Child Lures Child Abuse Prevention Program

The Child Lures Prevention program is part of a landslide of newer child abuse prevention programs being foisted on innocent children in the classroom. 

 The sudden onslaught of child abuse prevention programs is the bishops’ faint-hearted response to widespread sexual crimes committed by clergy against children. The new term for such programs is “safe environment.”

The “Lures” program appears basically like all the other child abuse or 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.

Browsing uncritically at the Parent Guide, it appears to give a certain amount of actual 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 warns of predatory “lures” in organized categorizes:  asking assistance, lost pet, bribery, authority figures, fake job offers, faking an emergency, and the internet. No parent would be against alerting children to such dangers.  However, it is evident that this is only to be part of a larger program, one that includes dangerous explicit sexual information.  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.  “Body parts” are explicitly explained and repeatedly reinforced in the classroom.  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 which psychologically undresses children, thus destroying modesty, thereby making the once private body parts an easy subject to commonplace discussion.  The Parent Guide warns that predators use lures to shut down one’s “personal alarm system” (p. 3).  Yet, that is just exactly what explicit classroom sex education and these “safety” programs are doing and 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 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). 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 Parent 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 heart-breaking 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 no 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. 

Little children do not have an understanding of love and how it relates to the sexual sphere.  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 is very believable.  After all, the people who know the most about the contents of the child abuse curriculum are homosexual pedophiles and other perverts who 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, even children from good homes are 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 act including bondage.  Cardinal William Keeler refused any meetings with parents and praised the school.  That film was reluctantly 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 this subject is enlarged upon in the classroom, including the teacher asking about guns in the homes, and perhaps even taking notes.  They 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 3/18/04).

Internet and Media

Considering the attention Internet predators are getting, most parents are aware of these dangers.  But the real danger remains in the classroom where the sex curriculum is at work to routinely break down normal inhibitions in children—protective modesty and purity.  With children familiarized with all things sexual, they become tuned-in to sex.

As a result, sex on the Internet (and My Space), on television and in the movies is not shocking, but familiar and acceptable, 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. Probably this is why the bishops too, find this a model prevention program.

Add to this, the NEA (National Educators Association) gave the Child Lures Prevention program an award for “Advancement of Learning Through Broadcasting.”  The same NEA also gave its human rights award “to Kevin Jennings of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) whose stated goals ‘extend to incorporating homosexual concepts into all curriculum.’”   Jennings has discussed ways to perform homosexual acts with teens.  However, when a sophomore boy who was sexually abused by a homosexual man asked Jennings for help, he failed to report the homosexual abuser. (Washington Times, 7/3/04, p. A-4.) 

Not surprisingly, Jennings founded GLSEN to “fight harassment and bullying of homosexuals”, not to protect children.

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.

There is an ugly self-serving camaraderie among bishops whereby they have separated themselves from God’s laws, the Faith, and from those they were ordained to serve.  The many decades of contemptuous responses to parents who objected to sex instruction in the classroom and further the scandalous arrogant meanness toward parents who had children abused by clerics is clear when one sees that bishops and their priesthood were largely homosexual.  They act in defiance of God’s laws and civil laws. They protect the homosexuals among themselves and their clergy. All this is further evidence that the bishops act as if they are immune from God’s wrath – our God whose response to overt homosexuality in Sodom was to destroy the entire city.

The bishops, wrapped in their collective pride, would rather see children continue to lose their Faith and continue to be victimized than to break the bond of their secret brotherhood. Their lame attempts to soothe over the damage they have done without disturbing the homosexual element among them is blatantly insulting to Catholics and others.   Blaming parents and instituting programs that destroy the very sanctity of the family and the refuge of the home is ludicrous.  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!

G. K. Chesterton, a gifted writer who died in the mid-1930’s, prophesized the destruction of Europe (WW II), the abuse of psychiatry, and the rise of Islam.  He further forecast, “the next great heresy would be a cult of sex.”   That Chesterton used the word “cult” is important considering the obstinate, self-righteous contempt with which parents are treated by bishops, priests and diocesan educators.  Those drawn into cults are recognized by their own narrow beliefs and their resistance to reason or rational argument and their absolute intolerance of opposite views. When bishops, priests and diocesan educators refuse to listen to parents who, with arms full of proof, protest classroom sex programs, it is time to recognize this great evil that has befallen our Church and do something about it.

(The Chesterton Review, Vol. VIII, No. 1, Feb. 1987, p. 48, E. J. Oliver, quoting G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) in an article entitled, “Chesterton and Primitive Religion.”)