Back to the February 2003 Newsletter Index

Archdiocese should protect child's innocence in classroom

The following letter was written to The Catholic Review in response to their December 12 article, "Cardinal Keeler decries support of pornography by Fortune 500 firms." The Catholic Review did not publish it.

Editor:

It is very difficult to take seriously the Archdiocesan efforts to prosecute companies that distrib­ute pornography when, in my opinion as well as that of others, other forms of sexual perversion like sex educa­tion are given a free pass.

If we are serious about addressing pornography and do not want to appear as being disingenuous, and if we really want to eradicate pornography in all its forms and all of its disguises, then we need to start at home.

The religious alliance that met to stop the funding of pornography confronted an implied pigheaded, stonewalling attitude by the funders of pornography.

However, when we examine how the Archdiocese treats dissenters of the sex-ed program, these dissenters confront the same pigheaded, stonewalling, and/or bulldozing attitude .of defiance of not only well­reasoned argumentation of their contrary views but also defiance of official Vatican guidelines/ Church teachings.

R garding "sex::ed" educational materials used to educate our children in sexual matters, consistent Church teaching is that children should be educated in intimate sexual matters by their parents and not in the classroom.

Canon Francis Ripley, in his world-renowned book, This Is the Faith, says: "Parents have the right and duty of supervising everything connected with the educa­tion of their children."

The fact that many parents don't explain such

Mark, our Calendars NOW!

3rd Annual Maryland FACE THE TRUTH TOUR July 28-August 2

        Two seriously committed pro-life college or

graduate students needed to serve as a PAID director and assistant director! Contact Jack Ames 410-337-3721 . jackamespe@aol.com

DEFEND LIFE-jan.-Feb.. 2003

matters in a timely manner has always existed and does­n't justify a heavy-handed approach from outside sources to rectify the problem; furthermore, they are not responsi­ble for cleaning up the mess after the damage has been done.

The dangers of proceeding with, in my opinion, such insidious programs as Benziger Family Life, Fully Alive, and Growing in Love (which are popular programs being challenged and/or criticized by credible sources) include destroying the original innocence with which a child comes into the world and planting the seeds of sex­ua1 aberrance at a time that a child can least cope with such problems:­

The argument that children are already exposed to such material from the secular culture is irrelevant since the Church is to be counter-cultural. We are to make a difference and not be a corruptor of one's innocence.

"Better that a millstone be tied around one's neck and he be cast into the sea than to scandalize one of these little ones." (Luke 17:2)

William Nicholson Edgewood, Md.