Massachusetts Parents Opposed by Planned Parenthood and Allies in Boston

- R. T. Neary
September 23, 2003

Sex Education in the Public Schools was the focus of a controversial hearing at the Massachusetts State House in Boston on Sept. 18.

Amid over a score of bills, H1445 elicited most of the emotion with parental rights groups pitted against the educational establishment, Planned Parenthood and the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA).

H1445 calls for prior review of sexual content in health Ed Courses, the right to question teacher and administrators, the need for permission slips as in any elective, and conscience clause for teachers to refuse assignment in this subject area.

R.T. Neary, director of Project PARENT, challenged the opposition to the bill by the MTA and NEA. Neary explained that he spent three decades in the classroom where he served EN LOCO PARENTIS - in place of parent - not to REPLACE the parent. "When I juxtapose my roles as parent and professional educator, I assure you my parental rights are supreme - as are yours, " he told a joint House/Senate committee.

Neary pointed out that he is a former elected member of the board of directors of the MTA and a life member of the National Education Association. "However, I stand diametrically opposed to the MTA and NEA's position against parents on this issue, " he stated.

Planned parenthood, whose web extends through all the Boston Public School's Sex Ed programs as well as those in most of the cities and towns of the commonwealth, testified against H1445, stating that they must assure that the curriculum stays " comprehensive". That means that the knowledge and availability of abortion be readily available.

Brian Camenker, the President of the Mass. Parents Right Coalition, challenged Planned Parenthood's credibility to teach in this subject area since "Planned Parenthood is the second largest provider of abortion in the world, just after Red China."

The ACLU opposes the bill, stating that if it passed some children would not b able to obtain "medically accurate information." And a group called The Jewish Alliance for Law and Order Justice testified in opposition, asserting that it would force a sexual viewpoint on them, which is counter to their beliefs. The spokeswoman lauded a recently deceased teacher in her town that taught in Health Ed of the "choices" the students could make in lifestyle.

Camenker, who is also Jewish, backing the OPT-IN nature of H1445 cited examples of material disseminated to this children in Newton Schools. Much of it heavily promoted homosexuality and experimentation. One legislator called it indeed graphic, but thanked Camenker for presenting it as testimony.

The representative, obviously taken back the by salacious content, said he would favor H1445 because in the last 10 years, 'Health Education has gone full circle. OPT-IN has become necessary because the definition of Health Ed has become to graphic for discussion."

Massachusetts 2003 has had an incident where oral sex was performed on a school bus with student spectators, as well as sex being forced on a child by an older youngster. Neary of Project PARENT asked the legislators "if any for a moment believed that these happening are totally distinct from the discussion of these same sexual practices in the classroom?" There was not a single response from any member of the joint committee on Education, Arts and Humanities.

A 3-women panel from the Mass. Catholic Conference testified, citing incidents of material which ran counter to their basic, religious, moral beliefs. No Roman Catholic clergy were in evidence among the 75 spectators.

The parents right coalition and Project PARENT, each of whom had filed similar bills, estimated that those testifying in favor of H1445 outnumbered opponents by 3 to 1, but neither group would predict the outcome because of the seeming indifference to the testimony by those legislators who are heavily subsidized by left wing pressure groups.

The bill now heads to study by the joint committee, and ultimately a vote will be cast to decide if they will allow the entire house and senate to debate and vote on the bill.