Referendum 90: Accept or Reject Sexual Health SB5395
SB5395 is a well-intentioned alteration of the social education of our children. Designed for bullying prevention, gender identity inclusion and rape prevention, it seeks to implement Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE) in pre-K through 12 in an “age appropriate” manner using “evidence based” materials. Parental “opt-outs” are allowed and parents are guaranteed access to the material. Illinois, California and New York have mandated CSE already, what has evolved?
Introductions of gender fluidity and sexual orientation are common in pre-K-3 where non-traumatized, naive children have no natural idea what sexuality is. Several of the state-approved CSE programs normalize intimate touching, anal/oral sex and exploration of masturbation as “self-pleasure” in children as young as 10.
Ericksen and Weed published an extensive review of 60 well-designed, broadly accepted studies of school-based CSE in 2019 finding that CSE has little actual real-world effect and may increase the likelihood of sexual activity, pregnancy and disease in participating teens. Though experienced and exhaustive in methodology, their “evidence based,” peer reviewed material is ignored. Illinois and California have banned parents from legally opting-out due high refusal rates and many districts have integrated sexual material into multiple subjects, making it functionally unavoidable.
“Consent” frequently devolves into how to negotiate with a potential sex partner to obtain consent rather than withholding consent. Young students who refuse to comply with class mandates/activities contrary to their religious or personal beliefs have been isolated, ostracized, criticized, bullied or suspended.
CSE has a poor track record, will not protect children from abuse and mandates from Olympia limit local control. Please reject SB5395, reject R90.
Chris Beard, MD, PhD
Letter to the editor: Do the sensible thing and reject R-90
Julia Dawn Seaver/Vancouver
Oct 5, 2020
Age-appropriate, medically accurate sex ed information — that’s what SB 5395 called for, right? So why are opponents trying to repeal it with Referendum 90? Proponents of Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE) hide behind the bill and the standards, insisting neither require explicit information. But teachers don’t stand in front of the class and read the bill or standards. They teach from the curriculum.
Proponents can chant age-appropriate and medically accurate all they want. They can even click their heels together three times. But nothing is going to make most parents believe it’s age-appropriate to tell kindergartners about “a very sensitive little area at the top called the clitoris,” or that 12-year-olds should be encouraged to bathe together and engage in mutual masturbation. These examples are from curricula on the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s (OSPI) list. And there’s much, much more.
The fact districts can choose from different curricula is little help when one is just as bad as another. And children can’t be opted out of schoolyard discussions and the culture change that takes place at schools with CSE.
Read the curricula and see why 58% of respondents in OSPI’s own survey said “No” to CSE.
Then vote Reject R-90.
LETTER: Opposes Referendum 90
Sunday, October 4, 2020 1:30am
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
If you’re a parent or grandparent involved in your children’s or grandchildren’s education, you’ve likely heard objections to graphic, radical sex education mandated for K-12 in our state’s public schools In 2020’s legislative session, all state Democrats, including Mike Chapman, approved mandatory Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) for K-12, undermining local school board and parental authority.
What else is objectionable?
Two examples follow of Family Life And Sexual Health (FLASH, www.kingcounty.gov) which is a most typical CSE curriculum.
FLASH teaches 4th-6th graders extensive reproductive system vocabulary including the pleasure organs and gender roles.
FLASH Teaches 7th-8th graders about varieties of intercourse and dental dam use. If parents object to CSE they can opt out, but how do they opt out if their school decides to integrate sexual education into other subjects as CSE suggests?
What about parents that are not staying informed about their school district’s curriculum? In November, voters can vote against Referendum 90 in order to repeal mandatory CSE. Opposing Mike Chapman, Sue Forde worked for weeks helping to collect signatures to place Referendum 90 on our November ballot.
If R-90 succeeds in November, Sue promises to work in our state legislature, against mandatory sexual education. Vote for Sue Forde. She supports traditional family values. Billi Zippwald Sequim
We love this INFORMED post submitted by a fellow parent warrior:
"Whether someone agrees with comprehensive sexuality education or feels that opting out is a great option for their family, the bill itself has holes. Not only are there issues with what it dictates, but there are issues with what it does NOT say, and the ramifications of it are worth a second look.
From local school district boards to Governor Inslee prior to him signing the bill, these letters where posted. They explain why even school districts oppose this bill. Their reasons for wanting the bill rejected and the underlying issues below are facts as stated or NOT stated in the bill. Not opinion.
1) Nowhere in the bill does it mention funding. It is not funded, creating a hardship for districts already struggling to provide materials, essential programs and staffing for their schools. Developing curricula, providing materials and teacher training cost money. Districts will be on their own to fund it. Even if the curriculum they choose is “free”, training teachers and providing necessary classroom materials will not be.
2) It takes away local control over this most sensitive topic by dictating sexual health standards (including social issues) which MUST be taught across all grade levels, regardless of a school district’s current, parent-reviewed, chosen curriculum. It is a one-size fits all, even though needs in Seattle are going to look different from needs in Colville. The bill states that curricula must include the state’s standards and be reviewed by OSPI, so it really is no choice at all.
3) It requires that schools report annually to the state, and have their chosen curriculum and materials reviewed by OSPI for compliance with the standards. THIS IS NOT REQUIRED IN ANY OTHER SUBJECT AREA. This adds yet another layer of bureaucracy to our school system.
4) Nowhere in the bill does it state that OSPI may not alter the sexual health standards at any time, so long as they deem them “age-appropriate” and “medically accurate”, again without input from local districts or communities. The only conclusion we can draw is that whatever those standards become, districts will have to continue to align their curricula to them. Again, that is not a reflection of local control. You will find (or not find) each of these items, if you read the bill yourself. http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/.../Senate/5395-S.SL.pdf...
This legislation was rushed (passed in the Senate in the wee hours of the morning and then signed into law during quarantine), it has been under-publicized (many voters and even educators are still unaware of it), and was passed despite public outcry (thousands of e-mails and letters from citizens, protests, petitions, letters from school districts, and a poll which OSPI, themselves, reported to the legislature in 2019 showing that 58% of Washingtonians did not want it). Our legislature and governor have ignored the voice of the people. That is cause for concern."
Help us spread the truth about R-90!
The opposition has over a $1M, all the well-funded (through your tax dollars) organizations, and of course, the progressive media.
But we have the most powerful force of all--YOU, the parents and grandparents of the children who will be subject to their agenda.
We need you to go to the Seattle Times and every other news outlet with a story about R-90 and comment with the truth. It doesn’t have to be long and you don’t have to be an accomplished writer. Just post a point or two and/or your “favorite” curriculum example.
We CAN influence people who have only heard the opposition's talking points. Time is short. Let’s Go! REJECT R-90! https://www.seattletimes.com/.../the-times-recommends.../