Sex Ed.

[.dum.spiro.]

That's not true.

"OHH MY GOD, I AM SO HOT RIGHT NOW"

"I KNOW ME TOO. LET'S DO IT. I'M INCAPABLE OF OTHER THOUGHT RIGHT NOW."

"Ohhh... my god... what have we done?"

Contrary to popular belief, this is not how teenagers operate and/or think.

that is not what i meant--perhaps for some--but, for the majority: no. i did not mean that.

i simply meant that, unless a baby is trying to be made...
it is not particularly on the mind.
neither are STD's.
...consequences are thought of before and after--never during.

and, if they were...the sexual experience would not last too long.
so, no harm done.

there are too many other thoughs going on.
and none of which are pessimistic and life threatening.

unless, of course, you're being raped.

or having intercourse with David Prowse.

 

[Youve Got To Be Kidding!]

Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.

Those and other assertions are examples of the "false, misleading, or distorted information" in the programs' teaching materials, said the analysis, released yesterday, which reviewed the curricula of more than a dozen projects aimed at preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

In providing nearly $170 million next year to fund groups that teach abstinence only, the Bush administration, with backing from the Republican Congress, is investing heavily in a just-say-no strategy for teenagers and sex. But youngsters taking the courses frequently receive medically inaccurate or misleading information, often in direct contradiction to the findings of government scientists, said the report, by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), a critic of the administration who has long argued for comprehensive sex education.

Several million children ages 9 to 18 have participated in the more than 100 federal abstinence programs since the efforts began in 1999. They reviewed the 13 most commonly used curricula -- those used by at least five programs apiece.

The report concluded that two of the curricula were accurate but the 11 others, used by 69 organizations in 25 states, contain unproved claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods regarding reproductive health, gender traits and when life begins. In some cases, the factual issues were limited to occasional misinterpretations of publicly available data; in others, the materials pervasively presented subjective opinions as scientific fact.

Among the misconceptions cited by investigators:

* A 43-day-old fetus is a "thinking person."

* HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.

* Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse.

* Homosexuality can increase your chance of getting aids to 50%

* 50% of Homosexuals have Aids

One curriculum, called "Me, My World, My Future," teaches that women who have an abortion "are more prone to suicide" and that as many as 10 percent of them become sterile. This contradicts the 2001 edition of a standard obstetrics textbook that says fertility is not affected by elective abortion.
*********************************************************
By the way this is a NeoCon Sex Education summary. There was much more to it but I was looking for the complete teaching standards and can not find them all.

 

[ElGringo17]

* Homosexuality can increase your chance of getting aids to 50%

* 50% of Homosexuals have Aids

As to the top quote, male homosexuals by a much greater factor than 50% increases ones likelyhood of aquiring HIV

As to the bottom quote, male homosexual HIV seroprevalence rates are statistically tied into their age.

As an example, about 20% of 20 year old male homosexuals are HIV seropositive, and at about 50 years of age, male homosexual seroprevalence rates are about 50%

Sorta goes to show you that male homosexuality statistically shortners ones lfiespan, and that AIDS DOES in fact discriminate, in spite of the anti-heterosexual propaganda spewed by heterophobic AIDS homophiles.

 

[UKAllTheWay]

They should teach the biology of sex with the parents permissions, and leave out the homosexual and other sexual deviant behaviors.

They should leave out moral/religious issues too, that is the parents responsbilites.

The whole scare tactic stuff is a joke.....especially the heterosexual AIDS propaganda nonsense.

From a health protection standpoint kids would be better off wearing a helmet in the car drive to school and never using condoms for sex then the other way around.

 

[Mixed View]

I don't have to believe you. I just graduated from highschool so this isn't exactly a stagnated topic for me. I know the kind of kids in highschool. I'm one of them.

If someone teaches a kid how to use a condom and do it with perfect use, that's intelligent. If someone gives a kid a condom and says, "Just in case..." they're basically saying, "It's okay that you're being irresponsible, just use this."

That's not a good policy.

I'm sorry, but why do kids need to be taught how to use a condom and how to get the pill when everyone at my school knew all about it by like 7th grade. Kids are always going to be irresponsible and say "Hey, it can't happen to me" (STD's) Since kids will always be irresponsible why wouldn't we teach the healthiest way of life? Which is abstinence.
Kids might say "I didn't know to use a condom"
Trust me, they did.

 

[Kelzie]

I'm sorry, but why do kids need to be taught how to use a condom and how to get the pill when everyone at my school knew all about it by like 7th grade. Kids are always going to be irresponsible and say "Hey, it can't happen to me" (STD's) Since kids will always be irresponsible why wouldn't we teach the healthiest way of life? Which is abstinence.
Kids might say "I didn't know to use a condom"
Trust me, they did.

Oh, I don't know...maybe cause it doesn't work? Kids are going to have sex. Nothing you can do will stop it. Might as well prepare them for it, instead of patting them on the head and telling them to wait for marriage.

 

[FinnMacCool]

Well let me just say coming from an actual teenager that I went to a catholic school for freshman year and we had all these teaching about A.I.D.s absitence etc. shoved down our throats. This person came in and said that 1 out of 5 people had an STD and that we are all going to die etc. etc. It went out one ear and came out the other. Who is supposed to believe any of that garbage really? And its coming from a very conservative woman by the name of Pam Stencil if anyone cares and how can you possibly trust her? She says also that going on pills make you 2 times more likely to get an std but then doesn't mention the fact that you can ususually use a condom and have your girl on the pill so I'm not sure if she is just plain lying or what. I looked up some information myself but I got different figures so whatever. I think I can make my own choices.

 

[Lantzolot]

I think that abstinence being taught is a necessity. STD's are a real problem in today's society. People need to know about them.

I had sex ed. for 2 weeks during health. I also have it now during world history. What? World history? All my history teacher ever talks about is sex. Did you know that a rhino does it for 3 days at a time but only once a year. A lion does it an average of 8 times a day. What does that have to do with world history.

 

[Kelzie]

I think that abstinence being taught is a necessity. STD's are a real problem in today's society. People need to know about them.

I had sex ed. for 2 weeks during health. I also have it now during world history. What? World history? All my history teacher ever talks about is sex. Did you know that a rhino does it for 3 days at a time but only once a year. A lion does it an average of 8 times a day. What does that have to do with world history.

What three days straight? I mean do they take cigarette breaks or anything?

 

[Nezdragon]

Oh, I don't know...maybe cause it doesn't work? Kids are going to have sex. Nothing you can do will stop it. Might as well prepare them for it, instead of patting them on the head and telling them to wait for marriage.

Ok then. Lets apply your logic elsewhere. People are going to murder other people no matter what right? The law doesn't stop people, they're going to do it anyway. So why don't we teach that murder isn't necessarily bad, but you should kill people in the least painful way or whatever...

If making drugs illegal isn't stopping people from doing them, than according to your logic what's the point of making them illegal, when we could teach people *better* ways to do them? If they're going to do it anyway, what then is the point of enforcing the law?

Doesn't make much sense to me either.

The argument "they will do it anyway" is simply irresponsible and self-defeating. You cannot justify an argument that way. Actually, it sounds pretty stupid.

In African countries where they taught 'safe sex' and gave out free condoms, the number of AIDs patients skyrocketed. In other African countries where abstinance was taught, AIDs rates went down. Obviously abstinence is the better choice.

Oh, and many kids usually don't know crap about sex. They think such things as "you won't get pregnant the first time" or "you won't get an STD if you do it for the first time"...

If kids are going to be abstinent, I'm all for that (being abstinent myself, it isn't as hard to do as you make it out to be). If kids decide to have sex, then they ought to pay the price for their decisions. They should be responsible for the consequences. If we teach kids THAT, I bet a lot less teens would be having sex. I have yet to see any of these 'scare videos', and quite frankly I don't need to. I made that decision on my own.

 

[Kelzie]

Ok then. Lets apply your logic elsewhere. People are going to murder other people no matter what right? The law doesn't stop people, they're going to do it anyway. So why don't we teach that murder isn't necessarily bad, but you should kill people in the least painful way or whatever...

If making drugs illegal isn't stopping people from doing them, than according to your logic what's the point of making them illegal, when we could teach people *better* ways to do them? If they're going to do it anyway, what then is the point of enforcing the law?

Doesn't make much sense to me either.

The argument "they will do it anyway" is simply irresponsible and self-defeating. You cannot justify an argument that way. Actually, it sounds pretty stupid.

In African countries where they taught 'safe sex' and gave out free condoms, the number of AIDs patients skyrocketed. In other African countries where abstinance was taught, AIDs rates went down. Obviously abstinence is the better choice.

Oh, and many kids usually don't know crap about sex. They think such things as "you won't get pregnant the first time" or "you won't get an STD if you do it for the first time"...

If kids are going to be abstinent, I'm all for that (being abstinent myself, it isn't as hard to do as you make it out to be). If kids decide to have sex, then they ought to pay the price for their decisions. They should be responsible for the consequences. If we teach kids THAT, I bet a lot less teens would be having sex. I have yet to see any of these 'scare videos', and quite frankly I don't need to. I made that decision on my own.

Nice fallacy. Damn which one was it...Simon would know. Anyway, different scenarios, can't really use the same logic. Thanks for playing though. :2wave:

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I think that abstinence being taught is a necessity. STD's are a real problem in today's society. People need to know about them.

I had sex ed. for 2 weeks during health. I also have it now during world history. What? World history? All my history teacher ever talks about is sex. Did you know that a rhino does it for 3 days at a time but only once a year. A lion does it an average of 8 times a day. What does that have to do with world history.

...Hmm... I think I want to date a lioness. GROWL.

 

[steen]

In African countries where they taught 'safe sex' and gave out free condoms, the number of AIDs patients skyrocketed. In other African countries where abstinance was taught, AIDs rates went down. Obviously abstinence is the better choice.

I find it interesting that you saw a need to outright lie here. The only country that really got condoms introduced was kenya, and while rates went up in the other severely infected countries, the new HIV infectuion rate in Kenya dropped by 10-15%. If you hhave to make claims, at least make sure they are not outright false, ok?

Oh, and many kids usually don't know crap about sex. They think such things as "you won't get pregnant the first time" or "you won't get an STD if you do it for the first time"...

A spledid argument for effective, scientific and accurate sex-ed.

If kids are going to be abstinent, I'm all for that (being abstinent myself, it isn't as hard to do as you make it out to be). If kids decide to have sex, then they ought to pay the price for their decisions. They should be responsible for the consequences.

By getting HIV! Yeah, what a great argument. "We won't teach you the truth, so that if you don't do what we want you to do, then you die." Your hatred of kids and your desire for their demise if they don't follow your moral script is duly noted.

You must be one of those why STILL believe that if your teenager defies you, he needs to be taken outside the city wall and stoned, right?

If we teach kids THAT, I bet a lot less teens would be having sex.

And those who do, they deserved to die anyway, right? I am always amazed of the callousness of the rightwing fundie theocrats. I am always amazed of how they turn the Biblical message of love and support into one of control, oppression and hate mongering.

 

[galenrox]

Ok then. Lets apply your logic elsewhere. People are going to murder other people no matter what right? The law doesn't stop people, they're going to do it anyway. So why don't we teach that murder isn't necessarily bad, but you should kill people in the least painful way or whatever...

If making drugs illegal isn't stopping people from doing them, than according to your logic what's the point of making them illegal, when we could teach people *better* ways to do them? If they're going to do it anyway, what then is the point of enforcing the law?

Doesn't make much sense to me either.

The argument "they will do it anyway" is simply irresponsible and self-defeating. You cannot justify an argument that way. Actually, it sounds pretty stupid.

In African countries where they taught 'safe sex' and gave out free condoms, the number of AIDs patients skyrocketed. In other African countries where abstinance was taught, AIDs rates went down. Obviously abstinence is the better choice.

Oh, and many kids usually don't know crap about sex. They think such things as "you won't get pregnant the first time" or "you won't get an STD if you do it for the first time"...

If kids are going to be abstinent, I'm all for that (being abstinent myself, it isn't as hard to do as you make it out to be). If kids decide to have sex, then they ought to pay the price for their decisions. They should be responsible for the consequences. If we teach kids THAT, I bet a lot less teens would be having sex. I have yet to see any of these 'scare videos', and quite frankly I don't need to. I made that decision on my own.

Alright, this argument is just flat out proposterous, I mean dead seriously. For one, when it comes to illegal drugs, why not make them safer?
And as far as the murdering analogy, my brain tried to make a run for it after that one, cause it's sick and tired of being forced to take in ideas as ridiculous as that, and then comprehend that there are actually people who actually think that that is in some way shape or form a pertinent analogy!

How many people have sex in their lives? How many people murder someone in their lives? Everyone except for priests, basically, believe that sex is ok under fairly broad conditions, such as marriage, which is quite common, yet murder is by definition never legal under any conditions.

Kids will screw, not all of them, but most of them. This is a fact. Abstinence classes do nothing. As someone who has gone through those ridiculous classes, I'll explain to you the effect. First, they scared the hell out of me about sex with all sorts of worst case scenario photos of STDs, like "Notice how it's black and *****. It fell off two weeks after this picture was taken" and so on. Although I didn't take this particularly seriously, it created the idea in my head that having sex isn't really the most responsible way of taking care of my penis.
And then I had sex. And guess what? I was FINE! My penis was right where it was afterwards, and seemed actually quite pleased!
And this then taught me that the school had been lying to me outright, and that I shouldn't take anything they told me about sex seriously, and thus the school lost all credibility and thus all ability to curb my sexual activity, even when it was at a point where it needed curbing.

You can't lie to kids. The majority of abstinence programs are based either on lies or at the very least deliberate attempts to mislead kids, but what they're ignoring that these kids are also reaching an age when they start to see through this bullshit, and thus it is at this point when trust in someone who's older and wiser, such as many people at a school, is most important, and yet you cling to this idea that destroys trust in anyone at these schools, and considering most kids don't really like to listen to their parents talk about sex, you're destroying a resource that could be very valuable in teaching RESPONSIBLE sex, like "It won't kill you, at least it is EXTREMELY unlikely to kill you, but in the end you realize that if you do it enough with enough people you've spread yourself so thin that you'll regret doing it in the first place." Tell the truth, build up trust.

 

[ludahai]

But shouldn't a teacher encourage a student to make the right choice?

That's the parents responsibility. In my opinion, the parents should be given the curriculum BEFORE the course begins and parents should have the right to opt their children out of the class if they see fit.

 

[Kelzie]

That's the parents responsibility. In my opinion, the parents should be given the curriculum BEFORE the course begins and parents should have the right to opt their children out of the class if they see fit.

I also think parents should be able to opt their kids out of algebra, because guaranteed knowing how to solve three variable equations is a lot less useful than sex ed.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I also think parents should be able to opt their kids out of algebra, because guaranteed knowing how to solve three variable equations is a lot less useful than sex ed.

Ohh snap!

Hey some people use asymtopes alot more than they use sex ed.

...Steven Hawking?

 

[ludahai]

I also think parents should be able to opt their kids out of algebra, because guaranteed knowing how to solve three variable equations is a lot less useful than sex ed.

Give me a break. A required academic subject like algebra is not on the same plane as sex ed which touches on some moral issues, some of which would be offensive to people of religious persuasion. I have a right to raise my children in a Christian household without the state introducing the amorality of premarital sex and condoms in school.

 

[galenrox]

Give me a break. A required academic subject like algebra is not on the same plane as sex ed which touches on some moral issues, some of which would be offensive to people of religious persuasion. I have a right to raise my children in a Christian household without the state introducing the amorality of premarital sex and condoms in school.

it depends on the time from where you draw your morals. The belief against all pre-marital sex is somewhat antiquated, and mathematicians have been executed before for progressive mathematic ideas, so thus if you just draw your morals from further back in time than many, since a lot of people, including myself, draw our morals from older sources (christianity), algebra could very well be considered a moral issue to some.

Plus, although your idea sounds great in theory, in actual practicality it leaves quite a bit to be desired. Yes, it would be fantastic if all parents taught kids what they need to know to make them safe, but the fact is some parents are scared, and some parents believe that as long as their kids don't know anything about the subject then they'll never do it, and some parents just aren't good, and wouldn't adress the topic out of sheer laziness, and thus we're left with kids who know how to screw, are ready to screw, and don't know anything about how to be safe about it.
And believe you me, if I hadn't had the idea of condoms crammed down my throat from a young age, I'd probably be a father now, or at the very least a guy who drove a girl to the abortion clinic.
I just find it amazing that so many people who are opposed to abortion are also so opposed to steps to prevent them.

 

[ludahai]

Plus, although your idea sounds great in theory, in actual practicality it leaves quite a bit to be desired. Yes, it would be fantastic if all parents taught kids what they need to know to make them safe, but the fact is some parents are scared,

Why should my rights as a responsible parent be taken away from be due to the fact that some certainly are NOT so responsible?

 

[Kelzie]

Give me a break. A required academic subject like algebra is not on the same plane as sex ed which touches on some moral issues, some of which would be offensive to people of religious persuasion. I have a right to raise my children in a Christian household without the state introducing the amorality of premarital sex and condoms in school.

I am morally offended at the thought of my children learning algebra. I have the right to raise my children in an algebra-free household.

 

[ludahai]

I am morally offended at the thought of my children learning algebra. I have the right to raise my children in an algebra-free household.

Please don't give me cause to lose respect for you intelligence. Though we usually disagree, I respect you. This is pure lunacy on your part and you know it.

 

[Mixed View]

Alright, this argument is just flat out proposterous, I mean dead seriously. For one, when it comes to illegal drugs, why not make them safer?
And as far as the murdering analogy, my brain tried to make a run for it after that one, cause it's sick and tired of being forced to take in ideas as ridiculous as that, and then comprehend that there are actually people who actually think that that is in some way shape or form a pertinent analogy!

How many people have sex in their lives? How many people murder someone in their lives? Everyone except for priests, basically, believe that sex is ok under fairly broad conditions, such as marriage, which is quite common, yet murder is by definition never legal under any conditions.

Kids will screw, not all of them, but most of them. This is a fact. Abstinence classes do nothing. As someone who has gone through those ridiculous classes, I'll explain to you the effect. First, they scared the hell out of me about sex with all sorts of worst case scenario photos of STDs, like "Notice how it's black and *****. It fell off two weeks after this picture was taken" and so on. Although I didn't take this particularly seriously, it created the idea in my head that having sex isn't really the most responsible way of taking care of my penis.
And then I had sex. And guess what? I was FINE! My penis was right where it was afterwards, and seemed actually quite pleased!
And this then taught me that the school had been lying to me outright, and that I shouldn't take anything they told me about sex seriously, and thus the school lost all credibility and thus all ability to curb my sexual activity, even when it was at a point where it needed curbing.

You can't lie to kids. The majority of abstinence programs are based either on lies or at the very least deliberate attempts to mislead kids, but what they're ignoring that these kids are also reaching an age when they start to see through this bullshit, and thus it is at this point when trust in someone who's older and wiser, such as many people at a school, is most important, and yet you cling to this idea that destroys trust in anyone at these schools, and considering most kids don't really like to listen to their parents talk about sex, you're destroying a resource that could be very valuable in teaching RESPONSIBLE sex, like "It won't kill you, at least it is EXTREMELY unlikely to kill you, but in the end you realize that if you do it enough with enough people you've spread yourself so thin that you'll regret doing it in the first place." Tell the truth, build up trust.

I really don't like the analagy that " Well if they do it then we should change everything we teach to make it safer, but the right thing to do we shouldn't teach" Just cause people do it doesn't mean we should change what we teach.

Can everyone admit that abstinence is the healthiest lifestyle, cause if it is then it is the safest, then we should teach it.

 

[Kelzie]

Please don't give me cause to lose respect for you intelligence. Though we usually disagree, I respect you. This is pure lunacy on your part and you know it.

No it's not. You seem to be of the opinion that your religious morals are more important than educating your children. Well, than so are mine.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't the church force the guy who discovered the earth was round to recant? Seems religion doesn't really mix well with facts.

What about people who don't believe in medicines? Should there children be forced to take biology, where they could potentially learn about vaccines?

Or howbout the people who think that no literature should be read except the bible because it is corrupting? Should they be allowed to opt their children out of english?

Don't get all cranky on me because I exposed your argument.

 

[Kelzie]

I really don't like the analagy that " Well if they do it then we should change everything we teach to make it safer, but the right thing to do we shouldn't teach" Just cause people do it doesn't mean we should change what we teach.

Can everyone admit that abstinence is the healthiest lifestyle, cause if it is then it is the safest, then we should teach it.

Sitting in your house with the lights off, no appliances running, and eating veggies and tofu for the rest of your life is also much healthier than most life styles. Should we be teaching that in school? People are going to have a life. We teach them not to leave the stove on, to look both ways before crossing the street, and a slew of other things designed to make them safer for life. Be serious here. People, at some point in their lives, will be having sex. Might as well teach them how to do it responsibly.