All right; I reclaim my time because I think my colleagues see the problem. No matter how good the intentions might be verbally, the problem is, if we adopt the Hancock amendment by itself, it has the effect of prohibiting school counseling and guidance, it has the effect of prohibiting AIDS education. Now I put myself second to none in, quote unquote, advocating Christian values around here, and I am aware of the flyer that is here. But I am going to plead with all my colleagues on this amendment to have the courage of their convictions and to recognize that as of January of this year 63,000 young people between the ages of 20 to 29, and most medical people say that means every one of those 63,000 was infected with AIDS while they were teenagers, and I ask my colleagues simply: How many kids do we have to kill before we have the courage to stand up and say it's time to educate them and to do what is right, not what is politically popular at that moment?
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the impact of the Hancock amendment on AIDS education and school counseling.
Share
More from Steven Gunderson
I am not opposing the Armey amendment. I guess my advice is, to people, to simply understand the Ford amendment solves the home schools issue on teacher certification. What Mr. Armey intended to do was to clear up any potential problems in…
Do they have to sign a report ahead of time proving they are not doing a thing of this sort?
Would the gentleman say under his amendment no school guidance counselor in America would be able to counsel a student, boy or girl, who came to them and said, ``I am really struggling with who I am''?
But think about it, if that satisfied this requirement, have we not reached the level of absurdity when we require that schools have to point out that they spent 1 percent of their money of $360 on stamps and report that to the Federal…





