"When I graduated from medical school, I took an oath. Standing with raised right hand, I vowed to prevent illness at any opportunity given to me. In his youthful innocence, I believed that I would fight against cancer, heart disease and emotional disorders. But I'm not so naive. After spending twenty-five years and thousands of hours with young people in trouble, I found that my most difficult struggle — not against dangerous diseases. I have to fight against dangerous concepts.
And I am here with you today to discuss these dangerous ideas such as:
— Children are sexual from the moment of his birth.
— The study of sexuality is considered healthy at any age.
— Young people should be encouraged in their attempts to question the moral values that they are taught at home.
— Individual rights take precedence over the rights of the population to be protected from diseases.
These ideas are, in fact, are the basis of the so-called Comprehensive sex education programs developed by the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the American Council on Sexuality Information and Education (SEICUS).
There are a number of publications to which I refer. One of them is called "Healthy, Happy and Hot" («A healthy, happy and causes a desire"). Another — "International Guidelines on Sexuality Education: An Evidence-Based Approach to Education in the field of sex, relationships and HIV / STI prevention," which extends the UNESCO.
You may not notice the dangerous idea that I mentioned a moment ago. You can not see them because they are written by the positive language. The language that will make you believe, "Yeah, that sounds great! That's exactly the message that young people need my country. " But if you study the material (especially stuff like this, addressed to young people, not material for politicians and other adults), you will find that these programs are not what you thought.
For example, a brochure entitled "Healthy, Happy and causes a desire" is addressed to HIV-infected youth. This publication glorified casual sex with multiple partners. There is no promotion of sexual abstinence. There are no appeals to reduce the number of partners. Quite the contrary.
As a physician who cares for the health of young people over the past 25 years, I see a steady stream of patients passing through my office, mostly girls and young women. They suffer from sexual decisions taken by them. And 100% of their suffering could have been avoided!
I met so many sacrifices that she wrote a book about his patients. The book was called "Unprotected: Student psychiatrist shows how political correctness in her profession endangers every student." I started to learn what is taught in sex education, focusing on material from books and websites that are recommended in the classroom. And I wrote my second book, "You're teaching my child what? The physician exposes the lies of sex education and talks about how this lie harm to your child. "
As a doctor, I set myself the same goal — to keep people away from the offices of doctors and therapists. In my research I found that the activities of organizations such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the American Council on Sexuality Information and Education, is an obstacle in my way. Their priority — not sexual health. Their main goal — sexual freedom!
These large and powerful organizations believe that sexuality extends from the cradle to the grave. They support early initiation of sexual activity, communication with multiple partners and sexual experimentation.
But these are the behaviors that fuel the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases infections, HIV, AIDS, lead to an increase in the number of abortions and emotional disorders.
Those who practice the lifestyle promoted by these organizations are at the doctor more often, not less often. And so it is for a very simple reason. When sexual freedom is a priority when people are encouraged to start having sex at an early age to explore and experiment with different partners, suffer sexual health. And please do not forget that these programs are referred to as complete, accurate and scientifically based. They state that provide young people with all the information that they need to know to make informed responsible decisions. These programs assume that the possession of this information will lead to the adoption of the healthiest decisions.
But I have studied the Web site of the Federation of Family Planning and SEICUS, as well as the material that they create for use in the classroom and for self-study children. And I'm here to tell you that their comprehensive program of sex education is not. It is not comprehensive. It is not medically accurate. And it does not provide young people with the necessary information.
I know it's tough statements. But I guarantee you that they are based on extensive research and thorough analysis.
One of the important points that you need to understand — is that sex education is a social movement. His call — to change society. That was 50 years ago, when the movement began. And it is still so today. The movement envisions a world without sexual taboos and restrictions. A world that can be called free of Judeo-Christian morality: every person, regardless of age, carries its own sexual choices, everyone decides how big a risk he is willing to take on. And the judge is prohibited. In this "perfect world" there is complete equality of the sexes. Boys and girls, men and women — all have the same degree of risk when making sexual decisions. This idea permeated the entire program of sexual education.
But here is the problem. The problem is that the program is not based on reality. When it comes to the negative consequences of sexual activity (and you know what they are — an infection, cancer, infertility, unwanted pregnancy), there is no sexual equality. It never was. And it never will be. That girls and women are the first to suffer from the consequences of early sexual activity and the presence of many partners. And this is not misogyny. This is biology. This anatomy and physiology. This is due to the structure of organs, hormones and brain functions. It's biology that every girl should know. But the scientific evidence, which I'll tell you in a few minutes, lowered sex education program, because, in my opinion, they call into question the idea of gender equality and freedom of sexual expression.
So the point of my presentation is that sex education program, created by the Federation of Family Planning and SEICUS and distributed by UN agencies are not doing what is claimed.
They do not protect the health and well-being of youth!
Instead, they seksualiziruyut children and encourages conduct that endangers their health and well-being.
What am I going to do now is, first, to explain the origins and philosophy of what is called the Comprehensive sex education program. Then I'll tell you about the scientific data that is deliberately not included in this program. I'll tell you what you should tell young people — what to tell her, but it is not told. Finally, you will hear that you personally can do to make it happen, to stop the sexualization of children and advocate for their health and innocence.
Whence the radicalism of modern ideas about sex education? It all started in the 1960s. Was based on a model of human sexuality Alfred Kinsey. Now we know that Alfred Kinsey's research on which he based his campaign for social reform, have been fabricated and that he was a man of deep mental disturbances. In short: Kinsey was convinced that traditional morality has no value and is non-destructive. This person does not stop at nothing when it came to sexuality (I mean, really before anything). For example, he believed that pedophiles misunderstood and unjustly punished. Sexuality — this is not the appetite, which must be harnessed, insisted Kinsey. He taught this. And so he lived. I very much doubt that for all 62 years of his miserable life at least for one day, Kinsey was familiar with the fact that we have gathered in this room, think of healthy sexuality.
And what is surprising — the personal sexual philosophy of this man was institutionalized in the modern sex education. Modern programs are based on the teachings of Kinsey. It's as if someone came out and said, "When it comes to nutrition, we all make mistakes. And I have all the necessary research to prove it. My vision is better. Eat more red meat, consume more oil, sugar and caffeine. I have data to prove it. " This would lead people into raptures. They would build an entire industry around it. And then, years later, suddenly come to light that the person whose model of healthy eating has anyone actually suffered from high blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease. That's how everything is turned on its head.
Kinsey died in 1956. And a few years later was based SEICUS, American Council on Sexuality Information and Education. Here I want to note that SEICUS exposed as a candidate for consultative status with the UN. A decision on this matter may be adopted by June. And we must do everything we can to prevent it. SEICUS — this is not an organization that you could afford to influence your children in your countries.
So when SEICUS was founded … I want you to understand that in the early 1960s thanks to the antibiotics have begun to treat the most common STIs, such as syphilis and gonorrhea. And we all thought, "Great! No other STDs! We have antibiotics! "Can you imagine? But then thought so. Also in 1960, the pill became available. So, all these horrible infection is defeated, and unwanted pregnancies could be avoided. There are birth control, there are antibiotics. At the time, believed that both problems are solved, it was thought that the problem had disappeared. The only obstacle to the adoption of the concept of sexuality, Kinsey was a middle-class morality.
So, SEICUS was founded by Dr. Mary Calderon, who worked for the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Like Kinsey, it is believed that there is an urgent need to move away from traditional notions of sexuality. She was convinced that sex education is too much negativity, it's too much focus on diseases and unwanted pregnancies. According to her, the real problem was that the company is a puritanical and suppresses individual freedoms. In sex education too many "no", alleged founder SEICUS, while its approach is based on a "can do".
Proper sex education will teach children that since their birth, they are sexual beings. And the expression of their sexuality is an absolute, natural and healthy. She has written a book addressed to parents, which states the following: "Children are sexy, they have sexual thoughts, and they do sexual things. Parents need to accept and respect the erotic potential of the child (…) Professionals who study children, recently confirmed the presence of a pronounced sexuality in newborns. " All this is based on the Kinsey reports received from pedophiles who have dealt with teenagers, children and babies up to one year, and record the results.
"Table 34 — the study of the systematic sexual abuse of boys' books of Alfred Kinsey's" Sexual behavior in the Human Male ", 1948, p. 180
In addition to teaching about sexuality "from the cradle to the grave" to sex education "was not to impose anyone sexual standards but simply to make information available in order to help young people and adults to make their own decisions."
For example, proposals to wait adulthood, wait until marriage would not work. This would not have prevented, since the goal was not to impose a particular standard of conduct. It was important to make the information available, and then allow the young people to make their own decisions. Nothing has changed in the area of sexual education and to date.
The purpose of sex education was "to try to give young people the opportunity to question, examine and evaluate their own attitude and the attitude of the community towards society, gender and sexuality."
It may sound nice, but think about it. They encourage children to question what they are taught. I'm not sure that all parents agree.
What actually is referring to Dr. Calderon, when she says that sex education should be open and positive, it is necessary to replace the "impossible" to "can"? Which would entail a rejection of traditional values? All of this means much more than sexual relations before marriage or outside of marriage.
Modern sex education aimed at the destruction of boundaries. In the words of co-founder Lester SEICUS Kirkendalya: "Religious taboos are too limited to, our entire system of belief should be revised … traditional religion was a fiasco, as it was surrounded by people and prohibitions set boundaries of thinking." "We need to expand the boundaries of human sexuality." "Physical pleasure is the same price as a moral value."
So much so, that the vice president SEICUS Wardell Pomeroy in 1980, declared: "It is time to recognize that incest should not be considered either a distortion or a symptom of mental illness."
"Child sexual experience, such as a link with a relative or a more senior person, not necessarily a negative effect on the child," — said board member John Money SEICUS in an interview with Time magazine in April 1980.
Time magazine named these people "pro-incestuous lobby."
All of these ideas that I mentioned:
— sexuality that stretches from the cradle to the grave;
— that young people have sexual rights;
— that adults should step aside and let the kids make their own decisions;
— the moral taboos surrounding people and taboos should be relaxed;
all of these ideas seksualiziruyut children.
I want to draw your attention to the fact that all these organizations have parents and politicians, is different from what they are taught to young people as a result.
For example, these groups claim that sexual behavior is necessary to postpone that the behavior associated with a high risk, it should be possible to avoid. And that, ideally, there should be no sexual relations as long as the young people do not have entered into a serious relationship with mutual obligations. They say it in public forums, as well as in the materials addressed to parents and politicians.
In particular, there is a radio interview in 2007 with the head of the Department of Public Policy SEICUS Bill Smith, where he was asked: "Do you agree that it is best that children do not engage in sexual activity in high school? Am I right? "He said," Sure, absolutely! Young people should wait before they start having sex. In this there is no doubt. "
Sounds good, right? We all love it. But let's look at the brochure, published SEICUS. It's called "Talking about sex." Here's how it begins: "Every person has a fundamental right. At the same time, adults can say and do things that will make young people feel as if they have no rights. It is very important for you to know your rights so that you can stand up for yourself when necessary. " "At any point in your life you can choose to express whether and to express, how, their sexuality." "The majority of sexual behaviors entail some level of risk. You decide what level of risk you are willing to accept. "
And here's a quote from the book, endorsed by the Federation of Family Planning of uncertainty when deciding whether to become sexually active, "No one can tell you whether you are ready to have sex. You only know if you can handle such a responsibility. "
There are many such examples. I will not quote them all. But essentially you can see that they do not call children to wait. These organizations are not doing what they promised to do. Moreover, they actually introduce the children to the behaviors and lifestyles associated with high risk, and make them the norm, describing them as acceptable, healthy options.
Here is the info about anal sex, laid out on the website of the Federation of Family Planning and addressed to young people: "Some traditional couples use anal sex in order to preserve her virginity partner. For those who like it, anal stimulation can be part of masturbation, sexual intercourse or oral sex. "
Tell us, in this room there are experts on infectious diseases? Although in reality and do not. I'm sure you realize that what is proposed here — is the fecal-oral-fecal contact. And it is a model of behavior associated with the highest risk, as you can imagine. And certainly it is not something that parents want their children to know. Not to mention the practice.
Dentists are now advised to examine patients for oral cancer. A cancer of the oral cavity is very closely related to human papillomavirus infection that people get when a large number of partners to engage in oral sex. However, this important information is not reported to our children.
That is, in essence I am saying that the important information related to human health, is not included in what is called the "Comprehensive" sex education program. Integrated — means comprehensive, which includes everything you want to know.
But after all the information that HPV infection causes cancer in your mouth, the children are not reported. Instead, the Planned Parenthood Federation of telling them about anal sex and oral-anal contact. Here is an article about the relationship of HPV (human papilloma virus) with head and neck cancer, dated 2007. That is already widely known. Why is this not fall into the comprehensive program of sex education? Guess!
It is a scientific fact that the development of cervical cancer prerequisite is the availability of human papillomavirus. Why do girls and young women are particularly susceptible to HPV? All because of the cervix, it is not yet sufficiently developed. A cervix is the entrance to the uterus. Formed cervix — and its shell is very dense, it is covered with numerous layers of cells — so it is difficult to become infected. But underdeveloped cervix, cervix teenager or a young girl, a thickness of only one cell. This surface is coated with a layer of one cell is called the "conversion zone." With age, she squeezed, is reduced. But so far it has not happened for HPV, Chlamydia and STI is the perfect place for an attack. Think about the anatomy of women, girls: ejaculate containing STI falls right there, right in the bull's-eye. And why so many women are infected with HPV and other STIs. With age, as I said, this area will become smaller, and after the birth she disappears completely.
We are all different. People come to me with questions — disappears in what age? I do not know all your questions. But if you go to the doctor for an examination, you may ask, what size your "transformation zone."
I call the "zone of transformation", the cells of which it is composed, politically incorrect cells. Why? Because they are contrary to the ideology, which asserts that boys and girls — are one and the same. This zone indicates that the increased vulnerability of girls in terms of STIs. In the reproductive system of boys do not like the zone of vulnerability. But they have a place like this, in the digestive system to the anal area, for example. Tissue there is very fragile, the thickness of only one cell — like the "transformation zone."
In its brochure "Healthy, Happy and causes a desire" at the Planned Parenthood Federation had the opportunity to explain it all. After pamphlet addressed to HIV-infected youth. Yes, many of these young people will be boys. And many of these guys will participate in anal intercourse. The International Federation has been an ideal opportunity to say, "Look! This area is very sensitive, it is easy to break, there's a lot of blood vessels. It is very easy to get an infection, especially if you have HIV. In addition to the blood (blood transfusions, for example), HIV is most commonly transmitted through anal intercourse. At least 20-30 times more easily pass through the anal intercourse HIV than vaginal. And the Federation has a great opportunity to explain all this to young people.
Cervix informations are well known in the medical environment. This is what informs the CDC (Centers for Disease Control): "STIs are a serious threat to the health of women and their fertility. Biological factors put women at greater risk than men. " One of these factors is the cervix. There are others.
So, the data on women's vulnerabilities are not mentioned in the Comprehensive sex education program. And they call themselves feminists! They say they want to improve the well-being of young girls. It all turned on its head.
Biology says, "Wait! Girls are more vulnerable than men! "And it's true.
And I want to say something else, returning to the brochure "Healthy, Happy and causes a desire." HIV-positive young people say they have the right to sexual pleasure, but they have no obligation to disclose their status to sexual intercourse or to the partners or to the society as a whole. Let me explain this. HIV-positive people say that they do not need to talk about their condition as long as it is not easy to share this until it's convenient for them.
Let's think about this for a minute. Let's face it. Suppose a young person is infected with HIV — let's call it "A". He comes into contact with another young man — let's call it "B". They have sex. "A" read the brochure and does not feel any obligation to tell people his analysis of the negative or positive. "B" does not give the right to make an informed decision to enter into a sexual relationship. He is unaware of the risk. And then "B" is positive for HIV. There is evidence that only one act to be HIV-positive. I have personally met people like that. So, when "B" is HIV-positive, his diagnosis, his treatment is delayed. After all, he had no idea that the connection was dangerous for him. And now this "B", just infected in the initial stages of the disease, even before HIV test gives a positive result, continues to live and have sex with other people. So start of the epidemic. And so it is growing pandemic. And then we ask, "Why AIDS is out of control?"
One of the goals of the Comprehensive sex education program is proclaimed reduction behaviors associated with risk. And then they go out and tell people what they do not need to inform partners about their HIV-positive status? Because of all this innocent people lose their lives.
And now let's move on to another amazing scientific topic, to what is called "biochemical affection." Over the past 20 years, we have learned (and this is scientific evidence) that the hormones that are produced during intimate behavior, cause feelings of affection and trust. Especially in women, oxytocin is mainly because the female hormone. I call this hormone, like those cells, "politically incorrect" because it challenges the assertion that the differences between men and women based on cultural traditions and socialization. He challenges the idea that sexual behavior is easily separated from the emotional attachment.
What is a hormone? Hormone — a molecule that "travels" from one organ to another, and sends the message. Depending on the context, oxytocin carries a variety of information throughout the body. During labor, it is sent from the brain to the uterus and gives her team to contract and expel the child. During lactation oxytocin cells of the breast sends orders to the brain to produce milk. But oxytocin "travels" and inside the brain with messages about emotions and behavior. If you take a virgin rat and entered her oxytocin, and then place it in a cage with a litter of other rats, this rat-virgin under the influence of oxytocin will behave as if the young — her own. Thus, oxytocin sends the message "create connection, create an emotional attachment."
What should I know young people — oxytocin produced during intimate behavior. The very fact that intercourse is not necessary to start the production of oxytocin. I guess I should not even say that condoms do not affect the behavior of this hormone. I'm not saying that a random sexual intercourse creates a deep emotional attachment, such as you can see between the mother and the child. Of course not, that would be ridiculous. But what I am sure is that we can learn from their anatomy. We are programmed to experience not only the pleasure during intimacy, but emotional and unconscious reactions to the person with whom we are close.
Another difference between men and women: estrogen enhances the action of oxytocin, while testosterone decreases it. And it's amazing! When the body is the highest level of estrogen? Just before ovulation — that's when it reaches its peak. Just listen to how we are organized! It's so beautiful — that on the day of the month when we can conceive and bring new life into this world, we are the most susceptible to emotional attachment to the person with whom we are creating this new life.
In addition to the emotional attachment oxytocin affects our judgment and risk assessment. It affects the parts of the brain associated with a sense of confidence. In fact, when young people are sexually active, oxytocin acts on the girl's brain, which should be waving a red flag. We assume that this is just a random intercourse, the connection for one night with someone she does not know the real thing. Normally, the brain would sound the alarm, "Think about it! Is this good? Is it safe? What are you going to feel tomorrow morning? Is this a smart move? "But instead of the brain, rather than amygdala acts oxytocin, which to some extent makes the voice silenced. And the girl less careful, less suspicious. Yes, under normal circumstances, in relation to "thus" young man, when you know that it will be next to it — the one you need, when you realize all of this, you want this to happen, you will not think, "Hmm, he did not understand with the laundry yesterday … I do not know … Something he gained a lot of weight … Somehow it does not really look." You do not want it to be so. You're going to want to associate themselves with him. Thus, oxytocin, depending on the circumstances, affects healthy miraculous. But young people need to be aware that he may jeopardize their judgment.
Young people come to me after some time had sex, especially girls, and asked, "What's wrong with me, Dr. Grossman? I feel affection for him. What's wrong with me? "Usually, the girl wants to see some sign that she likes him, too. She is constantly checking your email, sms she is waiting for him — she's waiting for a sign that there is a connection between them. And I say to them, 'Are you all right. " And the girls were relieved to find that they are not crazy. I explain to them about oxytocin and affection. The only thing that is wrong with these young people — is that they are not familiar with these and other biochemical data associated with sexuality. They do not even know it.
And how do they know? All of these "comprehensive" sex education programs do not tell them about it. How can young people can know it?
I want to mention that there are other amazing data obtained from studies of oxytocin. For example, patients with autism, due to the fact that they have been a violation of affection, often prefer things to people. They often do not know how to establish eye contact, they are concerned, they have problems with a sense of trust in people. If oxytocin is administered to such patients, there are significant improvements in these areas.
Another amazing research: a comparative analysis of the two groups of women who gave birth to two weeks ahead of schedule. The women from the same group were natural childbirth (and during natural childbirth oxytocin reaches incredibly high bar). In women, the other groups were conducted via scheduled c-section birth, these women do not pass through the contractions and the birth process, they do not produce oxytocin. Two weeks later, these mothers gathered together and each had a magnetic resonance imaging of the brain — their brains were scanned for response to the cry of their own child. The brain of women survivors of natural childbirth and exposed to oxytocin was more sensitive. I do not want someone who has had a C-section, I thought, "Oh my God! I did not, I have a problem with a sense of affection towards my child. " Do not even think that way! All this — the only interesting study in support of the idea that oxytocin is associated with feminine sensitivity to attachment.
Oxytocin includes love and trust. It disables caution and reluctance in the brain.
So, I will sum it up, although it was possible to say much more. I want to emphasize that the stakes are very high. The pleasure of intimacy, of course, unusual, natural and healthy reaction. And young people have to say about it. But they also have to say that although it is unusual, natural and healthy, but to behave irresponsibly and spontaneously — is unnatural and unhealthy. Sex — it's a very serious matter. You can not take anything for granted. One intercourse can change your life forever. The female reproductive system is particularly sensitive and fragile.
The programs developed by the Federation of Planning and SEICUS, distributed worldwide through the UN, are extremely dangerous. Instead of presenting material that level, we talked about today, and that fuels the desire for a healthy ideal — wait for the final maturation and preferably marriage — instead of all these ideas, these programs talk about sexual rights, the rights to sexual pleasure in any age, the rights to multiple sexual partners who are not obliged to inform you of their HIV status. This is crazy.
I want to ask everyone: read this information and begin to act. I'll tell you about the petitions that we sign www.StopSexualizingChildren.org — a petition against this kind of programs aimed at sexualization of our children and the advertising of unhealthy lifestyles in the name of sexual rights in the name of diversity, in the name of sexual freedom. Around the world, we are witnessing a catastrophic level of diseases transmitted through sexual contact. We are at war with error, but errors are winning. To go back to your seats, we need a complete overhaul of how we acquaint young people with the subject of sexuality. Thank you for your attention!
About the Author
Miriam Grossman (Miriam Grossman, MD): the famous American expert, a psychiatrist, a medical doctor. Author of numerous lectures, speeches, articles and books on the disclosure, "sex education", imposed by the adepts of "family planning": United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), etc. In particular, in 2009, Miriam Grossman published a book on the subject titled "You're teaching my child what? The physician exposes the lies of sex education and talks about how this lie harm to your child. " This book was especially great attention in the United States.
Dr. Miriam Grossman argues convincingly that "seksprosveschenie" program IPPF etc. organizations, the purpose is "prevention of sexually transmitted infections" (STIs) and "reproductive health" (as declared), and the implementation of utopian social projects involving the destruction of traditional moral values and moral principles of the society.
As pointed out by Dr. Grossman is "seksobrazovanie" deeply unscientific. "Sex and the Enlightenment" ignore evidence of modern biological and medical sciences, which have long proved a great threat to the physical and mental health of adolescents 'sexual freedom', which they deceive the planners.
According to Dr. Grossman, «sex education» is based "not on what can be seen under a microscope, and the dangers of politicized ideology that gives a distorted view of life." Under the guise of "science-based sex education" inspire children to dangerous and immoral ideas and behaviors that can completely ruin their lives. Facts that prevent the construction of a "new brave world" sexual revolutionaries, they are simply ignored.
"Thousands of hours I spent with my patients — students living on campus, let me say: when dominates sexual freedom, sexual health is suffering," — says Grossman.
"Our children are urged to play with fire, and receiving doctors and therapists are already full of people who were burned and the outside and from the inside" — with deep sorrow she notes.
In addition, as Miriam Grossman writes in his book, "What do you teach my child?" (2009), sex education imposed by the adepts of the IPPF, should be attributed to one of the factors that increase the rate of suicide in adolescents. Pushing them to an early and premarital sexual relations, this "education", provides the teenagers of various kinds of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). But the acquisition of STIs and for an adult — a lot of stress, and for a teenager with his immature psyche it can be unbearable challenge in encouraging him to commit suicide. Also teenage girls and young women are often extremely difficult to survive breakup, which can also cause suicides. This is Miriam Grossman says in his previous book, "Unprotected" ("Unprotected"), in which it analyzes the causes of the spread of depression and suicide among students of American universities.
At the same time, causing the early sexualization of children, "seksprosvetiteli" as noted by Miriam Grossman, hide from teenagers and young adults (or ridicule in their eyes) that the only way that allows the young person to avoid all these terrible dangers of "safe sex." This simple method that humanity has been practiced for thousands of years, is to preserve premarital chastity, and create a strong family with a person adheres to the same principles.
Thus Miriam Grossman denies demagogic statements adherents of "family planning" of the alleged "necessity" and "utility" promote this kind of "educational" programs. On the contrary, it warns of the danger of such programs for the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of children and adolescents, including from the point of view of the increasing number of teenage suicides.