Friday, February 13, 2009


This will be a most unpleasant experience. First, it's a little long. Second, it's been sanitized to the point it feels disjointed to me. Third, it's a volatile topic. Fourth, I fear your reactions. However, I believe so strongly in the sanctity of human life that I'm willing to alienate all of you in order to bring light to this issue. My material and research is a little dated. This article was written a few years ago, and I don't have the time to provide fresh figures. But at one time, the information I'm presenting was hard fact. I pray that you will each prove me wrong and that I've sounded the alarm for no cause. I'm especially interested in what our professional educators (Gwen, Rosslyn, and so forth) will have to say about my assertions. Sex Ed is different with each locality. Most of my research reflects what was happening in Dallas, Texas in the late 90's and early 2000's. With no further disclaimers, I present:

“Our presence in schools guaranteed a 50% increase in pregnancy,” said Carol Everett, former sexual education teacher and abortion clinic owner. “We had a strategy that changed with every class; our ultimate goal was to generate a market for abortions”. Many schools in our nation have implemented a sexual education program. What are they teaching? What agenda does a woman like Carol Everett support, and what is she teaching in a sexual education program?

There are two basic thoughts on sex education. The first is an abstinence only program teaching that sexual relationships and activities are solely for after marriage. The second school of thought teaches sexual awareness and safe sex measures, including abortion.


Historically, sex education began at home. Children successfully learned about relationships and family life in general by observing their own families. They learned about affections and responsibilities on a personal level by interacting with their parents and siblings.
According to Microsoft Encarta, modern public sexual education essentially began in the post-World War II era and was known as “social hygiene.” At first, the programs only included the physical process, workings of sex organs, venereal diseases, family roles, and the psychological and emotional causes and consequences of sex. As the years passed, the public schools began to adopt a less factual approach and began to teach sex as a philosophy. The modern driving force behind today’s sexual education is a government organization called SIECUS, which stands for, Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. SIECUS works hand in hand with Planned Parenthood.

According to the SIECUS web site, their primary goal is the promotion of adult sexual health. They “provide accurate information about human sexuality, including growth and development, human reproduction, anatomy, physiology, masturbation, family life, pregnancy, childbirth, parenthood, sexual response, sexual orientation, contraception, abortion, sexual abuse, HIV/AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases, … as well as the ability to create satisfying relationships…. This would include helping young people develop the capacity for caring, supportive, non-coercive, and mutually pleasurable intimate and sexual relationships.”

In 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act (P.L. 104-193) that directly conflicts with the philosophy adopted by SIECUS. The law created an abstinence only program in Section 510, Title V of the Social Security Act. Congress allocated matching funds with the states to enable the implementation of abstinence-only-until-marriage education.

Many states were eager to begin teaching the more moderate and conservative method in hopes of lowering their teen pregnancy rates. Abstinence programs began demonstrating satisfying results. The Pro-life community eagerly rejoiced that teen pregnancy was going down and that the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) was declining. Yet, the liberal factions were furious at the success of the abstinence message.

Citizen Link website remarks that “the safe-sex cartel (Planned Parenthood, SIECUS and their ideological allies in the public health community) have pulled out all stops to sabotage Title V. Initially, SIECUS lobbied for governors not to apply for the block grant funds. After all 50 states applied for the money, SIECUS began promoting ways to spend the money wastefully.

Unfortunately, many states have adopted the SIECUS template and have created programs that: [1.] Aim the abstinence programs almost exclusively at pre-teens. [2.] Strip the “marriage” aspect from the abstinence message. [3.] Promote oral sex and mutual masturbation as an alternative to sexual intercourse. [4.] Contain unrealistic evaluation requirements to set abstinence up for failure. [5.] Stack review panels with condom advocates. [6.] Concentrate spending in non-targeted and expensive mass media. [7.] Exclude the abstinence message from classrooms. It is likely that the abstinence message will be wasted in many of these states”.

The attempts to undermine Title V became increasingly apparent with each state’s reaction. In Minnesota, the message was focused on children 14 and under, about 2% of the total teen pregnancies. In Montana 42% of the funding was spent on salaries, overhead, and janitorial services. (Federal law restricts spending more than 10% on administrative costs.) In Washington, Christine Charbonneau, a state official on sexuality, taped her presentation of how to sabotage Title V. In Tennessee, the state plan spent Title V money on soccer and basketball leagues. Gov. Angus King of Maine proclaimed his opposition to Title V while he proclaimed his intention to take the money. In Nebraska, a draft identified parental opposition to comprehensive sex education (a non-abstinence program) as a major problem.
The opposition was not limited only to states. The safe-sex cartel resurrected the Douglas Kirby study of abstinence education in California, a condom use study, and presented it as a new study to raise questions about Title V. On a CNN live debate, Debra Hafner said that SIECUS had never received any taxpayer money. SIECUS deleted the listing of the grant they received off of their Web site the next day. The Durex Condom Company conducted a confusing telephone survey and used loaded questions to inflate their position. (The FCC slapped Durex with sanctions after the study revealed its findings.) Jane Fonda made a series of inaccurate statements on an appearance on Good Morning America. Project Director Dave Poehler, of the Centers for Disease Control, used his position to lobby against Title V during business hours. The list of ridiculous attempts to subvert Title V went on and on. If the safe-sex cartel was truly interested in banishing teen pregnancies and stopping STDs, then why do they fight so hard to stop a positive approach? Watch as the conspiracy unfolds:

Carol Everett owned one-third interest in two abortion clinics in Dallas, Texas, and was very closely associated with SIECUS. She stated on Focus on the Family Daily Broadcast, originally aired in 1998, and in a personal interview with this author, that they had two marketing plans for her abortion clinics. The first plan was to use the Yellow Pages. The second marketing plan involved sex education. Her business goal was three to five abortions per girl between the ages of 13 and 18. Their program began with Kindergarten. They place the children in a circle, alternating them boy, girl, and talked to them about their private parts. They would then ask each child what their parents called their private parts. The sex educator (trained by Planned Parenthood) would then laugh at the terms their parents used, in an attempt to make the parents look foolish and discredit them. Everett stated that they were attempting to undermine parental influence and cause the children to trust what they said as ultimate truth. The Planned Parenthood instructor urged the children to share information with each other, taking turns at recess revealing their private parts to each other. This strategy changed with every class. In the first, second, and third grade, the curriculum included using nude models of children in a book titled, It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie H. Harris. This book has demonstrations and diagrams of intercourse, and was available in almost every school library and in most beginning year classes. In addition to sexual intercourse, It’s Perfectly Normal encourages children to explore masturbation, abortion, and homosexual practices.

In the fourth grade, they taught masturbation. The instructor urged the children to experience masturbation by themselves at first. Then as they became more comfortable with it, to share masturbation as a group activity. In doing so, they introduce the homosexual agenda and alternate lifestyles.

Each year the goal was to devalue parents and break down natural modesty. Starting in the fifth grade and continuing through high school, they taught sexual contact and intercourse.
In High School, life sized sex models of the human body are brought to the classroom and used for their demonstrations. The children are so hormonally energized by the classes that they often experience sexual behavior before they get home from school. The school pregnancy rate increased by fifty percent with the presence of Planned Parenthood and SIECUS materials. Carol Everett said that they developed “A skillfully marketed product sold to a frightened young woman.” She was so successful in marketing abortions that she had first hand experience with performing over 35,000 abortions within 6 years. And this was occurring in the heart of the Bible Belt, Dallas, Texas.

Amy Stephens had multiple abortions during her teen years. While attending college in California, she started working with Family Planning and was closely associated with Doctor Allride, a famous abortion doctor in Southern California. “There is a savior mentality in abortions,” she confided, to Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family radio broadcast. After a few years, Amy became morally conflicted with the greed driven abortion industry. Before she abandoned her pro-choice platform, she worked closely with SIECUS and the National Education Administration.

In a taped interview with Dr. Dobson, she revealed that SIECUS and the National Education Administration shared common goals. They wanted to produce comprehensive, sexually healthy kids. During a child’s developmental years, they taught that homosexuals could have partners and alternate lifestyles. They asserted that abortion is an option and that masturbation and fantasies are acceptable behavior.


Many parents are concerned throughout the US. If the information provided here is accurate, then why is there so much support for a liberal sex education program? Planned Parenthood teaches their instructors how to avoid concerned parents and divert their attention. We would have no knowledge of the diversion practice if it weren’t for women like Carol Everett and Amy Stephens. In the Focus on the Family broadcast entitled “Sex Education and Our Children,” Carol and Amy reveal many of the strategies used by Planned Parenthood to thwart attempts to evaluate or stop liberal sex education techniques. Many of the concerned parents were either lied to or made to look and feel foolish. The parents were not aware that the instructors had undertaken specific classes on confrontational parents.

A strong misinformation campaign is hard at work to establish the illusion that there is a broad resistance to the abstinence program. The truth is that most parents support and strongly approve of the abstinence message. “A major study of 28,000 adults taken by USA Today in 1997 found that 56 percent thought the best way to reduce pregnancy is to teach abstinence while only 31 percent thought that the best way is to promote safe sex”.


“It is entirely possible for adolescents to remain abstinent. In fact, the majority of females ages 12 to 19 have never had sex. Health professionals agree that abstinence is, far and away, the single most healthy choice. But, to remain abstinent, teens need to be encouraged and equipped with medically and socially accurate information on the consequences of sexual promiscuity and with knowledge, character development and skills on how to remain abstinent. And abstinence needs to be presented in a manner which unapologetically states that choosing the best alternative in sexual health is the social norm. The message of comprehensive safe-sex education: We’d prefer that you choose abstinence. But if you decide not to choose abstinence, make sure you use a condom. A parallel message to abstinence-centered education would be this: ‘Don’t smoke; it is not healthy for all the following reasons…and here are a number of skills to help you avoid smoking.’ The parallel message to comprehensive sex education would be: ‘We wish you wouldn’t smoke, but if you do, smoke filtered cigarettes…and we will provide them to you without telling your parents.’ The comprehensive safe-sex message is also known as the ‘duel message.’ It sends adolescents a compromised and confused signal”.Evaluating Your School District’s Sex Education Program.” 26, Feb. 1998. 20 Oct. 2000.

But aren’t the majority of students sexually active? Wrong. Not every student is active. In fact, in 1995 the Federal Centers for Disease Control found that nearly half of high school students, 48% girls, 46% boys, had never had a sexual experience. Not only that, a large percentage of those that had sex wished that they had remained virgins. In addition, they would like to acquire the skills to become abstinent.

What can parents do to protect their children from SIECUS and other liberal sexual education programs? The Federal Government allows, within the public schools, a program called Release Time, which congress provides and is legal in all states. Release Time allows children to leave schools for an alternative education program, to include Sexual Education. Concerned parents should approach their schools and ask what their sexual education program is teaching for the next ten years. If they are teaching an abstinence-based program, then safe sex topics are not addressed.

Citizen Link Web site gives this advice to concerned parents. “Parents should evaluate a variety of areas when examining their school’s sex education materials. They should gather information about how the material deals with the following areas: Role of Parent in the School Decision Making Process, Portrayal of Parent in the Curriculum, Moral Perspective, Sexual Development, View Toward Abstinence, Consequences of Promiscuity, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Alternative Lifestyles, Contraception, Adoption, Character & Social Development, Marriage, Family, Human Reproduction, [and] Parenting”.

Parents should find out if they can participate in the teacher training classes. One can glean much information from sitting through the course. Parents should serve on a sex education committee and become involved with special interest groups. Attending school board meetings can also prove advantageous. In short, parents should find a way to become involved in their child’s sex education. Assuming that your school is handling the subject appropriately is dangerous. Raising a child is the parent’s responsibility.

I recognize that this material is a little out dated. In fact, I would dance in the streets if you parents could prove me wrong. There is nothing that would make me happier than for you to demonstrate that I'm way off base with this article. Please do so!


Tracy said...

Travis, good for you, for speaking out about this! (You're a brave man!) I have read similar things in various conservative books and would like to say I'm shocked, but unfortunately, I'm not. Though I don't have to worry about it yet, at this point, I have no intention of putting Reagan in public school, because of things like this. If I find myself without much of a choice in that, I will be so involved and so loud, that I will be hated by the school.

I could be wrong about this, but I really believe we as a society have begun to turn back toward conservatism. We didn't get into this mess overnight, and we won't get out overnight either. But more people are standing up, speaking out, and getting involved, than ever before.

BTW, since you are so staunchly pro-life, you might be interested in a new program I just heard about. If you're interested, check out

Travis said...

I knew you'd back me up. We home school our kids for two reasons. First, because my daughter was sooo premature (28 weeks), she has some residual issues that make homeschooling a necessity. Second, because New Mexico schools are so liberal that they tromp all over family values. When we lived in the mountains (still New Mexico), I was appalled at the EXTREME leftist views they promoted. That was what stirred me to write this article. I felt as though I had no choice but to argue against their complacent, no, deliberate lifestyle.
Thanks for the encouragement.

Alison Bryant said...

Kudos yet again. This should be broadcast from the rooftops. I've always admired your (and Mrs. Travis') courage regarding issues like this.
I like to think that I stay up on the nitty-gritty of what's really going on, but I learned a lot I hadn't realized before. Thanks for your diligence. I'm curious: how did you get in touch with Carol Everett to interview her?
Keep up the good fight! We can't ignore this.

Shifting gears, I had to laugh at a memory this brought up. The one film we watched in school about this (girls in one room, boys in another) made me feel like I was listening to America's Top 40 Countdown because it was narrated by Casey Kasem.
I'm so thankful that sex ed in school was very limited for us and invited a lot of parental involvement. So different from the reality you uncovered here, but even so I wonder how it paved the way to what you described.

One more comment and I'll un-hijack the blog. In 2007 I was at a New Mexico state meeting under the auspices of the Dept. of Health. In one address to the group, a supervisor made a random comment that the state's mandated abstinence program had been "dumped" on him. He rolled his eyes and made choice comments; this drew laughter from the crowd. I wish I could go back and speak up right there.

Travis said...

Carol Everett was still living in Dallas at the time I interviewed her. I took a chance and called her on the phone. She was eager to help me and was very candid in her responses. She also provided me many of the materials I referenced.

She is a woman who has been washed in the blood and is an inspiration to me. If she can be redeemed, then anyone can.

Travis said...

I've never even had a Sex Ed class.
Does that mean I'm old?

God's Not Finished With Us Yet... said...

Hmmmmm; that's a lot to chew over; a lot of insight and truth, which is sad and unfortunate. It also makes me a little depressed. Before I was serious about my relationship with Christ, I once visited a planned parenthood building, as a teen. They were so good about telling me I wasn't doing anything wrong, so good with their script of me making the right decision. But something in me (God, yet I didn't know it at the time) made me uneasy, so I ran as fast as I could out of their office withing 10 min. from entering the front of their door.

Bare with my honesty because I am a sinner and as a teen I was not a virgin, so I assumed I was pregnant. However when I took a home test I discovered I was not. God saved my babies for later date.

Our son is in a private Christian preschool, yet we can't afford to have both our kids in a Christian academic school. So how do you chose? Right now our son is in private because I am homeschooling my Kindergartner and teaching her scripture daily. But what about next year? (OH, and please read the poem on my site about The New Pledge of Allegience' It's written by a 15 year old and is out of this world.) So where was I? Whatever happened to home owners paying taxes on public school when we were once promised by our government vouchers to any private school of our chosing? How fair is that? I struggle with this a lot because next year Hannah will be in the public school, which I don't hate but don't like. It worries me for her future and not just sex education but about teaching how 'we evolved through apes', or 'the big bang theory'.

It's just a huge mess! Sorry to babble so long....

Travis said...

Yes, Sarah, you are right. There is so much more to it than simple sex ed. Evolution and the removal of God from our schools is a very real element that we must all face. You were quite eloquent with your commment. Thanks for stopping by.

Kate said...

Did you post this because of my sex educator comment? :) It's okay if you did...
I was more than a bit appalled at Ms. Everett's agenda. That is not the kind of sex ed I would support.
There are such widely differing views on how this should be handled - from not at all to the situations that you described in your article. I fall between those two extremes but am
pretty confident that I am one of your more liberal readers. So as one of those, I do think it is important for teenagers to be educated about the risks of the various kinds of sexual activity and how to prevent through abstinence and how to reduce your risk if you are going to be active. I am quite open with my daughter and answer any question she asks me with an age appropriate answer, related to our bodies and otherwise. I don't expect and wouldn't want health class to be the first place she learns about stuff. But there are kids who just don't know or are incredibly misinformed about what is safe, safer and what is not safe at all.
It would be impossible to have a perfect sex ed program in schools because the definition of perfect varies with the listener. In general, I think doing something is better than nothing... but if that something is Everett's agenda, then I would pick nothing.

gzusfreek said...

Travis, this was heavy for me, but it is truth and I'm glad you posted it!
I pray the Lord can use it for change!
God bless you and yours!

Travis said...

No, Kate, your comments were only a coincidence! I was curious how you would react to this article, as you are more liberal than the majority of my readers. However, you are moderate compared to a true liberal. I do appreciate your comments. I think any parent would be offended by the tactics explained by Mrs. Everett. I'm also glad that she has since repented of that life and now dutifully serves God in an effort to end the abortion industry.

Kate, it's parents like you who demonstrate true love by openly discussing such issues with your daughter. Many Christian parents are afraid of their children in this regard. We could all learn to sing a sheet of your music!

KM, thanks for the encouragement. You are always a bright part of my day.

Dave said...

Travis, I put you down to give a sex talk to our middle schoolers at church this week. Both male and female. Good luck and God be with you. Oh, and make sure you open AND close the time with prayer.

Talkin' Texan said...

Satan is here to kill, steal, and destroy. Your post here shows just one of his powerful tools.
We had about a billion reasons for homeschooling our children and this was just one.
May God open the eyes of the blind. Thanks for your attention to this sad thing.

Avily Jerome said...

Wow, Travis!
That was an incredibly powerful post! Thanks so much for all the work and research you did, and for posting that, even if it's slightly outdated.

That just reaffirms my decision to homeschool. Thanks again!

Rosslyn Elliott said...


I'm going to be very frank. I have to admit that I have some trouble believing what Carol Everett says.

I'm a moderate in many ways, and it causes me to distrust people who swing from one extreme to another. I'm more likely to trust someone who moves from extreme behavior to moderate behavior, as I think moderation is a sign of increasing wisdom. Going from one political extreme (pro-abortion tactics in sex ed) to another (generating hysteria in the opposite direction) is not convincing to me. Yes, there may have been a couple of people who engaged in sex ed so radical and premature that one might call it "sick." But the more important issue you address is the general trend in sex ed--the philosophy and attitudes behind it. And, sadly, sex ed is only one facet of the larger cultural problem of a lack of understanding for healthy sexuality and respect between men and women.

Travis said...

Dave-Keep it up!
AJ-You'll never go wrong investing into your children's lives. It's not an easy thing to homeschool, in fact, it's overwhelming and hard, but it's the right choice on many levels.

Rosslyn- I can appreciate your take on Carol Everett. It seems too unbelievable to be true. I first discovered Mrs. Everett via Focus on the Family when they were interviewing her. Of course, when she was doing abortion industry work, she was an unbeliever and had no regard for God in her life. Once she found Christ, God restored her heart and now she is one of the most outspoken anti-abortion speakers in the Christian world. I have Mrs. Everett's interview with James Dobson on tape, just in case.

Janis said...

So how did your talk to the middle schoolers at your church go, Travis? P.S. I have good material if you need any.