A Critique of the Child Lures Prevention Program Parent Guide
Critiqued by Mothers Watch, Summer 2004
The Child Lures Prevention program is part of a landslide of child abuse prevention programs that will be pummeling innocent children in the classroom. These programs are the Bishops’ response to widespread sexual child crimes by Bishops, priests, and other authority figures working in contact with children in various dioceses throughout the country. The new term for such programs, “safe environment”, which was coined by the Bishops, sends its own message. How could any diocesan employee, clergy or otherwise, be trusted to teach children about child abuse when it is still unknown how many more homosexual pedophiles, and other perverts, are still working with children in dioceses throughout the country? One really must wonder whether “safe environment'” is being created to be a “safer environment” for undiscovered predators.
The “Lures” program is basically like all the other child abuse, child safety or safe environment programs. It is designed to attract a variety of concerns for children’s safety, as its Parent Guide cover states: “How to Keep Your Child Safe From Exploitation, Abduction, Internet Crime, Drugs and School Violence”. Interestingly, this program uses as its key word, the word “lures.” The idea is that the program will teach children not to be lured into situations where abuse or kidnapping may occur, or be lured into drugs, or become a victim of violence.
The Parent Guide, actually appears to give a certain amount of common sense advice for parents, which is basically what parents would normally be telling their children and reinforcing each time the opportunity presented itself. The Parent Guide book provides the “lures” in categories:
- asking assistance
- lost pet
- bribery
- authority figures
- fake job offers
- faking an emergency
- the internet
No parent would be against alerting children to such dangers; however, it is evident that this is to be part of a larger program, one that includes dangerous explicit sexual information and the troubling political correctness of the day. Furthermore, it includes so-called “self- esteem” that is not only prideful, but which can give children a sense that they can somehow be in control of the situation by reasoning with an abuser, or just saying “No!” instead of immediately fleeing perceived danger.
Child abuse-prevention programs, while purporting to teach a child to be safe, may very well be “luring” them into dangerous situations and actions by destroying the protective quality of innocence and purity in children. Children are more apt to flee from any impure infringement upon their privacy when their sense of decency and modesty remain intact, especially when reinforced with Catholic teachings.
Sex-Ed Spin-off
Although no detail is given in the Parent Guide, “Lures” is just another dimension of secular sex education. The teaching of sexual body parts regarding the “bathing suit zone” is emphasized throughout the Parent Guide. No doubt that in the classroom, “body parts” will be explicitly explained and repeated reinforced. Such teaching outside the privacy and intimacy of the family is very destructive of purity. It destroys the very protective modesty it feigns to protect. Open discussion in a classroom setting makes the “private” become “public.”
Publicizing the “under the bathing suit” body parts does not keep them private, but takes them out of hiding. The children become familiarized and preoccupied with this public invasion. To talk of those parts exposes them and makes them subject to commonplace discussion so that they are no longer private. The Parent Guide warns that predators use lures to shut down one’s “personal alarm system” (p. 3). That is just exactly what explicit classroom sex education and these “safety” programs are doing. Sexual predators, knowing the children have had sex education, are given just the edge they need to “lure” the child into learning more. The Parent Guide even states that, “Exploitation often begins with innocent behavior that escalates into abuse” (p. 5). Abusers know the content of child sexual abuse programs no matter what the title and they will use them to their advantage.
Under the “Pornography Lure” the Parent Guide even states, “Often youngsters are exposed to increasingly graphic materials over time” (p 11). Again, this is exactly what classroom sex education does, often beginning in Kindergarten with the names of genital body parts and getting more and more graphic with each grade level. In classroom sex education the very young are taught that masturbation is a feel good self-touch which plays right into the hands of any homosexual pedophile or sexual predator.
The Parent Guide states, “It is against the law for anyone to touch a child’s private parts or to tell a child to touch theirs” (p. 4). Now this bit of legislation is another lawsuit waiting to happen against the Bishops! Under this law, the Bishops’ Natural Family Planning instructions in the classroom (e.g. Teen STAR) that includes teaching young students to touch their own body parts in search of mucus could very well be considered unlawful child abuse, and parents should look into this. The Parents Guide also says “sexually exploited children are at greater risk for drug and alcohol abuse, depression, suicide, teen pregnancy and even violent crime”, (p. 3).
Ignoring the protests of parents, the Bishops became the exploiters of young people by promoting experimental classroom sex, drug and suicide programs. The heartbreaking results have become commonplace, children whose souls have been lost, children falling victim to sexual promiscuity, depression and suicide. These young people were not criminally assaulted, but legally assaulted by Bishops through their pet classroom sex programs, with equally tragic results. Adding a separate child abuse dimension will not stop the abuse already in place. It is nothing more than putting a tiny band-aid on an open festering wound.
All sex programs are basically the same although some like to change certain wording to make it their own. We see in the Parent Guide that “Lures” does not like the words “good touch and bad touch since a ‘bad touch’ may actually feel good”. Therefore, they use the words “Real Love and Fake Love” to mean basically the same thing. The ambitious desire for educators to turn out “programs” that use the same basic message as all the others, but change the wording to give it a different look, is evident here. But the change makes it no less dangerous.
In fact, little children do not have a good concept of what love is. They are too young. They certainly do not know how the sexual sphere is involved. Therefore, if that friendly trusting homosexual pedophile begins making advances that he calls “real love”, he can be very believable. If he says that real love feels good and fake love hurts, the trusted pervert will be very believable. After all, the people who will know the most about the contents of the child abuse curriculum will be the homosexual pedophiles and other perverts who will have to learn to “adjust” their approach to unsuspecting child victims accordingly.
The Parent Guide tells parents that the targets for pedophiles are children “without supervision” or those who “have issues at home”. This may be true of some children, but what those who have been victims of priests are revealing is that, in many cases, that children from good homes were not safe. Parents trusted the priest and often welcomed him into their home. No parent should believe that his or her child is safe. Perverts are very clever. They often fool adults first.
Bullying and Violence
This program is very politically correct with its addition of “The Lure of Hate and Violence” which includes “anti-bullying”. Anti-bullying programs are the newest social programs usurping yet more classroom time. The Parent Guide refers to school shootings saying, “some gunmen have cited ongoing ridicule by fellow students as contributing to their rampages”.
Not a popular news item is the fact that an “anti-bullying” program had been piloted at Columbine High School the year prior to the tragic murders. The very fact that so many acts of violence are being committed in the schools should give reason for people to look into the programs including the sex, drug, etc., programs which all employ psychological techniques adversely effecting youth.
If the Bishops concur with the concern the authors of “Lures” have about violence in the media, they need to take a good look at the sex and violence portrayed in literature and films required in the Catholic classroom. A good example is Notre Dame Prep, a prestigious girls school in Baltimore that, for ten years was showing an absolutely filthy XXX-rated film, Not a Love Story, depicting women engaging in every vile sex act including bondage. Cardinal William Keeler refused any meetings with parents and praised the school. However, that film was replaced with a 15-minute segment of a movie titled, The Accused, which contained a violent gang rape. Schools get away with the worst pornography by giving it the “educational” label, thus making vile curriculum politically immune to laws against pornography.
Staying the course of political correctness, “Lures” has its gun component. A few sentences about guns in the home in the Parent Guide include the statement “Consider getting rid of all weapons permanently.” (p. 17) One can be sure that subject will be enlarged upon in the classroom and may include the teacher asking about guns in the homes, and perhaps even taking notes. They will justify such invasive prying because of the “school violence”, however, where else might this information go?
Something to keep in mind about bullying programs is that they are also being recommended by the United Nations and by liberal democrats. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is president of an organization that distributes an anti-bullying curriculum to schools titled, “Operation Respect: Don’t Laugh at Me” (Washington Times 3/18104).
Internet and Media
Considering the attention Internet predators are getting, most parents are aware of these dangers. But the real purpose is at work to routinely break down normal inhibitions in children’s protective modesty and purity. With children familiarized with all things sexual, they become tuned-in to sex. As a result, sex on television and in the movies is not shocking, but familiar and acceptab1e, and the TV and film “sex stars” have become the role models.
It really seems incredulous that anyone would find the recommendations of TV personalities a reliable source when it comes to curriculum. However, the Child Lures Prevention program website discussing “Program Evaluations” claims to have been featured on the “Leeza” show, CNN, Oprah, Primetime, Today, and 48-Hours. It also claims that the USCCB website lists the Child Lures Prevention program as a Model Prevention Program.
The NEA (National Educators Association) gave the Child Lures Prevention program an award for “Advancement of Learning Through Broadcasting”. Just recently, the same NEA also gave its Human Rights award to Kevin Jennings from the Gay and Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) whose stated goals “extend to incorporating homosexual concepts into all curriculum.” Jennings has discussed ways to perform homosexual acts to teens and failed to report the sexual abuse of a sophomore by a homosexual man when the boy asked Jennings for help (The Washington Times, 7/3/04, p. A-4.)
By the way, Jennings founded GLSEN to “fight harassment and bullying of homosexuals”. So what made the Child Lures Program qualify for an award?
The Child Lures website boasts that the program has been “proven to be effective in safeguarding children and youth”. This so-called success is based on pre-tests and post-tests on children in Pre-K to grade three. That’s like saying that lollipops should take the place of vegetables in a child’s diet because the children surveyed liked lollipops better. It all defies common sense.
The Bishops have to be fully aware that the sexual abuse scandals that have sprung up like wild fires across the country were ignited and fueled by the Bishops own doing, by what they have done and what they failed to do. The Bishops have acted in defiance of the teaching of the Catholic Church by not only instituting, but also enlarging upon their sex instruction programs. They not only failed to listen to the God-ordained experts, the parents, but for over 30 years have contemptuously dismissed parents’ ongoing urgent pleas to ban classroom sex instruction. The Bishops, wrapped in their collective pride, would rather see children continue to lose their Faith and continue to be victimized than admit they were grievously wrong. They would rather blame parents and institute programs that destroy the very sanctity of the family and the refuge of the home rather than listen to the advice of parents. The Bishops have turned the Church in America into a den of corruption and those they have hurt, and continue to hurt the most, are the children. May God have mercy!
“Luring” Parent and Child
A Critique of the Child Lures Prevention Program Parent Guide
Critiqued by Mothers Watch, Summer 2004
The Child Lures Prevention program is part of a landslide of child abuse prevention programs that will be pummeling innocent children in the classroom. These programs are the Bishops’ response to widespread sexual child crimes by Bishops, priests, and other authority figures working in contact with children in various dioceses throughout the country. The new term for such programs, “safe environment,” which was coined by the Bishops, sends its own message. How could any diocesan employee, clergy or otherwise, be trusted to teach children about child abuse when it is still unknown how many more homosexual pedophiles, and other perverts, are still working with children in dioceses throughout the country? One really must wonder whether “safe environment'” is being created to be a “safer environment” for undiscovered predators.
The “Lures” program is basically like all the other child abuse, child safety or safe environment programs. It is designed to attract a variety of concerns for children’s safety, as its Parent Guide cover states: “How to Keep Your Child Safe From Exploitation, Abduction, Internet Crime, Drugs and School Violence”. Interestingly, this program uses as its key word, the word “lures.” The idea is that the program will teach children not to be lured into situations where abuse or kidnapping may occur, or be lured into drugs, or become a victim of violence.
The Parent Guide, actually appears to give a certain amount of common sense advice for parents, which is basically what parents would normally be telling their children and reinforcing each time the opportunity presented itself. The Parent Guide book provides the “lures” in categories:
- asking assistance
- lost pet
- bribery
- authority figures
- fake job offers
- faking an emergency
- the internet
No parent would be against alerting children to such dangers; however, it is evident that this is to be part of a larger program, one that includes dangerous explicit sexual information and the troubling political correctness of the day. Furthermore, it includes so-called “self- esteem” that is not only prideful, but which can give children a sense that they can somehow be in control of the situation by reasoning with an abuser, or just saying “No!” instead of immediately fleeing perceived danger.
Child abuse-prevention programs, while purporting to teach a child to be safe, may very well be “luring” them into dangerous situations and actions by destroying the protective quality of innocence and purity in children. Children are more apt to flee from any impure infringement upon their privacy when their sense of decency and modesty remain intact, especially when reinforced with Catholic teachings.
Sex-Ed Spin-off
Although no detail is given in the Parent Guide, “Lures” is just another dimension of secular sex education. The teaching of sexual body parts regarding the “bathing suit zone” is emphasized throughout the Parent Guide. No doubt that in the classroom, “body parts” will be explicitly explained and repeated reinforced. Such teaching outside the privacy and intimacy of the family is very destructive of purity. It destroys the very protective modesty it feigns to protect. Open discussion in a classroom setting makes the “private” become “public.”
Publicizing the ”under the bathing suit” body parts does not keep them private, but takes them out of hiding. The children become familiarized and preoccupied with this public invasion. To talk of those parts exposes them and makes them subject to commonplace discussion so that they are no longer private. The Parent Guide warns that predators use lures to shut down one’s “personal alarm system” (p. 3). That is just exactly what explicit classroom sex education and these “safety” programs are doing. Sexual predators, knowing the children have had sex education, are given just the edge they need to “lure” the child into learning more. The Parent Guide even states that, “Exploitation often begins with innocent behavior that escalates into abuse” (p. 5). Abusers know the content of child sexual abuse programs no matter what the title and they will use them to their advantage.
Under the “Pornography Lure” the Parent Guide even states, “Often youngsters are exposed to increasingly graphic materials over time” (p 11). Again, this is exactly what classroom sex education does, often beginning in Kindergarten with the names of genital body parts and getting more and more graphic with each grade level. In classroom sex education the very young are taught that masturbation is a feel good self-touch which plays right into the hands of any homosexual pedophile or sexual predator.
The Parent Guide states, “It is against the law for anyone to touch a child’s private parts or to tell a child to touch theirs” (p. 4). Now this bit of legislation is another lawsuit waiting to happen against the Bishops! Under this law, the Bishops Natural Family Planning instructions in the classroom (e.g. Teen STAR) that includes teaching young students to touch their own body parts in search of mucus could very well be considered unlawful child abuse, and parents should look into this. The Parents Guide also says “sexually exploited children are at greater risk for drug and alcohol abuse, depression, suicide, teen pregnancy and even violent crime”, (p. 3).
Ignoring the protests of parents, the Bishops became the exploiters of young people by promoting experimental classroom sex, drug and suicide programs. The heartbreaking results have become commonplace, children whose souls have been lost, children falling victim to sexual promiscuity, depression and suicide. These young people were not criminally assaulted, but legally assaulted by Bishops through their pet classroom sex programs, with equally tragic results. Adding a separate child abuse dimension will not stop the abuse already in place. It is nothing more than putting a tiny band-aid on an open festering wound.
All sex programs are basically the same although some like to change certain wording to make it their own. We see in the Parent Guide that “Lures” does not like the words “good touch and bad touch since a ‘bad touch’ may actually feel good”. Therefore, they use the words “Real Love and Fake Love” to mean basically the same thing. The ambitious desire for educators to turn out “programs” that use the same basic message as all the others, but change the wording to give it a different look, is evident here. But the change makes it no less dangerous.
In fact, little children do not have a good concept of what love is. They are too young. They certainly do not know how the sexual sphere is involved. Therefore, if that friendly trusting homosexual pedophile begins making advances that he calls “real love”, he can be very believable. If he says that real love feels good and fake love hurts, the trusted pervert will be very believable. After all, the people who will know the most about the contents of the child abuse curriculum will be the homosexual pedophiles and other perverts who will have to learn to “adjust” their approach to unsuspecting child victims accordingly.
The Parent Guide tells parents that the targets for pedophiles are children “without supervision” or those who “have issues at home”. This may be true of some children, but what those who have been victims of priests are revealing is that, in many cases, that children from good homes were not safe. Parents trusted the priest and often welcomed him into their home. No parent should believe that his or her child is safe. Perverts are very clever. They often fool adults first.
Bullying and Violence
This program is very politically correct with its addition of “The Lure of Hate and Violence” which includes “anti-bullying”. Anti-bullying programs are the newest social programs usurping yet more classroom time. The Parent Guide refers to school shootings saying, “some gunmen have cited on-going ridicule by fellow students as contributing to their rampages”.
Not a popular news item is the fact that an “anti-bullying” program had been piloted at Columbine High School the year prior to the tragic murders. The very fact that so many acts of violence are being committed in the schools should give reason for people to look into the programs including the sex, drug, etc., programs which all employ psychological techniques adversely effecting youth.
If the Bishops concur with the concern the authors of “Lures” have about violence in the media, they need to take a good look at the sex and violence portrayed in literature and films required in the Catholic classroom. A good example is Notre Dame Prep, a prestigious girls school in Baltimore that, for ten years was showing an absolutely filthy XXX-rated film, Not a Love Story, depicting women engaging in every vile sex acts including bondage. Cardinal William Keeler refused any meetings with parents and praised the school. However, that film was replaced with a 15-minute segment of a movie titled, The Accused, which contained a violent gang rape. Schools get away with the worst pornography by giving it the “educational” label, thus making vile curriculum politically immune to laws against pornography.
Staying the course of political correctness, “Lures” has its gun component. A few sentences about guns in the home in the Parent Guide include the statement. “Consider getting rid of all weapons permanently,” (p. 17) One can be sure that subject wil1 be enlarged upon in the classroom and may include the teacher asking about guns in the homes, and perhaps even taking notes. They will justify such invasive prying because of the “school violence”, however, where else might this information go?
Something to keep in mind about bullying programs is that they are also being recommended by the United Nations and by liberal democrats. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is president of an organization that distributes an anti-bullying curriculum to schools titled, “Operation Respect: Don’t Laugh at Me” (Washington Times 3/18104).
Internet and Media
Considering the attention Internet predators are getting, most parents are aware of these dangers. But the real purpose is at work to routinely break down normal inhibitions in children’s protective modesty and purity. With children familiarized with all things sexual, they become tuned-in to sex. As a result, sex on television and in the movies is not shocking, but familiar and acceptab1e, and the TV and film “sex stars” have become the role models.
It really seems incredulous that anyone would find the recommendations of TV personalities a reliable source when it comes to curriculum. However, the Child Lures Prevention program website discussing “Program Evaluations” claims to have been featured on the “Leeza” show, CNN, Oprah, Primetime, Today, and 48-Hours. It also claims that the USCCB website lists the Child Lures Prevention program as a Model Prevention Program.
The NEA (National Educators Association) gave the Child Lures Prevention program an award for “Advancement of Learning Through Broadcasting”. Just recently, the same NEA also gave its Human Rights award to Kevin Jennings from the Gay and Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) whose stated goals “extend to incorporating homosexual concepts into all curriculum.” Jennings has discussed ways to perform homosexual acts to teens and failed to report the sexual abuse of a sophomore by a homosexual man when the boy asked Jennings for help (The Washington Times, 7/3/04, p. A-4.)
By the way, Jennings founded GLSEN to “fight harassment and bullying of homosexuals”. So what made the Child Lures Program qualify for an award?
The Child Lures website boasts that the program has been “proven to be effective in safeguarding children and youth”. This so-called success is based on “pre-tests and post-tests on children in Pre-K to grade three. That’s like saying that lollipops should take the place of vegetables in a child’s diet because the children surveyed liked lollipops better. It all defies common sense.
The Bishops have to be fully aware that the sexual abuse scandals that have sprung up like wild fires across the country were ignited and fueled by the Bishops’ own doing, by what they have done and what they failed to do. The Bishops have acted in defiance of the teaching of the Catholic Church by not only instituting, but also enlarging upon their sex instruction programs. They not only failed to listen to the God-ordained experts, the parents, but for over 30 years have contemptuously dismissed parents’ ongoing urgent pleas to ban classroom sex instruction. The Bishops, wrapped in their collective pride, would rather see children continue to lose their Faith and continue to be victimized than admit they were grievously wrong. They would rather blame parents and institute programs that destroy the very sanctity of the family and the refuge of the home rather than listen to the advice of parents. The Bishops have turned the Church in America into a den of corruption and those they have hurt, and continue to hurt the most, are the children. May God have mercy!