I agree, it can be better coming from the parents. But it's not true that teaching it in school somehow devalues them. Especially since 90% of the parents out there don't talk about it with their kids, and are unwillng to do so. It's all in the presentation. If it's taught just like any other school subject, kids won't care. It has to be taught in a way that makes it important.
I agree, it can be better coming from the parents. But it's not true that teaching it in school somehow devalues them. Especially since 90% of the parents out there don't talk about it with their kids, and are unwillng to do so. It's all in the presentation. If it's taught just like any other school subject, kids won't care. It has to be taught in a way that makes it important.
How quickly we forget that society has to carry the burden of those involved in illegal drug use and trafficking. There even a big business based around it. Chiefly from Narcotics agencies, and the Penal Institutions that my taxes dollars are squandered away on. You want to save money by not teaching, and then turn a blind eye to the problems the lack of education causes?
The problems aren't caused by lack of education. They are caused by these individuals who make their lifestyle choices.
Who exactly lays out what constitutes a healthy lifestyle now? Children are not exactly renowned for making "the best" decisions for their lifestyle.
Somehow a person should be put to death by possessing "illegal" narcotics now? Seems a bit extremist to me.
I would think that legalizing illegal narcotics would be a vastly superior solution than to execute people. I would be more in line for regulation of the substances, which would eliminate practically all the organized criminal element, and provide are great deal of tax revenues.
Zen and Blanco,
What happened in the 90s? The evil libruls took over our kids moral goodness and introduced to them.....gasp....SEX ED!!!
What is the result of that horrific experiment in societal degradation you ask? Why don't we try to find out?
Kaiser Foundation Study
This is what we are trying to show you. Unlike the D.A.R.E. programs, this is actually working and having a positive effect!!!
Hell, it's even slowing down abortions which I would have thought that you and the religious right would be thrilled about. But alas, the hypocrisy that you go out of your way to try to expose on the left, is completely ignored by you when done by those on the right. Ironic actually.
What happened in the 90s? The evil libruls took over our kids moral goodness and introduced to them.....gasp....SEX ED!!!
What is the result of that horrific experiment in societal degradation you ask? Why don't we try to find out?
Kaiser Foundation Study
This is what we are trying to show you. Unlike the D.A.R.E. programs, this is actually working and having a positive effect!!!
Hell, it's even slowing down abortions which I would have thought that you and the religious right would be thrilled about. But alas, the hypocrisy that you go out of your way to try to expose on the left, is completely ignored by you when done by those on the right. Ironic actually.
There is nothing wrong with sex-ed. The problem lies in that conservitives act like that because anyone says anything about sex, the kids(or anyone for that matter) will go out and have more. The warped thought is that if they dont know about sex they cant have it. So they feel that the 'education' should be just 'wait until marriage, because God said so". The whole thing that is wrong with that statment is the assumption that all people follow thier spiritual belief system, and a great many people do not. People were having sex long before there were schools, or any mention of sex on tv or in the movies. People will figure it out, it's hardwired into the species to know how to reproduce. The whole philosophy promoted by the right is that the only desicions people should be allowed to make are the ones that come from the pulpit. And that is doomed to fail as long as there is more than one allowed desicion to make.
There was recently a move in the senate to pass a bill for a medicaly accurate teaching of sex-ed, and was harshly defeated. Knowlege exists. What someone does with it is soemthing else. Failing to inform the students of what knowelege is there to conform to someones ideal is a travesty of anything resembling education. Teaching students about what is out there for birth control, and protection in no way means they will go out and have more sex. What is does do is the ones who would have done it anyway are much less likly to end up pregnent or with an std.
There is so much more that should be tought that 'what you can sue in a job' at school. how many people use algebra and geometry at thie jobs? How about phys ed? I dont agree at all with how the school system in the country runs( but that in an of itself is a whole other thread) but 'only teach what you need in jobs' is simply ignorent. That mindset would eliminate atm, music, history, phys ed, hell anything other than reading writting and basic math. And yeah, there are idiot parrents out there, and unless we try to stop the cycle, they will have idiot kids, and idiot grandchildren. The fact is not all parents are informed, or even care. The little bit of money that these type of classes use is nothing in the grand sceme of things(you have a problem with taxes, chop the pork first before the real programs), especially if it can break the cycle of ignorence.
A comparision between an unplanned pregnancy and jail are so far apart as to make no sense, unless Blanco is proposing outlawing sex outside of marriage, and good luck with that one. Crime doesnt happen because they didnt know better that to rob a store, there is always another motive.
There was recently a move in the senate to pass a bill for a medicaly accurate teaching of sex-ed, and was harshly defeated. Knowlege exists. What someone does with it is soemthing else. Failing to inform the students of what knowelege is there to conform to someones ideal is a travesty of anything resembling education. Teaching students about what is out there for birth control, and protection in no way means they will go out and have more sex. What is does do is the ones who would have done it anyway are much less likly to end up pregnent or with an std.
There is so much more that should be tought that 'what you can sue in a job' at school. how many people use algebra and geometry at thie jobs? How about phys ed? I dont agree at all with how the school system in the country runs( but that in an of itself is a whole other thread) but 'only teach what you need in jobs' is simply ignorent. That mindset would eliminate atm, music, history, phys ed, hell anything other than reading writting and basic math. And yeah, there are idiot parrents out there, and unless we try to stop the cycle, they will have idiot kids, and idiot grandchildren. The fact is not all parents are informed, or even care. The little bit of money that these type of classes use is nothing in the grand sceme of things(you have a problem with taxes, chop the pork first before the real programs), especially if it can break the cycle of ignorence.
A comparision between an unplanned pregnancy and jail are so far apart as to make no sense, unless Blanco is proposing outlawing sex outside of marriage, and good luck with that one. Crime doesnt happen because they didnt know better that to rob a store, there is always another motive.
Kind of like what the eevul rethugs did to your daughter. Of course you don't give a sh!t about the parent if its a "conservative" parent.
Perhaps the economy had something to do with it? Maybe it did have a positive effect...overall...I still think it's a waste and it still draws away from parental responsibility.
You freaking dolt. I cared because she is in third grade!!!
And why don't you go around and ask all of those "conservative" parents if they would rather their TEENAGE child sit through a class on sex ed or tell them that they are or their girlfriend is pregnant. I'll bet that you would find out that a lot of these parents would secretly advocate abortion as long as no one in their congregation would ever find out.
When did I make that comparison? You've never heard of a historian? Or a musician? Or an athlete?
You forget that these children, will most likely become parents themselves someday. With the knowledge aquired as children, perhaps they will place a greater emphasis on the subjects than their non-parent and school educated elders. The key is giving people the knowledge and accurate information to the children. After that it then becomes an individual responsibility issue, like everything else in our world. I would rather have a redundant approach to all subjects. I would love to see 100% parental involvement with their childrens educations, sadly you cannot could on that to happen. The people that tend to be the most successful in life have multiple or very significant mentors that push them to succed. People would find themselves very lucky to find those traits in their parents.
It becomes a vicious cycle blanco, where the uneducated parent assumes that his or her child will "figure" it out on their own. Then when little johnny or susie comes home with the news of a baby on the way, they can hardly believe it. These types of issues are far to critical to just assume one side or the other will teach relevant information to the children.
They will become parents some day and they will trust the government to raise their kids. Big mistake.
Well that's certainly a flawed question. I'm sure they would choose that the kid not engage in such relations as he/she is told.
I'll ask you though: Would you rather your almost teenage child sit thru a class on sex ed or get preggers at 12?
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
I guess that mean PE, music, shop classes, and pretty much any other course not directly related to one's planned career have no place in schools, either.
Sorry, but school is not career training. School is part of the process of preparing children for adulthood.
Neither side can prove this one way or the other. However, if sex ed in school does work (as the study RiW posted shows), then maybe trusting sex ed to the schools wouldn't be such a bad idea. Parents seem to be doing a bad enough job of it anyway.
Of course, nothing can entirely replace the parent..but it sure can augment them. What's the problem with that?
No, I'm saying that for those who are not *educated* in accurate information should be taught. If you parent feels that they've empowered you with all the relevant information they deem neccesary, that is of course their call. Though to say a parent knows enough is a bit silly at best. Nothing bad will come of the school systems also adding their own input, and more up to date information. I'm certain plenty of parents didn't tell their kids about the dangers of AIDS.[Link], but look at those numbers. I would say a great deal of those *reported* cases could have been prevented had some knowledge been imparted to the participants.
You would trust Government to teach your children about sciences and math, but not about life sciences? That sounds like folly to me.
WHEN she turns twelve in a few years, I would choose the class 7 days a week, 24 hours a day and 365 days of the year.
Sex education is as essential as math to a teenager. Too many people have had their lives and potential ruined by a teenage pregnancy. Understand that I am not saying that the child itself ruined their life, but HAVING a child.
If teens are better educated about sex and can avoid an unplanned pregnancy because of it, their future is as limitless as only their drive and determination. With a child because they didn't realize or were not taught that there are certain caveats to even protected sex to consider, that future suddenly has some very major limitations on it.
I had sex ed in highschool and middle school as part of our regular health corriculum... Was fine, end of story. You cannot argue with the blanco/zen whackos... DO NOT FEED THEM.. COMPLETELY IGNORE THEM.
Or realize that education can prevent lapses in judgement. Just for clarification I have both a son and a daughter, and I presume to having both sides of the "talk" when it's age appropriate. That being said, I would much rather my daughter be taught from me, and reinforce at school that ridiculous ploys such as "pulling out" is a method of birth control. I'm not kidding, children *actually* believe it is. They believe as long as you do not ejaculate inside that it's fine as long as you are outside at that point. Though when you actually go through sex ed, you'd learn that just becoming erect flushes semen down the vas deferens. That alone can get a women pregnant... I had no clue. I knew from talks with my peers that pulling out was dumb, but I had *zero* clue that just becoming erect could impregnant a women. Knowledge in layered amounts is crucial to the reinforcement on how important things like sex ed is. Frankly when I first had sex with my then girlfriend, I was scared that I could impregnant her. I refused to have sex without using a condom, and she was also on the pill. My parents never talked with me, but from my experiences I definately plan on talking with my children, and I fully support teaching sex ed at school to reinforce what I tell them.
It's not our responsibility to provide such knowledge.
There is no guarantee of unwise choice. Kids are told not to do drugs and have sex and certainly have the option of choosing what they are told.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter