Camp Constitutuion’s Annual Family Camp’s Schedule

Our 10th Annual Family Camp is two months away.  We have what we thing is the best lineup of instructors in our camp’s history.  Here is the schedule:

Camp Constitution – 2018 – Daily General Schedule

Lakeside Christian Camp & Conference Center – Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Every Morning: (Monday – Saturday)
6:30 AM Run and/or Polar Bear Swim Optional
7:00 AM WAKE-UP!

7:50 AM Flagpole, Devotions, and Announcements +

8:00 AM Breakfast in Cafeteria
8:30 AM Staff Meeting // Students in Cabins (cleaning & decorating)

Classes (Mon.-Fri.) 9:00, 10:00, and 11:00 AM in Old Chapel near lake
(with mini-breaks in between)
Detailed Class List on other side of this page
Junior Patriot Classes as directed by Mrs Craft ________________________________________

Placement Quiz, and Exit Exam at Cafeteria or Location(s) to be Announced.

12:00 Noon Lunch — Cafeteria: Each camper to take care of own dishes as instructed + Two people from each table to return water pitchers, wipe down
tables, etc., before Recreation! (Unless otherwise instructed!)

1:00 – 5:00 PM: Special Activities: Photos, Hike, Field Trip; Optional Sessions.
Otherwise Recreation includes Swim & Boat activities (when Lifeguard is on duty), and organized competitions and games set up by Mr Kalis. Tournaments may also be organized, but participants have a duty to locate each other, follow charts and arrange times to play!

Evenings: (Sunday – Friday)
5:30 Dinner and Clean-up!
6:30 Class, 7:20 Flagpole
7:45 Class
8:35 Break*
9:00 Campfire – *Bring Flashlight & Song Book; Beware Mosquitoes!
10:00 Break: Snacks** and Camp Newspapers usually available
10:30 in Cabins; 11:00 Lights OUT!
** Pizza Party Friday evening after Campfire!

Saturday – After Breakfast, Cabin & Public Area Cleanup, Pack up your stuff, exchange info, & leave!
Safe Travels to All! Hope to See You Again Next Year!
Camp Constitution – 2018 Class & Event Schedule
SUNDAY
4:00—Staff Orientation — Cafeteria — Mr Hal Shurtleff
6:30—Campers (11 years or older) Placement Quiz — Mrs Ruth Harper, Mr Norman Tregenza
7:45—Camper Orientation — Mr Shurtleff, Mr John Hoderny, Mr Chris Kalis, et al.

MONDAY
9:00 AM—Introduction to the United States Constitution —Mrs KrisAnne Hall
10:00 AM—A Reverent Look at the United States Constitution —Lord Monckton
11:00 AM—Defending Your Worldview —Dr Duke Pesta

1:00— Camp Photo (All !) Using Risers at Campfire Pit w/ Richmond Pond (the lake) in Background
2:00— Optional Workshop: C.S. Lewis: Atheism to Apologetics —Dr Pesta

6:30 Get Us Out of the United Nations Mr. John McManus
7:45 The Moral American, B-1! —Mr John Hoderny (boys); Mrs King (girls)

TUESDAY
9:00 AM—The Bill of Rights —Mrs Catherine White
10:00 AM—The Global Warming/Climate Change Hoax —Professor Willie Soon
11:00 AM—Liberty Over Security —KrisAnne Hall
After lunch? Optional Recreation: HIKE up MOUNT GREYLOCK

6:30—Articles I – (Legislative), and II – (Executive) of U.S. Constitution —Catherine White
7:45—Attacks on the Union —Mr. Tom Moor
WEDNESDAY
9:00 AM—Agenda 21 to Agenda 2030 —Ms Debbie Baciigalupi
10:00 AM—America’s Godly Heritage Pastor Earl Wallace
11:00 AM—Climate Summit and the United Nations —Lord Monckton
AFTERNOON FIELD TRIP to BENNINGTON BATTLEFIELD & MUSEUM

6:30—Red Pill Politics —Mr Dave Kopacz Interviews Lord Monckton and KrisAnne Hall
7:45—Articles III Judicial, IV State Duties, V To Amend, VI Supremacy,Treaties, Treason & VII—Mr Tregenza
THURSDAY
9:00 AM—Truth Over Personality —KrisAnne Hall
10:00 AM—Life Under Sharia Law —Pastor William Levi
11:00 AM—Are the Sea Levels Rising? —Professor Willie Soon

3:00 Optional Workshop: Vaccines – Good or Bad? Or Both? —Punyamurtula Kishore
6:30—FINAL EXAM! —Mrs Harper and Mr Tregenza
7:45—Defending Your Worldview —Mr Michael King

FRIDAY
9:00 AM—Flags of Our Fathers (And Mothers) Mr. Richard Howell
10:00 AM—Taking Action —Mr King // Off-campus: Community Outreach —Mr Shurtleff
11:00 AM—What Is Money —Mr McManus

3:00 PM Optional Initiative Petitions Mr. Keith Davis

6:30—Exam Review/Graduation
7:45—Closing Ceremonies Hal Shurtleff, Lord Monckton

SATURDAY – After Breakfast, Cabin & Public Area Cleanup, Pack up your stuff, exchange info, leave!
Safe Travels to All! Hope to See You Again Next Year!

To register to camp: /http://camperregsecure.com/campconstitution/

If you aren’t planning on attending but would like to help send a young person to camp, consider a donation. You can do so via our PayPal account accessed on our homepage:  http://www.campconstitution.net

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by E-mail or call me (857)-498-1309

 

Camp Constitution Honors the Memory of Those Who Died While Serving in the U.S. Armed Forces

Camp Constitution honors the memory of the men and women who died in service to their country.

From This Day in History:

By proclamation of General John A. Logan of the Grand Army of the Republic, the first major Memorial Day observance is held to honor those who died “in defense of their country during the late rebellion.” Known to some as “Decoration Day,” mourners honored the Civil War dead by decorating their graves with flowers. On the first Decoration Day, General James Garfield made a speech at Arlington National Cemetery, after which 5,000 participants helped to decorate the graves of the more than 20,000 Union and Confederate soldiers buried in the cemetery.

The 1868 celebration was inspired by local observances that had taken place in various locations in the three years since the end of the Civil War. In fact, several cities claim to be the birthplace of Memorial Day, including Columbus, Mississippi; Macon, Georgia; Richmond, Virginia; Boalsburg, Pennsylvania; and Carbondale, Illinois. In 1966, the federal government, under the direction of President Lyndon B. Johnson, declared Waterloo, New York, the official birthplace of Memorial Day. They chose Waterloo–which had first celebrated the day on May 5, 1866–because the town had made Memorial Day an annual, community-wide event, during which businesses closed and residents decorated the graves of soldiers with flowers and flags.

By the late 19th century, many communities across the country had begun to celebrate Memorial Day, and after World War I, observers began to honor the dead of all of America’s wars. In 1971, Congress declared Memorial Day a national holiday to be celebrated the last Monday in May. Today, Memorial Day is celebrated at Arlington National Cemetery with a ceremony in which a small American flag is placed on each grave. It is customary for the president or vice president to give a speech honoring the contributions of the dead and to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. More than 5,000 people attend the ceremony annually. Several Southern states continue to set aside a special day for honoring the Confederate dead, which is usually called Confederate Memorial Day.

 

 

 

How to Get Your Local School Board to Adopt Phonics by Samuel L. Blumenfeld

(This was a speech Sam gave at an event in Saint Louis in the early 1990s)

Every September about 4 million six-year-olds enter the public schools of America
where they expect to be taught to read. Every child wants to learn to read and these
bright-eyed and bushy-tailed youngsters eagerly enter their classrooms with great
expectations.
Now these children feel very intelligent. After all they taught themselves to speak
their own language, without going to a school, without the help of a teacher, so that by
the time they enter that first-gradeclassroom, they’ve developed a speaking
vocabulary in the thousands of words. That is not only an extraordinary achievement,
it borders on the miraculous.
But, of course, we are all the products of the miraculous. And perhaps the greatest
proof of the miracles of creation is the fact that we alone of all the species learn to
speak. Why? The Bible makes it very clear. In the Gospel According to St. John we
read : “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God.”
God created language, and the Word is God’s power in action. After all, what do we
read in Genesis? “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” It was done
by the Word, not by an electrician, not by a physical act.
God gave man the power of speech, because he made us in His image. And
speech has given man tremendous power. But what were the first instructions God
gave Adam? We read in Genesis: “And the Lord God took the man, and put him into
the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man,
saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest
thereof thou shalt surely die.”
Well, we all know the sad story of Adam and Eve’s disobedience. They were kicked
out of the Garden of Eden into the cold, cruel world to fend for themselves. But God
did not take back the gift of speech. He knew they would need it more than anything
else if they were to survive as human beings. And that is why every child is born with
that gift, to remind us of where we came from and who made us
The tragedy is that the public schools are not permitted to tell the children any of
this. And so the children enter their schools with great expectations, hardly suspecting
that a group of professors of education have conspired to make it certain that those
expectations will be dashed to pieces. But for centuries, those expectations were
fulfilled, whether the school was in a log cabin or a red brick building. The children
were trained in academic skills that would serve them well for the rest of their lives.
The traditional primary school curriculum, the teaching of the three R’s, has a very
long, successful history. In fact, we have an excellent record of how primary education
Page 2 – St. Louis
was conducted in ancient Rome.
In a little book entitled The Education of Children at Rome by George Clarke,
published in 1896, we read:
“In the elementary school .. . instruction was confined to reading, writing, and
arithmetic…. For the methods employed in teaching reading and writing we are
dependent chiefly on Quintilian, who treats the subject at considerable length and with
his usual good jUdgment, in the first chapter of his book.
“In teaching to read the first step was to obtain familiarity with the forms and sounds
of the letters ….Tiles, on which alphabets or verses were scratched before baking,
were used in the youngest classes. Horace speaks of children being coaxed to learn
their letters by tid-bits of pastry….
“The letters having been thoroughly learned, the next step was to master their
various combinations into syllables . . .. (I]t would seem that it was usual to give pupils
successive combinations such a ba, be, bi, etc., ca, ce, ci, etc., to spell and repeat until
they had memorized them , and then to proceed to more difficult ones. Every possible
combination had to be thoroughly mastered .. . before the child was permitted to read
words… . ‘Much trust must not too readily be placed in the first act of memorizing;
constant and long-continued repetition will be necessary. In reading there must not be
too much haste about connecting syllables into words, or about reading fast, until the
pupil can form the combinations of letters in syllables without stumbling or hesitation,
or at any rate without having to stop to think about it. Then he may begin to form words
from syllables and continuous sentences from words.
“‘It is incredible how much delay is caused in reading by undue haste. It gives rise
to heSitation, interruptions, and repetitions when pupils attempt more than they are
equal to, and when, going wrong, they lose confidence even in what they already
know. Reading should first of all be sure, then continuous; it must for a long time be
slow, until by practice speed and accuracy are acquired. ‘”
That’s how intensive, systematic phonics was taught in ancient Rome. In fact, it was
taught the same way in the United States until the mid-19th Century when educators
began tampering with the basic method that had worked so well for 4,000 years.
That’s the proper way to teach children to read an alphabetic writing system .
Nobody knows exactly when or where the alphabet was invented. Scholars think it
was invented by the Phoenicians around 2000 B.C. Prior to the invention of the
alphabet human beings at first used pictographs which later evolved into ideographs.
A pictograph is a graphic symbol that looks like the thing it represents. You don’t
have to go to school to learn to read pictographs. We use them today on road signs or
Page 3 – St. Louis
in airports. I’m sure you’re all familiar with the little figures on rest-room doors. One
figure wears a skirt, the other wears pants. But now that so many wear pants, it can be
confusing. In other words, even simple pictographs can be ambiguous.
As civilization became more complex the scribes had to depict things that did not
lend themselves to depiction. It’s easy enough to draw a picture of a tree or an animal.
But how do you draw pictures of abstract ideas? How do you draw pictures of good
and evil, right and wrong, never and forever? You can’t. So the scribes drew little
symbols that did not look like the ideas they represented. We call these symbols
ideographs. And now you did have to go to school to learn what all of these symbols
stood for.
Modern Chinese is an ideographic writing system composed of 50,000 of these little
symbols, none of which look like the things they represent. It’s a terribly complex
system to learn, particularly for westerners.
However, somewhere around 4000 B.C. someone made a remarkable discovery.
Someone discovered that all of human language is composed of a small number of
irreducible speech sounds. And that person decided that instead of using a writing
system composed of thousands and thousands of symbols none of which looked like
the things they represented, and took years to learn and were easily forgotten, why not
create a set of symbols to represent the irreducible speech sounds of the language
and we would have a very simple writing system that required memorizing a very small
number of symbols that stood for sounds. And so the first alphabet was invented.
As I said, all of human speech is composed of a small number of irreducible speech
sounds. How many irreducible sounds do you think there are in English? No, not 26.
That’s the number of letters in our alphabet. The answer is 44. Yes, we have 44
sounds represented by only 26 letters, and that’s why some of our letters stand for ·
more than one sound, and some sounds are represented by more than one letter.
For example, the letter “a” stands for more than one sound. It stands for long “a” as
in April or apron; it stands for the short “a” as in cat or bat; it stands for the “ah” sound
as in father and car; and its stands for the “au” sound as in all and fall. Out “th” sound
is represented by t-h, the “sh” sound is represented by s-h, and the “ch” sound is
represented by c-h. And that is why it is important to teach children our alphabetiC
system in a logical, systematic way, starting with the simplest regular spelling forms
and progressing to the more difficult forms.
The invention of the alphabet was indeed revolutionary. It swept away ideographs
from the Western world and sparked the greatest intellectual advance in history. But
there is something else that is very important to know about the alphabet. As soon as
it was invented, the Scripture began to appear. Why then? Because man had to wait
until he had an accurate, precise means of transcribing the spoken word before the
Page 4 – St. Louis
word of God could be written down.
Again, the importance of the Word. Alphabetic writing is a direct transcription of the
spoken word, and accuracy is the hallmark of alphabetic writing.
The purveyors of whole language are in open rebellion against the concept of the
alphabet. In the first place, they do not believe in accuracy in reading. In an article
entitled “Reading Method Lets Pupils Guess,” in the Washington Post of Nov. 26, 1986,
the reporter wrote:
“The most controversial aspect of whole language is the de-emphasis on accuracy.
. . . American Reading Council President Julia Palmer, an advocate of the approach,
said it is acceptable if a young child reads the word house for home, or substitutes the
word pony for horse. ‘It’s not very serious because she understands the meaning,’
said Palmer. ‘Accuracy is not the name of the game.'”
But even in ancient Rome they knew that accuracy is indeed the name of the game.
Whole language teachers make no distinction between an ideographic writing system
and an alphabetic one. In a recently published book entitled, Whole Language:
What’s the Difference?, the authors write:
“Oral language, written language, sign language — each of these is a system of
linguistic convention for creating meanings. That means none is ‘the basis’ for the
other: none is a secondary representation of the other.” (page 9)
Of course, they are wrong. Alphabetic writing, as distinguished from ideographic
writing, is a graphic representation of the spoken language. That’s what made it so
different from ideographic writing. That’s what made it so much easier to learn. Its
accuracy was a tremendous enhancement to intellectual development, permitting the
unlimited development of new words in every field of human endeavor.
But one can only grasp the true lunacy of whole language theory when we read the
book’s definition of reading:
“From a whole language perspective, reading (and language use in general) is a
process of generating hypotheses in a meaning-making transaction in a
sociohistorical context. As a transactional process, reading is not a matter of ‘getting
the meaning’ from text, as if that meaning were in the text waiting to be decoded by the
reader. Rather, reading is a matter of readers using the cues print provide and the
knowledge they bring with them (of language subsystems, of the world) to construct a
unique interpretation. Moreover, that interpretation is situated: readers’ creations (not
retrievals) of meaning with the text vary, depending on their purposes for reading and
the expectations of others in the reading event. This view of reading implies that there
is no single ‘correct’ meaning for a given text, only plausible meanings. This view is in
Page 5 – St. Louis
direct contrast to the model of reading underlying most reading instruction and
evaluations.” (page 19)
No wonder the kids are confused! Incidentally, I wonder how many writers would
concur with this definition of reading. Writers generally take great pains to convey a
particular message. The last thing they want is for the reader to “create” a meaning
which is not there. The book elaborates on its definition. The authors write:
“Whole language represents a major shift in thinking about the reading process.
Rather than viewing reading as ‘getting the words,’ whole language educators view
reading as essentially a process of creating meanings …. Meaning is created through
a transaction with whole, meaningful texts (i.e., texts of any length that were written
with the intent to communicate meaning.) It is a transaction, not an extraction of the
meaning from the print, in the sense that the reader-created meanings are a fusion of
what the reader brings and what the text offers . … In a transactional model, words do
not have static meanings. Rather, they have meaning potentials and the capacity to
communicate multiple meanings.” (page 32)
If that isn’t pedagogical insanity I don’t know what is. The insane have a tough time
living in the real world. They live in a world of fantasy, much like our whole language
educators. They tell us that there is no objective meaning to anything you read. The
reader creates the meaning. If that’s the case, what’s the point in reading what others
write? Why not simply stare at the page and say anything you want? Or why stare at
the page at all?
Which brings us to the subject at hand: how to get your local school board to adopt
phonics. I imagine that any sane member of a school board, who took the time to read
what whole-language theorists say about whole language, would be convinced to
switch to phonics. Better still, send the member a tape of this lecture which can be
listened to with little effort while driving a car.
There is no reason why American children should be subjected to this educational

lunacy. They want to be taught to read. They don’t want to be turned into learning

disabled, intellectual cripples, programmed for a life of academic failure.

How can we save them?
School boards do respond to parental pressure, so you must do all you can to alert
and inform parents of what is happening in their children’s school. This can be done
by distributing literature about the harmful effects of whole language. I’ve written
several newsletters on this subject which you might consider using. Also, you should
let the school board know that there are many good phonics programs available on
the market: the Spalding program , Sing, Spell, Read and Write, and my own reading
program , ALPHA-PHONICS, which is presently being used by thousands of
Page 6 – S1. Louis
homeschoolers with great success. It’s inexpensive, simple to use, and all in one
book.
Also, look into the possibility of presenting your case to the school board at a public
meeting. Do this after you’ve sent each board member the same literature you are
distributing to the parents. If you can get to talk to each member individually, that
would be even better. Call them on the phone and see if they are amenable to a oneon-one
meeting.
Also, I would talk to the teachers. I don’t know of a teacher who doesn’t to do a
good job. They want the children to learn. But be diplomatic. Teachers like to
consider themselves the experts in these matters. Some will be very strongly
committed to whole language, but ask them to read the literature and respond to it.
You may be able to get them to think twice about their teaching theories.
But you may also find some teachers willing to listen and learn. My publisher, Peter
Watt, will be happy to supply you with a sheaf of letters from parents who have
successfully taught their children to read with Alpha-Phonics. There is nothing more
convincing than good stories of success.
Also, I strongly advise you to develop good relations with the local media: the
newspaper, local radio talk-show, and TV news and public service departments. Do all
you can to get the media on your side. It should be easy to convince the editor of the
newspaper that the future prosperity of his medium depends on schools turning out
good readers. If young people can’t read, that editor may soon be out of a job.
Are there districts where parents have succeeded in getting phonics into their
schools? Yes. In eight elementary schools in Houston, a phonics program, which had
been removed to make way for whole language, was reinstated. The schools had
been using Chapter 1 funds to pay for a heavily structured phonics program which the
children loved. But the Houston school district decided to cut off the funds and force
the schools to adopt a whole-language approach. The result was dismal.
However, after much pressure from parents, teachers and principals, the funding for
the phonics program was reinstated in the eight schools. Unfortunately, the other 162
elementary schools in the district are continuing to use whole language.
It is also important for the school board to know that there are many serious cri~iCS
of whole language among professors of education. Professors Pat Groff of San Diego
State University and Jeanne Chall of Harvard University easily come. to mind. In fact,
the January 8, 1992 issue of Education Week reports on recent studies that cast doubt
on whole language as a reading teaching technique. The studies were ma?e In
Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. and published in the December 1991 Issue of the
Journal of Educational Psychology. It may be worth your while to get copies of these
studies and hand them to your school board for review and comment.
Page 7 – St. Louis
You would think that it would be easy enough to convince school board members
that intensive phonics is preferable to whole language in teaching children to read.
After all, intensive phonics has a track record of success going back thousands of
years, while whole language is based entirely on theory, not practice.
With the desperate literacy problem this nation now has, it certainly is no time for
experiments in a field where we know what works. Children get only one chance to be
six years old, one chance to be taught to read in the first grade. They ought not to be
experimented on. Nor should the school board want the children to be experimented
on. But if the school board permits this experimentation to take place, it should be
willing to present to the parents the results of the experiment.
Of course, if the children read inaccurately and make up meanings of their own, the
whole language educators can claim success. And if that is also the school board’s
idea of success, then you may have no choice but to take your own children out of the
school and urge your friends and neighbors to do likewise.
But we must assume that your school board is made up of rational, well-meaning,
and decent human beings. We’ve all heard stories of school boards’ utter disdain for
parents. But, who knows? Yours may be different. It’s at least worth a try. Certainly
the children deserve the effort, even if it’s not successful. After all, their welfare, their
future is at stake.

A link to this article in PDF:  http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Articles/How%20to%20Get%20Your%20Local%20School%20Board%20to%20Adopt%20Phonics.pdf

 

Article V Convention Promoter Meckler tells state legislators what they need to hear to get what he wants by Judi Caler

Mark Meckler, President of Convention of States Project (COSP), has spent much time and money over the past five years lobbying state legislators to support an Article V convention.  Meckler says the only way to rein in an abusive federal government is with amendments; and the only way to get the amendments is at an Article V convention.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides that Congress is to call a convention if 2/3 of the States (34) apply for it.  States “apply” by submitting to Congress resolutions passed by their Legislatures.

In order to procure Legislatures’ approval on such resolutions, Meckler flatters state legislators by suggesting they are the wise ones who can be trusted to smack down the feds at an Article V convention.  He also promises that legislators will have total control over the Delegates and can keep them from running amok and proposing “unauthorized” amendments or a new constitution.  So, imagine how surprised state legislators nationwide would be to learn that Meckler declared on Iowa radio recently that legislators aren’t to be trusted at an Article V convention, and that we shouldn’t trust any legislator anywhere!

In the segments that preceded Meckler’s appearance, host Simon Conway was livid that the Republican-dominated Iowa House didn’t have the votes to pass the “heartbeat” bill;[1]  and that leadership was refusing to bring the bill to a vote so that constituents could at least hold their representatives accountable.

Meckler’s first question was from a listener who texted,

Q: “[Our legislators] won’t pass a heartbeat bill (and) you want me to trust them with a convention?”                          

 Meckler answered,

“If you think you have to trust [legislators] with a convention, you don’t understand how a convention works.  A convention is all about the people. All the states come together. And then it has to go out for ratification to all the states. So, the idea that you have to trust a legislator or a few legislators–the whole point is we need to step away from the legislatures [or legislators] in the convention. Don’t trust any legislator anywhere. Look, the Founders didn’t expect us to trust legislators. That’s why they gave us Article V.”[2]

 Meckler’s response was consistent with derogatory remarks[3] by Robert Kelly, now COSP general counsel, in referring to state legislators.But the Mark Meckler legislators know flatters them at hearings and expounds on their power under Article V. At a Nebraska committee hearing[4] on February 25, 2015, Meckler said,

 “…There’s not a lot of common sense in D.C. But when you travel around the country, it’s amazing, the common sense, and especially in a Legislature like this. You guys are inside. Maybe you don’t see it. I see it as an outsider. You guys are citizen legislators. That’s what the founders intended. They expected you guys to be running things. They trusted the common sense of the average person….” [p.49]

“Delegate selection, how the delegates are treated, what the authority of delegates is, is up to every state. And as an important part of that process, by the way, you’re going to limit delegate authority… According to standard law of agency… you have the right to limit any [delegate’s] authority to act on your behalf. If they act outside the scope of that authority, you have the right to say that they’re not acting within their authority and their authority has no actual legal effect under any law…So you guys have very strong control over your delegates before…and during deliberations in the [Art. V] convention.” [p.47]

So, when pinned down by ordinary citizens, Meckler says we shouldn’t trust state legislators with an Article V convention. And when talking to legislators, he butters them up by telling them they are so sensible that the Framers trusted them with the power to control Delegates to such a convention!  But the Truth is that the only power state legislatures are granted under Article V is to ask Congress to call a convention. Period.

Yet COSP tells state legislators that they will control the Delegates. COSP says this because legislators wouldn’t vote for Congress to call an Article V convention if they didn’t think state legislators could control the Delegates.COSP operatives are creative in their insistence that Delegates can be controlled. They use arguments and techniques that defy our founding documents, logic, and even the dictionary. For instance,

1,   They sponsor “Faithful delegate” bills which are designed to give a false sense of security to legislators who think such bills will prevent a runaway convention

2, They write “Understandings” into some COSP applications to do the same as above [see linked pp.1-2; (1) through (12)

3, They promote pre-planning conventions to hammer out convention “rules” that Delegates can ignore

4, They wrongly equate Agreements or Compacts among the States (Art. 1, Sec. 10, last clause) with an Art. V convention.

5, They use Newspeak to deny their “convention of states” is the same as a “constitutional convention” where our Constitution can be replaced.

6, They stage a 3-day “simulated convention” to “prove” that an Article V convention called by Congress won’t run away and write a new Constitution

It’s about time state legislators learn that COSP uses flattery and makes false claims simply to induce them to vote for COSP applications for an Article V convention.

The push for an Article V convention is heavily bankrolled by the Koch Brothers  and George Soros.  If there is such a convention, a new constitution with its own new mode of ratification is sure to be offered.  Will it be a constitution which moves the United States into the North American Union?  Or will it be a constitution which transforms us into a Marxist dictatorship?

State legislators must reject all resolutions asking Congress to call an Article V convention. They must also rescind all outstanding applications from their states. Once a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop a new constitution with a new and easier mode of ratification from being imposed.

[1] Iowa’s “heartbeat” bill would ban most abortions at the baby’s first detectable heartbeat.

[2] News Radio 1040 WHO, Des Moines, Iowa; Simon Conway Show, April 9, 2018, at 20:35.

[3] On Mar. 15, 2014 at a debate in Yorktown, VA, staff attorney Robert Kelly, representing COSP, refers to state legislators as “scumbag politicians.”

[4] Transcript, Nebraska Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, Feb. 25, 2015

Judi Caler lives in California and is Article V Issues Director for Eagle Forum of California, and President of Citizens Against an Article V Convention. 

 

The Weekly Sam: “The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America” A Review by Sam Blumenfeld

Charlotte Iserbyt has put her great exposé of the dumbing-down agenda of American education on the Internet, so that anyone
can now read it and download it free of charge. The DeliberateDumbing Down of America is a big book and so very importantthat anyone interested in the future of this country must read it. I wrote a Foreword for the book that basically explains what Charlotte achieved by her incredible research based on documents she took out of the files of the Department of Education in Washington, where she worked as a Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) during the first Reagan administration. She is
the consummate whistleblower, with an overwhelming sense of responsibility as a public servant and a parent. Here’s the essence of what I wrote:

Charlotte Iserbyt is to be greatly commended for having put together the most formidable and practical compilation of
documentation describing the “deliberate dumbing down” of American children by their education system. Anyone interested in the truth will be shocked by the way American social engineers have systematically gone about destroying the intellect of millions of American children for the purpose of leading the American people into a socialist world government controlled by behavioral and social scientists. Mrs. Iserbyt has also documented the gradual transformation of our once academically successful education system into one devoted to training children to become compliant human resources to be used by government and industry for their own purposes. This is how fascist-socialist societies train their children to become servants of their government masters. The successful implementation of this new philosophy of education will spell the end of the American dream of individual freedom and opportunity. The government will plan your life for you, and unless you comply with government restrictions and regulations your ability to pursue a career of your own choice will be severely limited. What is so mind boggling is that all of this is being financed by the American people themselves through their own taxes.

In other words, the American people are underwriting the destruction of their own freedom and way of life by lavishly financing through federal grants the very social scientists who are undermining our national sovereignty and preparing our children to become the dumbed-down vassals of the new world order. It reminds one of how the Nazis charged their victims train fare to their own doom. One of the interesting insights revealed by these documents is how the social engineers use a deliberately created education “crisis” to move their agenda forward by offering radical reforms that are sold to the public as fixing the crisis  which they never do. The new reforms simply set the stage for the next crisis, which provides the pretext for the next move forward. This is the dialectical process at work, a process our behavioral engineers have learned to use veryeffectively. Its success depends on the ability of the “change agents” to continually deceive the public which tends to believe anything the experts tell them.And so, our children continue to be at risk in America’s schools. They are at risk academically because of such programs as whole language, mastery learning, direct instruction, Skinnerian operant conditioning, all of which have created huge learning problems that inevitably lead to what is commonly known as Attention Deficit Disorder and the drugging of four million children with the powerful drug Ritalin.

Mrs. Iserbyt has dealt extensively with the root causes of immorality in our society and the role of the public schools in the teaching of moral relativism (no right/no wrong ethics). She raises a red flag regarding the current efforts of left-wing liberals and right-wing conservatives (radical center) to come up with a new kid on the block -“common ground” character education — which will, under the microscope, turn out to be the same warmed-over values education alert parent groups have resisted for over 50 years. This is a perfect example of the Hegelian Dialectic at work. (Karl Marx’s communist philosophy is called “Dialectical Materialism.”)

The reader will find in this book a plethora of information that will leave no doubt in the mind of the serious researcher exactly where the American education system is headed. If we wish to stop this juggernaut toward a socialist-fascist system, then we must restore educational freedom to America. Americans forget that the present government education system started as a Prussian import in the 1840’s–’50’s. It was a system built on Hegel’s belief that the state was “God” walking on earth. The only way to restore educational freedom, and put education back into the hands of parents where it belongs, is to get the federal government, with its coercive policies, out of education. The billions of dollars being spent by the federal government to destroy educational freedom must be halted, and that can only be done by getting American legislators to understand that the American people want to remain a free people, in charge of their own lives and the education of their childrenAnd since finally conservatives in Congress are seeking ways to reduce the size and cost of government, a good place to start is in dismantling the U.S. Department of Education. That’s one way to stop financing the deliberate dumbing down of America.To get to the free download of Charlotte’s book, click here.    https://archive.org/details/DeliberateDumbingDownOfAmericaCharlotteIserbyt

You can still buy the book if you prefer to have a hard copy that you can read at your leisure and pass on to friends and relatives. And if you still have children in the public schools, you’ll know exactly what is going on inside those walls

(Here is a link to a PDF version of the article:

http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Articles/Book%20Review%20-%20Deliberate%20Dumbing%20Down%20of%20America.pdf

 

 

Camp Constitution at the 2018 Mass HOPE Homeschool Show

Since 2010, Camp Constitution has had an information table at  Mass HOPE’s annual homeschool convention held at the DCU Center in Worcester, MA.  This is the largest homeschool show in the region.   In the eight years we have attended, we have made numerous friends-many of whom have attended our annual summer camp.  We offer those who stop by our table a 10 Question quiz on the U.S. Constitution, free copies of the U.S. Constitution, books, DVDs,  introduce them to the Sam Blumenfeld Arechives, and offer a free drawing for a week at camp.  This year’s convention took place over this past weekend.   Thanks to all who helped to make this possible with a special thanks to Dr. Punyamurtula Kishore.  Here is a link to Mass HOPE’s web site:  http://masshope.us/index.php?sub=About_Us

Our next homeschool show will be in Lancaster, PA hosted by the Christian Homeschoolers of Pennsylavnia June 1-2.

 

 

 

 

 

The Weekly Sam: The Benefits of Teaching History at Home By Samuel L. Blumenfeld

The other day I was having dinner at a friend’s house and was chatting with his
12-year-old daughter who attends a local public school. I asked her how she was doing,
and she told me that she hated school-not merely disliked schoo~ but hated it. I had
hoped that her parents would home-school her. But they just couldn’t do it. I told her I
thought I knew why she hated school-because it was boring. Yes, she replied. It was
boring. And then I said, “And you’re probably not learning much also.” She wanted to
know what I meant by that. So I asked her to name the first three wars that the United
States was involved with. She got the first one all right, the Revolutionary War. But the
only other war she could think of was the Civil War, and she had no idea when that took
place.

The second war, I told her, was the one fought against the Barbary pirates of
North Africa who kidnapped Americans for ransom. An American invasion of
Tripolitania brought that war to a victorious end. My friend’s daughter had never heard
of that war. The fact is that most Americans have never heard of it. But the anthem of
the U.S. Marine Corps should remind us: “From the halls ofMontezuma, to the Shores of
Tripoli… ”

The third war was the War of 1812. She had never heard of that one either. She
had never heard of the Battle of New Orleans, or the burning of Washington by the
British, or Andrew Jackson, the hero of that war who later became our seventh President.
“But I know all about the Industrial Revolution,” she volunteered. It turned out
that her class had been studying the cotton mills of New England and how young girls
were being exploited by the mill owners who were rich and mean. So, at the age of 12,
she was already being indoctrinated to view factory owners as exploiters of poor young
girls.

She had heard of Eli Whitney and the cotton gin. But she had never heard of
Robert Fulton and the steamboat. In other words, the public schools were teaching
“social studies” not history. Their aim was to indoctrinate children in a pro-socialist view
of our history by emphasizing the meanness of capitalism.
But homeschoolers have the freedom to teach history as history and not as
propagandistic social studies. History is such a fascinating subject and can be studied in
so many different ways: chronologically, by reading biographies and autobiographies, by
unit studies, by concentrating on certain eras and events. The Civil War commands great
interest for many reasons. Thousands of books have been written about virtually every
aspect of that war. There are even organizations that stage mock battles of the Civil War,
with uniforms and weapons made to the exact specifications of the real things.

Every American should have a foundational knowledge of American history in
order to affirm one’s American identity and heritage. Our nation’s history is such a
remarkable story, so full of great and wonderful people, so vibrant with human endeavor
and enterprise, so stirring in its afftrmation of freedom and love of country, that it
behooves a home schooling parent to learn and teach history to one’s children as a means
of making sure that a child understands what it means to be an American.
Americans, and homeschoolers in particular, have a responsibility of transferring
to future generations the philosophy of our founding fathers, who sacrificed so much so
that we could enjoy the fruits of liberty. It is only through knowledge of history that we
can make sure that our free society continues to exist in decades ahead.

It is, of course, a tragedy that millions of young Americans will never learn
history in their public schools, which have betrayed the trust that parents have, over the
years, placed in them. But it is the opinion of this writer that government schools have
never been compatible with the principles of a free society in which parents have the
responsibility of educating their children in accordance with their own values and beliefs.
Prof. Benjamin Bloom, father of Outcome-Based Education, wrote in his famous
Taxonomy: “By educational objectives, we mean explicit formulations of the ways in
which students are expected to be changed by the educative process. That is, the ways in
which they will change in their thinking, their feelings, and their actions.”
Knowing how important it was to start indoctrinating children as early as
possible, Bloom wrote: “The evidence points out convincingly to the fact that age is a
factor operating against attempts to effect a complete or thorough-going reorganization of
attitudes and values …. The evidence collected thus far suggests that a single hour of
classroom activity under certain conditions may bring about a major reorganization in
cognitive as well as affective behaviors.” Those are not the words of an educator who respects the values and beliefs of
parents whose children he is about to indoctrinate.

(A link to a PDF version of the above speech    http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Other/Benefits%20of%20Teaching%20History%20at%20Home.pdf

The Weekly Sam: A Short Uncensored History of Sex Ed

By Samuel L. Blumenfeld

The dictum that ideas have consequences is nowhere better demonstrated than in the
ideas that have led to the introduction of sex education in American schools. The first
idea of consequence was Sigmund Freud’s notion that sexual repression causes neurosis.
If sexual repression makes you ill or creates dysfunction, then the remedy, of course, is
free sexual expression. That was not the cure that Freud recommended, but Freud’s idea
so strongly influenced American culture that clothes for women went from the trussed up
sexually repressed fashions of 1900 to the loose liberating flapper skirts of the roaring
twenties-in only twenty years!
The second idea came from Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, who
launched a campaign in 1916 to promote contraception and abortion in order to free
women from the burdens of unwanted pregnancy. Sanger later adopted the views of the
eugenicists who promoted the idea that the fit should be encouraged to have children and
the unfit to not. Sex education became an indispensable part of Sanger’s birth control
movement. As a result, Planned Parenthood has been one of the pioneer advocates of
comprehensive sex education in the schools. In 1953, Planned Parenthood staffer Lena
Levine wrote: “[Our goal] is to be ready as educators and parents to help young people
obtain sex satisfaction before marriage. By sanctioning sex before marriage, we will
prevent fear and guilt. … we must be ready to provide young boys and girls with the best
contraception measures available so they will have the necessary means to achieve sexual
satisfaction without having to risk possible pregnancy.”
The third idea came from sexologist Alfred C. Kinsey, head of the Institute for Sex
Research at Indiana University, subsidized by the Rockefeller Foundation. Dr. Kinsey’s
best-selling report, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, published in 1958, promulgated
the idea that human beings are sexual from birth. The data on 317 infants and young
boys was supposedly the source of that idea. This controversial data was obtained from a
pedophile who had actually masturbated infants and boys and kept records of his
experiments. All of this was exposed years later by Dr. Judith Reisman, who accused
Kinsey of complicity in the sexual abuse of young children. Her book, Kinsey: Crimes &
Consequences (1998), provides all the sordid details.
The fourth idea came from Dr. Mary Calderone, past Medical Director of Planned
Parenthood. She and her colleagues launched SIECUS, the Sex Information and
Education Council of the United States, at the Kinsey Institute, specifically to teach
Kinseyan sexual ideology as sex education. Dr. Calderone transfonned sex education
into sexuality education, presently taught in American schools. SIECUS has provided the
public schools with a wide variety of sex education materials: films, slides, books, and
pamphlets.
The fifth idea came from the Humanist Manifesto of 1973, which challenged the views of
orthodox religion on sexual behavior and proclaimed total sexual freedom among
consenting adults as the new moral standard for sexual behavior. The Manifesto was
signed by many academicians, including Dr. Lester A. Kirkendall, a director of SIECUS,
as well as by Dr. Alan C. Guttmacher, president of Planned Parenthood.
In 1976, Dr. Kirkendall published A New Bill ofSexual Rights and Responsibilities,
signed by 37 leading sexologists and authors. The book states: “Humanists have had an
important role in the sexual revolution. Although Humanist Manifesto II contains a brief
section on sexuality, we thought a more detailed statement would be useful.”
Out of this interlocking directorate of humanist sex education organizations came the
ideas that have formed the ideology of the sexual revolution and the curriculum of sex
education in American schools. The results have seen dramatic changes in teen sexual
behavior with its tragic consequences: more pre-marital sex experimentation, more teen
pregnancies, more teen abortions, more teen venereal disease, more teen emotional
unhappiness leading to an increase in drug addiction. Inevitably, pre-marital sex leads to
abusive jealousy among teens as they change sex partners. This has resulted in physical
abuse and even murders.
There is little doubt that pre-marital sex is the cause of more social problems than any
other activity in America today. Yet, pre-marital, recreational sex is heavily promoted by
music, television sitcoms, movies, books, and other products of popular culture. All of
this is legitimized by the so-called liberating ideas of Freud, Sanger, Kinsey, Calderone,
and others, while attempts to return to the moral standards based on religion are rejected
as reactionary, repressive, outmoded, and authoritarian.
Meanwhile, the sexual revolution changed America’s views on sex as reflected in actions
by government and the courts. In 1965, the u.s. Supreme Court, in the case of Griswold
v. Connecticut, ruled that Connecticut’s law prohibiting the use of contraceptives by
married couples violated a newly defined right of marital privacy. As a result, ten states
liberalized their family planning laws and began to provide family planning services with
tax funds.
In 1970, Congress enacted Title X of the Public Health Services Act, which provided
support and funding for family planning services and educational programs, and for
biomedical and behavioral research in reproduction and contraceptive development. Title

X also authorized funding for a Center for Population Research within the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
In 1970, New York state enacted the most progressive abortion law in the nation, and
Planned Parenthood of Syracuse, New York, became the first affiliate to offer abortion
services.
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that the constitutional right of
privacy extended to a woman’s decision to have an abortion, thereby legalizing abortion
throughout the United States. In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Planned Parenthood
of Central Missouri v. Danforth, struck down state requirements for parental and spousal
consent for abortion and set aside a state prohibition against saline abortions.
In 1976, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, named after Planned Parenthood’s president,
published 11 Million Teenagers, which focused attention on the problem of teen
pregnancy and childbearing in the United States.
In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court found the Massachusetts statute, restricting minors’
access to abortion, unconstitutional. It ruled that if states required minors to obtain
parental consent for an abortion, they must also give minors the alternative of obtaining
the consent of a judge, in confidential proceedings and without first notifying their
parents.
In 1979, the California State Department of Education published a draft of its new sex
education curriculum, Education for Human Sexuality: A Resource Book and
Instructional Guide to Sex Education for Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve. The new
program was developed with partial funding from the U.S. Office of Education. It called
for explicit instruction in human sexual intercourse, alternative sexual life styles,
abortion, masturbation and other issues involving sexuality.
Beginning in preschool or kindergarten with mixed-group visits to restrooms, these visits
are followed by a description of male and female genitalia. The children read two
pamphlets from Planned Parenthood which tell them that “masturbation is a perfectly
acceptable, useful, comforting thing to do with sexual feelings” and “masturbation cannot
hurt you and it will make you feel more relaxed.”
At age nine, children begin their study of methods of birth control, including “all the
contraceptive methods and services available.” At age 12, children “visit a local drug
store to check the availability of contraceptive products.” They study the law regarding
emancipated minors who are “making their own decisions.” They learn that “pregnancy
prevention services are available to young people without parental consent.” They take a
field trip to a “family planning clinic” and they go through it “from beginning to end” and
fill out a patient’s form for such a clinic.

Also at age 12, boys and girls study “unplanned pregnancy” and discuss whether it is best
to have the baby, offer it for adoption, or have an abortion. They discuss the “support
system” that is available to them and they listen to a guest speaker from Planned
Parenthood. They learn that the decision for an abortion is theirs alone to make requiring
no consultation with their parents.
The curriculum recommends ten days of sex instruction in each school year from preschool
through the 12th grade. The program calls for the development of “decision making
skills” through exercises in “values clarification.” It should be noted that this
program in sexuality has been implemented throughout the United States in many school
districts.
In 1981, the Alan Guttmacher Institute published Teenage Pregnancy: The Problem that
Hasn’t Gone away, an analysis of teen sexuality, contraceptive knowledge and use, and
pregnancy experience. It emphasized the need for making confidential contraceptive
services accessible to sexually active teens.
In 1982, Planned Parenthood published “Sexuality Alphabet,” a tool for sex education.
George Grant, author of Grand lllusions, writes of this publication: “Planned
Parenthood’s sex education programs and materials are brazenly perverse. They are
frequently accentuated with crudely obscene four-letter words and illustrated by
explicitly ribald nudity. They openly endorse aberrant behavior-homosexuality,
masturbation, fornication, incest, and even bestiality-and then they describe that
behavior in excruciating detail.”
In 1983, the National Education Association included the following resolution in its
Handbook under the title of Family Life Education:
The National Education Association believes that the developing child’s sexuality
is continually and inevitably influenced by daily contacts, including experiences
in the school environment. The Association recognizes that sensitive sex
education can be a positive force in promoting physical, mental, and social health
and that the public school must assume an increasingly important role in
providing the instruction. Teachers must be qualified to teach in this area and
must be legally protected from censorship and lawsuits ….
The Association urges its affiliates and members to support appropriately
established sex education programs, including information on birth control and
family planning, parenting skills, sexually transmitted diseases, incest and sexual
abuse, the effects of substance abuse during pregnancy, and problems associated
with and resulting from preteen and teenage pregnancies.
In 1993 it added “information on sexual abstinence, diversity of sexual orientation,
prenatal care, and sexual harassment” to its list of sex education programs. In other
words, the scope of sex education keeps getting larger and larger. For example,
information on homosexuality has developed into a course of its own within the sexuality
curriculum.

In 1985, the Alan Guttmacher Institute published its report on Teen Pregnancy in
Industrialized Countries, indicating that the U.S. teen pregnancy rate of 96 per 1,000 was
the highest in the developed world. A two-year study by the National Academy of
Sciences agreed with the AGI study and concluded that “prevention of adolescent
pregnancy should have the highest priority,” and “making contraceptive methods
available and accessible to those who are sexually active and encouraging them to
diligently use these methods is the surest major strategy for pregnancy prevention.”
In 1970, less than half of the nation’s school districts offered sex education curricula and
only one had school-based birth control clinics. In 1998, more than seventy-five percent
of the districts teach sex education and there are more than one hundred clinics in
operation. Yet the percentage of illegitimate births has only increased during that time,
from only fifteen percent to a mind-boggling fifty-one percent. In California, where
public schools have had sex education for more than thirty years, the rate often
pregnancy is the highest in the nation. (Grant, p. 128)
Meanwhile, the AIDS epidemic in the United States, which began with eleven cases in
1979, had grown to 24,000 cases in 1986, to 339,250 cases in 1993, to 665,357 cases in
1998. The National Education Association has recommended that AIDS education
become an integral part of the school curriculum. “AIDS education must include
education about all means of transmission, including sex and intravenous (IV) drug use.
Information on prevention options must include abstinence and medically accepted
protective devices. Instruction in decision-making skills to assist students in correlating
health information and personal behavior is essential.”
On September 15,1985, the Chicago Sun-Times reported: “Free birth control pills and
condoms are being dispensed to Du Sable High School students by a new clinic in the
South Side school. A second clinic is scheduled to open Feb. 1 at Orr High School on the
West Side for the same purpose …. William Young, director of teen health for the Ounce
of Prevention Fund, a member of a coalition of foundations fmancing the two clinics, said
the opening of medical clinics in high schools is “part of a national trend. ” Young said
that cities with clinics in high schools included St. Paul, Minn., Dallas, New York,
Kansas City, Cleveland and San Francisco …. The Du Sable clinic’s operating costs are
$225,000 a year, Young said, all being provided by the coalition of foundations, which
includes the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, N.J.; the Joyce Foundation of
Chicago; Pittway Corp. Charitable Foundation of Northbrook; and the Commonwealth
Fund of New York.”
It was inevitable that sexuality education would have to include same-sex behavior, or
homosexuality, in a very open way. On February 10, 1992, Governor William F. Weld of
Massachusetts, signed an executive order creating the nation’s first Governor’s
Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. The Commission was formed in response to the
epidemic of suicide by young gays, lesbians, and bisexuals as revealed in the 1989
federal report on youth suicide. That report concluded that gay youth represented “up to
30 percent of (the estimated 5,000) completed youth suicides annually.”

The Governor’s Commission made five key recommendations for schools: (1) School
systems should make public commitments to ensure that schools are safe places, free of
discrimination, violence, and harassment for gay and lesbian students. (2) Teachers,
guidance counselors, and all school staff should be trained to respond to the needs of gay
and lesbian students. (3) Every high school in the Commonwealth should establish a
support group where gay and straight students can meet each week and discuss gay and
lesbian issues. (4) All school libraries should develop a collection of literature, books,
films, and pamphlets for students seeking to learn more on gay and lesbian issues. (5)
Gay and lesbian themes and issues should be integrated into all subject areas in the
school curriculum.
In August 1994, the Governor’s Commission produced a report on the “Prevention of
Health Problems Among Gay and Lesbian Youth” and “Making Health and Human
Services Accessible and Effective for Gay and Lesbian Youth.”
It has become increasingly difficult to tell the difference between sex education and
pornography, for sex education is not about education, it’s about sex, and it’s difficult to
teach about sex explicitly without it becoming pornographic. For example, on March 25,
2000, the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Governor’s Commission for Gay
and Lesbian Youth, and the Gay and Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN)
co-sponsored a statewide conference at Tufts University called “Teach Out.” Teenagers
and children as young as 12 were encouraged to come from around the state, and many
were bussed in from their home districts. Homosexual activists came from across the
country to take part in the conference.
According to audio tapes made at the conference, participants discussed oral sex, anal
sex, vaginal sex, oral-vaginal sex, clitoral sex, and a homosexual practice called “fisting.”
Needless to say that when the public became aware of the substance of the Teach Out, it
caused a scandal that made headlines and was vigorously discussed on radio talk shows.
In February 1999, SIECUS conducted a public poll on its Internet site asking readers
‘”who had the greatest impact in bringing about a positive change in the way America
understands and affirms sexuality. The top ten, chosen from a list of 100, were Judy
Blume, Mary Calderone, Ellen DeGeneres, Joycelyn Elders, Hugh Hefner, Anita Hill,
Magic Johnson, Madonna, Gloria Steinam, and Ruth Westheimer.”
Obviously, there are many parents who do not share the views of the top ten. Judy
Blume’s novels have often been cited as too sexually explicit. But objection to sex
education is nothing new. Various parent and religious groups have been critical of
explicit sex education from the day it became known what was in the materials that
Planned Parenthood and SIECUS were providing the schools.
Since neither parents nor religious groups have been able to stop the sexual revolution or
the humanist sexuality juggernaut, they have called for greater emphasis on abstinence
and less on contraception and condom distribution. They achieved a substantial victory
when the Congress voted in favor of an $88 million “Abstinence Only” program as part
of President Clinton’s “National Strategy to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.” Starting in the fall
of the year 2000, abstinence-only programs began to receive automatic re-funding every
year for the next five years during the federal government’s appropriations process.
One would have thought that the sex educators would have been happy with a federal
program funding “Abstinence Only.” Instead, SIECUS has launched a no-holds-barred
campaign against “Abstinence Only,” claiming that it won’t prevent teenage pregnancies
or STDs. They call the program “fear-based.” But what’s wrong with being afraid of
getting an unwanted pregnancy or getting AIDS? Fear prevents people from doing
wrong things and foolish things. It is an important part of our self-protective instinct.
If “Abstinence Only” is fear-based, is sexuality education pleasure-based? These
increasingly hot debates over sex education will continue for years to come as humanists
and Christians struggle for control of what goes on in the public schools.

A link to this 1999 article from the Sam Blumenfeld Archives:

http://blumenfeld.campconstitution.net/Manuscripts/A%20Short%20Uncensored%20History%20of%20Sex%20Ed.pdf