

[Thinkingabout]

16. I agree, the teachers must have attended the same sex classes Todd Akin did.

Does t make sense in lots of ways, they want to teach abstinence but be considerate of others. I am not for young girls getting pregnant because their bodies are young and they need a little freedom as an adult before the responsibility of motherhood.

[AtheistCrusader]

11. It's going to continue too, as long as people invest some 'value' in virginity for girls that they

have no concept of whatsoever for boys.

It's your body. Your sexuality is your own business. Any educational aids from school should be about health and safety, not some abstract religious purity nonsense.

[SheilaT]

5. Too many people in this country are

what I'll call base line Christians, meaning they may not be overly religious, but they were raised within some form of Protestant Christianity, and while most of them are very nice people and not particularly racist, they just don't get that a lot of people simply aren't like them. They don't see the fundamentalist whackos as a danger or threat, because they are so nice themselves, and for them their Christian beliefs are fairly low key and would never (at least this is what they think) be used to brow beat others.

They know about Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists, but may not actually know anyone from any of those faith traditions. They do believe that everyone should be free to worship as they want, but are most comfortable if these others aren't very visible.

They are not at all bothered by prayer in public meetings, like at the city council, because, after all, it is non-denominational, and so far they can tell, could not possibly offend anyone. They just don't get it that the "non-denominational" prayer is still a Protestant Christian one, and is actually offensive in some degree or another to someone not within their mind set.

They honestly think atheists are simply misguided and can't understand why anyone would totally reject all religious belief, especially a belief in a traditional God. To that end, they do get disturbed by Hindu and Buddhist beliefs, if they really think about them. They get it that Jews worship the same God, but some of them are a little confused and think Allah might be a different (false or non existent) God, but others understand that Allah and God are just the same word in different languages for pretty much the same concept.

Therefore, all of these base line Christians don't think there's anything wrong with such things as abstinence only classes, because they have no idea how much that is based on a very specific interpretation of the Bible, and just how much religion of a specific kind is in these classes.

These are not the people who equate atheism with religion (every time I hear that I want to inquire politely for directions to the nearest atheist church) but think that we all should be able to get along, and so think religion in the public sphere just isn't a problem.

These nice people, and I know a good number of them, just don't get it.

[Fred Sanders]

6. It is Alberta, the rural Texas of the north. Christian domination, Christian arrogance.

[Scarsdale]

7. Funding

Here in the US I am sure these groups get funding from taxpayers. Could WE file a suit against this, since the SC allowed Hobby Lobby to stop funding birth control as part of their religious right? It has been shown that abstinence only does NOT work. One senator who was on the committee for this, has a 17 year old unmarried daughter who is pregnant. If THAT does not change his mind about this, what will? Give the young people the facts then let them decide for themselves. Look at the Palin family, three teens had babies without marriage.

[betterdemsonly]

8. Yes, they can be sued

and charges can be brought,since this is a violation of the no establishment clause.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. Problem is, these assholes have no end of internal funding to 'volunteer' in our schools.

Like the 'councilors' issue in Australia. They have a law against school chaplains, yet they still get in as 'volunteers', and there seems no shortage of 'volunteers' and funding to back them, even though the school isn't paying for it.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/jun/19/court-stops-australian-funding-of-school-chaplains/

The moral meddlers are only too happy to pony up for their social engineering projects.

The 'abstinence only' bullshit has to be taken out via quantifiable efficacy studies (showing the utter lack thereof) and the like. Funding/suit about funding is not going to get them out. Need stronger repellant.

[betterdemsonly]

12. Studies won't convince those who espouse these views

They are antirational. They can't be defunded either because many billionares like fundies. They want to be in the pants of the working class. Religion gives them that power. We just need to sue the shit out of them to overturn these laws and to soak up their gravytrain.

I am not an atheists,but I think their religious views are extremist and don't want them forced on me or my kids.