Michelle Malkin » Fact-checking the liberal fact checkers: The truth about that sex-ed bill

Fact-checking the liberal fact checkers: The truth about that sex-ed bill

By Michelle Malkin • September 16, 2008 11:01 AM

Both the Obama campaign and many media commentators claim that McCain’s recent sex-education ad is a sleazy, dishonorable, blatant, clear-cut lie.

Do these critics have a point?

First, read the bill, especially line 14, and judge for yourself.

Now, read this excellent article in National Review Online by Byron York, who interviewed one of the bill’s sponsors.

After reading the bill and York’s article, it’s hard to disagree with York’s conclusion:

“[T]he bill’s intention was to mandate sex education, especially concerning contraception and the prevention of sexually-transmitted diseases, for children before the sixth grade and as early as kindergarten. Obama’s defenders may howl, but the bill is what it is.”

Posted in: Education, Media Bias

Printer Friendly

comments (96)

trackbacks (12)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#101

On September 17th, 2008 at 3:13 am, Mark Jaquith said:

I read the bill. The McCain ad is dishonest. Nowhere in the bill does it force comprehensive sex education onto kindergardeners, as McCain’s sleazy ad suggests. It mere says that any students already receiving comprehensive sex education must also be taught about STDs. That doesn’t mean that kindergarteners will receive comprehensive sex education. All it says is that comprehensive sex education must contain talk about STDs.

How Byron got through his whole article without understanding that simple phrase in the bill is beyond me. He saw what he wanted to see, I guess. Trust me, I’m no friend of Obama’s. But McCain’s ad is a dishonest, despicable smear. It makes Obama out to be a peddler of sexual information to children, when the bill leaves unanswered the question of when comprehensive sex education should be given to students.
#102

On September 17th, 2008 at 10:34 am, corkie said:

On September 17th, 2008 at 3:13 am, Mark Jaquith said:

Mark Jaquith, you also forgot to mention the part about Obama lying about this bill.
#103

On September 18th, 2008 at 2:09 pm, happy2behere said:

Mark J – Obama is a smart man. The language in the bill leaves the door ajar for activists to push it wide open.
To that end the McCain ad is not dishonest as you claim, it shows the bill for what it is – overall – a very bad thing.
#106

On September 29th, 2008 at 5:22 pm, MDH3 said:

First of all, said line (14) indicates that the information in the bill is to be taught to children in grades “K through 12.”

You have quoted only part of the sentence. The entire sentence is as follows, emphasis mine:

Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV AIDS.

What was that word you used? Disingenuous?