The basic philosophy apparently is based on inconsistency of thought to get you where you feel comfortable. Have you ever heard a liberal argue against abstinence only sex education? They don't like the concept. (Actually I don't like it either. Information about all aspects of every topic has never failed me.) But, liberals demand that children be taught not only about abstinence, but also about fundamental human reproductive processes and even beyond that. They also encourage the instruction, even at very early grades, of alternative lifestyle practices. Their contention is that will encourage "understanding" and foster "diversity".
But consistency in rationale being the hobgoblin of small minds, we then find this:
Denial Ain't No River
It escapes me why Virginia would have to develop a program of their own rather than simply incorporate the NRA's Eddie Eagle materials, but that's not the issue. Here's the logic of a liberal on display:
"It's not the wisest thing because, for instance, [my daughter]. She doesn't know what a gun is. But, if she sees gun safety, then now she's curious about it," says Nery Washington, who lives in Harrisonburg.
What netherworld does this blivet exist in? His daughter "doesn't know what a gun is"? Has he no television? Is she exposed to no movies? Do her friends own any video games? Is he unaware of "Grand Theft Auto"? What would be so dangerous about a message of "Stop, don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult" when you encounter a gun?
Under Washington's logic, being taught about gun safety is going to be dangerous. Being ignorant about guns is safer!
So, how does he feel about abstinence education for his ignorant child?