Love & Passion Quote by James Dobson

Dobson’s line isn’t really about condoms or diagrams; it’s about jurisdiction. By framing “explicit” information as something that can be taken away from kids “especially girls,” he recasts sex education as a kind of institutional trespass: the school system barging into a space that should remain private, gated, and morally supervised. The loaded verb “strips” does heavy work here, suggesting violation and loss, not learning. It turns pedagogy into predation.

The subtext leans on a familiar conservative bargain: innocence is less a developmental stage than a social asset, and “modesty” is the currency. Notice how modesty is treated as fragile and finite, as if knowledge itself corrodes virtue. That’s rhetorically useful because it avoids arguing against the empirical aim of sex education (reducing harm, preventing pregnancy, curbing STIs) and instead relocates the debate to cultural symbolism: what kind of girl are we producing?

“Especially girls” is the tell. Dobson’s concern isn’t evenly distributed across genders; it presumes female sexuality as something that must be protected from articulation, and male sexuality as something that just is. The implication is that a girl who can name her body and understand contraception has crossed a line from “modest” to “available,” a leap that confuses information with invitation.

Contextually, this tracks with late-20th-century evangelical activism that treated sex ed as a proxy battle over parental authority, feminism, and the loosening grip of traditional gender scripts. Underneath the polite worry is a harder claim: ignorance functions as a moral technology, and institutions shouldn’t disrupt it.