Lies to sexual education!

In 2024 the Polish nation faced another systemic anti-Polish action, which is to effort to introduce sexual education into schools according to WHO standards, under the misleading name of wellness education. Specialists, hired to elaborate the method aspects of this assassination, usage a set of on-call explanations to lull the vigilance and confuse the nation. Poles so learned that this education, which they were introduced to them, meets the following parameters:

1.) It is world-neutral, so it does not violate the rights of parents to rise their children in accordance with its world-view, enshrined in the Constitution and global law.

2) It is an nonsubjective technological knowledge, and all kid has a constitutional right to learn, which is compulsory until the age of 18.

3) The cognition of wellness is essential to people, or they will not be able to live healthyly, and as part of wellness education, sexual education is needed due to the fact that it is an essential part of health.

4) Sexual education must be run by the state due to the fact that parents do not talk to their children on these topics. Children learn from their peers and pornography, thus learning about inappropriate behaviour patterns.

5.) Children and young people, influenced by inappropriate behaviour patterns, enter into toxic relationships and dangerous behaviors, and through sexual education young people will be able to avoid them.

6.) Children and young people cannot realize what happens to them due to their deficiency of education, nor can they compose and communicate their needs. They don't know how to ask for aid and fall into intellectual crises, leading to depression, thoughts, and suicide attempts. Therefore, sexual education is simply a social work towards young people.

7.) Sexual educators frequently find themselves accused of talking about masturbation, about sexual relations, about different models of families, homosexuality, transsexuality, contraception and abortion, and thus demoralize young people, contribute to the breakdown of families and the worsening of demography. They simply deny it, say that these phenomena are natural and normal, while all undesirable situations happen precisely due to the fact that there is no sexual education in schools.

And now, 1 by one, we will deal with their arguments.

Ad 1. No sexual education is world-neutral, due to the fact that it concerns very crucial aspects of life that are regulated not only by biology, but besides by culture. If only biology were liable for sexuality, man would not be different from an animal and would not accomplish anything, and in peculiar he would not make a civilization of advanced technology. The drive is simply a large force that can make and destruct just as much as it can, and it is so very crucial for the sake of civilization to submit to the sphere of impulse, lustfully, emotional standards of culture. In Latin culture, the pattern is the order of the sexual sphere. Sex is essential, and it serves as 1 of the ingredients of marriage. The intent of matrimony is first to bring distant and rise offspring, and second to aid each another and satisfy lust. Sexual education, on the another hand, cheats about worldview in 2 ways. First, 1 of its chapters is values and attitudes, and this means that it presents a worldview. However, it is not straight revealed, hiding behind the cabalistic pseudo-scientific language. However, the analysis leaves no doubt. This education is detached from any philosophical, ethical, and spiritual basis, appropriate to Latin civilization. Sexuality is treated as an component of wellness and wellness as a condition for appropriate functioning. This approach is appropriate for 2 beings – animals and machines. The animal has no morality, and the device can be improved and programmed to function smoothly. wellness is besides cited in the social context as social health. This means that the full society is treated as 1 mechanism, composed of biological machines. In this sense, man is simply a biological machine, programmed for "health", that is, the efficient functioning of a "healthy" society, or human resource, of biological machines, that performs their tasks efficiently. This is so a very circumstantial worldview, expressed in the Enlightenment book of thinker Julien de la Mettrie – “Man – Machine” of 1747, and in the 1971 book by behaviour Burrhus F. Skinner “Beyond Freedom and Dignity”. This view, which sees man as a device that can be steered, programmed and improved, is in fact a lucipheric view.

Sexual education is so a violation of the rights of parents enshrined in the Polish Constitution and acts of global law. Above all, however, it violates the natural rights of parents to rise their own children as a consequence of their parental responsibilities. This right is not given to parents by any authority, but they have it by nature, and their legal evidence is only a confirmation, not a source. No 1 has the right to infringe this in any way, nor the bodies that establish or apply the law. The only limitation is the permanent inability of parents to execute their parental duties, which is an exceptional situation.

Sexual education is so a gross violation of the rights of parents, as well as the unauthorised intrusion into the child's private sphere. It forces children and young people to interact with the worldview of the authors of sexual education and this cognition that the educators like. due to the fact that it is cognition about profoundly intimate matters, it is simply a profound violation of intimacy, and even rape of children and young people.

Ad 2. The cognition provided under the subject wellness education combines 2 varieties – nonsubjective and ideological. nonsubjective cognition concerns nonsubjective facts that do not affect students’ beliefs. specified cognition is already present in the Polish programming basis in various subjects, so the fresh subject does not introduce anything new. In fact, within existing subjects, actual cognition of wellness is included in circumstantial contexts alternatively than in the theoretical separation provided by the fresh object. In fact, wellness cognition is just a pretext for the introduction of sexual education, which sees man as a machine.

Knowledge, which is the basis for sexual education has its authors, and it is worth knowing the main names. Magnus Hirschfeld, psychiatrist, pen of homosexuality and transvestiteism; Wilhelm Reich, psychiatrist, advocate for the merger of the communist and sexual revolution; Alfred Kinsey, entomologist, author of many sexual behaviour studies, considered to be 1 of the father of the sexual revolution; Michel Foucault, philosopher, advocate for the release of human freedom from oppression and superstition, and at the same time pedophile; John Money, psychologist, creator of the concept of gender, pioneer of surgical sex correction, advocate of romanticist pedophile. specified technological authorities are the patrons of sexual education. no of them were doctors, but they were all more or little sexual maniacs. peculiar attention should be paid to Alfred Kinsey's "adventure". In the 1940s, he conducted major sociological studies, thanks to the backing of the Rockefeller Foundation. The results of his investigation supposedly proved that there is no sexual norm, due to the fact that people in their section let themselves to have the most loose sexual behavior, and the kid is simply a sexual being since birth. His investigation has been conducted on prostitutes, homosexuals, pedophiles, sex offenders, and the most frequent of the worst pelons.

He obtained any of the results from pedophiles, whom he gave instructions to test the consequence of children during their rape. erstwhile the Foundation took his backing from him, he was desperate to hang himself on his own genitals. To this day, the Kinsey Institute is operating, the Hirschfeld Award is awarded, the sex concept is simply a career, and the WHO uses this kind of achievements. That's science.

Sexual perverts invoke the constitutional right of all man to learn. By discipline they mean sexual depravity, only due to the fact that any of its creators had technological titles. This does not change the fact that many of them are sex maniacs, fraudsters, degenerates, rapists and criminals who have not been brought to justice solely due to their technological standing and connections.

Ad. 3. Before the emergence of wellness education, people someway lived, and in many areas they lived better than modern people. They surely did not endure from common morbid obesity and intellectual problems. Without the introduction of sexual education to schools, humanity besides had no problems with reproduction and interpersonal relations, on the contrary, it seems that they had less problems. Just compare the statistical parameters with each another – erstwhile sexual education, the number of teenage pregnancies and abortions, changes in demographics were introduced. In times prior to sexual education, they did not have specified dilemmas as sex dysphoria. Sexual education promoters, including those in Poland, say that cognition is needed to society. To check the validity of their claims, it is adequate to compare the period of their technological activities with the statistical image of society, and to trust on hard statistical data – the number of births, marriages and divorces. We will then see that before the beginning of technological and public activities these people were much better with it than after respective decades of their work. So either sex educators are not doing well, or on the contrary, they are successful, and now they want to deepen it.

It is actual that sexuality is an crucial part of human life. This, however, does not entitle sex educators to enter the individual lives of people with their imagination of sexuality. Besides, these educators are just a tool. They are followed by politicians and officials who usage this pretext to enter the intimate sphere of human beings and to have it completely. If you erstwhile consider that you have the right to form human sexuality, and all people have the work to surrender to this power, the next step will be to interfere, who, with whom, like, erstwhile should have sex. Recently, people shouted loudly that they would not let bishops to look in bed. Now, the same people humbly agree that officials should find their sexual norm.

Ad 4. Sex educators and officials treat all parents as if they were inept educationalally, so they want to do their occupation as usual for the sake of their children. Since erstwhile do you decide what your parent and kid are talking about? Are we surviving in democracy or in state theocracy? Do you want to be a god, deciding everything?

Pornography is indeed a problem. It is so crucial to see how children can access it. We will learn that the main origin is mobile devices and computers, giving each kid access to the Internet. On the another hand, there are easy accessible net portals with pornography. The proposal should be simple: the state prohibits the usage of these devices at school, abandons digitalisation of education, introduces statutory restrictions on access to certain content. It can be done, there are tools, you can usage artificial intelligence, any countries can handle it. Why won't politicians and specialists who care so much about the psyche of children introduce specified solutions? If there is any pathology in society, why does the state not want to remove sources, but tries to adjust society to this state? Would it be due to the fact that a powerful pornographic lobby would lose profits? Or is it due to the fact that the right goal is not to defend children, but to sexually defend them? Is sexual education so different from pornography?

The argument about inappropriate behaviour patterns, utilized by sex educators, seems to be mocking. What behaviour do sex educators encourage? Good and healthy due to the fact that they say so themselves? We should first examine why youths behave badly and what that means. Is what is incorrect at the same time immoral? Then possibly we should reconstruct moral order? Why don't these educators want to tell young people that they're expected to behave morally? It's due to the fact that they rejected morality, and their full concern is how to have sex, not to reproduce.

If people behave immorally, then the state should not adapt to this pathology, due to the fact that then it confirms it itself, and pathology becomes the norm. There has always been a tendency to break rules and scope for forbidden fruit, which usually has a negative effect on the people themselves who do so. But as long as there is simply a order of moral values and what is good, what is bad, people are limited, and even erstwhile they are above standards, they can always reconstruct order in their lives. But erstwhile there is no moral norm, only medical norm, then they will lose their orientation completely, and their life will be a streak of life failure.

Ad 5. It would be essential to hotel to 2 sources – hard facts and reason. What is the current behaviour of young people in countries where there is permissive sexual education, and what they looked like erstwhile there was no specified education. This, of course, is not the full picture; there are many factors that affect social processes, but let us not let ourselves go into the field. Considering the poisoned sources of sexual education, who would think that their effects would be better than good education based on moral and intellectual virtues?

The introduction of children into sexual education will alternatively consequence in the other effect. Contrary to what the sex maniacs of Kinsey's genus thought, children are not curious in sexual spheres before reaching sexual maturity, and even if so, not due to sexual needs, but out of curiosity. However, what turns adults so much is not attractive to children at all. specified curiosity emerges spontaneously, along with psychophysical improvement and sexual maturation. Many things change – body, voice, taste, interest. No more fairy tales or childish games. This is subject to the natural order of development. Sexual education disrupts this order, implicating the kid prematurely in the area of mandatory interests, and immediately in a distorted way. It is an component of Skinner's “conservation technology” – a method of social engineering, utilizing behavioral conditioning causative, or advanced training. Man controls himself there by managing his emotions and urges, and these are controlled by their artificial induction. Sexual education is not about wanting to aid young people in their lives, but about taking control of them.

Ad 6. The deficiency of knowing of its own states has 2 sources Firstly, the deficiency of own life experiences, which is natural and should not be artificially interfered with. Sexual and emotional experiences belong to this intimate sphere, which everyone must experience alone, and especially the state should not interfere with it. The second origin is the actual deficiency of cognitive, logical and linguistic tools. That's a lot better than sex education. Just take care of the Polish education – dissertations, essays, own statements, combined with cognition of classical literature, which adequately explains human motivations, feelings, emotions and besides indicates appropriate attitudes. This, however, has just been reduced by at least 20%, precisely to make area for sexual education. A akin issue concerns the subject of biology, which is said to be addressed by sex education. Thus, real tools for knowing and communication are taken from school to justify the introduction of others.

These intellectual problems surely have different sources than sex educators say. Here you can again correlate the existence of sexeducation in public space and the activities of sex educators with intellectual problems of youth. Of course, there are besides another causes, specified as divorceal breakdown of families, ubiquitous anticulture and circular lockdown. But sex education does not mention these causes, So he does not truly effort to aid young people in their intellectual crises, alternatively deeper. Then the educators will have even more students. As far as social responsibilities are concerned, society and power should defend children and young people from specified content alternatively than exposure it to it.

Ad 7. Masturbation alias autosexual behaviour there are treated as a medical standard. Sex educators pretend to be world-neutral, so they claim that what is simply a medical standard is besides beneficial. This should be seen as an incentive for masturbation. In general, normals manipulate freely. They themselves find what is the norm, erstwhile they talk about different models of the family, about sexual partners, about homosexual relationships, about transgenderity, and all of that they represent as average phenomena. For them, if there's something, that's normal, so you can usage it as much as anything else. So they treat marriage, partnership, and homosexual matrimony equally. Transgenderism is viewed as an expression of expression, as are also behaviors. At the same time, they express themselves with concern about matrimony and fertility, which is one more time a mockery, as people who treat a homosexual relation as equal to a married couple with children say.

If we let these people access to children on a nation-wide scale, we will give them the chance to disrupt the psyche of children and young people. This disorder will be peculiarly severe due to the fact that it concerns the sphere of the most intimate, crucial for the full later life of the child. It besides applies to the key age for its social development. Knowing the problems we have with demography, with the intellectual state of young people, with the household crisis, power allows ourselves to massively deform the lives of full generations. You can realize sexual maniacs pretending to be scientists, that they want to satisfy their perverted dreams, as Kinsey, Reich or Hirschfeld did. You can realize the degenerates, that they want to get into the sexual sphere of children, it turns them on. But how can it be explained that you let it? Only that it serves a abroad force, striving to take totalitarian power over Poland, its nation and resources.

To be continued, this is part of the larger publication “A Guide to a Conscious Nation”.

Bartosz Kopczyński

President of the Society for Social Knowledge

www.wtworzystwo.pl