• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Christian group opposes legislation that would teach grade school children how to protect themselves from sexual abuse.

Correction: God only allowed Noah to put one male and one female of each animal species on the ark. So that is what Noah did.
There is conflicting info about that. Some animals actually had 7 pairs of each animal, not just 1 of each sex of each animal. (Won't even get into the ridiculousness of the belief that all animals on the planet could actually make it to the Ark and back to their native continents in that time frame regardless of their actual ability to make such a migration in that time or their diet or temperature requirements.)

Many animals in the wild though are not monogamous, particularly not for life. Natural is not simply what someone wants it to be.
 
Absolutely! That is precisely why Noah only allowed two animals of each species on the ark. I'm sure Noah married all the animals to their appropriate counterparts so that there would not be any unnatural fornicating. 😁

That brings me to a topic that got me in trouble when I was a kid. I asked my parents what color Noah was. My parents immediately determined the question to be irrelevant.

At that age I had a basic understanding of sex. I had recently received questioned and concerned looks from my parents when I asked if God had a penis and balls. No matter, I was a curious and an apparently impertinent kid.

In so many words, I was told not to ask questions about God's junk.

So, I continued, if Mr. and Mrs. Noah's ethnic origin didn't matter, were they white? One of my younger brothers in the back seat with me whispered for me to shut up.

If Noah and Mrs. Noah, were white and their 3 sons were white and the son's wives were white and God had told them have abundant wild baby-making sex, where did
black people come from?

That's when my father shouted who wants to stop for ice cream?

At that point, in my early years, I had already begun to suspect that what I read in the Bible and what I had been taught wasn't necessarily true.

My parents, my teachers, the church had obviously lied to me about things in life. When they told me sex was bad I thought, hell, they lied to me about other things, why are all these people telling me sex was bad. I couldn't wait to be a teenager in a back seat.

Sex is fun. God made it fun. Most of y'all know it is fun whether you are married or not. Sex after becoming divorced was earthshaking.

Celibacy is unnatural.
The story of Noah and the Arc was actually one of the main reasons I started questioning Christianity (and religion in general) at a young age as well. There are just so many problems with that story and any questions on it tend to be dismissed as "well God works that way", which is just too much for me to accept.
 
The story of Noah and the Arc was actually one of the main reasons I started questioning Christianity (and religion in general) at a young age as well. There are just so many problems with that story and any questions on it tend to be dismissed as "well God works that way", which is just too much for me to accept.
I addressed that particular point in my article explaining Noah's Ark & the Flood.
 
It does not make them want to have sex any more than they already wanted to have sex.
Kids, especially teenagers, often do exactly what they're told not to. But if they want to have sex, then it's best if they have as much knowledge as possible to make better informed and responsible choices.
The verse means having sex is only evil if you are not married to your sex partner.
Leave it to religion to make something fun and pleasurable like sex wrong or "evil."
 
So the schools are going to protect the kids from their own parents. Got it.

Now why do parents want kids in the first place if they intend to abuse them?

Why do Leftists always assume that the government is the best and wisest source of all things?

It seems so obvious that government is stupid, wasteful, dishonest and self serving that assuming any altruism is less than sane.

Still, Leftists want us to believe this in spite of the huge and growing mountain of evidence that proves this belief has been wrong, is wrong and likely will be wrong going forward. Seems odd.
 
Depending on the state (if not required in all states) Schools do have a legal obligation to protect students from suspected or potential harm from adults, including the parents, via notifying the state's child protective services or law enforcement.
Let's face it, some people should not be parents. Especially if they willfully harm or abuse their kids. It's unfortunate such circumstances occur.

Stipulating that any child abused by any adult is an atrocity, the percent of children abused (including neglect) by their parents is less than one percent in the US.

That means that for more than 99% of children, parents are concerned and not abusive or neglectful.

Some parents do a better job than others, but, for the most part, they're doing the best they can with what they've got.

They are assigned a complex responsibility, given precious little training and must execute this task while they are occupied with multiple kids, earning livings, helping the community and often taking care of their own parents.

Parents are pretty consistently awesome examples of altruistic selflessness. Exceptions to the rule are sad evidence of human failings.

 
Center for Christian Virtue. Policy director David Mahan said the bill should allow parents to opt their children out of the curriculum altogether and argued it lacks a clear definition of what "age-appropriate" instruction means. These people are sick if they seek to block a law that protects children from sexual abusers. They are claiming that it is a violation of abstinence-only education but abstinence-only sex education has nothing to do with protecting children from sexual abusers. This is not about teaching sex education but about protecting vulnerable children from predators. It would seem that they know that there is sex abuse happening in churches and they didn't want kids to accuse those who are gaming them, people such as priests, ministers, and other religious types.

Every one of these parents who oppose this law should be investigated themselves because a rational parent would want their child to have the knowdlkge to protect themselves from abuse.



Strange that there isn't a single word about this on their website.
 
Why do Leftists always assume that the government is the best and wisest source of all things?

It seems so obvious that government is stupid, wasteful, dishonest and self serving that assuming any altruism is less than sane.

Still, Leftists want us to believe this in spite of the huge and growing mountain of evidence that proves this belief has been wrong, is wrong and likely will be wrong going forward. Seems odd.

And yet markets are so pure.
 
Without going into all the reasons why, and there are many, it’s foolishness to trust “educators” with teaching your children about sex, and what they define as abuse without seeing the curriculum. And age of the children is of paramount importance.

Also, for all of you haters of Christians, it’s also extremely ignorant of you to lump all of Christianity under one roof. We are not all Catholics, and our churches/denominations do not have systemic sexual abuse of children. It’s dishonest and unfair to accuse or imply that all of Christendom has the same problem as the Universal Roman Catholic Church.

I doubt that you false accusers will apologize but you should. Especially the author of this bigoted OP.
 
Well, adultery and prosecution are practiced by non-humans.

Monkeys ,chimps and penguins practive prostitution. And as for adultry, they figure out about 50% of a birds eggs are fertilized by someone other than the birth they allegedly paired with.

Do monkeys get married?

If not, they never commit adultery.

Prosecution has nothing to do with nature.
 
Why? What difference does it make if a couple has relations before or after they're married? After all, it's better to test drive before you buy.

You know why. Stop making up unrelated and irrelevant strawmen to make completely dishonest rebuttals.
 
There is conflicting info about that. Some animals actually had 7 pairs of each animal, not just 1 of each sex of each animal. (Won't even get into the ridiculousness of the belief that all animals on the planet could actually make it to the Ark and back to their native continents in that time frame regardless of their actual ability to make such a migration in that time or their diet or temperature requirements.)

Many animals in the wild though are not monogamous, particularly not for life. Natural is not simply what someone wants it to be.

There is no conflicting information about it. No other animals are mentally capable of obeying and disobeying God. Only humans can do that. So only humans have the nature to marry, commit adultery, and divorce against the will of God.
 
Leave it to religion to make something fun and pleasurable like sex wrong or "evil."

Whether something is wrong or evil depends on human nature too. Incest, rape, prostitution, adultery, and premarital sex are never right or good for society. Only people who actually do those things or love them ever think otherwise.
 
You know why. Stop making up unrelated and irrelevant strawmen to make completely dishonest rebuttals.
What strawman? It was a question.
There is no conflicting information about it. No other animals are mentally capable of obeying and disobeying God. Only humans can do that. So only humans have the nature to marry, commit adultery, and divorce against the will of God.
A meaningless platitude unless one can prove there's a god to begin with. But animals do not seem to need a god. Perhaps they're smarter than humans in some ways.
Stipulating that any child abused by any adult is an atrocity, the percent of children abused (including neglect) by their parents is less than one percent in the US.

That means that for more than 99% of children, parents are concerned and not abusive or neglectful.

Some parents do a better job than others, but, for the most part, they're doing the best they can with what they've got.

They are assigned a complex responsibility, given precious little training and must execute this task while they are occupied with multiple kids, earning livings, helping the community and often taking care of their own parents.
Ok, and? That really doesn't address or refute anything I said.
 
Whether something is wrong or evil depends on human nature too. Incest, rape, prostitution, adultery, and premarital sex are never right or good for society. Only people who actually do those things or love them ever think otherwise.
What harm comes to society from premarital sex? What is it about marriage that magically makes sex better for society or the parties involved?
 
There is no conflicting information about it. No other animals are mentally capable of obeying and disobeying God. Only humans can do that. So only humans have the nature to marry, commit adultery, and divorce against the will of God.
Animals are capable of both having monogamous relationships but many species do not. Neither of these things indicate that either monogamy or sleeping around (outside of a monogamous relationship) is unnatural. Both are natural relationship types. Again though marriage is not natural. Monogamy may be natural, for some species to participate in, but that is not an absolute either.

Your god, not mine. You are assuming to speak for your god though without evidence anyone should believe or follow those rules.
 
Last edited:
Without going into all the reasons why, and there are many, it’s foolishness to trust “educators” with teaching your children about sex, and what they define as abuse without seeing the curriculum. And age of the children is of paramount importance.

Also, for all of you haters of Christians, it’s also extremely ignorant of you to lump all of Christianity under one roof. We are not all Catholics, and our churches/denominations do not have systemic sexual abuse of children. It’s dishonest and unfair to accuse or imply that all of Christendom has the same problem as the Universal Roman Catholic Church.

I doubt that you false accusers will apologize but you should. Especially the author of this bigoted OP.

Catholic churches have been known for sexually abusing children for decades. Many Catholics say, "Only a few people are doing it. Most Catholics do not support that." Or they think, "A few bad people make everyone else look terrible." What they do is ignore it. Protestants do not remotely support sex abuse in the clergy or deny it happens. If people are going to hate "Christians" for anything, they have to limit that to the Catholic Church.

That said, Of course nobody should hate Catholics for being, well, Catholics. The only reason to hate them is what they do outside of their Christian beliefs. Same goes for all Orthodox and Protestant Christians.

I hate people who hate women whether they are Christians or not. I do not hate Catholics because they are Catholic or Southern Baptists because they are Southern Baptist. It is all about what they do, not what they believe.
 
Animals are capable of both having monogamous relationships but many species do not. Neither of these things indicate that either monogamy or sleeping around (outside of a monogamous relationship) is unnatural. Both are natural relationship types. Again though marriage is not natural. Monogamy may be natural, for some species to participate in, but that is not an absolute either.

Your god, not mine. You are assuming to speak for your god though without evidence anyone should believe or follow those rules.

Only humans are able to know what they are doing is right or wrong, good or evil, for God or against God. So no other animals are capable of sin.
 
I would opt out my kids out from that conversation too, especially if they are under age 7 or 8. I really don't want some libtard teacher using the pretext to talk about predators and describing sexual abuse, to talk about sexuality most likely. This conversation is one that PARENTS are able to have with their children, without some teacher scaring the hell out of them. That conversation we all have with our kids about not talking to strangers, "stranger danger", about not allowing ANYONE to touch them. And to tell an adult if someone does.

Beyond that, parents watch over you own kids. You take them to school and you pick them up when they are young. You know where they are at all times, and YOU the parent should not automatically trust any adult with your kids. Not teachers, not coaches, not scout leaders, not priests/pastors, not anyone. Because when a PARENT is closely supervising their kids, the pedophiles will be aware of that. Most serial pedophiles don't just randomly pick any kids. Most target the kids who have parents who are not keeping tabs.

Only liberals believe that EVERYTHING must be handled by schools or the government. Most of us were able to handle all these matters, including conversations about sex with our children on our own, when it was age appropriate.

One thing my wife and I tried to do was to allow our kids to be kids, and not burdened with all the crap of the world...for at least a few years, which is so hard to do these days.

It's good that you're teaching your kids about bodily autonomy. Not all parents do this. In fact, as some have pointed out in this thread, it is the parents themselves who sometimes commit the abuse.

So children have the right to learn about bodily autonomy. If this means learning it at school, so be it.
 
I guess they didn't catch all the priests.
 
Without going into all the reasons why, and there are many, it’s foolishness to trust “educators” with teaching your children about sex, and what they define as abuse without seeing the curriculum. And age of the children is of paramount importance.

Also, for all of you haters of Christians, it’s also extremely ignorant of you to lump all of Christianity under one roof. We are not all Catholics, and our churches/denominations do not have systemic sexual abuse of children. It’s dishonest and unfair to accuse or imply that all of Christendom has the same problem as the Universal Roman Catholic Church.

I doubt that you false accusers will apologize but you should. Especially the author of this bigoted OP.

Your "not all Christians" comment is unhelpful.

If I complained that some drivers were reckless and dangerous, no one in their right mind would respond by saying that "not all drivers drive like that." I wasn't talking about the good drivers. I was talking about the dangerous ones, because that's where the problem lies.
 
I guess they didn't catch all the priests.

Enough priests were caught for the Catholic Church to be hated for its sex abuse in the clergy (while banning premarital sex for everyone else). If they want to ban premarital sex for all of your members - a rule that God could not have made more clear in Scripture - no priests should do it either.
 
Back
Top Bottom