• 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!

DA: sex ed could get teachers arrested

So he's a war hero who saved children and is saying ludicrous things about teachers getting arrested.

American said:
Okay it's obvious that many here have strayed off the topic, and some have no clue who this DA really is. Well I'll tell you, he's a war hero who saved orphans in Iraq.
Click to expand...
 
American said:
Okay it's obvious that many here have strayed off the topic, and some have no clue who this DA really is. Well I'll tell you, he's a war hero who saved orphans in Iraq.
Click to expand...

Relevancy fail.

fail-owned-chacha-question-fail.jpg


:lol:
 
misterman said:
So he's a war hero who saved children and is saying ludicrous things about teachers getting arrested.
Click to expand...
You don't know that he's wrong.
 
Jerry said:
Some token minority of students will have sex, sure, but endorsing it will encourage many more to risk unwanted pregnancy then there would have been had you not.
Click to expand...

There is no small minority about teenagers having sex. They will and that is just a part of society today. The more they know about it the safer they will be. I am not saying the school should hand out condoms, but at least tell them why to use them and what they can help prevent.
 
American said:
You don't know that he's wrong.
Click to expand...

Um, yeah, he's wrong about teachers getting arrested for teaching what state law directs them to teach, and that many parents routinely teach to their children as well.

If you think this idiotic ploy by this DA has any connection to reality, well, I have to stop here to stay within forum guidelines.
 
Sex ed isn't out teaching them to have sex, it's about making responsible choices so that you are protected from harm. If they don't learn about it in an official capacity, then they will learn about sex from their peers and the media they watch. Most parents don't do the sex ed talk or it's extremely brief and doesn't deliver the facts.

Abstinence is a valid tool to avoiding all the problems associated with sex, but all scientific evidence points to the fact that abstinence-only education doesn't work. We live in a world where making love can get you sick now if it's with the wrong person so you need to protect yourself.

I found most sex education classes redundant growing up because I was already looking up the reading materials on my own, but most of my peers only knew what their friends were talking about and plenty of rumors and misinformation got ironed out in the classroom. I didn't grow up in the google era though, so now I'd imagine a lot of kids who are curious just look up the facts online. It's still beneficial to have an educator explain it to you though.

There is no valid reason to deny young people access to knowledge about their own bodies for their self-protection and self-actualization. Keeping people ignorantly in the dark is the best way to ensure that they make mistakes in life, and in this case mistakes that they could possibly never recover from.
 
soccerboy22 said:
There is no small minority about teenagers having sex. They will and that is just a part of society today. The more they know about it the safer they will be. I am not saying the school should hand out condoms, but at least tell them why to use them and what they can help prevent.
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't they?
 
samsmart said:
This also brings up another question: what would happen if parents tried to teach their children the things the DA say would endorse sex among teens, which is illegal? The DA isn't saying that the state shouldn't teach teens those aspects, but rather anyone who tries to teach teens those aspects. So if you read closely, the district attorney is also implying that even parents teaching their children how to use a condom is illegal and could lead to prosecution.

So what do you parents think of that? This prosecutor isn't saying "Leave sex education to the parents," but rather, "Anybody who tries to give a teenager comprehensive sex education is breaking the law" and taking the decision out of the hands of parents.

So, parents, I would think twice before supporting this district attorney who says he can prosecute anyone who teaches a teenager how to use a condom, because he's including parents in that group.
Click to expand...

Probably the same thing that happens when parents let their children drink in the home: nothing.

Here in SD you can give your child hard liquor if you want, as long as it's in your home; that doesn't mean minors can or should be allowed to drink in bars or other public venues.

So do keep in mind that teachers are not afforded parental rights and the the public school is not a private home.

Besides, the left doesn't support homeschooling, this would include sex-ed.
 
Last edited:
soccerboy22 said:
There is no small minority about teenagers having sex. They will and that is just a part of society today. The more they know about it the safer they will be. I am not saying the school should hand out condoms, but at least tell them why to use them and what they can help prevent.
Click to expand...

Teens are gona smoke, too, so it follows you support free Marlboro Lights handed out at the school..."they're going to smoke anyway...

Same exact thing.

Yes, we should tech teens about having sex safely, and safely means in a committed relationship.

Some token minority of teens are going to do whatever anyway, that doesn't mean we condone it.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Besides, the left doesn't support homeschooling, this would include sex-ed.
Click to expand...

Another sweeping, and unsupported, statement.
 
Jerry said:
Teens are gona smoke, too, so it follows you support free Marlboro Lights handed out at the school..."they're going to smoke anyway...

Same exact thing.
Click to expand...

Except for the part where condoms prevent unwanted pregnancy.

Then again, this comparison doesn't really apply to me because I support teens having sex.

Yes, we should tech teens about having sex safely, and safely means in a committed relationship.
Click to expand...

Uh, what? Unwanted pregnancies are a result of sex, which has nothing to do with whether or not someone is in a relationship.

EDIT: Btw, they really need to add a section into the curriculum about grooming. There's nothing nastier than a hairy snatch.
 
Last edited:
Erod said:
You're one of those dudes that spends all his extra cash on trips to Thailand, aren't you.
Click to expand...

Now that is quality debate there. Accuse some one you disagree with of being something vile with no evidence. Keep up the good work.
 
Jerry said:
Teens are gona smoke, too, so it follows you support free Marlboro Lights handed out at the school..."they're going to smoke anyway...

Same exact thing.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. First of all, there's no safe way to smoke. Smoking is not an inherent part of our biology. There is no hormonal drive to smoke. Smoking can never be taken part in with any measure of "protection" from the diseases it causes.

This was a stupid comparison.

Yes, we should tech teens about having sex safely, and safely means in a committed relationship.

Some token minority of teens are going to do whatever anyway, that doesn't mean we condone it.
Click to expand...

Token minority? Either you were one of the chess club nerds who never had a girlfriend or you are intentionally blind to what teens really are like.
 
Redress said:
Now that is quality debate there. Accuse some one you disagree with of being something vile with no evidence. Keep up the good work.
Click to expand...

LOL, he just said that he "supports teens having sex."

Now how do you debate that seriously?
 
jallman said:
Uh, no. First of all, there's no safe way to smoke. Smoking is not an inherent part of our biology.
Click to expand...

Oh, man, what a great way for the cigarette industry to come back - invent "safe smoking."

Practice safe sex, and safe smoking, kids!
 
Erod said:
LOL, he just said that he "supports teens having sex."

Now how do you debate that seriously?
Click to expand...

Explain to him the reasons why it is a bad idea, the potential for abuse, and basically disagree logically. That is debate. What you did is just insult him, which made no point except make you the bad guy in the discussion.
 
Erod said:
LOL, he just said that he "supports teens having sex."

Now how do you debate that seriously?
Click to expand...

If you're legitimately trying to understand my position, it's quite simple. Many people here, even those that do support teaching teenagers about sex and condoms and stuff, come from the position that "they're going to do it anyways" and don't really say if they are actually okay with them having sex. They sort of dismiss that, which IMO makes their arguments incredibly stupid. By clarifying that I have absolutely no problem with teenagers having sex, it gives me consistency where they don't have it. For example, I am all for handing condoms out in high school for free, and so can argue based on principle. This is why Jerry's analogy doesn't apply to me.

Get it now? Or do you want to troll some more? :)
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Then again, this comparison doesn't really apply to me because I support teens having sex.

EDIT: Btw, they really need to add a section into the curriculum about grooming. There's nothing nastier than a hairy snatch.
Click to expand...

OK, Redress, those were his quotes.

Now where do I begin to debate that?
 
... America is one of the few countries I know of where people who know very little about a subject get to tell others why it should or should not be taught and how it should be taught.

Example:

The Christian right who is scientifically illiterate gets to tell the rest of the country what we should teach in science classes.

History revisionists in Texas get to dictate what should be printed in 80% of our history books.

And people who know virtually nothing about sexuality get to tell us just what sexuality is.
 
Erod said:
Now where do I begin to debate that?
Click to expand...

You could try debating the merits of pubic hair, but we all know (yourself included, hopefully) that would be impossible. :ssst:
 
Last edited:
Khayembii Communique said:
You could try debating the merits of pubic hair, but we all know (yourself included, hopefully) that would be impossible. :)
Click to expand...

I've never considered the merits of a teenager's hairy snatch, as apparently you have by your quotes earlier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom