Targeting Children?

Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE)

In recent years, sexual rights activists have shifted a great deal of their efforts to children and have made young people one of their main targets. A primary way they do this is by promoting comprehensive sexuality education as an international right mandated by law. This is because if they can raise up the next generation educated in their radical sexual ideologies and teach them to advocate for these as protected human rights in laws and policies in their communities, then they will have largely won the battle.

Comprehensive sexuality education comes in many forms and can be disguised as human rights education or life skills programs. Most comprehensive sexuality education programs contain a number of the following components:

    • Teach children to advocate for “sexual rights.”
    • Teach children various ways to obtain sexual pleasure.
    • Promote condoms to children without informing them of their failure rates.
    • Teach children to masturbate.
    • Encourage children to experiment sexually with individuals of their own sex or the opposite sex.
    • Promote anal or oral sex to children or teach them these behaviors are safe.
    • Promote promiscuity to children as a “right.”
    • Denigrate the religious and cultural values of their parents or community.
    • Provide sexual counseling, information or services to minors without parental consent.

Most, if not all, of the UN-promoted or UN-funded sexuality programs contain many of the program elements noted above. Click here for a special report exposing these UN-supported programs. You can also go to www.stopsexualizingchildren.org to learn more.

The Obama administration is at the forefront of the movement at the United Nations to establish “comprehensive sexuality education” for children as young as age ten as an “international human right,” and U.S. representatives at the UN consistently oppose any language advanced by pro-family countries that is intended to protect the rights of parents to guide the sexual education of their children.

In fact, during negotiations at the UN Commission on Population and Development in April 2012, U.S. representatives angered delegates from developing countries because the U.S. sponsored a resolution on maternal mortality, insisting on a provision calling for comprehensive sexuality education worldwide. The U.S. then refused to allow a reference recognizing the prior right of parents to guide the education of their children to be included in the resolution, relegating parents to merely having a role in helping guide their children’s education.

International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF)

One of the largest purveyors of comprehensive sexuality education programs in the world is International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF). IPPF’s sexuality programs are designed to raise up the next generation to demand their “sexual rights.” For example, an excerpt from IPPF’s publication EXCLAIM!,1 distributed at the United Nations states, “young people . . . are entitled to sexual pleasure and how to experience different forms of sexual pleasure is important for their health.” This is what they are teaching to children as young as age 10. The EXCLAIM! publication also teaches children how to organize and advocate for their sexual rights.

IPPF’s It’s All One—Comprehensive Sexuality Education

It's All One CurriculumInternational Planned Parenthood’s “It’s All One” program was launched at a special invitation-only breakfast event in the cafeteria at UN headquarters in New York. This program is endorsed by the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) and was created by the Population Council.

“It’s All One” asks teachers to lead discussions on homosexuality, sexual diversity, how sexual minorities are treated in society, and how their rights are violated.

Even more concerning is the fact that “It’s All One” claims its priorities were established by: “the global health and education agencies, including the United Nations General Assembly, UNAIDS, the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and that it “respond[s] to international policy mandates including the Millennium Development Goals.” In other words, the “It’s All One” program claims it is what the UN has mandated that children should receive.

Here are some of the assignments and activities “It’s All One” suggests for children:

(WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT)

  • Preparing a short skit involving an intimate relationship—married, male–female unmarried, or same-sex couple
  • A worksheet on sexual desire that includes questions on erections, vaginal lubrication, sexual fantasies
  • Discussion on how sexual minorities are treated in society and how their rights are violated2
  • Real case studies and discussion on homosexuality with the objective of “empathiz[ing] with them”
  • Discussion on whether attitudes and ideas about sexual diversity in society are changing
  • A true/false test on sexual behavior that includes questions and answers on masturbation3, orgasm4, ejaculation, oral sex, sexually pleasing a partner5, penis size6
  • A case study on informed consent gives this example: “Isaac has had several partners but lets Ivan, his new boyfriend, believe that he is still a virgin, as Ivan is. When they have sex, Ivan agrees not to use a condom, thinking there is no risk of infection. Can Ivan give free and informed consent?”
  • An activity on making difficult decisions requires students to create a comic strip based on ideas from a list of suggested difficult decisions including: “You have decided to tell your partner that you are not experiencing pleasure (or orgasm) during sex.”

Planned Parenthood operates in most countries of the world and is making billions of dollars off of their sexual services for children and adults. In 2010 alone, IPPF received $3.5 million from multiple UN agencies including UNFPA, UNAIDS, UN Women, WHO and the World Bank.

Planned Parenthood brings teams of lawyers and youth to UN conferences to pressure governments to establish comprehensive sexuality education as an international human right in UN conference documents. They also manipulate governments of developing countries to call for comprehensive sexuality education or sexual education in their statements to the UN. They hide the more controversial aspects of CSE and claim that CSE programs will lift developing countries out of poverty and prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases among other things.

International Guildlines on SexualityA number of the people representing developing countries in UN negotiations are actually paid employees of International Planned Parenthood who offer their services for free as technical experts, when in reality they get on government delegations to promote the sexual rights agenda of Planned Parenthood in UN negotiations. They are good at what they do, and this is bad news for the children of the world.

UNESCO’s “International Guidelines on Sexuality Education”

Created in collaboration with UNFPA, the UN Population Fund, the World Health Organization and UNICEF, the “International Guidelines on Sexuality Education” are completely in line with the philosophies of Planned Parenthood and other sexual rights organizations. In fact one of the main authors of the guidelines was from SIECUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, the main purveyor of similar sexuality curricula in the U.S. (Click here to read Family Watch’s brief on the UNESCO Guidelines.)

Below are some excerpts from UNESCO’s Guidelines on Sexuality Education:

  • “respect” for “sexual and gender diversity”
  • “a man who becomes a woman and is attracted to other women would be identified as a lesbian”
  • “masturbation is not harmful”
  • “both men and women can give and receive sexual pleasure with a partner of the same or opposite sex“

UN General Assembly Report: Children Have a Right to Sexuality Education

In October 2010, the UN General Assembly received a radical report from the Special Rapporteur supposedly on “The Right to Education.” The report claims that there is now an international human right to “comprehensive sexual education” which includes a right to “pleasurable sexual experiences.” The report further claims that this “right” can only be realized “if [children] receive comprehensive sexual education from the outset of [their] schooling.” (Click here to read Family Watch’s brief on the Special Rapporteur’s report.)

In other words, according to this report, children as young as five or possibly even preschoolers must be taught about their right to sexual pleasure.

This report was created by UN Special Rapporteur, Vernor Munoz, who received a mandate from the UN to issue the report on “the right to education.” (A Special Rapporteur is supposed to be an unbiased “expert” appointed by the UN to study and report on an issue.) However, Mr. Munoz clearly exceeded his mandate and was promoting his own personal sexual rights agenda with his report and his unilateral attempt to establish a fictitious right to sexual education.

In the report, Munoz states that he “considers that pleasure in and enjoyment of sexuality . . . should be one of the goals of comprehensive sexual education, abolishing guilt feelings about eroticism that restrict sexuality to the mere reproductive function.”

With regard to HIV the report declares that “restricting sexual education to the issue of sexually transmitted diseases . . . may create an erroneous association between sexuality and disease, which is as harmful as associating it with sin.”

With regard to religion, the report warns that in some cases “sexual education has been obstructed in the name of religious ideas” and then adds “that comprehensive education acts as a guarantor of a democratic and pluralistic environment.”

The report also criticizes “barriers to sexual education, such as allowing parents to exempt their children from such education.”

So in other words, religion and parents should not interfere with the state’s obligation to sexualize children in order to guarantee this “democratic and “pluralistic” society.

The report discusses what helps young people “have better sexual lives,” as if improving the sexual lives of youth is a valid goal of governments, and it strangely states that the “goal of education for sexuality” is “to develop a transforming role for men by going beyond the strictly genital and physical aspect,” whatever that means.

The report cites to the UNESCO International Guidelines on Sexuality Education, which calls for respect for “diversity of sexual orientations and identities” and cites a UN Committee ruling that governments are “required to ensure that sexual education programmes did not reinforce stereotypes or perpetuate prejudices regarding sexual orientation.”

But worst of all, the report endorses the radical “Yogyakarta Principles,” which have been called the “Magna Charta” of the sexual rights movement, claiming that these Principles “have to be taken into account in education: because of its inclusion on the “diversity perspective.” Click here to read a brief on the Yogyakarta Principles and why they are so dangerous.

The report concludes by calling upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to “investigate specific problems relating to barriers and challenges to effective enjoyment of the right to comprehensive sexual education” and for the UN Human Rights Council to question Member States during their periodic reviews about how they are ensuring the “enjoyment of the right to comprehensive sexual education.”

Finally, the U.S. under the Obama administration has been leading the charge at the UN to promote comprehensive sexuality education for children as young as age ten.

Please click here to sign the petition to the United States Congress calling upon them to stop the Obama administration from pushing this education that is an assault on the health and innocence of children.


  1. http://www.ippf.org/NR/rdonlyres/9CDED64D-5750-41A1-994D-E7D35D0F1580/0/Exclaim.pdf
  2. Family Watch International recognizes the basic human rights of all people, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. All citizens, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, have the right to housing, employment, and to be free from violence and harassment. While we condemn violence or harassment of anyone, we do not accept that individuals should be given special rights based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
  3. It’s All One Curriculum, Volume 2, page 68: “There is no problem with masturbating frequently. The only time masturbation can be considered a problem is if it gets in the way of other things the person should be doing or if the person is disturbing other people or otherwise causing harm to themselves.” And “Masturbation is one of the best ways to learn about and understand how one’s body responds to sexual stimulation. It can help women and girls learn how to reach orgasm.”
  4. It’s All One Curriculum, Volume 2, page 69: “Vaginal intercourse does not lead to orgasm for many women, regardless of how long the man continues; more often, women reach orgasm as the result of direct stimulation to the clitoris.”
  5. It’s All One Curriculum, Volume 2, page 68: “To minimize discomfort or pain, partners should take time to explore each other’s bodies and become fully aroused before penetration, so that the woman’s vagina is well lubricated.”
  6. It’s All One Curriculum, Volume 2, page 69: “A large penis does not give a woman more pleasure during intercourse. Although women differ, most women say that it is what the man does, not his size, that matters. In fact, a very large penis may be uncomfortable or even painful for a woman.”
 http://www.standforfamiliesworldwide.org/sffww/targeting-children

President’s Budget Eliminates Sexual Risk Avoidance Programs

For Immediate Release
Wednesday, April 10, 2013


President’s Budget Eliminates Sexual Risk Avoidance Programs

Today, President Obama sent his proposed FY 2014 budget to Congress. In an unfortunate, but predictable move, the budget calls for the elimination of discretionary funding for Sexual Risk Avoidance (SRA) abstinence education. In addition, it also directs the US Department of Health and Human Services to repurpose a portion of the Congressionally-established Title V state block grant for abstinence education to yet another new program that focuses on contraception rather than on avoiding all risk.[i]  Using Title V funds for programs that are not compliant with the Congressional definition for abstinence education is a violation of congressional intent and therefore, outside the authority of this budgetary directive.

The FY 2014 budget will only increase the current 1:16 disparity between SRA abstinence education and so-called ‘comprehensive’’ sex education. Nearly 7 in 10 Democratic parents would like to see more equality in funding for abstinence education and almost 60% specifically oppose the president’s efforts to eliminate SRA funding.[ii] In addition, since nearly 75% of teens targeted for sex education classes (age 15-17) are not sexually active,[iii] one would expect federal sex education policy to reinforce these good decisions and encourage more teens to make the same healthy choices. Sadly, the President’s recent budget ignores these compelling facts in favor of making a wrong-headed policy statement that serves the narrow agenda of  special interest groups.

Valerie Huber, President/CEO of NAEA states: “The President’s move to eliminate Sexual Risk Avoidance (SRA) abstinence programs is completely out of touch with what his base wants, what parents want, and what is in the best interest of America’s youth.”

Research shows that students benefit from SRA programs, regardless of their sexual experience, or lack thereof.  Students in successful SRA programs are more likely to delay sex than their peers, and if they are sexually active, have fewer partners and are no less likely to use a condom.

Huber continues: “It’s troubling that the President would want to prevent students from receiving the encouragement and skills to avoid sexual risk.”

NAEA calls on Congress to ignore the President’s sex education policy recommendations and instead choose the common  sense position of supporting SRA programs and the positive results they are achieving among youth.


[i] Fiscal Year 2014 Appendix: budget of the US government. Pages 461, 480-1. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/appendix.pdf
[ii] Parents Speak Out survey. Available at http://www.whatTheyToldUs.org
[iii] National Center for Health Statistics. ( 2011). Teenagers in the United States: Sexual
activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing, 2006–2010 . National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports 23(31) : 1
###
NAEA is a professional association representing organizations and individuals who support a priority on risk avoidance through abstinence education. NAEA members serve students across the nation. For more information, visit the NAEA website: www.theNAEA.org and www.abstinenceworks.org.

To arrange an interview with NAEA, contact Christine Eckley at 202-248-5420 or 937-608-7262 or email at info@TheNAEA.org

www.theNAEA.org www.AbstinenceWorks.org