School has Planned Parenthood speak without parental notification

Recently, various posters have voiced the opinion that schools have no business teaching morality.

In that light, what do you think of this story?

I wonder what Planned Parenthood has to do with homosexuality? Are there that many gays worried about birth control?

And in other news, Elementary Schools Sued for Unlawful Pro-Homosexual Presentations.

Considering the PJI’s bias, I’ll have to ask for another cite before commenting on the OP.

Contrary to popular perception, Planned Parenthood isn’t just about controlling births. They also have a pro-homosexual agenda.

Well, that’s within your rights… but I hope you realize that “bias” cuts both ways.

The press release describes a situation that was perhaps well-intentioned, but poorly implemented. I would hardly call the “ice breaker” exercise effective. Normally these exercises are geared toward making people feel more comfortable. This was outrageous.
Schools should deal with these difficult issues. By choosing to not deal with them, they send a message. I think discrimination and cruelty…harassment, that are seeded in hate and fear must be addressed. Schools should be comfortable and safe for all students. Schools should not advocate or prescribe sexual orientation. What should be emphasized is responsibility, tolerance, informed choice, abstinence, monogamy…the benefits of these. While religions and society both differ on what is considered moral or immoral, the vast majority of people agree about many of the basic issues. Such as, tolerating other belief structures, being responsible, safe sexual choices etc.

I, too, would like to see a news article from from another source such as the local newspaper.

And your evidence for this is what, exactly?

That funny, but this article from the Arcata Eye tells an entirely different story about the local Planned Parenthood-sponsored Spare Change theatre group being denied access to the high school by the school proncipal, even though they were willing to work with him to change the parts of the presentation he found objectionable(something they’ve willingly done at other schools, btw.)

Perhaps I’m misreading, but I don’t believe the article and press release are describing the same event (or non-event, as the case may be). In fact, the article you provided has the principal referring to other Planned Parenthood “teen outreach” programs that the school participates in. I don’t believe these cites contradict each other. Am I misunderstanding what you are trying to convey?

For what it’s worth, this cite indicates that the principal has reconsidered re: “Spare Change.”

I’ve yet to understand how that can be a bad thing, or really even what it is. Frankly, I’ve never been beaten up by someone with a pro-homosexual agenda, so I’d probably like them better than those anti-homosexual agenda people anyway. (Funny thing is, I’m not even gay. I just “looked gay”. I’ve also never been told by anyone with a “pro-homosexual agenda” that God hated me.)

The Planned Parenthood web site itself, which has numerous essays about the need to be accepting of homosexuality. Is this a sufficiently authoritative source for you?

The page you cited, Jubilation, addresses community attitudes only in these two quotes:

Their mission and policy statements include this:

These address (1) groups composed of GBLT people, (2) those to whom gay people come out, and (3) the interior ethical position of Planned Parenthood.

I see absolutely nothing suggesting that they are promoting homosexuality – just its acceptance in the people who so self-identify. And the reasoning – that it will prevent depression and suicide in such people, particularly the youth – seems compelling to me.

What precisely is your problem with their views?

Aw, c’mon Poly . . . you know quite well that any group (or person) that doesn’t actively oppose homosexuality must support it.


It seems that “pro-homosexual” is to be interpreted as equivalent to anti-anti-homosexual.

I don’t see anything in the linked page that is “pro-homosexual”. At the most, it is pro-tolerance, combined with strictly factual information about variation in sexual expression and gender expression. Planned Parenthood does seem clearly opposed to homophobia, but I don’t see how this equates to being “pro-homosexual”. I’m not even sure what “pro-homosexual” means: does a pro-homosexual actively insist that as many people as possible be gay, or merely advocate that homosexuals should be left alone?

Planned Parenthood specifically promotes homosexuality as a viable lifestyle. This doesn’t mean that they’re encouraging people to become homosexual, but they’re pro-homosexual in the same way that a civil rights activist can be pro-minorities.

One might quibble about the phrasing, but the point remains – Planned Parenthood is about more than just birth control, and they make no secret of this fact.

Neither do I, and I never claimed such. The prefix “pro-” is not short for “promoting.” It simply means to favor or to be on the side of something. This is not necessarily the same as promoting something.

For example, if an American is “pro-Israel,” it does not mean that this person believes we should all become Israel. Rather, it simply means that the person is sympathetic to and supportive of Israel. In other words, he or she is on Israel’s side.

Being “pro-<something>” is not automatically the same as saying “Hey, we should convert to <something>.”

I’d really like to hear a better explination of this statement, because it means almost nothing to me. What exactly is pro-minorities in your example?

Already explained, but if you want it repeated…

To be “pro-<something>” means to be sympathetic to <something>'s cause. It does not necessarily mean promoting conversion to that camp. In fact, there are many organizations which call themselves “pro-family,” but nowhere will you hear them saying “It’s wrong to be single all your life!”