At what age should our children be before the school system may issue government subsidized condoms to them?
Wake up people. Kids have sex. Stop pretending that guys and girls still think the other gender have koodies until they are married. It is the way the world is. Would you rather have them having a bunch of kids running around or the school wake up and acknowledge the fact that kids need real life advice. We are not helping anybody by pretending that kids don't do it.
Yes. Yes it is.
Kids use illegal drugs too. Dirty needles spread deadly diseases such as HIV and hepatitus. Why aren't you advocating schools hand out needles to school children? Because you are IN DENIAL OF REALITY and are pretending kids don't use drugs?!
Handing out condoms isn't "advice." It is openly endorsing children having sex, even if doing so is a felony criminal offense.
Not every child has your promiscuity moralities reflected in your message nor do all parents. Not every parent is OK with the school teaching their 13 year old daughter to have sex with anyone she thinks she'd like to.
Impose your promotion and facilitation of promiscuity on your own little children, not mine.
Having sex is not illegal. And providing condoms does not mean they have to pass them out. They can have them readily available in the office or elsewhere. I am not asking them to go child to child and hand them out and encourage the use of them, simply have them readily available. Sex is not illegal, but it is a fact of life, so why should the schools shield students. Drugs are illegal, therefore the schools should not endorse safe use of them, they should discourage the use of them. In the case that drugs are made legal, I would support the schools endorsing the safe use of them as well. As long as there is no illegal activity I see no reason why the schools should shield anybody from the real world.
Having sex is not illegal. And providing condoms does not mean they have to pass them out. They can have them readily available in the office or elsewhere. I am not asking them to go child to child and hand them out and encourage the use of them, simply have them readily available. Sex is not illegal, but it is a fact of life, so why should the schools shield students. Drugs are illegal, therefore the schools should not endorse safe use of them, they should discourage the use of them. In the case that drugs are made legal, I would support the schools endorsing the safe use of them as well. As long as there is no illegal activity I see no reason why the schools should shield anybody from the real world.
Kids use illegal drugs too. Dirty needles spread deadly diseases such as HIV and hepatitus. Why aren't you advocating schools hand out needles to school children? Because you are IN DENIAL OF REALITY and are pretending kids don't use drugs?!
Handing out condoms isn't "advice." It is openly endorsing children having sex, even if doing so is a felony criminal offense.
Not every child has your promiscuity moralities reflected in your message nor do all parents. Not every parent is OK with the school teaching their 13 year old daughter to have sex with anyone she thinks she'd like to.
Impose your promotion and facilitation of promiscuity on your own little children, not mine.
I'm actually kind of surprised by how many people chose 11-12 years old. Really? Don't you think there might be a problem if 11 and 12 year old children are having intercourse?
Sure, but it's MORE of a problem if they are having intercourse without a condom. And THAT is generally the alternative, not abstinence. I think a lot of people who oppose giving condoms are approaching this from the mindset that if the kids just don't have access to condoms, they won't have sex...but studies just do not support that conclusion.
Hmm. That's interesting. Somebody should start a poll asking at what age people lost their virginity. I think 13-14 would be on the low side.
In high schools where intravenous drug use is a problem, they absolutely SHOULD hand out clean needles in the school. Ironically, your analogy that is supposed to be an outrageous extension of this idea, is actually a perfectly reasonable policy itself.
There is no correlation between access to contraception and the age at which people start having sex (or the frequency with which they have sex).
Then they can still tell their daughter not to. Hell, they could even forbid their daughter from taking the free condoms if they wanted to (although that would be extremely bad parenting). It's not like the school is telling their kids that they SHOULD go out and get laid.
Please cite the studies that indicate that access to contraception "promotes promiscuity." Actual academic studies with actual data, not right-wing Bible-thumping blogs, please.
You'd probably be right that its on the low side. But "low" does not mean zero.
You'd probably be right that its on the low side. But "low" does not mean zero.
Perhaps, but if a school was EVER to become aware of such activities by such young children, the parents should be informed immediately. THAT is the responsible thing to do IMO. Not to simply hand out a condom and send them along their way.
It is just not right for the school to be involved in handing those troubled 11 to 12-year-old children condoms. That is like putting a band-aid on a bullet hole. Those children need HELP, not condoms. There is more to worry about when it comes to children that age having sex than just STDs and pregnancies.
You're willing to hand out needles to facilitate school children shooting up does tell where you are coming from.
I think the burden of proof is on you.
What the school IS telling them is that using a condom makes sex "safe," when it does not,
and it asserts the only safety issue of sex is disease and pregnancy, which it isn't,
and - as I've oft noted - for young teenagers having sex is criminal and criminal deliquency. Children who break the rules - and the law - aren't to be faciliated by the school system to do so. In my opinion, when a 14 year old can have "safe" sex by all measures of what constitutes "safe" is exactly never.
And I believe actually are required by law in most states to do so, though schools like to exempt themselves if they can get away with it. A 14 year old having sex is a crime. It is criminal deliquency - minimally - by that teen and felony sexual assault by the other, depending on age. If not, then it is criminal deliquency by the other.
If the children are close in age, I don't think any criminal charges should be brought. They could be just experimenting and one thing led to another, and if they are both children, I don't see the point in ruining their reputations or their lives by bringing them up on charges. But you never know who these young children are having sex with. They could easily be victims of molestation. As a matter of fact, the children who are sexually active at that young of an age probably have been sexually assaulted.
Sexual promiscuity at a young age is a symptom of sexual assault.
And I believe actually are required by law in most states to do so, though schools like to exempt themselves if they can get away with it. A 14 year old having sex is a crime. It is criminal deliquency - minimally - by that teen and felony sexual assault by the other, depending on age. If not, then it is criminal deliquency by the other.
Perhaps, but if a school was EVER to become aware of such activities by such young children, the parents should be informed immediately. THAT is the responsible thing to do IMO. Not to simply hand out a condom and send them along their way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?