What a doozy of a headline:

Sex Ed for Kindergarteners ‘Right Thing to Do,’ Says Obama

As it turns out — and of course this never, ever happens in the MSM — the headline is a gross misrepresentation both of the article below it and of Obama’s views. Well done, ABC.

Right-wing nutjob Alan Keyes smeared Obama over this issue during their Senate race in Illinois in ‘04. At least in its headline, ABC has resurrected that smear. The impression one gets is that Obama wants innocent, wide-eyed kindergartners to be taught the finer points of anal sex technique.

But — no. What Obama actually supports is “age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools,” which is a great idea, one very much at odds with the anti-sex, anti-science bias of the right. Given that our children are being inundated with sexual images, that they are learning about sex, and not always good things about sex, at ever younger ages, that they are having sex at ever younger ages, or at least having irresponsible sex at disturbingly young ages, that HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy remain serious problems, that, in generally, our children are being sexualized at early ages, there very much needs to be such sex education in the schools — and this goes for Canada as well as for the U.S., I might add (Europe tends to be more progressive, in a good way).

Does this mean starting early — like, in kindergarten? Yes, absolutely. Should children not be told the truth about where babies come from? Some details could be avoided, of course, but what is the point of lying to them or otherwise denying their budding sexuality and interest in sexuality?

Now, we get this in the ABC piece, but well below the headline:

“Keep in mind: I honor and respect young people who choose to delay sexual activity,” Obama continued. “I’ve got two daughters, and I want them to understand that sex is not something casual. That’s something that we definitely want to communicate and should be part of any curriculum. But we also know that when the statistics tell us that nearly half of 15 to 19 year olds are engaging in sexual activity, that for us to leave them in ignorance is potentially consigning them to illness, pregnancy, poverty, and in some cases, death.”

When Obama’s campaign was asked by ABC News to explain what kind of sex education Obama considers “age appropriate” for kindergarteners, the Obama campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story from the Daily Herald in which Obama had “moved to clarify” in his Senate campaign that he “does not support teaching explicit sex education to children in kindergarten. . . The legislation in question was a state Senate measure last year that aimed to update Illinois’ sex education standards with ‘medically accurate’ information . . . ‘Nobody’s suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,’ Obama said. ‘If they ask a teacher ‘where do babies come from,’ that providing information that the fact is that it’s not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing. Although again, that’s going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards.’”

In addition to local schools informing kindergarteners that babies do not come from the stork, the state legislation Obama supported in Illinois, which contained an “opt out” provision for parents, also envisioned teaching kindergarteners about “inappropriate touching,” according to Obama’s presidential campaign. Despite Obama’s support, the legislation was not enacted.

So: Obama does not support teaching “sex ed.,” broadly understood as what might be taught to teenagers, to kindergartners. Rather, he supports sexual responsibility, including birth control, and respects abstinence. In other words, he takes sex and sexuality seriously. Rather than seeking to suppress it, or to encourage young people to repress it, which is how many on the right treat it, he wishes to empower young people to make responsible decisions. And this starts with ensuring that they know the truth — for what is a responsible decision if not an informed decision? So he supports the teaching of “‘medically accurate’ information” — again, in an “age-appropriate” way. What should be taught to a 16-year old is obviously different than what should be taught to a 5-year old. In addition, he wishes to empower parents to make decisions regarding their children’s sex education, too. And is it not a good idea, too, to teach children — and this is where getting to them at a young age is crucial — about “inappropriate touching,” that is, about sexual abuse? Why pretend it doesn’t exist? It does, and it happens a lot, more often than parents know, or want to know. Shouldn’t our children know what it is and what to do about it?

Kudos to Obama for taking this stand on sex education. Given how both his opponents on the right and the media that cover him misrepresent his views, making him out to be some sort of pervert, it is truly a courageous stand.