• 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!

Should schools include gay sex as part of sex education curriculum?

Should gay sex be added to the sex education curriculum?


  • Total voters
    38
Oh, I forgot to mention that Iam an anti-anal sex too :)

OK, but anal sex can be performed by one who is straight or one who is gay. So I'm not sure how this applies to your original question.
 
OK, but anal sex can be performed by one who is straight or one who is gay. So I'm not sure how this applies to your original question.

I think that "gay sex" musn't exist in a curriculum at all .. You cant deny that studients wont try to have sex with a same-sex person claiming that they are applying what shown in their books or whatever .
With no bias to my straight instincts, I see no reason "at all" from involving gay-sex as a part of any curriculum .
 
I think that "gay sex" musn't exist in a curriculum at all .. You cant deny that studients wont try to have sex with a same-sex person claiming that they are applying what shown in their books or whatever .
With no bias to my straight instincts, I see no reason "at all" from involving gay-sex as a part of any curriculum .

Sex education can be a great opportunity for teachers to make aware students about homosexuals, homosexuals in our society and to help pave the way for acceptance of such people within our own households, streets, communities etc. If people stop being ignorant of such things, then we wont see so much discrimination.
 
Would you forbid the discussion of sexual reproduction in the biology class as well? For instance, the difference between oviparous and viviparous animals?

That's not "sex-ed" and you know it. I'll thank you to be honest and on point.

Would it be feasible for a biology teacher to explain the anatomy of a mammal while ignoring the reproductive organs? Would the private parts of a dissected frog or cat be ignored?

That's not "sex-ed" and you know it. I'll thank you to be honest and on point.

How would you structure a lesson about the nature and purpose of DNA and chromosomes while avoiding the topic of 'sex?'

That's not "sex-ed" and you know it. I'll thank you to be honest and on point.
 
Grateful Heart said:
Would you forbid the discussion of sexual reproduction in the biology class as well? For instance, the difference between oviparous and viviparous animals?

Biology.

Why cant safe sex be a general term referring to all sex? Is there certain other health measures needed for gay sex? No. So sex-ed as a general term is much more affective. Theres no need to distinguish between the two. Would it be acceptable to do that since we are taught sex-ed at a fairly young age? Probably not.

On the contrary, im not saying dismiss homosexuality in the class during sex education. Its obvious there is discrimination in our society still against gays. Discrimination is usually a result of a lack of understanding, or ignorance. If people are educated about homosexuals maybe we can lift that iron curtain and really help homosexualism in society live without being opressed.

EDIT: Dont know why i use the term iron curtain, nothing else came into mind. Communism has nothing to do with it :cool:
 
Last edited:
Sex education can be a great opportunity for teachers to make aware students about homosexuals, homosexuals in our society and to help pave the way for acceptance of such people within our own households, streets, communities etc. If people stop being ignorant of such things, then we wont see so much discrimination.

Actually a better opportunity for such a discussion would be in civics, social studies, or current events. We only need open a newspaper, magazine, or any new web site these days to see the issue of gay rights discussed, even during presidential debates. We had a president proposing a constitutional amendment about the definition of marriage, after all.

Were our high school's supposed to ignore the potential constitutional amendment entirely? Or should they have somehow been expected to explain that Mr. Bush was supporting such an amendment without explaining its relevance to homosexuals?

;)
 
Actually a better opportunity for such a discussion would be in civics, social studies, or current events.

Okay, agreed.

We only need open a newspaper, magazine, or any new web site these days to see the issue of gay rights discussed, even during presidential debates. We had a president proposing a constitutional amendment about the definition of marriage, after all.

The issue of gay rights being discussed only gives those against homosexuals in our society a chance to voice there ignorant, unfounded arguments. Regardless of who proposes what constitutional amendment or who debates what, people need to be educated about these things, and it doesnt start in campaigns or newpapers. It begins in the classroom.

Were our high school's supposed to ignore the potential constitutional amendment entirely? Or should they have somehow been expected to explain that Mr. Bush was supporting such an amendment without explaining its relevance to homosexuals?

This poll isnt specific to the US only. No high school should ignore the existence of homosexuals in our society or within the school itself, in the US or abroad.
 
I think that "gay sex" musn't exist in a curriculum at all .. You cant deny that studients wont try to have sex with a same-sex person claiming that they are applying what shown in their books or whatever .
With no bias to my straight instincts, I see no reason "at all" from involving gay-sex as a part of any curriculum .

What about students who have "straight sex" and say the same thing?

Here's a reason: Education.

How else will students learn about it?
 
What about students who have "straight sex" and say the same thing?

Here's a reason: Education.

How else will students learn about it?

Trial and error? That's how I learned, goddamnit. (A lot more "error" than you'd think considering how few "trials" there were)
 
You're going to jerk off for a week over that post?!?!?!?

That's really creepy (Which is what my first girlfriend said when I pulled down my pants)
Be ready for some...
061224buttsecks.gif

 
The issue of gay rights being discussed only gives those against homosexuals in our society a chance to voice there ignorant, unfounded arguments.

Well, that's exactly the point. The more people are open to discussing their ignorant and unfounded arguments in a public forum... the more likely those ignorant and unfounded arguments are to be exposed for the ignorance and unfoundedness that they are!

It's similar to the creationist argument. The more they talk... the more they expose their idiocy.

:2wave:
 
Trial and error? That's how I learned, goddamnit. (A lot more "error" than you'd think considering how few "trials" there were)

That's unsafe, and not socially acceptable in today's society.
 
I find it so funny and ironic that the Surprise Butt Sex image uses a man that said the line:

"Queering doesn't make the world work"
 
Which one?

Me having sex or letting kids figure things out by trial and error?

Trial and error, 'cause if students are forced to use that method for gay sex, who's to say other students won't do the same concerning straight sex?
 
When did "sex education" change from teaching students how reproduction works to teaching them how to have sex?
 
When did "sex education" change from teaching students how reproduction works to teaching them how to have sex?

Britain, year 6, they teach us. Dont know about America but just because they dont do it there doesnt mean same goes for everywhere else.
 
Britain, year 6, they teach us. Dont know about America but just because they dont do it there doesnt mean same goes for everywhere else.

Well, you started this thread talking about Ohio. I grew up in Ohio and I know what the sex education was when I went through it.

The point is, there's a valid argument to be made to teach kids the biology of sex in school -- reproduction. I've got no problem with that. It's science, and it's something burgeoning adolescents need to know. I also have no problem with covering STD prevention anymore than I do with teaching dental health.

But anything beyond that is something very different, something the public schools have no business being in.
 
When did "sex education" change from teaching students how reproduction works to teaching them how to have sex?

I think I understand what you're trying to say here. I think you're making a distinction between teaching about the micro level mechanics of reproduction such as egg, sperm, zygote and so on, versus the teaching of the macro level mechanics of reproduction, which might be described as 'insert peg A into slot B.' Is that what you're saying?

If that's the case, would you include in the course an explanation of how the sperm actually manage to get from the testes to the egg? A 'detailed route map' if you will? Or would that be too close to teaching 'how' to have sex?

:confused:
 
Back
Top Bottom