What will kids be forced to learn under the revised Minnesota Health Standards?
Please read this time sensitive article.
January 20, 2026
This post will be longer than normal, but it’s a critical and time sensitive post for our Minnesota readers. The Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) is taking public comments on the MN Health Standards through February 9, 2026. After you read this substack, please take the time to request a hearing and register your comments at this link. The link will be provided again at the end of this article.
If at least 25 people include in their comments a request for a hearing of the proposed rules, the administrative law judge overseeing the rulemaking process will schedule a virtual hearing in March. Otherwise, the Minnesota health standards and its existing benchmarks will be adopted without a public hearing.
The Health Standards that have been opened for comment, inexplicably, do not include the benchmarks (the specific content areas) that received overwhelming objections last year. In Draft 2, beginning in kindergarten students were required to affirm the left’s unscientific gender ideology dogma. After receiving 8000 comments, they revised that draft by removing much of the offensive language. As Catrin Wigfall of the Center of the American Experiment stated, “In fact, there are no references to “gender” at all throughout the document.” But it’s a ruse. They have not actually abandoned gender ideology; they just removed obvious references to it and the public’s ability to comment on them. Gender ideology is still fully embedded in all the national sex ed and health content standards which Minnesota’s proposed Health standards must align with as stated in the SONAR (Statement of Need and Reasonableness).
This time, MDE has opened public comments ONLY for the general and vague Standards they revised and that the Education Commissioner approved, which include none of the unacceptable benchmarks. In other words, MDE appears to be “listening” to the public, but they are not. They heard the public opposition to gender ideology benchmarks loud and clear, and they do not want to hear us again.
Let us explain.
Child Protection League has written extensively about Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE). Perhaps no other issue has consumed more of our time – or the public’s – than the fight against state-level CSE mandates, as the left remains relentless in its obsession to hyper-sexualize our children to drive “social change.” Over the years, the Marxists who infiltrated our educational institutions understood that the real center of any cultural revolution is NOT economics, but culture. And the most effective way to “transform” the culture is to transform a child’s understanding of family structure, their bodies, healthy sexuality and the intrinsic value of human life. CSE has been the primary weapon they have unleashed against our children to achieve this end. It seeks to strip children of normal societal and sexual boundaries essential for healthy relationships, stable families, and strong, functional societies.
The MDE’s required Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) states that the “rules align” with and “reflect” SHAPE (Society of Health and Physical Educators) and the National Sex Education Standards(NSES).
From the Minnesota SONAR introduction:
SHAPE and NSES frameworks are developed in collaboration with the most radical Comprehensive Sex Ed promoters, SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change and the Future of Sex Education (FOSE). (FoSE is directly referenced in Appendix C of the Commissioners Report.) These standards provide detailed teaching on K–12 sex education content. In other words, Minnesota standards and benchmarks must “align” with the core “content” and “skills” these organizations require.
Let’s take a quick look at them, shall we?
First, let’s understand who SHAPE, NSES and NHES all turn to for guidance: SIECUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. SIECUS is regarded by the educational cartel as the reigning “authority” on sex ed standards. They write the majority of curriculum worldwide. Establishing CSE mandates in every state in the US is their long-term goal. Their stated mission:
SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change has served as a leading national voice for sex education since 1964, asserting that sexuality is a fundamental part of being human, one worthy of dignity and respect. Through advocacy, policy and coalition building, SIECUS advances sex education as a vehicle for social change—where all people receive sex education, are affirmed in their identities, and have power to make decisions about their own health, pleasure, and wholeness. [Emphasis added.]
It is also embedded in their logo:
They keep track of state progress. Since MN has not adopted a CSE mandate, SIECUS gives MN a “C-” overall and a “D-” on required content.
That’s a badge of honor. Here’s why. According to the SIECUS evaluation, Minnesota received a “C-” because:
They don’t like what we do require: parental review and opt-out options, abstinence instruction and no required instruction for radical gender ideology and consent.
Next, let’s look at one of the stated goals of NSES:
Under their “Guiding Principles and Values” NSES makes many revealing statements. Among them:
- Parental values and wishes are ignored. “Only the “district, school, administrator, and educator knows best the context in which they are teaching and are in the best position to best identify the needs of their students and the strategies, materials, time and resources needed to support students in achieving the NSES.”
- Every student is regarded as some kind of victim. “The standards have been written through a ‘trauma-informed lens.’”
- Heterosexual norms are considered “harmful” and to be avoided. “Sex education should avoid cis-normative, heteronormative approaches, aim to strengthen young people’s capacity to challenge harmful stereotypes, and be inclusive of a wide range of viewpoints and populations without stigmatizing any group.”
- A child’s fantasy identity is to be believed and fully supported. They write in bold: “No one else is qualified to label or judge another person’s sexual identity, including their sexual orientation or gender identity, and it is important that the language and terms young people use to identify themselves is respected by the adults in their lives. Adults, including educators and administrators should respect and use the pronouns each student uses for themselves.”
Beginning in kindergarten, students are expected to list the “medically accurate names for body parts including genitals” and “identify different kinds of families”…including “same-gender” and explain why it is important to “show respect for different kinds of families.” They also are to define “bodily autonomy” and “consent.”
By the end of 2nd grade, they are to “define gender, gender identity, and gender-role stereotypes” and the different ways people express them. They are also asked to “demonstrate” dignity and respect toward those of “differing family configurations” and “immigration status.”
By the end of 5th grade, they must “distinguish between sex assigned at birth and gender identity.” They must explain that “gender expression and gender identity exist along a spectrum.” They are also expected to “differentiate between sexual orientation and gender identity” and to advocate for “ways to promote” people of “all genders, gender expressions, and gender identities.” And they dive into “masturbation”… for 11 yr. olds.
In grades 6-8, the advocacy requirements become a mandate to “develop a plan for the school” to promote this unscientific and radical gender ideology. They are also asked to “identify” how to “access” “medically accurate sources of information” and define “vaginal, oral and anal sex.” What organizations do you suppose they will consider to provide “medically accurate” information?
By the end of 10th grade, they are to describe the impact of “racism and inequality” in sexual health and begin “demonstrating” sexual behavior communications with their partners. They are also to “explain reproductive justice” and how it relates to sexual health.
By the end of 12th grade, all the ‘isms’ are being explored: “sexism, racism, ableism, classism, homophobia and transphobia” along with the “impact of power and privilege within romantic or sexual relationships” which include all the gender bending concepts, economics, immigration status, etc. Students also explore state laws “related to a minor’s ability to give and receive sexual consent.
What you read above is just some of the content that will be embedded in the new MN Health Standards…because, according to our health commissioner and the review committee’s SONAR, our standards must “align” with them.
This curriculum, this content, are examples of what Minnesota’s proposed Health Standards will align with, BUT they are hidden behind benign sounding policy words like “functional health knowledge” and “essential health skills.” And the public has been told to limit their comments to those statements only. In other words, the MDE will craft the health standards’ content behind closed doors and shut public comment out.
This is wrong and we need to ask for a hearing on the content.
In addition, the draft open to public comment in February, does include a heavy emphasis on indigenous instruction. Starting in kindergarten, the proposed Minnesota benchmarks mandate children to learn about the “cultural traditions,” “cultural teachings” and “practices” of various “communities” – specifically “Indigenous” communities. The “skills” side involves action words like “describe,” “explain,” and “demonstrate.” All Minnesota children are to learn them, as reflected in the SONAR:
The MDE website is filled with information about Indigenous Education for All (IEFA).
IEFA is heavily spiritual. Making Indigenous Education mandatory for all children is highly objectionable, as it will require them to learn and practice things like Restorative Mindset.
Screenshots from Indigenous Education for All:
Living in “alignment with values and principles” that do not align with one’s own faith is indoctrination not education.
Thus, the devil really is in the details.
There is so much more. We encourage you to visit our webpage for further information.
Today, please take the time to respond to the MDE’s request for public comments.
Tell them you object to the standards’ alignment with the radical comprehensive sex education content of SIECUS, SHAPE and NSES. Let them know that while the standards are deliberately vague, you understand their intent – to force your children to “live in alignment” with and “demonstrate” their affirmation of cultures, lifestyles, traditions, teachings and beliefs that do not align with your own. Tell them you recognize their goal to confuse children about the reality of biological sex and traditional sexual mores.
Minnesota, under Governor Walz, has every intention of steamrolling over all that is true, right, healthy and normal for our children.
What can we do?
- Be part of exposing them by calling them out in your public comments and requesting a public hearing on the health standards content the SONAR report states Minnesota standards must align with.
- Tell the MDE that you do not want your child living “in alignment” with indigenous teachings, traditions and ancestral practices which conflict with your own faith traditions.
- If you are interested in being a litigant in a lawsuit to challenge this deliberate sexual and spiritual indoctrination in court, please contact CPL.