So, in order to ward off a 1 in 1000 occurrence, we need to train 13 year olds up like professional porn stars.
That makes perfect sense! :roll:
Condoms break much more than that, especially if handled by an inexperienced person. I remember a kid in high school who used a condom, but didn't roll it down. He lost it during sex and couldn't find it. I always wondered about where it went and how long it might have been in there.
Oh Yes! People have been doing sex just great for thousands of years as long as you don't count all the rape, groping and molesting, sexual harassment, stalking, sadistic physical and sexual abuse of slaves, enemies at war, servants, wives and children, unwanted children, deadly botched abortions, unsatisified and frustrated women, non-consensual genital mutilation of children, people who tortured themselves because of their normal and harmless desires or acts, child molestation, incest, jealous murders, diseases, and the torture and murder of sexual non-comformists.
Oh, trying to back pedal I see. You said that "lube helps prevent the spread of HIV." You didn't mention anything about condoms because you were trying to defend your buddy's lube remarks when he was obviously referring to anal sex and everyone but YOU knows it. :lol:
Taken to an extreme or in the wrong situation, lack of foreplay can be rape or at least very unpleasant. Schools needn't teach how to do foreplay, but the role of foreplay should be discussed. All the major aspects of sex are worth discussing at some level. If the classes don't cover something important, questions will probably come up anyways from the students (unless they don't allow questions).
There is no need to be going into such depth with middle school aged children. Most of them are not having sex. The ones who are should probably be investigated by CPS, not taught how to make it more comfortable. A lot of times when a 13-year-old is sexually active it's because she or he was sexually molested or abused in some way, and they are acting out.
Other than teaching criminal law about sexuality, the school teaching how kids should interact with each other in interpersonal relationships is a violation of the separation of church and state. The government, ie school, is teaching a belief system of one religion (Christianity) is correct and teaching belief systems of other religions, such as Islam, is an evil, false religion.
"Abstinence" is Christian doctrine, not government law, and "abstinence" is not a doctrine of all religions.
All religions to not accept anal sex. Yet it is being taught.
Why can the government teach children in school which religions rules of relationship and sex are good and which rules of relationship and sex are evil and wrong?
I didn't know that the poster is gay, so I did not assume he was referring to anal sex because having lube available when using condoms is a good safe sex practice, gay or straight. People also get HIV from blood transfusions and use of a contaminated needle. Yes, there are 13 year olds shooting up. Anal sex happens pretty commonly between teen boys (both experimenting and gay) in boarding schools, during sleepovers, camping etc.
For which that principal and you have decided that the solution is to tell 12 year olds that as they enter puberty they should have anal sex in response to their sexual urges? Just with each other or with the teacher? The teacher could probably do in more correctly the first few times as part of their sex education to avoid them becoming a rapist.
And the reason you think that is exploration of serial rapists was - in your opinion - that they lacked have sex by age 13?
I don't children are as stupid as the pedophile minded principal believes they are in learning about sex, but they may be as vulnerable as the principal hopes.
They shouldn't and don't. If they are discussing a particular act it might be appropriate to mention "this religion or culture considers this practice taboo, while this one doesn't" for social/historic background. Just because a religion doesn't accept something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and shouldn't be discussed in school. No religion accepts murder, yet it happens and gets discussed in school.
For which the solution is to have that sex supervised by teachers in school instead so the teachers can watch to make sure they are doing it correctly and show them how if not?
If that was something going to be taught in a school my child was going to I would take the child out and put the child into virtually any other private school. If I could not afford to, I would tell my child that the teacher is a danger, mentally sick person and to scream for help if the teacher comes within 10 feet of him or her. I also would be exercising my free speech at school board meeting and the PTA demanding the pedophile minded teacher, principal or whoever is involved - naming them so the newspaper got it right - as pedophile-minded sick people and would throw their names in those terms with their pictures all over the Internet - with Google map showing where each one lives. My wife would do worst, but this is a small child. Within a week whoever most put this into place would be perceived as a pedophile by nearly everyone.
Both of us would be intolerant of a sicko wanting to mess with own child's head in explaining his/her in forcing our child to listen to his/her sex-fantascies about adolescent sex, requiring our child to take tests to prove our child accepts and agrees, about condoms, lube, the proper steps to take in pursuit of sex, how to have sex or any other pedophile-minded outrageousness towards our children. Leaving out violence and property destruction, it would be collective vigilante-ism at it's most effect levels.
So in addition, you want schools teaching religious doctrine - claiming expertise in it. As you said, no religion accepts murder, but there is not consensus on religion on sex.
Where is the statutory authority of the government to be dictating to children how they should act in regards to personal relationships away from school? Who the hell do they think they are? Mandatory education in the principal's or teacher's view - or the government's view - on the proper and improper ways of sex, courtship and romance? You?
The only legitimate grounds for schools to teach about sex is 1.) biology and 2.) statutory law. All the rest is religious bigotry, the government promoting it's own ideologies being forced upon children of the sex-values of whatever government official is dictating it, and absurd classes in general.
If the school wants to offer - not during regular hours - a teacher or principal telling students - whose parents and those students want to listen - his or her own practices and believes about sex, that would be fine - as long as anyone else was allowed to use school facilities to do so too. To advocate and teach about polygamy, to teach against marriage. To lecture against marriage. To lecture against anal sex. To declare that men are dominate. To teach that men are not. In favor of anal sex - or any and all other topics about sex and relationship.
I don't know what makes you of superior rights to declare that YOUR personal ideology will be forced upon child and counter views will not.
No one said that we should teach that 12 year olds should have anal sex. That is a lie. The point is that some 12-13 year olds are having anal and all sorts of other types of sex and should be taught how to do it safely, which is with a partner they know, and with condoms and lube.
They should be sexually educated but take it easy! How about telling them the general trend in sexuality first rather then the whole story at once?!
You have anal, and oral sex mentioned there. Why not tell these later after they have the basics for not everyone may enjoy those you know (especially the first one).
The only freaking things missing in the list are: two girls and a cup sexual interaction, all forms of paraphilia, bukkake, bondage, S&M (not talking about the DP user), and who knows what else!
While I agree that some kids know this stuff, it's not true that everyone knows this stuff. And thus, those that don't - and would never do such things - are being exposed to it and treated as if that doesn't matter.
You are outraged about activities that never happen ["have that sex supervised by teachers in school"] and viewpoints that no one advocates ["forcing our child to listen to his/her sex-fantascies"].
What does promoting 12 year olds to have anal sex nicely have to do with academic education?
Since that school district is assumes all moral upbringing of children and all other parental roles the school district should have pay all costs of childrearing. With schools telling children how to have sex and how to have relationships, it is inexcusable that schools also don't tell children how to vote and what clothes to wear.
It is not at all unusual for young people to have oral and anal sex before they have vaginal sex. What do you think happens at single gender boarding schools?
Did you know that there is a difference between mentioning and promoting? Look it up.
No one has any hate here. Where you get that, I have no idea. We just don't want you pushing your sick ideologies onto our children. If you want your children to be promiscuous at an early age, go for it, but we don't want your bad influence on our children.
Who elects the school boards? The parents. The "community." States and the fed should be running this thing, under the advice of real doctors and researchers and free from the prejudices of redneck indiana parents.
I support intelligent federal and state legislation requiring fact-based sex education with a focus on safety and health. I have no probelm with teaching that sex, like driving, sky diving and drinking is risky and is most appropriate for older people not young teenagers.
I support intelligent federal and state legislation requiring fact-based sex education with a focus on safety and health. I have no probelm with teaching that sex, like driving, sky diving and drinking is risky and is most appropriate for older people not young teenagers.
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?