A controversial sexuality program being imposed on college students aims to indoctrinate them with the view that anything goes when it comes to sex, as long as the other party or parties “consent.” The accompanying survey, meanwhile, gathers highly sensitive data on the views and beliefs of those students, and does not even have suitable answers for those with traditional religious beliefs.
The “interactive” scheme, known as “Not Anymore,” is peddled under the guise of teaching students not to sexually assault and rape each other. Of course, this was common sense and common knowledge — at least until recently, apparently — in America and every other Christian society.
The ongoing destruction of sexual morality being unleashed on America by sexual revolutionaries, though, may be eroding that.
One of the videos shown to students as part of the orientation features a homosexual man describing his “abusive relationship” with another homosexual man during college. “It culminated in the last night of my freshman year, he tried to have sex with me and I told him not to, and he kept going and he wouldn’t stop,” the victims said. “After that I was really upset.”
After the clips, a screen pops up with some highly controversial claims, informing students that “consent is a voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity,” and a whole bunch of other ideas about “consent” and how it is obtained. Nowhere does the program ever suggest to students, many of whom come from Christian homes, that sexual activity should be reserved for marriage.
Why new students were being ordered to watch stories of homosexual rape and forced sodomy was not immediately clear. One reason, perhaps, is to prepare the students to think of sex through an “anything goes” lens, as long as there is consent. This view makes a mockery of the sanctity of marriage and the views of countless millions of Americans — including those who pay the taxes to support these radical colleges.
In one of the videos forced upon the students, a bald woman gives a hint as to why the youth are being forced to sit through the indoctrination sessions when she claims the scheme is mandated by the U.S. government. “You may wonder why you’re being asked to watch a program on inter-personal violence,” she says. “The answer is simple: First, it’s a requirement of the federal government.”
Of course, there is no constitutional power for the feds to force anyone to watch anything. Instead, the program markets itself as a way to help colleges and universities “meet Campus SaVE Act (Violence Against Women Act) and Title IX mandates.” These unconstitutional schemes have been widely criticized by pro-family activists as unconstitutional efforts to undermine marriage and family.
After sitting through the propaganda instructing young people to believe that “consent” is all that is necessary to make any sexual act OK, the young students — typically age 18 or 19 — are ordered to take a personal survey about it. Among other questions, it asks students about their age, religion, race, gender, and sexual orientation
The multiple-choice questions ask, among other things, how to determine whether somebody gives their “consent,” whether people can have sex until one says to “stop,” dating, stalking, “what percentage of college men will be the victim of sexual assault,” and much more.
Nowhere do any of the questions even hint at the possibility that sex may be best saved for marriage — something that would save young people from endless emotional pain, venereal disease, unwanted pregnancies, and other devastating consequences of fornication.
Outraged parents who contacted FreedomProject Media expressed disgust. “My son is attending college to earn a finance degree, not to have his mind unreasonably searched and molded to fit a certain agenda,” said Heather Coker, a Mississippi mom who said the Constitution should protect students from this sort of thing. “Nor is the purpose of his attending college to be profiled to fit in a certain group.”
Blasting the “progressive” survey and its assault on privacy and traditional values, Coker called the “Not Anymore” scheme “a cunning and divisive tool used by classic propagandists seeking to indoctrinate and undermine privacy and religious beliefs.” Many of the answers on the test, she said, do not represent the views of her family or her son, so “he would be forced to be lumped into statistics that are not a direct reflection on both him and so many like him.”
And that is not all. “There are scenes that are indeed traumatic to be viewed or heard, and this should not be required by the federal government as it goes against deeply held convictions and can possibly further exacerbate underlying issues with those who may actually have been abused,” added Coker, blasting the supposed federal mandate purporting to force young people to participate.
Photo: skynesher/iStock/Getty Images Plus
This article appeared originally at FreedomProject Media and is reprinted here with permission.
