Snake and Apple By Selwyn Duke

A while back we heard about the United Nations pact
that would prohibit parents from choosing their children’s religion.
Now the UN is issuing another dystopian proposal, a sex-education
curriculum that would teach children as young as five about
masturbation and “gender roles, stereotypes and gender-based violence.” And those are just two elements in a 98-page report issued by the UN’s Economic,
Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and which includes curricula
for children between the ages of 5 and 18. Joseph Abrams at FoxNews
reports, writing:

Under the U.N.’s voluntary sex-ed regime,
kids just 5-8 years old will be told that “touching and rubbing one’s
genitals is called masturbation” and that private parts “can feel
pleasurable when touched by oneself.”

. . . By the time they’re 9 years old,
they’ll learn about “positive and negative effects of ‘aphrodisiacs,”
and wrestle with the ideas of “homophobia, transphobia [prejudice
against transsexuals] and abuse of power.”

At 12, they’ll learn the “reasons for”
abortions — but they’ll already have known about their safety for three
years. When they’re 15, they’ll be exposed to direct “advocacy to
promote the right to and access to safe abortion.”

Read the rest here.

Posted in , , , ,

9 responses to “United Nations Plan: Teach Masturbation to 5-Year-Olds”

  1. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    No offence (and i realise this one is doing the right wing rounds) but if you actually read the document it doesn’t say what you are worried it says. Its an off shoot of several much older public health documents from the UN which are all pretty damn bland and benign. Most of the document is a motherhood type statement about the importance for child safety and health that they are aware opf their bodies including the right to say no to inappropriate touching, there is a vaguish committment to info re contraception, abortion is hardly mentioned at all. AND IT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE. So take a good deep breath and relax a little.

    Like

  2. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    The UN is worthless! They fail at every function of their original charter and the fact that they still find it necessary to even make an official comment on such issues is mind blowing. I have an idea; if they are so into this childhood conditioning toward decadence and sexual perversion perhaps they should try it on only a few nations before they make the whole world go that way. Let’s start with the Moslem countries and see how well they like it.
    We must get out of the UN; they are just thieves, perverts and enablers.

    Like

  3. John Avatar
    John

    yoyo, you mentioned ‘your’ country. I assume this is the UK. I’d like to know what you’re doing in MY country destroying it. Isn’t it enough that England is a pc hellhole? Why do you have to try to make America like it? Misery loves company I guess.
    Go back to where you came from.

    Like

  4. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Yoyo said, “AND IT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE. So take a good deep breath and relax a little.”
    “So take a good deep breath and relax a little,”
    the man said to the frog in the pot of water, as he struck the match and lit the flame beneath.

    Like

  5. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    John, no you guessed wrong. and no I’m not in “your” country (I would have thought it also belongs to my family members who live there). I dont like the UN either, I think it has made some major mistakes in the past 20years, however, I think you do yourself a favour not to mention reduce stress if you concentrate on the real errors of the UN such as the hideous anti rascism conference which was just an Israel bashing event.

    Like

  6. Rich Tompkins Avatar

    Well-supported point, Walt.

    Like

  7. Philip France Avatar
    Philip France

    What is missing from this dialog is an honest discussion regarding human sexuality.
    Human sexuality should be considered a spiritual one because within it is the potential for human life. While I agree with Selwyn Duke on most of his points, I disagree that human sexuality should be limited to married couples only (although I agree that this is ideal, and substantially so).
    To support my assertion, I have the following rebuttals:
    1. Radical feminists and “free-love” radicals for two generations have effectively eroded this sage advice to the point that is virtually inarguable. I cite, in sympathy and empathy, divorced individuals who have experienced the physical pleasures of human sexuality rightfully (as evidenced by their progeny) but who wish to share the Gnostic knowledge of this intimacy without the desired results. The “fruit”, if you will.
    2. The misunderstanding of the Biblical term “fornication”. Most of us understand the term “fornication” as illegitimate sex outside of the bonds of marriage. The puzzling attribute is that this term “fornication” in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic translates from the same exact word as the word “adultery”. In such cases, a careful study of the Biblical context is required to determine its actual meaning. In my studies, this word should have virtually unanimously been translated “adultery”. References to sexuality outside a formal marriage of a man and a woman are guarded by more vague and general verses, such as Ephesians 5:15, which admonishes us to “walk circumspectly” (head on a swivel in order to examine whether or not our present action(s) might adversely affect the walk of a fledgling believer).
    I will conclude with the following observation: human sexuality should always be considered in context for that with which it was intended, i.e. the propagation of the human species. Human sexuality should NEVER be casual. It should be considered in its natural light in that the result is, or could be, a natural propagation of human life and could (and should) result in a pregnancy and then, it follows, a live birth. A progeny. If this is not one’s intention, the best advice is to abstain.
    Sex for recreation is morally corrupt and an abrogation of our Designer’s intent. Human sexuality as an expression of love and desire to perpetuate this union by way of progeny is an expression of unspeakable joy regardless of whether or not the production of progeny is possible, probable or unlikely. I agree wholeheartedly with Selwyn Duke, and evidence in support thereof is overwhelming that a child born of human sexuality requires a loving father and a loving mother. This is a family. The Mallard ducks that frequent the property on which I live instinctively understand this. Why can’t so many of our fellow humans?

    Like

  8. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    I’d love to comment on your whole comment and will later if i can. just briefly I had to laugh about the duck comment. I kept ducks for several years and the drake bonked everything that stood still long enough (including an attempt on the cat) so maybe it’s not the best analogy for such a reductionist comment. LOL

    Like

  9. Sel Nguyen Duc Avatar

    Really? Teaching five year olds to masterbate? Maybe they should hire someone from the Catholic Church for that. Seems wise to tap that vast pool of experience if you’re going to do it at all.

    Like

Leave a reply to Rich Tompkins Cancel reply