Why can't we teach both the 1776 and 1619 curriculum? Isn't it teachers jobs to teach non-biased education?

PFC (Join to see) I think the difference between creation theories and the xountry's history is just that. One is a theory and one is not. If we start saying that history is relative because everyone from that time period is dead, then we are hurting our children more than helping.

CPL (Join to see) You're right in a point. We are hurting our children but by not teaching the raw truth we are no better than our ancestors. I just believe we're at a tipping point now

PFC (Join to see) I agree that all history must be taught, both the good and the bad. But the 1619 project only teaches the evil of America. Its designed to make this country look like it has only done bad. If this country was never any good, why stand in the way of it being fundamentally changed?

CPL (Join to see) I believe both should be taught because you can't acknowledge only the good a country has done or the good times it only had. I walk the gray line on most things. We aren't a bad nation fundamentally but we have a bad past and we've done things we aren't proud of but we've always tried to right our wrongs and that's the point I want to ge across.

For someone that has a masters degree in "school law", what ever the hell that means, you do not know what a fallacy is. Appeal to authority. Listen to me, I know because someone told me I knew.

MSgt Jonathan Stump - F you and the high horse you road in on, I tried to have a debate with you but all you do with your little brain is attack and deflect which means you are too ignorant to have a debate or reasonable conversation, seems you bring nothing to the table but ignorance and stupidity.

More states reject funding for comprehensive sexuality education
August 18, 2016 — A growing number of states are opting against federal funding for evidence-based sexuality education while still accepting money for abstinence-only curricula, Governing reports.

Sexuality education funding

The Obama administration in 2010 began offering grants through the Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) to promote comprehensive sexuality education. PREP was designed as an alternative to Title V, which provides funding exclusively for abstinence-only instruction.

According to Governing, PREP has been found to reduce teenage pregnancy, increase contraceptive use and delay sexual activity. For example, Kansas' rate of teenage pregnancy declined by 9 percent in 2010, after the state accepted PREP funds and many schools moved away from abstinence-only education.

States that accept PREP money award it to local health departments and school districts.

States reject PREP grants

Seven states rejected PREP funding in 2016, up from five states in 2015, Governing reports. Florida, Indiana, North Dakota, Texas and Virginia opted against PREP dollars this year and last. In 2016, Kansas and South Dakota also opted to reject PREP funding. Moreover, all the states that have rejected PREP funding this year, aside from South Dakota, also opted to accept Title V dollars this year and last.

Overall, most states received funding from PREP and from Title V, Governing reports. Washington, D.C. and 44 states received PREP grants, while 35 received Title V funding.

Health officials concerned

Health officials have concerns about the implications of states' decisions to promote abstinence-only curricula without supporting comprehensive sexuality education, Governing reports. Fewer than half of U.S. high schools meet the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) standards for comprehensive sexuality education.

Chitra Panjabi, president of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, noted that when states opt against PREP funding, private organizations frequently implement politically motivated sexuality education curricula. For example, she noted that an antiabortion-rights group in Teton County, Wyoming, hired an abstinence-only speaker who was later removed from the curriculum. According to Panjabi, if Wyoming had been using PREP funds, the speaker would never have been hired.

In Kansas, Cassie Sparks, public information officer at the state Department of Health and Environment, said state officials opted against PREP funds this year to allow state localities to individually apply for the federal money.

However, Greg Stephenson, personal health services manager at the Wyandotte County Public Health Department in Kansas, expressed surprise that state officials opted against PREP funding, noting that the funding seemed to be universally appreciated by stakeholders. "The local government was pushing it, the school board wanted it, parents liked it, [and]we got a green light from everyone," he said. Moreover, he said he was unsure whether districts and local entities are permitted to apply individually for funding.

Stephenson also voiced concern about his state's decision to opt against funding, noting that few teachers seem likely to provide comprehensive sexuality education on their own. "If a 16-year-old gets pregnant, she is more likely to not finish school, and that sets off a bad domino effect for the rest of her life," Stephenson said, adding, "The impact of these programs goes way beyond sexual health" (Quinn, Governing, 8/16)

The 7-3 vote was along party lines, with Democrats in the majority. Some Fiscal Committee members questioned why they were hearing the request again after it was soundly defeated in December.

The $10 million would have been the first of five installments under the federal grant. The committee's vote was the same as it was when it was first introduced in December.

"I'm disappointed," said Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut. "I know that all of the legislators want to do what's right. They want to lean in and help at-risk kids, and that was an opportunity for that to happen. I think it's still stuck in the legislative process, and I hope we can move this forward."

The charter school system has been a touchstone of political debate for years. New Hampshire has 27 charter schools, and some committee members who rejected the grant money said that for now, that's enough.

"This proposal calls for the addition of 20 new charter schools," said state Sen. Lou D'Allesandro, D-District 20. "Let's get the charter schools that we have in place right now taken care of, make sure they're doing their job, that they are financially able to survive."

The total grant was for $46 million spread over five years. Supporters of charter schools said they ultimately cost less than public schools, but opponents said that after the grant money runs out, taxpayers would have to foot the bill.

Edelblut said the proposal is not dead, and he will continue to fight to expand the charter school system in New Hampshire.