Across the United States, parents are waking up to the unsettling realities of “Comprehensive Sex Education” (CSE). Often marketed as a modern, science-based curriculum aimed at promoting safety and inclusivity, CSE goes far beyond the traditional “birds and bees” talk. Under the surface, it is saturated with radical gender ideology, graphic content, and postmodern distortions of sexuality. As Christians and conservatives, it is our responsibility to examine this program carefully, understand its origins, critique its worldview, and offer a biblical response.
Definition: What Is Comprehensive Sex Education?
Comprehensive Sex Education is a teaching approach that claims to offer students medically accurate, age-appropriate, and inclusive education on a wide range of topics related to human sexuality. These include sexual development, reproductive health, consent, contraception, gender identity, and sexual orientation. CSE often positions itself in contrast to “abstinence-only” programs, seeking instead to normalize early sexual activity, explore diverse sexual behaviors, and introduce children and teens to ideas that were once reserved for mature audiences.
Key characteristics of CSE include:
- Promotion of “sexual rights” for children and teens
- Inclusion of LGBTQ+ ideologies and identities
- Emphasis on “consent” over abstinence
- Affirmation of transgender identities, including pronoun use and medical transition options
- Graphically detailed discussions of sexual acts, often including illustrations
Sources of Comprehensive Sex Education Materials
Most CSE curricula are created or promoted by progressive organizations that advocate for sexual liberation, abortion access, and LGBTQ+ normalization. Key sources include:
- Planned Parenthood – The nation’s largest abortion provider is also a prolific producer of CSE curricula. Their materials are explicitly ideological, sex-positive, and abortion-friendly.
- UNESCO and International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) – International organizations promoting CSE globally under the banner of “sexual rights.”
- SIECUS (Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States) – A leading proponent of “sexuality education as a right.”
- Advocates for Youth – A leftist NGO pushing “reproductive justice” and youth sexual autonomy.
- The Trevor Project and GLSEN – LGBTQ-focused groups that integrate their gender ideology into school curricula.
These organizations collaborate to push global standards through international treaties, federal lobbying, and direct partnerships with public school systems.
Where Are These Materials Used in the U.S.?
Comprehensive Sex Education is increasingly mandated in blue states and progressive school districts, particularly in:
- California – The California Healthy Youth Act mandates CSE from grades 7 through 12 and explicitly includes LGBTQ content.
- Oregon and Washington – Require “inclusive” and “affirming” sexual education for all grades.
- New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Colorado – Have adopted or are pushing mandates for statewide comprehensive sex ed.
- Local School Boards – Even in conservative states, progressive school boards often adopt CSE materials under the radar, especially in urban or college-town districts.
In many cases, parents are not informed about the details or are discouraged from opting out. Some districts use third-party vendors, shielding themselves from accountability for content.
Developers and Marketers of the Curriculum
Several prominent curricula dominate the market:
- “FLASH” (Family Life and Sexual Health) – Developed in Seattle, promoted nationally
- “Our Whole Lives” (OWL) – Created by the Unitarian Universalist Association in partnership with the United Church of Christ
- “Rights, Respect, Responsibility” – From Advocates for Youth, designed to shift cultural norms around sex
- Planned Parenthood’s Toolkit – A multi-tiered curriculum adapted by many schools and youth programs
These curricula are heavily promoted through teacher training programs, federal grants, and university partnerships. In many cases, they are bundled with materials that hide their most graphic content until implementation.
Curriculum Content: LGBT, Transgenderism, and Sexual Fetishes
Many CSE programs contain highly controversial content, including:
- LGBTQ+ Affirmation – Children are taught that gender is a spectrum, sexual orientation is fluid, and “coming out” is empowering. Heteronormativity is often portrayed as outdated or oppressive.
- Transgender Ideology – Lessons encourage children to question their gender, explore new identities, and sometimes consider puberty blockers or hormone therapy without parental involvement.
- Sexual Practices and Toys – Some curricula provide details on anal sex, oral sex, masturbation, use of sex toys, and even BDSM. Graphic diagrams and “how-to” guides are not uncommon.
- Pornography and Sexting – Rather than condemning these, some CSE programs aim to teach “safe” consumption and sharing practices.
- Consent Over Morality – CSE often frames consent as the only moral standard, eliminating the concept of sexual purity or self-restraint.
This is not hypothetical. Real-life materials handed out to students have included books like It’s Perfectly Normal and Gender Queer, which contain explicit illustrations of sex acts and gender transitions.
Examples That Alarmed Parents and Educators
Across the country, parents have documented shocking examples of CSE in action:
- Illinois (2023): A teacher showed 5th graders a cartoon video of a woman demonstrating masturbation with a toy, claiming it was “age-appropriate.”
- New Jersey (2022): Curriculum for 2nd grade included teaching that children can “have boy parts but feel like a girl.”
- Washington State: Middle school students received worksheets describing various sexual positions, rated on “pleasure” and “risk.”
- California: CSE courses included group activities where students role-played negotiating sex and “consent” in various scenarios, including same-sex relationships.
- Colorado: Parents discovered that their kids had been taught about “anal sex as safer than vaginal sex” without notification.
These examples are not isolated. They reflect the deeper agenda embedded in these programs—normalizing sexual experimentation and rejecting traditional moral boundaries.
Stated Goals of CSE Developers and Implementing Schools
According to their official documents, the goals of CSE are:
- Promote “sexual autonomy” and “youth sexual rights”
- Normalize LGBTQ+ lifestyles and identities from early childhood
- Reduce teen pregnancies and STDs through early education
- Teach “inclusive” language and challenge “binary thinking”
- Empower youth to become activists for “reproductive justice”
In reality, many of these goals mask ideological reprogramming:
- Redefining gender and the family
- Undermining parental authority
- Sexualizing children in the name of rights
- Advancing political goals tied to the broader progressive agenda
Christian Lens: What Should Disturb Believers?
From a biblical worldview, comprehensive sex education is deeply troubling. Christians grounded in Scripture find the following aspects intolerable:
- Denial of God’s Design for Gender – Genesis 1:27 teaches that male and female are created by God. CSE introduces gender fluidity, which denies this design.
- Promotion of Sexual Immorality – Ephesians 5:3 warns, “But sexual immorality and all impurity…must not even be named among you.” CSE promotes behaviors the Bible condemns.
- Assault on Parental Authority – Proverbs 22:6 charges parents with the duty to train children. CSE replaces parents with state-sponsored ideology.
- Indoctrination of Children in False Identities – Romans 1:24–27 describes the descent into dishonorable passions. CSE curricula essentially catechize children into rebellion.
- Normalization of Pornography and Fetishes – Philippians 4:8 tells us to focus on what is pure. CSE turns purity into a joke.
- Rejection of Abstinence and Purity – 1 Thessalonians 4:3–4 commands believers to abstain from sexual immorality. CSE ridicules abstinence as unrealistic.
In sum, CSE opposes God’s revealed will and trains children to live by the flesh rather than by the Spirit.
The Neo-Marxist Strategy and the “Long March Through the Institutions”
Comprehensive Sex Education is not merely misguided; it is a calculated tool in the Neo-Marxist playbook. Inspired by cultural Marxists like Antonio Gramsci and Herbert Marcuse, the strategy is simple:
- Undermine the Family – Redefine parental roles and sexual norms to break down traditional family structures.
- Capture the Schools – Turn education into indoctrination, targeting youth before they can critically resist.
- Promote Identity Politics – Encourage children to self-identify by race, gender, or sexuality, fragmenting shared identity as Americans or Christians.
- Redefine Morality – Replace objective morality with subjective “lived experience,” making sin into a right.
The goal is revolutionary: to displace Christianity, dismantle Western civilization, and build a new order. Sexual ideology is simply the soft-entry point—emotionally compelling, institutionally legitimized, and culturally enforced.
Conclusion: A Call to Awareness and Action
Comprehensive Sex Education is not just a curriculum—it’s a worldview war being waged against the hearts and minds of the next generation. Christians and conservatives must not be silent.
We must:
- Know the facts and expose the materials
- Engage our schools and school boards
- Support parental rights legislation
- Teach biblical sexuality at home and in the church
- Pray for revival and cultural reformation
The fight for our children’s hearts begins with truth. It’s time to stand, speak, and reclaim the moral foundation our culture once cherished.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
rob@basedchristianity.org
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain some opinions I don’t agree with.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots.
You can always send me an email at rob@basedchristianity.org if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
If you have evidence that I am wrong about a material statement of fact, provide the evidence and I will gladly review it and make revisions if merited.
Obviously, there are some assertions that are matters of opinion that I will not change, but I always strive to be truthful. We are all capable of mistakes and misunderstandings on occasion, though.
Regarding depictions of Jesus, images accompanying the article may contain depictions of Jesus. I realize that some fellow Christians, particularly some conservative Presbyterians, consider these images to be a form of idolatry. I do not agree with their opinion on this matter. These images are for illustrative purposes and do not represent a form of worship.
I recommend these Youtube channels for good content on Christian matters: Founders Ministries, Ligonier Ministries, Grace to You, G3 Ministries, and Truth for Life. RC Sproul, Voddie Baucham, Alistair Begg, Kevin DeYoung, Albert Mohler, Tom Ascol and John MacArthur are well-known, trustworthy pastors and teachers with content across multiple forums.
Francis Schaeffer, Tom Ascol, Allie Beth Stuckey and Nancy Pearcey have some valuable materials related to cultural matters, as well.