Fred Lucas writes in a July 23 CNSNews.com article:
The Senate will consider the nomination of Cornelia Pillard, a vocal abortion advocate who said abstinence education was unconstitutional for violating “reproductive justice,” to serve as a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a hearing Wednesday.
But in the very next paragraph, Lucas quotes Pillard — and it’s clear she is referring to abstinence-only sex education, not “abstinence education” (emphasis added):
“The equal protection critique of abstinence-only curricula is strengthened and rendered more amenable to judicial resolution by the fact that sex education classes are designed not only to expose students to ideas, but also to shape student behavior,” Pillard, a Georgetown University Law professor, wrote in a 2007 article titled “Our Other Reproductive Choices: Equality in Sex Education, Contraceptive Access and Work Family Policy” in a faculty publication.
Lucas waits until the 13th paragraph of his article to explain what exactly Pillard says is “unconstitutional” about abstinence-only education — that it is discriminatory because it “prescrib[es] chastity and maternity for women while assuming lustfulness and autonomy for men.”
Lucas then quotes Valerie Huber, president of the National Abstinence Education Association, attacking Pillard and defending abstinence-only education, but neither Lucas nor Huber mention the fact that abstinence-only education has been repeatedly criticized for promulgating inaccurate and biased information.