Thank you, Toronto Star, for ignoring my work.

A few weeks ago, at the invitation of several parent organizations, I traveled from New York to Toronto and addressed a crowd of almost one thousand people. It was dinner time and mid-week, but we ran out of chairs. When the topic is graphic sex education for children, people show up.

The sex ed portion of the curriculum imposed by liberal premier Kathleen Wynne, I explained, is not about health, but about molding the attitudes of children. The goal is to produce students who respect and affirm nearly any type of sexual lifestyle. Teachers will promote an ideology which has nothing to do with disease prevention and everything to do with sexual license.

My talk (watch it here) and accompanying PowerPoint included lots of hard science: the immature cervix, the physiology of the vagina and rectum, the differentiation of the embryonic brain, and the prefrontal cortex of the adolescent.

You see, Premier Wynne’s curriculum omits all that. It fails to provide students with the science they must know, especially the biology that explains the dangers of sexual activity in adolescence.

Instead, it instructs students: there are three types of intercourse. Wait until you’re older, and always use a condom.

There are lots of problems with that, but I focused on the “wait til you’re older” portion.

For a seventh grader, “older” can mean eighth grade. In seventh grade he didn’t have sex. In eighth grade he did. He waited til he was older, right? Just like his teacher said.

We can’t just tell kids “wait til you’re older”, I explained. We must say “the urge is healthy and wonderful, but sex is a very serious matter and even with protection, carries high risks for a teenager. One encounter can change your life forever. Sex is for adults.”

I stated that the curriculum first and foremost fails to protect boys who are attracted to other boys. Because of the high risk of transmitting HIV through anal intercourse (even with a condom) and because gay males on average have a higher number of partners and therefore more exposure to infected individuals, boys must be warned.

It was clear to the audience: these are facts that cannot be denied. This is science that students must know. It could save their lives.
Why, then, is it missing from the curriculum? Because, I explained, they undermine the notion of sexual freedom upon which it is based. When science contradicts the dreams of social activists, they’re ignored. They don’t exist.

The audience, the most diverse I have ever addressed, appreciated my words. They gave me a standing ovation.

While the event was certainly newsworthy, it was covered only by conservative media. So I was surprised when I got this email:

I am a reporter with the Toronto Star, Canada’s largest circulation daily paper. Working on a story about sex-ed protests here in Ontario over the new curriculum, and I understand you have been speaking to groups here about your concerns about it. I will need to speak with you today 416 xxx xxxx. Many thanks KR

A journalist from Canada’s equivalent of The New York Times! Could some balanced reporting come from her? I doubted it. If she acknowledged my biology-based arguments, it would be a first.

I called KR and gave her an abridged version of my lecture, including a good amount of hard science. She asked, “Are you anti-gay?” I said, “To the contrary – I’m trying to save their lives. The curriculum fails to warn them of risks, that’s one reason I oppose it.”

She thanked me and agreed to send a link to her article in the morning, but there was no email the following day, so I went to the Toronto Star website. Maybe it didn’t run yet? I wrote KR and got this:

It ran today — the quotes from you were trimmed because of space — but thank you so much, I will keep them on file for future stories. I really appreciate you taking the time to speak with me.

Here is her article. As expected, not a word about the inaccuracies of the curriculum, or the omissions that place young lives at risk. No mention of my lecture, my professional credentials, the huge audience. Poof! None of it happened.

“The quotes from you were trimmed because of space”? I think not.

First of all, “trimmed’ is the wrong word. KR, you are a journalist and should know about words. “Trimmed” means pared or edited. What I said was ignored.

Why? Because I exposed the curriculum as an ideologically-driven house of cards. Sadly, the Toronto Star is a mouthpiece for activists who sacrifice children on the altar of social agendas. Just like I stated at the event: if what’s seen under the microscope undermines their beliefs, it doesn’t exist.

KR, you had a chance to act with integrity and provide your audience with life-saving information. The readers of the Toronto Star may support the premier, but herpes, chlamydia and HIV infect their children too. These horrific bugs do not discriminate between conservative and liberal — you can trust me on that one.

Toronto Star, I wish your journalist had the courage to report the inconvenient truths I described. But in her failure to do so, I am validated. And for that, I thank you.


  1. Bev Honsberger - reply

    This is not unlike the Star a noted liberal rag and for this reason and many others I would not ever subscribe to this paper.
    I would however like to read what the left out portions are so I can see just what treachery the Star is up to now.

  2. Kathy Helmer - reply

    Don’t feel bad. I Just posted this on Wynne’s wall: For one thing, all polls show that between 78% and 85% of parents are against this.To top that off, Wynne says she consulted with 4000 parents on this-one from each school. Only 1638 parents responded and NONE of the questions was anything to do with sex ed. For another, it is not just the sex ed-it is the sexual indoctrination of our children throughout every subject in school. There is scientific proof that there are 2 genders. there is no proof that there are 8 or 10 or 50. The Canadian Charter of Rights states parents have the initial and final say over their children’s education. So does the UN Charter and the new resolution that was just passed. Pushing this on people is against our parental rights and is something that happened in Nazi Germany. To top it off, it is all based on lies. Oh, and if any of you pro sexualization people haven’t noticed, there is only ONE comment from a dissenter because after you express your disatisfaction, Wynne has you blocked. You call that a democracy? PS:post was removed within 5 min.

  3. Paul - reply

    Your info was trimmed because you spout lies.

    You will never be validated.

    • MiriamGrossman - reply

      Could you please provide examples of the lies to which you refer?

  4. saima - reply

    yr article is very informative and giving the bitter truth behind this new sex education, which will be harmful not useful. People of Canada hv to decide, what type of future generations they r looking for Canada. A healthy, well educated or like what Wynne wants.

  5. Susan - reply

    Thank you for using science as a defense for parents against this hidden agenda of Premier Wynn. We need more media blitz and news coverage to bring awareness to parents and teachers who are parents.

  6. Paul - reply

    Until you’ve read the entire ON curric, you can not comment on it.

    No where does it simply state to “wait until you’re older”.

  7. nancy - reply

    @paul page 198 c1.3

  8. Lyubov - reply

    The very title of the article in the Star “Schools get creative to deal with a wave of sex-ed opt-outs” leaves me feeling that I, as a parent, am being tricked by schools. I didn’t even want to read the body of the article, already anticipate some jerking around, but never saying what really matters. Thank you for the firm stand on facts and science, I really appreciate the unveiling of the ugly face of the sex ed curriculum.

  9. A las Barricadas - reply

    Gay people don’t realize that the game that they are playing will blow up in their own face. I used to be compassionate and understanding person but now that they are going after my 7 year old I am ready to pick a torch and rocks and fight for my rights and for my family.

    They day will come when this will swing in the opposite direction and given that straight people vastly outnumber katherine wynns don’t be surprised to see how “barbarians” will burn down Rome yet again.

    You started it, so you better be prepared for what is coming your way.

    A las Barricadas!

  10. Meya - reply

    Many of my friends expressed the same feeling! Unfortuantely, I believe the gay group is also beig utilized as a tool by some interest groups and industries. Some of my gay friends also said the sex-ed is too early too soon for the kids. I admired them for their honesty and bravery.

  11. Michelle - reply

    I will be sharing your video with others because this needs to be heard.
    Thank you for these discussion points and for teaching me how to educate my children and other parents better.

  12. William - reply

    Thank you for advancing sensible science based debate and analysis. Most refreshing!

  13. Thumbnail - reply

    I never had children and was complete ignorant about what kids were being taught. I am now in my fifties and learned a few things I did not know.

  14. Pingback: 兒少性事極危險 美加家長反兒少性教課綱 | 台灣守護家庭

  15. Pingback: 別人家的孩子死不完? 青春不設限 兒少將陷入高風險的危害中 | 台灣守護家庭

  16. Pingback: 別人家的孩子死不完? 只推廣保險套性愛 使青少年陷入高風險的危害中(內含兒少不宜圖文) | 台灣守護家庭

  17. Pingback: 別人家的孩子死不完? 只推廣保險套性愛 使青少年陷入高風險的危害中(內含兒少不宜圖文)

Leave a Reply