Select Page

Dr. Judith Reisman’s discovery of Kinsey’s fraudulent data and criminally derived experiments on children contained in Indiana University’s Kinsey Reports, is the basis of research done by Colonel Ron Ray, Eunice Ray and Dr. Linda Jeffrey of RSVPAmerica. 

Kinsey’s fraudulent data formed the basis for the Kinseyan sex education programs which began to enter schools in the mid 1960s, as well as for law changes redefining rape, sodomy and child molestation laws from state to state. 

The changes to legal prohibitions paved the way for the explicit promotion of Kinsey’s various “sexualities.” 

A new report [see below] fully brings to light the history of the legal changes and the ramifications on society.

POSTED: JUL 07, 2004
Colonel Ron Ray and his wife Eunice Ray, founder of the RSVPAmerica Campaign, gave a historic summary of how America’s foundational laws protecting women and children based on the principles of the Old and New Testaments were abolished using fraudulent science and how those foundational protections for women and children were undermined by the “Kinsey Reports.” The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) published the Kinsey Report’s impact on Education and Law in its “State Factor” of April 2004.

Citing supreme Court decisions from the 19th and 20th centuries, Colonel Ray identified the “fixed” American laws that provided safety and security for the nation. Eunice Ray then summarized the research carried out during the RSVPAmerica Campaign (Restoring Social Virtue and Purity to America, 1998-2003) which built on Dr. Judith Reisman’s discovery of Kinsey’s fraudulent data and criminally derived experiments on children contained in Indiana University’s Kinsey Reports.

These fraudulent data formed the basis for the Kinseyan sex education programs which began to enter schools in the mid 1960s, as well as for law changes redefining rape, sodomy and child molestation laws from state to state. The changes to legal prohibitions paved the way for the explicit promotion of Kinsey’s various “sexualities.”

Sex education was first introduced into states as a “crime prevention” strategy by state law revision commissions who relied on Kinsey’s personal, “frequent and extended consultation” for their recommendations to legislators and other public officials. Specifically the Illinois Commission in 1953 declared that Kinsey’s “data permeated all present thinking on the subject” of sex offense law.

Dr. Linda Jeffrey, Director of Research for the RSVPAmerican Campaign, led the data collection effort which has produced a Monograph in support of the 16-page ALEC briefing paper in which Dr. Jeffrey documents how state criminal code revisionists from 1955-1980 have used Kinsey’s junk science foundation in state sex education programs and state law revisions based on the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code, a project which relies upon zoologist “Dr. Kinsey’s knowledge of what is criminal.”

The Campaign has documented State Law Revisions in 30 states, occurring from 1950-1980, generally for the first time in a state’s history. Dr. Jeffrey connected her findings regarding the ALI’s impact on Criminal Law to the ALI-2001 Model Code in Family Law, and warned conference participants that the ALI’s recently published family law model is being used in courts and law schools to dissolve American family values, following the destructive pattern used to deconstruct fixed Common Law principles which protected the social institution of marriage resulting in national stability.

The briefing paper, “Restoring Legal Protections for Women and children: A Historical Analysis of the States Criminal Codes” may be ordered from the American Legislative Exchange Council. The full 192 page monograph may be ordered at


An Excerpt from the ALEC State Factor:


Few people realize that the great library collection of…the Kinsey Institute…was formed very specifically with one major field omitted: sex education. “[I]t seemed appropriate, not only to the Institute but to its major funding source, the National Institute of Mental Health, to leave this area for SIECUS to fill. Thus we applied and were approved for a highly important grant from the National Institute for Mental Health that was designed to implement a planned role for SIECUS to become the primary data base for the area of education for sexuality.
– SIECUS Report, May-July 1982, p. 6.

The ALEC Education Task Force passed a unanimous resolution declaring what has been ALEC’s policy for years; that all teaching must honestly promote accuracy of information including verifiable scientific findings. Washington, Arizona and New Jersey were among the states introducing legislation in 2001 demanding medically accurate information in sex education. The new K-12 sex education is grounded in the fraudulent scientific foundation of the Kinsey Reports.

Since 1964, the Sex Education and Information Council of the United States (SIECUS) has provided sex education materials to public schools. SIECUS, a private entity, received initial seed money from the Playboy Foundation.(1) It was founded via the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University as its outreach. SIECUS is dependent upon Indiana University’s Kinsey Reports, including the “scientific” tables documenting the Kinsey protocol of ongoing molestation of infants and children by pedophiles, including at least one former Gestapo officer.(2) These criminal acts provided the “proof,” Kinsey said, of sexual desire and erotic capacity in infants and children. Therefore, according to Kinsey, “science” requires teaching kindergarten children about their sexuality. In the April 14, 1980 issue of Time Magazine, SIECUS was described as part of the “pro-incest lobby,” and in 1996, SIECUS issued a position statement advocating the use of “sexually explicit materials” to teach school children:

When sensitively used in a manner appropriate to the viewer’s age and developmental level, sexually explicit visual, printed, or on-line materials can be valuable educational personal aids helping to reduce ignorance and confusion and contributing to a wholesome concept of sexuality.(3)

Just as SIECUS was founded to promote Kinseyan sex education to school children in 1964, the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists (AASECT) was created in 1967 to train and accredit educators, health personnel and other “helping” professionals in the area of human sexuality based on the Kinsey “findings.” Patricia Schiller was AASECT’s first executive director. Mrs. Schiller writes,

AASECT at its national and regional sex workshops and institutes, includes sensitivity sessions….Attitudes toward nudity, adolescent pregnancy, masturbation, abortion, homosexuality, contraception, divorce, group sex and extramarital sex relations are of major significance in the effectiveness of the sex education and counseling process. These are the realities of human sexuality.(4)

A new study refuting the claims of the Kaiser Family Foundation and SIECUS reports that when parents are presented with the actual statements of comprehensive sex education curriculum, 61% are opposed to having their children exposed to such information. The curricula promoted by the Centers for Disease Control tallied a whopping 75.3% opposition from parents.

The study was conducted by Zogby International on a random sample of 1,245 adult parents of children aged 5 to 18. The Zogby poll reports that former surveys by Alan Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS and Advocates for Youth have been seriously flawed by vague, d
and leading questions, with a clearly biased agenda to convince parents that such “expert” sex education is needed for their children’s health and well being. Examples of outrageously biased questioning by SIECUS and Planned Parenthood are given in the February 13, 2003 Zogby Study analysis entitled, “Deception Uncovered.”(5)

Since Kinseyan findings within sex education materials entered schools, rates of sexual disease and dysfunction have increased. Condoms are now ubiquitous and are widely promoted in schools by public school and health authorities to prevent pregnancy and sexual disease. Yet, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) study on condom effectiveness (June 2000), condoms do not prevent a stunning 98% of STD transmissions.(6)

Condoms never protect against Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) that is spread by skin contact, not by fluids(7) and is the cause of cervical cancer, which kills 5,000 women per year in the United States. The prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, suggests that “increased condom use will increase the number of AIDS transmissions that result from condom failures.(8)

There is a 24% pregnancy rate for teens who use condoms.

As for condoms and AIDS, according to the December 1999 Center for Disease Control reports, heterosexual contact has accounted for a miniscule 4% of AIDS in males, and a total of 10% of all AIDS cases in men, since reporting began in 1981. AIDS in the U.S. remains overwhelmingly a homosexual sodomy/drug user disease.(9)

Dr. Meg Meeker(10) in her 2002 book, Epidemic: How Teen Sex Is Killing Our Kids has estimated the sexual revolution harvest:

• Nearly 1 in 5 adolescents is living with an STD, p. 13.
• In the 1960s a shot of penicillin could cure the two known STDs, syphilis and gonorrhea. Today there are no simple cures and, in most cases, no cures at all, p. 15, 31.
• The CDC considers the STD epidemic a “multiple” epidemic of at least 25 separate diseases (nearly 50 if you count the various strains of virus groups.), p. 14.
• Over 80% of STD-infected teens are unaware they have a STD; therefore they don’t get medical attention and may continue to infect others. p. 35.
• False claims are asserted by sex educators who under inform or mislead kids about STDs and condoms that offer little or no protection from disease. pp. 104-5.
• Pharmaceutical companies promote drugs that control STD symptoms, encouraging children in the delusion they can be promiscuous without any of the associated problems.
• Anatomic and immunological differences make the adolescent body – particularly the female’s – more susceptible to STDs than the adult body. pp. 175-6.
• The idea of maintaining sexual freedom rather than preventing disease remains the driving force and primary focus of national sex education and the STD epidemic continues to worsen as long as it does. pp. 26-29

Sex education in public education was promoted to teachers and parents in the early 1950’s as a sex crime “prevention program.” Guided directly by Kinsey, who served on the Illinois commission’s workgroup to devise the “Framework for Sex Offender Laws,” Illinois blamed poor parenting and lack of education for high levels of sex crimes in the early 1950s. These rates seem miniscule in comparison with those today.

The Report of the Illinois Commission on Sex Offenders stated:

Children oftimes are inadequately trained to live in a free society. The inability of some parents to rear children in a democratic atmosphere and, at the same time, to observe the conventions of society is a fact that needs consideration. Too often indulgence on the one hand or oppression on the other result in emotional maladjustment that may lead to sexual offense. Methods of educating adults, who deal with children must be considered also. Prevention through mental hygiene and sex education for both adults and children may prove to be effective.(11)

Kinseyan legal reformers testified before legislatures and in professional literature that sex education would reduce violent sex crimes and high rates of sex offender (rapists and child molesters) recidivism.(12)

And AASECT [American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists] worked at “educating adults, who deal with children.”

Carol Cassell (currently the director of the Center for Disease Control’s Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program) describes ASSECT’s use of the Kinsey Reports as the root of their professional authority:

Look how we’ve used the Kinsey data. We’ve used it for everything from assessing the stability of marriage to raising children to trying to understand human growth and development — not just sexual but also psychological growth and changes over time.(13)

Taught by AASECT trained teachers, the SIECUS sex education programs were guided by The Kinsey Report’s assertion that human beings are sexual actors from birth.(14) At law, this meant that four or five year old children could be considered “provocateurs.”(15)

Redefining children as sexual beings resulted in lowered penalties for rape and child molestation reflecting the new science’s claim that there is no harm unless “serious force is used.”

In public education, after state laws were changed, SIECUS expanded “the talk” about sexuality from a total of thirteen minutes to sex education covering thirteen school years with the theme that any and all imaginable sexual behaviors, at any age, are simply “responding to a wide human need.”(16)

Between 1994 and 2000, SIECUS received over one million tax dollars from the publicly funded Center for Disease Control. The CDC materials promote sodomy as “normal” and as equally fulfilling and desirable as marital coitus.

In the SIECUS 1991 Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Kindergarten-12th Grade, a family is redefined as any grouping of people who care for each other (Key Concept 2). Kindergarten children are told that marriage is a mere option some people choose (“Some couples who love each other live together in the same home without getting married” Topic 5, level 1).

The sex “experts” and the Kinseyan sex education monopoly are well entrenched in higher education. For example, Tennessee legislators passed Abstinence legislation to promote “Marriage.” However, the Lifetime Wellness Curriculum Framework produced by the Tennessee Department of Education treats Marriage as merely a parenting and economic option chosen by some.

School children are guided in graphic games about oral and anal sodomy and about death.

Tax supported teaching programs are required to be accurate in order to be funded.

There is no doubt, after reviewing pre-Kinsey levels of sexual disease and dysfunction, the SIECUS sex education programs post 1964 have seen STD rates skyrocket.

Abstinence programs calling for modesty and saving sex until marriage guarantee taxpayers a major reduction in costly post-Kinsey disease and dysfunction.

1 Reisman, J. A. Supra. note 5, at 177.

2 Kinsey, Pomeroy and Martin, SEXUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE HUMAN MALE, page 180, Table 34.

3 SIECUS Report, February/March 1996, “Position Statement” on “Sexually Explicit Materials.”

4 Herbert Otto, (Ed.), THE NEW SEX EDUCATION, at 171. (Chicago: Association press/Follett Publishers, 1978).

5 Survey results and analysis are available at

6 The panel of researchers found effectiveness in the heterosexual transmission of HIV and the female to male transmission of gonorrhea. These two areas represent 2% of all STDs occurring annually in the U.S. See the Response of the National Abstinence Clearinghouse to
the NIH Condom R
eport; American Social Health Association, Sexually Transmitted Diseases in America: How Many Cases and at What Cost? Kaiser Family Foundation, December 1998; and CDC HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 1999.

7 Dr. John Diggs, WebMD,

8 Justin Torres, “Condom crazy: The UN Pushes Contraception to fight AIDS.” WORLD MAGAZINE, VOL. 15, September 9, 2000

9 Center for Disease Control, HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. Dec. 1999. Vol. 11, No. 2, Table 5.

10 Meg Meeker, EPIDEMIC: HOW TEEN SEX IS KILLING OUR KIDS, (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2002).

11 Illinois Commission on Sex Offenders, March 15, 1953, p. 36.

12 Herbert Wechsler, Challenge of a Model Penal Code. 65 HARVARD LAW REVIEW at 1103 (1952).

13 Carol Cassell, Contemporary Sexuality, The American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists (AASECT), (October, 1991).

14 The Illinois Commission cites this as a “scientific finding” on p. 9. See also, Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C.E. SEXUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE HUMAN MALE. at 181 (W. B. Saunders, 1948).

15 A term used by Psychiatrist and Law Professor Ralph Slovenko to describe a four or five year old girl. See R. Slovenko & C. Phillips, Psychosexuality and the Criminal Law. 15 VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW, at 809 (1962). “The sometimes extreme seductiveness of a young female is a factor which has no place in the law, but it certainly affects motivation. Even at the age of four or five, this seductiveness may be so powerful as to overwhelm the adult into committing the offense. The affair is therefore not always the result of the adult’s aggression; often the young female is the initiator and seducer.” (Emphasis added).
16 Albert Deutsch (Ed.), SEX HABITS OF AMERICAN MEN, A SYMPOSIUM ON THE KINSEY REPORTS at 126-128, (New York: Prentice)

[“New Legal Research Exposes Scientific Fraud Still Affecting Sex Education and Sex Crimes in the United States”, RSVPAmerica, 7/7/04]