Middle school to give out birth control pills

[mrrman]

I would freak if this was my kids school

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: mrrman
I would freak if this was my kids school

Then I truly hope your children would be able to get free condoms outside the home... since I don't want to pay more welfare.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
too lazy to quote but
a) thecoolnessrune - abstinence? Awesome. good for you. But to claim moral superiority and call people who have sex in their teens "sluts" or "whores" like you did shows that you are, in fact, judgmental and perhaps have issues dealing with maturity and empathy.

b) "your gf is probably having sex with other people" - that comment was harsh and I apologize for such..but I do know the male and female pscyhe, regardless of my personal relationship turmoil. Too much evidence shows that people enjoy sex, not having sex with one person often leads them to have sex with others. It hasn't really happened to me, I'm not basing this on myself. BUT people are an odd beasts and you can be wonderfully chaste, to put that faith in another 18 year old, especially an 18 year old girl, is asking a lot. Unless she's fat! Hah. i'm an ass, sorry.

1. Do I have a problem with empathy? Yes, yes I will completely agree with that. My GF most certainly would agree and it's something I'm working on. I apologize.

2. Having sex != maturity. It would be wise to remember that.

3. Am I judgmental? Hell yes.

4. Yes, people enjoy sex, I have no doubt I will have a blast when that time comes. But I haven't had sex with anyone else, nor do i have a desire to. My GF is of the same mindset. Is she fat? No, quite the opposite, she needs to gain a bit more weight. Is she 18? No.

5. Are you an ass? Sure. We both are

What gives you the right to be judgmental?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: taltamir
yea... an 18 year old girl practicing abstinence is unlikely... female psyche doesn't work this way.

Besides. sex is a wonderful natural things... and at 18 you and her don't even have to contend with any moral stigmata... in fact everyone assumes that you are having sex if you are a couple at that age... so abstaining at that age is merely you practicing your freedom of religion. It does not make others who do not whores, sluts, or morally deficient... please refrain from such demeaning comments towards women... or are you applying the term whore and slut to males aswell? (in which case please refrain from that as well, it is uncalled for)

Self-control of sexual urges can always be attained. You don't HAVE to do it. Me and my GF have simply chosen not to.

You masturbate. You aren't exactly controlling your sexual urges.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
I would love for you to explain in detail how me not having sex causes testosterone to "build up." Or did you mean to say that? Maybe your anus was just fussy again cause you've been letting too much shit build up in you..

All the empirical evidence is in your posts. You are unbelievably naive and yet you post as if you have some sort of authority. It'll bite you in your ass one day and hopefully there'll be someone there to help pick up your overbearing nonsense.

:roll:
wow i guess you cant answer the question then can you.

Answer the question of why not ejaculating would lead to a build up of testosterone? Do you actually need that answered?

He later on admitted to masturbating but his position of being superior for abstaining is pathetic. Calling sexual beings whores for not exercising his careful use of masturbation instead of intercourse is a pathetic argument.

 

[taltamir]

Oh... I forgot masturbation is considered bad...
You see, I am an atheist (well, agnostic technically)... I am not worried about impregnating the succubae with my spilled seed creating demon children who will later haunt me.

And besides, masturbation is nothing compared to real sex.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
too lazy to quote but
a) thecoolnessrune - abstinence? Awesome. good for you. But to claim moral superiority and call people who have sex in their teens "sluts" or "whores" like you did shows that you are, in fact, judgmental and perhaps have issues dealing with maturity and empathy.

b) "your gf is probably having sex with other people" - that comment was harsh and I apologize for such..but I do know the male and female pscyhe, regardless of my personal relationship turmoil. Too much evidence shows that people enjoy sex, not having sex with one person often leads them to have sex with others. It hasn't really happened to me, I'm not basing this on myself. BUT people are an odd beasts and you can be wonderfully chaste, to put that faith in another 18 year old, especially an 18 year old girl, is asking a lot. Unless she's fat! Hah. i'm an ass, sorry.

1. Do I have a problem with empathy? Yes, yes I will completely agree with that. My GF most certainly would agree and it's something I'm working on. I apologize.

2. Having sex != maturity. It would be wise to remember that.

3. Am I judgmental? Hell yes.

4. Yes, people enjoy sex, I have no doubt I will have a blast when that time comes. But I haven't had sex with anyone else, nor do i have a desire to. My GF is of the same mindset. Is she fat? No, quite the opposite, she needs to gain a bit more weight. Is she 18? No.

5. Are you an ass? Sure. We both are

What gives you the right to be judgmental?

The same right that gives you the right to call me judgmental, asshole, naive, etc. etc.

 

[taltamir]

Nobody gives rights... they only take them away.

If no one took away your "right" to do something then you can. When someone writes down in a legal document that you have the right to something what they mean is that the government should in theory not prevent you from doing that... of course very few such rights have ever been strictly adhered too.

 

[aplefka]

Threads like this make me realize why I stopped coming back to ATOT. :/

You should find something wrong with birth control being given out in middle school no matter what your religious views are. Where the fvck are we as a society when it's okay for 6-8th graders to be having sex? This isn't ancient times where life spans are shorter and people are married by the age of 10 or 12 and have families and whatnot. Sex is already so desensitized by the media, now we're just furthering that.

 

[tailes151]

I don't think it's right per-se, but they seem to at least be going about it in the right way. If they were just handing 'em out like candy it would be a whole different issue.

And yes, some kids do have sex in middle school. That's when I started...

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: aplefka
Threads like this make me realize why I stopped coming back to ATOT. :/

You should find something wrong with birth control being given out in middle school no matter what your religious views are. Where the fvck are we as a society when it's okay for 6-8th graders to be having sex? This isn't ancient times where life spans are shorter and people are married by the age of 10 or 12 and have families and whatnot. Sex is already so desensitized by the media, now we're just furthering that.

Yea your right, you should have stopped coming back to ATOT.

 

[thomsbrain]

kids at that age are already making their own choices regarding sex, especially the girls, who often look much older than their age (scary but true). as a result, they need to be able to make their own choices regarding contraceptives.

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Kev
This is retarded. The type of kids who would be having sex in 6th-8th are not going to be responsible enough to take the pill consistently enough for it to be effective, so this is pointless.

I call BS... you are assuming that only morally decrepit, irresponsible people would have sex when they hit puberty... This completely disregards human nature and sexual hormones.

heck, a 12 year old is probably more likely to engage in sexual activities then a 15 year old... because they are not as RESPONSIBLE yet.
At 12 I was masturbating 3 times a day and wishing to have a chance sexual encounter with a sexy woman in her early twenties...
At 15 I was deathly afraid of STDs, especially aids, and to a lesser degree teen pregnancy (thank you so much sex ed for introducing those phobia) that I practiced abstinence...
I didn't get over those fears until early in college (where I decided I could trust protection).

Interestingly enough my recent conversation with my younger brother and his friends who are now 15 reveal a similar trend Where they are often too afraid to go all the way with their girlfriends...
How long that will last? no one can tell... but they better have protection when it is needed.
Just not PILL protection because thats bad. (hormones should only come from your body, or to treat an illness)

You completely missed my point but whatever.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: purbeast0
what the hell who's bright idea was it to come up with this crap?

and people "under 15 years old" incorporates 2 years of highschool kids there.

eh, i didnt know of anyone who was 13 when they started 9th grade

I was 13 for the first half of 9th grade. Yes, I was a 16 year old senior too.

 

[Regs]

I knew a few. I would of too if I wasn't a 12 year old with no sense of hygine, oily head, pimples everywhere, and hair growing out of my head like tumble weed. Oh, and did I mention the few extra rolls on my stomach?

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: m1ldslide1
reducing the rates of STD's and teenage pregnancies. State-sponsored abstinence education is standing firmly in the way of real education ever happening.

People had sex for millions of years. It's a fact. STD's came, or people started to become aware of them, and for some reason we should stop screwing?

It's natural, it's not going to stop over night if at all. We're not machines.

Though I do not wish an STD on anyone, I just think the 100% protective sex and abstinence is a lost cause.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I dunno. I think they real controversy in the USA is that a majority of Americans cannot believe that children (11+ in this case) are sexual beings. People are not sexual until the night of their wedding. Such is what most parents want to believe. To provide BC to pre-teens is to admit they want to engage in sexual activity, and that just does not fit with our puritanical paradigm here in the USA. I think the reality is, and this may shock many of you, is that humans are sexual from as far back as the womb, and that has been documented. But being sexual is a chemical/hormonal instinct. The power and maturity to grant consent is a completely different issue. Hence AoC laws that are necessary and need enforcement. Does giving BC fly in the face of this? Does it grant consent where it should and does not exist? These issues are the heart of the matter IMO.

Go to Europe, and you can get BC in the form of pills, condoms, etc. from just about anywhere for free. Then again, it is socialized health care.

Go to Germany and you see their "Mach's Mit" condom ad campaign just about everywhere. It's brilliant. http://www.machsmit.de/

I'm quoting this because it is one of the few posts worth quoting here. Too many people in the US get sucked into the controversy aspect of issues and lose focus on the matter at hand. This is usually due to moral conflicts, religious conflicts, and a ridiculous obsession with control but it also varies from problem to problem.



The problem at hand:

Young kids are getting pregnant and yes, it is because they are having sex.



Some facts about the problem:

1. They are having sex and we can't stop that.

2. We don't live in a fantasy world. No amount of teachings, morals, or laws will fully eliminate the problem and grant us complete control over it no matter how much we want to believe that's the only answer we need. To try and do so to the extreme will only take away more freedoms from both the parents and the kids beyond a point that most people would be happy with.

3. In order to reduce the problem the most, we will need multiple preventative measures since there are so many different kinds of kids being exposed to this problem and each situation is different. We have many of these preventative measures already in place. This BC in schools is just another one.



The questions to ask yourself:

If every school magically provided this service tomorrow, would life in the US really be that bad? Would it be worse? Would it be better? Why? Remember, morals and desires for control don't make underage pregnancies any easier and they obviously are not preventing it from happening. Try to consider this problem by backing off from your emotional attachment to the issue and think about it from square one.

 

[OutHouse]

Its truly amazing how far away from the subject at hand.

the bottom line is it is wrong for a school to be giving prescription drugs to minors without the parents consent. i cant even believe people in here are saying that this is a OK thing to do. I wonder if the school that is doing this is still going to send out permission slips to the parents for field trips.... see my point?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Citrix
Its truly amazing how far away from the subject at hand.

the bottom line is it is wrong for a school to be giving prescription drugs to minors without the parents consent. i cant even believe people in here are saying that this is a OK thing to do. I wonder if the school that is doing this is still going to send out permission slips to the parents for field trips.... see my point?

Its truly amazing how people, even cnn, can;t read or cuts out all the checks before anybody can get them. The school is not giving out anything. Anybody that wants them has to get parents permission to go to the clinic. Even then the doctor will check them out and then only offer them if they fit the bill and also if they ask.
Its not like there is a big jar of BC beside the condom being given out like M&M's.

So yes the parents ARE involved. If they don;t want their kids to get them then they don't give permission.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Citrix
Its truly amazing how far away from the subject at hand.

the bottom line is it is wrong for a school to be giving prescription drugs to minors without the parents consent. i cant even believe people in here are saying that this is a OK thing to do. I wonder if the school that is doing this is still going to send out permission slips to the parents for field trips.... see my point?

Its truly amazing how people, even cnn, can;t read or cuts out all the checks before anybody can get them. The school is not giving out anything. Anybody that wants them has to get parents permission to go to the clinic. Even then the doctor will check them out and then only offer them if they fit the bill and also if they ask.
Its not like there is a big jar of BC beside the condom being given out like M&M's.

So yes the parents ARE involved. If they don;t want their kids to get them then they don't give permission.

Ya, it's not like it is a secret being kept from the parents that the school their child goes to is providing BC under set conditions. Sadly, a lot of parents out there do not have health insurance for their kids and would be willing to give them BC if they could afford it. A large percentage of underage pregnancies occur with children from families with low incomes. There are many reasons for this, but those reasons don't matter. What matters is that this solution can help those people and many others.

The bottom line here as a parent is that in one hand you risk your kid deciding to have sex with BC. On the other hand, you risk your kid deciding to have sex without BC. You can't fully eliminate the risk of them having sex so why not teach them what you want to teach them and add BC on top of that? Kids are human too and make bad decisions despite their best judgment and what we teach them. Think of the BC as a back up plan that gives them more breathing room in case they make that mistake. If the kids look at the BC as an excuse to have sex without risk then the parents not teaching them well enough. It's not the BC's fault or the schools.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: m1ldslide1

Originally posted by: waggy
because one way or another the taxpayers are going to be paying.

also the parents have to enroll the hcild in teh "health program" to begin with.

and paying for the little sluts birth control is a hell of a lot chepaer then paying her or someone else to raise the kids.

I thought I would quote this one more time to emphasize the point. Again, for coolnessrune on your abstinence, but just because you feel uber-responsible doesn't mean that anybody else does or even should have your point of view. And they don't. Plain and simple. So if you would get off of your moral high horse for a minute you would see that you are going to be paying either way, so you might as well choose the option that A. costs you less and B. is less of an economic and social drain on society.

(that option is birth control btw)

Or choose option C: Don't give them free pills, educate them, and if they still mess up then their SOL. Let them take responsibility for their actions.

Yes, I know the "THINK OF THE BABY!!" people will be fussing, but that doesn't change the fact that those girls and boys dug their own grave cause they were stupid. I shouldn't have to pay for that consequence unless I choose to.

So you want the kids to be responsible, yet deny them a powerful tool that would help them be responsible? I sure hope you don't feel the same way about free condoms.

And what is the education you're proposing? Abstinence is the only way to prevent pregnancy and STIs? When used correctly, BC is over 99% effective; condoms about 98%. When used simultaneously, the risks are minimal.

Moreover, there are sexual activities apart from intercourse that are even less risky and contribute to healthy adolescent development (but still benefit from the protection BC and condoms provide).

You're entitled to be celibate befor marriage; just recognize that the majority of young people do not feel this way, and they are entitled to information and tools that help them to express their sexuality more safely.

I completely agree with this and have never contested it. However, I shouldn't have to pay for it.

My friend I alluded to earlier could get condoms if she wanted to and she was smart and did.

If they want to engage in this, let them. They have just as much access without me paying for it. If they are so set on having sex then they can find a way to pay for it.

I disagree with you here. Some kids may not be aware of BC pills/patches as an option. Introducing it in school at least makes them aware of the option. As well, the health care staff in the school will be able to provide guidance in using BC effectively. If they were to buy pills or patches in a drugstore, they might not receive instruction on how to use them properly.

Because of the guidance that is possible in a school environment, providing BC as an option there provides much more value for taxpayer dollars.

 

[TwiceOver]

If this were to happen everywhere, what would daytime talkshows have left to talk about?

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Citrix
Its truly amazing how far away from the subject at hand.

the bottom line is it is wrong for a school to be giving prescription drugs to minors without the parents consent. i cant even believe people in here are saying that this is a OK thing to do. I wonder if the school that is doing this is still going to send out permission slips to the parents for field trips.... see my point?

The parents have to give consent to enroll their child in the health program.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: TwiceOver
If this were to happen everywhere, what would daytime talkshows have left to talk about?

I think we need Jerry Springer here on ATOT.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: Citrix
Its truly amazing how far away from the subject at hand.

the bottom line is it is wrong for a school to be giving prescription drugs to minors without the parents consent. i cant even believe people in here are saying that this is a OK thing to do. I wonder if the school that is doing this is still going to send out permission slips to the parents for field trips.... see my point?

The parents have to give consent to enroll their child in the health program.

correct, so they already should know their child would now have access to the meds, but the point still remains that the child *does not* have to disclose to their parent that they actually did receive bcps and are taking them.