There was much consternation and outrage when President Trump suspended funding to the World Health Organization last week. Outrage aside, WHO clearly deserves to lose funding just on the basis of the past two months alone. This is a health organization that has addressed a global pandemic by getting nearly everything wrong every step of the way. WHO originally covered for China and downplayed the threat posed by COVID-19, then reversed itself and called for draconian lockdowns, insisting that easing them could cause the virus to “reignite,” and then seemingly reversed itself again by putting Sweden forward as a “model” for battling the epidemic. I’m not sure that this performance is quite worth the $400 million in funding that we had been forking out.
But the case against WHO goes well beyond its stumbling response to the coronavirus. For many years, WHO has been a leading advocate for sexualizing and grooming children with radical “sex ed” courses. The Federalist has some details:
On the WHO’s official website, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is listed as one of the WHO’s major partners. Planned Parenthood is one of the largest world abortion providers. Additionally, the names and logos of top-tier UN agencies, including the WHO, all appear on the front cover of UNESCO’S “International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education” published in January 2018. This document — posted on the WHO website — is laced with references to childhood sexuality, including these statements:
“[Young] people want and need sexuality and sexual health information as early and comprehensively as possible.”
Children should have “agency in their own sexual practices and relationships.”
Comprehensive Sexuality Education can “help children … form respectful and healthy relationships with … sexual partners.”
It gets much worse. As Summit News reports, the World Health Organization’s Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe: A framework for policymakers, educational and health authorities and specialists” provides a framework for sexual education, and the guidelines for even the youngest age groups are fairly shocking. The document promotes a “holistic approach” that empowers children to become “more empowered in order to live out their sexuality and their partnerships in a fulfilling and responsible manner.” The true horror of this approach becomes clear when you realize that they want children as young as four to be “empowered” in this way.
An educational matrix within the document provides specific guidelines for different age groups. Children from ages 0-4, we’re told, should be “given information” about the “discovery of own body and own genitals” and “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body, early childhood masturbation.” They are also supposed to be informed of their “right to explore gender identities.” Children between 4-6 are supposed to be informed about the wonders of masturbation and genital exploration as well, with the added wrinkle that homosexual relationships are supposed to be introduced.
The guidelines get more graphic as you move into the older age brackets. About kids between the ages of 16 and 18, we are told: “The sexual career of young people usually proceeds as follows: kissing, touching and caressing with clothes on, naked petting, sexual intercourse (heterosexuals) and, finally, oral sex and sometimes anal sex.” The phrase “sexual career of young people,” coming from a giant bureaucratic organization, should severely creep you out. But then all of this — indeed, the very idea of government schools teaching sex ed — should creep you out.
It’s inevitable that government sex education will take a sharp left turn into this sort of grotesquery. That’s because every statement about sex is wrapped in the moral and philosophical beliefs of whoever is making it. It’s one thing to teach about human anatomy or the biological facts of human reproduction, but once you veer into lessons on the relative merits and proper or improper contexts for specific sexual acts and behaviors, you’ve entered a realm that will always be more ideological than scientific. It is the opinion of the degenerates at WHO that four-year-olds ought to be masturbating. Children at school don’t need to hear anyone’s opinions about sex — especially not that opinion. But that’s what sex ed always comes down to: opinions. And if the curriculum is developed and taught by hedonistic perverts, the children will be taught hedonistic and perverse opinions. There is no way around it.
The best way to stop these outrageously inappropriate and not-so-vaguely pedophilic sex ed courses is to stop all sex ed courses. Let the kids learn about the science of sex in science class. All of the rest of it should fall to parents to handle. And, no, this is not a veiled sales pitch for “abstinence education.” I don’t want government employees teaching my kids how not to have sex anymore than I want them teaching him how to have it. The case for abstaining until marriage is mostly moral, and I don’t think the classroom is the right place for that sort of instruction, nor do I trust the average school teacher to make the moral case against premarital sex effectively. All of this, again, should go to the parents. All the teacher needs to do is stick to the biological basics, though frankly I’m not sure we can trust them to handle even that anymore.