• 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!

Kids n' Kondoms

What age?

  • 11 - 12

    Votes: 6 14.0%
  • 13 - 14

    Votes: 9 20.9%
  • 15 - 16

    Votes: 6 14.0%
  • 17 - 18

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 7.0%
  • Oh, hell no!

    Votes: 19 44.2%

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
At what age should our children be before the school system may issue government subsidized condoms to them?

i dont think schools should be issuing condoms at all,just like i dont believe schools should teach sex ed/

if condoms are issued it should be from a pharmacy(ive gotten boxes of condoms free from planned parenthood,and each one had a smiley face stapled dead center into the condom,how effective is a condom with 2 holes through it????)since pharmacies holdmuch higher standards than schools and other facilities.

on sex ed,schools shouldnt teach it,or never should have the need to,this is a result of lazy parenting.ever heard those talk to your kid before someoneelse does commercials???it involves a dad talking about sex ed and the kid says he alsready knows,and the dad asks what he learned in sex ed,and the kid saysno i learned from doing.


since sex ed teaches how it works but taches nothing from experience,whereas parents have seen from experience what happens and can fully explain the consequences,many through trial and error.this is why i think parents should be more involved.infact nearly every female ive seen with involved parents has been more involved in protection,wheras females whohad nearly no parental involvement tend to go for attention,and even believing getting pregnant means a way to hold attention and commitment to them.in short its a failure on parents to be involved and teach their kids right from wrong,and demanding the stae do the most basic aspects of parenting and demand the schools do what trained pharmasits should do.
 
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.

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 all for sex ed, but I don't agree with the schools handing out condoms to other people's children. Most of the kids would probably just use them for balloons anyway.
 
Yes. Yes it is.

Since free birthcontrol is a step forward, what else should we be paying for? This is curiousity, as I dont really care as I am not going to be paying for it anyhow.
 
Rather than hand out condoms since sexual practices and morals are the school's decision, it would be far better then to hand out sex toys to young teens to play with to avoid diseases. Take that to the school board. All girls age 12 and older get an electric dildo and can get free battery replacements at the office. Similar toys for boys too. Also, hand out lots of child porn to the kids so they can use them age-appropriately.

That is far less likely to cause unwanted pregnancy or spread diseases.

If the schools would teach that homosexuality is vastly superior and encourage children to at least try it, that too might reduce the horrors of teen pregnancy that most our evil, rotten hell bound stupid mothers did for her first child. And, of course, the school absolutely should drill in how stupid most their parents were while at it.

That is less sexual intrusion into the children's lives and parents involvement than handing out condoms.
 
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? WHO are they having intercourse with? Each other? Why are they feeling that they must have intercourse at such a young age? And lastly, does anyone really think it is a good idea to just give that child a condom? That's kind of like giving an aspirin for amputation (like that? I just made that up - lol!).
 
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.

YOU ARE WRONG.

State laws

Each U.S. state (and the District of Columbia) has its own age of consent. Currently state laws set the age of consent at 16, 17 or 18. The most common age is 16.[46]
age of consent 16 (30): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia
age of consent 17 (9): Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Wyoming
age of consent 18 (12): Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania [47]

These state laws are discussed in detail below.
Ages of consent in North America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyone who gives a 14 year old child a condom anticipating it is to be used for sex - as opposed to an educational demonstration in class - should be criminally prosecuted. It is criminally illegal, and also therefore criminal juvenile deliquency, for a 14 year old to have sex. Any knowledge a 14 year old might be having or going to have sex - which asking for a condom would indicate - should immediately contact the police and juvenile authorities. Anyone facilitating in any way that child having sex is engaging in criminally contributing to the deliquency of a child - minimally - and should accordingly be prosecuted and held strictly civilly and criminally liable.
 
Last edited:
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.

I don't think that NOT giving out condoms is shielding the students. The only thing the school should be doing is sex education, teaching the children about responsible sex. There is no reason for the SCHOOL to be giving out condoms. Not giving them out also would not qualify as discouraging their use.

Perhaps for high school aged kids it might be a more appropriate gesture, but still questionable to give out condoms to children without parental knowledge IMO.
 
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?!

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.

Handing out condoms isn't "advice." It is openly endorsing children having sex, even if doing so is a felony criminal offense.

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).

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.

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.

Impose your promotion and facilitation of promiscuity on your own little children, not mine.

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.
 
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.
 
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.

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.
 
I also think that if children that young (11-14) are sexually active and having intercourse, the parents should be made aware of this ASAP if the school happens to find out. I think it would be pure negligence on the part of any school if they were to neglect telling the parents of children that young who were requesting condoms. It's just kind of creepy if you ask me.
 
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.

You'd probably be right that its on the low side. But "low" does not mean zero.
 
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'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. I'm not a right wing Bible thumper. BUT I do think since right wing Bible thumpers are required to send their children to school, what they think matters too as parents.

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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
You'd probably be right that its on the low side. But "low" does not mean zero.


In technical terms of the physical act of sex, without a doubt there are children "having sex" at age 6.

Since having sex at 12, 13 etc is criminally illegal and in fact is felony sexual assault, handing out condoms is basically certainly tolerating and supporting sexual assault, if not outright promoting it. Teach the children, "here, have the man use one of these so you don't get pregnant or a disease" to 13 year old girls. Actually very disgusting! I suppose it could come in handy for teachers on a tight budget. Because we don't want teachers getting the students pregnant or infected, do we?
 
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.


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.
 
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.

There is no such thing as a 12 year old having "safe" sex, even setting aside disease and pregnancy issues.
 
You're willing to hand out needles to facilitate school children shooting up does tell where you are coming from.

It sure does. I'm coming from a rational, evidence-based perspective that indicates those kind of programs work, as opposed to an emotional knee-jerk reaction.

I think the burden of proof is on you.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/reducing_teenage_pregnancy.pdf
New Studies Signal Dangers of Limiting Teen Access to Birth Control Information and Services

What the school IS telling them is that using a condom makes sex "safe," when it does not,

I don't know of any school that teaches that condoms are 100% safe. But they're a hell of a lot safer than doing nothing to prevent pregnancy.

and it asserts the only safety issue of sex is disease and pregnancy, which it isn't,

How does giving out a condom tell people that? Just because a condom only prevents disease/pregnancy means that they're telling kids that disease/pregnancy are all they have to worry about? If I tell people to wear their seatbelt in a car, am I telling them that they don't need to worry about drinking and driving as long as they wear it? :confused:

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.

Wearing a condom will reduce pregnancy by 86% for typical use and by 95% for perfect use. It will also dramatically reduce STD infection rates. "Safe" is a subjective term, but by any objective measure wearing a condom is a hell of a lot safer than not doing so.
 
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.
 
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.

This is a VERY interesting observation. This is possible. In every class there are a few girls who push for it in elementary schools, and they must have gotten the idea somewhere.
 
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.

This is evil. Why don't we then just close down every school and replace them with prisons, as soon as a girl in class wants to play with us? HAHAHA
 
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.

Great, so there is one more extra authority that itches for a reason to come down on us. I would vote "no" on this one. Surprising this may be to adults, but let me inform everyone, that it is not exclusively about how to hurt each other, that kids think about.
 
15-16 in my opinion. Only makes sense to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom