Lauren Boebert has some changes she’d propose to how — and when — sex education is taught to children in public schools. Her primary argument seems to be that nothing more than a binary definition of sex and minimal anatomy should be taught before high school.
It’s easy to be unhappy about what kids are being taught if you completely reject all facts and make up your own stories about course material. In Boebert’s case, she’s claiming that in her state, younger kids — she is at least including middle schoolers in this, and perhaps younger — are being taught “how to enjoy gay sex.”
Watch below as she explains her thoughts on sex ed, and then stick around for the facts.
Lauren Boebert came out against sex ed for middle school students, claimed it “starts sexualizing our children,” and warned of the “LGBTQ mentality that comes in and teaches kids.” pic.twitter.com/tBF5CmqAXm
— PatriotTakes 🇺🇸 (@patriottakes) April 8, 2022
“In elementary school, in middle school, yes I am [against sex ed]…They shouldn’t have comprehensive sex ed like we have in Colorado…Comprehensive sex ed isn’t just saying I’m a girl, you’re a boy, these are my parts these are your parts…It teaches kids how to have and enjoy same-sex sex, and of course, sex with the opposite gender.”
Perhaps there’s a school somewhere in Colorado teaching middle schoolers how to enjoy gay sex — doubtful that it would happen without making massive headlines, but technically possible. However, it’s not, at all, what the state standard is.
Thankfully, in 2019, the Denver Post covered the facts and fictions on exactly what new state laws would change in the sex education programs. You can read their full fact sheet here, but in short, contrary to some claims by conservatives, the law doesn’t ban discussion of abstinence, require explicit descriptions of gay (or any) sex positions or acts, and doesn’t even require schools to teach sex ed at all.
The law does forbid what is typically called “abstinence-only” sex ed — where kids are essentially told to “just say no,” and which is linked to higher rates of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, compared to states where kids are taught about safe sex and pregnancy and disease prevention.
It also requires teaching that same-sex relationships exist, and teaching about consent — but it doesn’t lay out exactly what schools have to teach in these areas.
Also, standing law requires that parents are contacted in advance of the class, with a detailed outline of the curriculum –which rather rules out that kids are being taught a lot of explicit sexual knowledge behind their parents’ backs.
By sharp contrast, Boebert seems to suggest that even in middle school, as kids pass through puberty, the instructions should be limited to defining binary sex identities by a few anatomical differences, and then cutting off the conversation until later — even if by then it’s too late.
What's Your Reaction?
Steph Bazzle reports on social issues and religion for Hill Reporter. She focuses on stories that speak to everyone's right to practice what they believe in and receive the support of their communities and government officials. You can reach her at Steph@HillReporter.com