• 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!

Are kissing and hugging the last stop before groin central station?

Are kissing and hugging the last stop before groin central station?

  • I fully support this bill and or cause

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9
That's not what the law is preventing. The law is preventing teachers who are teaching sex ed from talking about said activities. Laws against molesting children are already in place.

Ooooh, I see. I should've read the entire article.

They say that sex education should be more abstinence-based instead of talking about how to have sex. I would agree with that. Kids know how to have sex anyway. They don't need to be told that guys like it when a girl grabs their crotch. The points of sex education isn't to teach kids how to have sex, but how to prevent STDs, pregnancy, etc. I fail to see how discussing how to pleasure your mate has much of a place in junior high/high school sex ed.
 
Ooooh, I see. I should've read the entire article.

They say that sex education should be more abstinence-based instead of talking about how to have sex. I would agree with that. Kids know how to have sex anyway. They don't need to be told that guys like it when a girl grabs their crotch. The points of sex education isn't to teach kids how to have sex, but how to prevent STDs, pregnancy, etc. I fail to see how discussing how to pleasure your mate has much of a place in junior high/high school sex ed.

What one sees as instructions on how to have sex, another sees as providing health information. You would be amazed at some of the bodily misconceptions that teenagers often have.
 
What one sees as instructions on how to have sex, another sees as providing health information. You would be amazed at some of the bodily misconceptions that teenagers often have.

How is speaking about grabbing crotches or breasts health information? What's next? Is the teacher going to give the girls a lesson in how to properly give a blowjob?
 
How is speaking about grabbing crotches or breasts health information? What's next? Is the teacher going to give the girls a lesson in how to properly give a blowjob?

I very much doubt that teachers are instructing how to do this and it is hyperbole on the account of politicians to get a bill passed. This happens regularly.

Also, existing policies are enough to handle this situation. I doubt any school in the country doesn't have a PDA policy in their manual.
 
Ooooh, I see. I should've read the entire article.

They say that sex education should be more abstinence-based instead of talking about how to have sex. I would agree with that. Kids know how to have sex anyway. They don't need to be told that guys like it when a girl grabs their crotch. The points of sex education isn't to teach kids how to have sex, but how to prevent STDs, pregnancy, etc. I fail to see how discussing how to pleasure your mate has much of a place in junior high/high school sex ed.

They need to be taught how to have sex safely, which they don't know. Which includes talking about things like condoms, birth control, all forms of sex such as vaginal, oral, and anal. Also same sex sex needs to be discussed as well. Abstinence needs to be taught as well, but abstinence only education does not work, and equates to sweeping the problem under the rug.
 
They need to be taught how to have sex safely, which they don't know. Which includes talking about things like condoms, birth control, all forms of sex such as vaginal, oral, and anal. Also same sex sex needs to be discussed as well. Abstinence needs to be taught as well, but abstinence only education does not work, and equates to sweeping the problem under the rug.

They need to be taught how their body works!! I have heard some stuff that comes out of a teenager's mouth about birth control and the functionality of genitals and what not that is just horrifyingly stupid.
 
They need to be taught how to have sex safely, which they don't know. Which includes talking about things like condoms, birth control, all forms of sex such as vaginal, oral, and anal. Also same sex sex needs to be discussed as well. Abstinence needs to be taught as well, but abstinence only education does not work, and equates to sweeping the problem under the rug.

I agree that abstinence only education doesn't work, but it should be emphasized.
 
Please tell me this is a joke. Gateway sexual activity? So if I give my mother, or sister a hug before I get on a plane, will I also be charged with attempted incest?

No. That's not what the article is about.
 
I agree that abstinence only education doesn't work, but it should be emphasized.

And I don't necessarily disagree with that, just don't de-emphasize the ways you can have safe sex, or put a negative connotation on them. Because if you do that, it's not going to stop the kids from having sex, it's going to stop them from practicing safe sex.
 
Or they could just send the daughter away for nine months and then have them mysteriously come back with a new unexplained cousin or something.
 
No. That's not what the article is about.

I know that, but ridiculous measures require ridiculous response. I can't even fathom how he expects to enforce the proposed fines for this without getting kicked in the ass by the Supreme Court.
 
I know that, but ridiculous measures require ridiculous response. I can't even fathom how he expects to enforce the proposed fines for this without getting kicked in the ass by the Supreme Court.

I don't see how this would be unconstitutional ...
 
And I don't necessarily disagree with that, just don't de-emphasize the ways you can have safe sex, or put a negative connotation on them. Because if you do that, it's not going to stop the kids from having sex, it's going to stop them from practicing safe sex.

Kids are going to have unsafe sex no matter what the sex education teacher says. They have the judgement of a celery stalk. The only thing we can do is teach them how to do it safely and hope they actually THINK before jumping in and pretending they're invincible.
 
Kids are going to have unsafe sex no matter what the sex education teacher says. They have the judgement of a celery stalk. The only thing we can do is teach them how to do it safely and hope they actually THINK before jumping in and pretending they're invincible.

And that is my whole point so I don't know what we're arguing about?
 
I didn't think we were arguing. We're agreeing. :)

Well it sounded(or read) like we were arguing to me at least. Well up until that last post.
 
Just my two cents sex ed doesnt need to be based on anything but FACTS and INFORMATION period.

If you base it on anything else you set the kids up for failure.

There are also no laws needed in this area besides parental consent of when it can be taught. "Laws" about touching are pure nonsense.

I think sex ed should be deeply informative based on facts, give them ALL the information and let them decided because with or without the information that is what going to happen anyway. I don't know why people are so naive about this stuff.

I have no problem with talking about morals, abstinence etc etc but those are only talking points in a sex ed class, they should be touched on, explained that everybody has their own and move on because that part is for THE PARENTS.

I wish the OPTION for sex ed started as soon as 6 grade for all kids with parents consent of course and if the parents feel that's too early then they can hold off until they feel its right BUT guess what, kids talk, have older family members and its an electronic world so IMO the sooner the better. Education education education.
 
It takes a twisted mind to not only fear sex this much, but to fear all contact between people. It's really only our American insecurity over sex that makes us equate any touching with a "gateway" to sex. We are so insecure about it that we cannot see any way to be physical with each other without being sexual. Less repressed cultures don't equate the two. Does anyone really only ever hug or kiss someone they intend to sleep with? To suggest that there is no valid human contact that isn't sexual is just plain absurd.
 
It takes a twisted mind to not only fear sex this much, but to fear all contact between people. It's really only our American insecurity over sex that makes us equate any touching with a "gateway" to sex. We are so insecure about it that we cannot see any way to be physical with each other without being sexual. Less repressed cultures don't equate the two. Does anyone really only ever hug or kiss someone they intend to sleep with? To suggest that there is no valid human contact that isn't sexual is just plain absurd.


You have a point. Over the last four decades I've seen people become a LOT more paranoid about their children based on media frenzy over child abuse, and also a LOT more sexualized and polarized about sex and related issues.

I come from a touchy-feely family. Beware if you show up at a family gathering as someone's guest, you will almost certainly be hugged and possibly kissed. :mrgreen: Even the men hug each other, despite that being out of fashion these days... I hug my son every day, sometimes I kiss him on the head. NONE of this touchy-feely stuff in my family is the least bit sexual, but there are people who think it is wrong anyway. We ignore those people. :mrgreen:

However, a careful reading of the available info reveals the the governor was actually mainly trying to prevent teacher endorsement of things like oral and anal and manual sex. The whole hugging and kissing thing was mainly based off something a comedian said in a parody.
 
You have a point. Over the last four decades I've seen people become a LOT more paranoid about their children based on media frenzy over child abuse, and also a LOT more sexualized and polarized about sex and related issues.

I come from a touchy-feely family. Beware if you show up at a family gathering as someone's guest, you will almost certainly be hugged and possibly kissed. :mrgreen: Even the men hug each other, despite that being out of fashion these days... I hug my son every day, sometimes I kiss him on the head. NONE of this touchy-feely stuff in my family is the least bit sexual, but there are people who think it is wrong anyway. We ignore those people. :mrgreen:

However, a careful reading of the available info reveals the the governor was actually mainly trying to prevent teacher endorsement of things like oral and anal and manual sex.
The whole hugging and kissing thing was mainly based off something a comedian said in a parody.

And I'd still say that is too far. All of those things are perfectly valid sexual acts, and they need to be discussed in sex ed.
 
And I'd still say that is too far. All of those things are perfectly valid sexual acts, and they need to be discussed in sex ed.

I am willing to be the Manual may disagree with you.
 
Back
Top Bottom