Obama’s HHS Grooms Children for Sex

(Warning: The following contains disturbing information of a sexual nature.)

My strength is as the strength of ten, because my heart is pure. ~ Alfred Lord Tennyson

My dear friend and colleague Dr. Judith Reisman, a visiting law professor at Liberty University School of Law, recently guest lectured during “Sexual Behavior and the Law,” a course I teach. Dr. Reisman’s lecture was filmed by CSPAN and will be airing soon.

In past years, Dr. Reisman has served as scientific consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). She is a world renowned expert on the discredited research of bug doctor turned “sexologist,” Alfred Kinsey.

Alfred Kinsey

Kinsey, though married to a woman who took part in his many filmed “scientific” orgies, was a promiscuous homosexual and sadomasochist. He managed to completely upend and twist the world’s perception of human sexuality in the 1950s and ’60s with his world famous “Kinsey Reports.”

Even today, most are completely unaware that during his tenure at Indiana University, Kinsey facilitated, with stopwatches and ledgers, the systematic sexual abuse of hundreds, if not thousands, of children and infants – all in the name of science.

Among other things, Kinsey asserted that children are “sexual from birth.” He further concluded, based upon experiments he directed and documented in his infamous Table 34, that adult-child sex is harmless, even beneficial, and described child “orgasm” as “culminating in extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting. …” Many children suffered “excruciating pain,” he observed, “and [would] scream if movement [was] continued.” Some “[would] fight away from the [adult] partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax, although they derive[d] definite pleasure from the situation.”

Yeah. Sounds like it.

It’s little wonder that Dr. Reisman identifies Kinsey as a “sexual psychopath.” These children were as young as 2 months old.

Disturbing though that may be, what’s equally disturbing is that nearly all of today’s liberal “comprehensive sex education” curricula – such as that pushed by groups like the National Education Association (NEA), Planned Parenthood and the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) – is derived entirely from the criminally fraudulent research of Alfred Kinsey.

But even more troubling is a recent discovery by Dr. Reisman. She found that the Obama administration, which fully embraces the debunked Kinsey sex-education model, has begun pushing a curriculum that, in many ways, eerily mirrors the “FBI Molester Grooming Paradigm.”

In short, she found that both Obama’s HHS and many public sex-education programs are doing to children, constructively, what pedophiles do to “groom” them for sex:

According to the FBI, child molesters:

  • Demonstrate sex acts to children. Offenders commonly use pornography to teach or give instructions to naïve children about how to masturbate, perform oral sex and/or engage in sexual intercourse.
  • Lower the sexual inhibitions of children. Some children naturally fear sexual activities. Some offenders show pictures of other children engaging in sexual activities to overcome these fears, indicating to their intended victims that it is all right to have sex with an adult because lots of other boys and girls do the same thing.
  • Desensitize children to sex. Offenders commonly show child pornography to their intended victims to expose them to sexual acts before they are naturally curious about such activities.
  • Sexually arouse children. Offenders commonly use pornographic images of other children to arouse victims, particularly those in adolescence.

During her lecture, Dr. Reisman shocked the 50-plus in attendance by illustrating that today’s Kinseyan-based sex education – as promoted by Obama’s HHS – does much of what the FBI describes above.

Graphic sexual images and explicit “values neutral” talk of sex and sexuality are rampant throughout classrooms across America, effectively desensitizing children and numbing their natural inhibitions. These inhibitions help protect children from potential predators.

Dr. Judith Reisman

According to Dr. Reisman, “the brain data fully support [the] finding” that such “sex education” literally changes the neural pathways of a child’s brain. There is mounting scientific evidence to support this hypothesis.

Whatever its motive, the Obama administration is guilty of employing these grooming techniques on children.

Consider, for instance, that just last year, the Department of Health and Human Services’ “Questions and Answers About Sex” website provided a “Quick Guide to Healthy Living” section which, like Kinsey, outrageously claimed that “Children are human beings and therefore sexual beings … which is healthy and normal.”

Get the implication? And what do “sexual beings” do? Well, they have sex, of course. “It’s hard for parents to acknowledge this,” admitted the page.

You think?

The HHS link then suggested that youth “may also experiment with sexual experiences, including those with members of the same sex, during the years they are exploring their own sexuality.”

Sound familiar? Remember, the FBI indicates that pedophiles will “teach or give instructions to naïve children about how to masturbate, perform oral sex and/or engage in sexual intercourse.”

Who needs pedophiles when we have today’s “comprehensive sex education”? It does all that and more.

Speaking of masturbation and other “sort of ‘sexual’ behavior … young kids exhibit,” the HHS is right there to help. The link says “Parents should only be concerned about masturbation if a child seems preoccupied with it to the exclusion of other activities.”

Otherwise, masturbate away, I guess.

Today’s Kinseyan “comprehensive sex education” model, embraced by Barack Obama and other “progressives,” is nothing short of educational malpractice. It’s child corruption. It’s criminally reckless. It’s undeniably “grooming” children for sex.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, a then-Sen. Barack Obama spoke about teaching “comprehensive sex education” to kindergartners: “It’s the right thing to do … to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools,” he said.

And by “science-based,” of course, he meant “Kinsey-based.”

So, what is age appropriate, science-based sex education? Well, we know what Alfred Kinsey thought was “age appropriate.” We know what he considered “science-based.”

I’d expect such “educational” grooming tactics and opinions from Alfred Kinsey or Jerry Sandusky, but not from public educators – not from the U.S. government.

And most certainly, not from the president of the United States.

 

Matt Barber

By

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • http://twitter.com/GarageSermons Sermon In The Garage

    Your article is insane. You warp & twist data so that it “fits” your neo-con ideology. If you were honest & Christian your article would reflect the many decades of sex ed evolution throughout the country across party lines. I would suggest u set aside your ideology and grow in your faith.

  • Wayne G. Fischer

    I find the neo-liberals schizophrenia amazing. They rail against any government “interference” in their sex lives (e.g., laws against sodomy – which, by the way “Sermon in the Garage,” is against God’s word, a.k.a. sacred Scropture), but promote government interference in children’s and teen’s sex lives. Huh.

  • MaryK

    I only had to read the heading of your column to know this came out of the bottom of the barrel when it comes to slinging smut in a political campaign! Some writers will never cease to stoop to the lowest levels to smear the proverbial stuff on their enemy’s faces. Shame on you Mr. Barber! This had to come out of the darkness of your own mind and I hope you never darken these pages again.

  • MaryK

    On further reflection, i want to add that i consider CE derelict in allowing space to this ridiculous excuse for a columnist. It is not that i shrink from the word “SEX”, -only the conclusions of this writer. I love my Catholic faith and my Church – but i am ashamed for those who call themselves Christian, yet would smear their own President, no matter how they may disagree with him, by trying to implicate him in a conspiracy to abuse children.
    I find i need to remember all those i recommended CE to, and reverse my opinions. As for me, i’m outa here! I will miss the thoughtful, intelligent and spiritual writers that i have read in the past.

  • mombryan

    Whether or not the claims in this article are completely true- the HHS and The Obama administration have undeniably delved deeply into the “sex education” of our children. Even if they are not desiring or following similar practices or leading to what this Kinsey guy did just yet, tell me why they would push so hard for young children- yes, kindergartners and younger- to know or understand sex? Where do you suppose we will end up once this education “evolves”?There is no reason for a small child to know anything regarding sex other than gender until they hit puberty and it effects them directly. The only argument for this “education” is to encourage them to be “sexual beings”. They aren’t, they don’t have the mechanics for it yet. Sexuality is obviously something we experience once we are mature. You destroy their innocence, the gift God gave them, when you offer such information. Protecting our children is far more important than any science.

  • HS Marc

    I have heard radio interviews about Kinsey before and what the article states is consistent. For those attacking two points; show that HHS is not going down the Kinsey model; secondly, Obama said while a state senator in Illinois that a baby who survived an abortion should just be left to die and has referred to what would be his grandchild as something “he wouldn’t want his daughter paying for for 18 years”. So in light of these actions the burden to prove anything his administration will do or will attempt to do is in those defending Obama and his ilk. If you decide to side with them your are siding with ideas that have failed every time they have been implemented in history and when they are, it is the sure fire sign of societal decay.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jack.river.77985 Jack River

    Is Willard’s Mormon anti-Catholic and anti-Christian beliefs what the Catholic Church really wants ? An example is how Romney believes when he dies, he will be God equal to Jesus Christ. For him to believe he can become equal to God is Satanic !

  • http://www.facebook.com/jack.river.77985 Jack River

    Protecting their ignorance ? Ignorant children grow up to become ignorant adults.

  • Linda H Maloy

    Bye-Bye MaryK! I would say we would miss you, but that would be a lie. You have drunk so deeply and so much of the Obozo kool-aid that it is easy to see that you will defend him no matter what. Have you ever done any research on Alfred Kinsey? I have. He is even WORSE than the outline in this article. It is not the fault of the author, nor the FBI, that Obama’s HHS outline for sexual education in our public schools is IDENTICAL to the ravings and atrocities that this “bug doctor” performed in his desire to back up his idiotic “conclusions.” You claim to be a Catholic. I doubt it, because anyone who is in favor of policies and claims that directly contradicts the teachings of Holy Mother Church after a couple of millinea to mull over things that affect the entire world, is either ignorant or a bald-faced liar. What’s the matter, honey? Afraid your “Great Messiah” might lose?

  • Linda H Maloy

    What are you? An Obozo plant? In 1960, the people against Kennedy, based on his religion claimed he was going to hand the country over to the pope! Gov.Romney’s religion is not something I want any part of, but he has stated repeatedly that he is not going to bring it into the White House as part of his administration of this country, which, last time I checked, is still supposed to believe in “Freedom of Religion,” whether I agree with it or not (I don’t). Besides, the main overriding issue in this election is the economy. As a woman for 59 years, my sex is not my only, or over-riding concern. This “War on Women” MUST have been invented by the “liberals” or “progressives” or “village idiots” whatever they are calling themselves this week. We absolutely MUST get the current occupant OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE! We are going down the tubes with this fool! I would vote for my Shih Tsu, Charlie if THAT would work! But Gov. Romney has the right kind of plans and ideas to get this country back up and running!

    I have to ask: Is the Obama kool-aid THAT tasty?,

  • Linda H Maloy

    What are you, an Obozo plant? Why are y’all bothering to try to invade a site that is mainly for Catholics to discuss and share ideas and opinions. Don’t think for a minute you are fooling anybody. Getting worried? Go have another drink of Oboma Kool-Aid. It will keep you ignorant. God bless you, anyway.

  • Linda H Maloy

    If ever I heard of an illustration of the pot calling the kettle black, this is it!

  • http://twitter.com/GarageSermons Sermon In The Garage

    Ummm! What is an Obozo plant? And, how is suggesting people check out the history of sex ed development “fooling anybody”? Suggesting people study facts and history is “ignorant”? Wow. BTW, I am a Catholic, for my entire life, with a Master in Theology and I studied a a Catholic Seminary and am a member of the National Catholic Bioethics Center.

    So I would suggest you maintain and grow your beliefs, but modify your temperament.

  • Terri Kimmel

    Dear Sermon,

    “Sex ed evolution” is not the issue here. It’s about the very real effects of policy instituted by our sitting president and his administration. The policy of the Obama Administration creates an “educational program” that mirrors grooming by sexual predators. That has nothing to do with politics, except that we need to use the political system to stop the corruption. Obama needs to be ousted.

    You might find this a little more compelling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wlXUSfkwcY

  • LarryM

    No, it’s protecting children’s natural modesty. It’s about teaching them, when age appropriate, about their God-given gift of fertility.

    Following the Kinseyan model of sexuality is, in fact, promoting ignorance, because it’s propagating a LIE.

    Frankly, sir, if you want to teach your children this lie, they’re your children. But don’t, by government fiat, force this ‘education’ on mine. Parents are the first and most important educators of their children. I want my children educated with MY values, which happen to be the life-affirming values of my Church.

  • LarryM

    MaryK, can you please attempt to refute what the author, and Judith Reisman are saying? It is insufficient to simply call it ‘smear’, ‘smut’, etc.

  • LarryM

    MaryK. Is President Obama a supporter of Planned Parenthood? Yes. Does Planned Parenthood support and promote ‘comprehensive sex education’? Yes. Look into what these programs actually promote. Educate yourself. It is a fact that these programs are based on the Kinseyan view of sexuality. Look into his record on life issues. It is a fact that, as a state senator, who voted against allowing the equivalent of the Born Alive Infant Act. This act requires physicians to provide medical care to infants who survive botched abortions. Yes, I’ll say it again, he voted AGAINST this. This is the most radically anti-life president EVER. This is not smear, it is fact.

    In the interest of ‘admonishing the sinner’, by holding onto these views, and voting for this president, you are putting your soul at serious risk. I pray you reflect on this, pray about this, and change your thinking. May God Bless you.

  • LarryM

    Please edify us, then. What in this article is inaccurate? And while you’re at it, be honest. Do you believe abortion and contraception are intrinsically evil, or not? Do you support the Church’s teachings, especially those in Blessed John Paul’s Theology of the Body or not? I will believe you. You’ve tossed in this ‘appeal to authority’ argument…let’s see how well formed you are after your extensive training in Theology.

MENU