View Poll Results: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

Voters
59. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    49 83.05%
  • No

    10 16.95%
Page 21 of 22 FirstFirst ... 1119202122 LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 211

Thread: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

  1. #201
    Professor
    bowerbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    australia
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 09:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,430

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by MajinLink View Post
    I think we need to hand out condoms in school and teach everything. Bristol Palin is a prime example of a failing sex education system. Just because you hand a kid a condom doesn't mean they'll use it. But if they're going to have sex, they'll have sex, and it's better with a condom than without.
    Well, they MIGHT use it but let's face it one condom does not go far with horny teenagers.

    Unless of course you are from Avegabenny where the local bicycle club keeps their emergency condom in a jar buried behind the Auto shed with a note "Please rinse out before replacing in jar"
    Last edited by bowerbird; 09-30-10 at 05:56 AM.
    Greenhouse gases: Any gas that, by an accident of chemistry, happens to absorb radiation of a type that the Earth, by an accident of history, would like to lose.
    The internet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind- boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it.


  2. #202
    Advisor Johnny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    06-24-11 @ 07:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    571

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by MajinLink View Post
    Bristol Palin is a prime example of a failing sex education system. Just because you hand a kid a condom doesn't mean they'll use it. But if they're going to have sex, they'll have sex, and it's better with a condom than without.
    It doesn't really affect her though. The family is wealthy. She can afford a kid. Just saying.
    “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
    -James Madison

  3. #203
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Simple question, yes or no, and explain your answer.

    Personally I think we should, it doesn't provide our kids with a proper sex education, and doesn't prepare them for the real world. I also think that sex education should include information on LGBT issues, and I think that our schools should offer condoms to our students with no questions asked.
    I agree with you on the abstinence thing.
    But why should it include lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender?

    Sex ed should be purely fundamental - without delving into an opinion at all - it should approach it as a function of nature and nothing beyond that. The emotion, relationship and other aspects aren't a school-nature.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  4. #204
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    I agree with you on the abstinence thing.
    But why should it include lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender?

    Sex ed should be purely fundamental - without delving into an opinion at all - it should approach it as a function of nature and nothing beyond that. The emotion, relationship and other aspects aren't a school-nature.
    Personally, I think the gay/lesbian/bisexual/tranny thing should be left out. I think its far better and more appropriate to discuss sexual organs (from a medical perspective), diseases, pregnancy, birth, and contraception (both abstinence and the use of various devices)

    Social attitudes about what is or is not moral should always be left to the parents.

  5. #205
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,054

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    I agree with you on the abstinence thing.
    But why should it include lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender?

    Sex ed should be purely fundamental - without delving into an opinion at all - it should approach it as a function of nature and nothing beyond that. The emotion, relationship and other aspects aren't a school-nature.
    I think that it would be a good thing to at least mention that these are sexualities and lifestyles that one may choose for themself. If the parents want to instill into their children that participating in such lifestyles is a sin, that is their business and should be left up to them. And it would be good to emphasize to teenagers that might be gay, whether they are openly so or still in the closet, the statistics and some facts about STDs and AIDS to them and ways that they can protect themselves. To relate the information only to heterosexual students could cause students who aren't to just tune out the information, which helps to put them at risk. If they feel included in the conversation, then they may actually take in and practice safe sex. I'm not suggesting courses on how to have sex, but every sexuality should be covered to help lessen the chances of getting AIDS or another STD for everyone, no matter what their sexuality.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #206
    User MajinLink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    10-01-10 @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    I agree with you on the abstinence thing.
    But why should it include lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender?

    Sex ed should be purely fundamental - without delving into an opinion at all - it should approach it as a function of nature and nothing beyond that. The emotion, relationship and other aspects aren't a school-nature.
    because the LGBT community has a pretty bad aids problem. I can see how it started, two dudes didn't wear a condom because obviously couldn't get pregnant from sex, and then HIV rolled around and now it affects millions

  7. #207
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by MajinLink View Post
    because the LGBT community has a pretty bad aids problem. I can see how it started, two dudes didn't wear a condom because obviously couldn't get pregnant from sex, and then HIV rolled around and now it affects millions
    That would be addressed by covering diseases.

  8. #208
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    I think that it would be a good thing to at least mention that these are sexualities and lifestyles that one may choose for themself. If the parents want to instill into their children that participating in such lifestyles is a sin, that is their business and should be left up to them. And it would be good to emphasize to teenagers that might be gay, whether they are openly so or still in the closet, the statistics and some facts about STDs and AIDS to them and ways that they can protect themselves. To relate the information only to heterosexual students could cause students who aren't to just tune out the information, which helps to put them at risk. If they feel included in the conversation, then they may actually take in and practice safe sex. I'm not suggesting courses on how to have sex, but every sexuality should be covered to help lessen the chances of getting AIDS or another STD for everyone, no matter what their sexuality.
    Why do 5th graders need to know about lifestyles?

    There are countless other *lifestyles* that aren't discussed, taught or talked about that aren't mentioned at all.

    Why not Fetish, bondage, swinging and BDSM? I could write a year's curriculum around all those things - but I digress.

    Theres *sex ed* and then there's *sexuality* . . . and I prefer my kids are limited to the basics of *sex ed* as a function of nature and be void of the *sexuality* for quite some time.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  9. #209
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,054

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    Why do 5th graders need to know about lifestyles?

    There are countless other *lifestyles* that aren't discussed, taught or talked about that aren't mentioned at all.

    Why not Fetish, bondage, swinging and BDSM? I could write a year's curriculum around all those things - but I digress.

    Theres *sex ed* and then there's *sexuality* . . . and I prefer my kids are limited to the basics of *sex ed* as a function of nature and be void of the *sexuality* for quite some time.
    Hopefully, sex ed isn't just taught in 5th grade. And I completely understand keeping a 5th grade sex ed class specifically on biology. I wouldn't even advance giving 5th graders condoms. Sex ed should be age appropriate. High schoolers, which are mostly teenagers 14-18, should get taught that there are different sexualities in sex ed. High school is generally where most people start recognizing who they are attracted to, not just going by what they are taught. If a person truly feels like they are sinning by being attracted to someone of the same sex as themself, then that is their choice. But it should be included in HS sex ed classes that there are some people who are attracted to members of their own sex and that there are people who are attracted to members of both sexes. Acting as if other sexualities besides heterosexuality are fetishes and/or should be ignored, adds to the problems. Especially if you consider the highest at-risk group for AIDS is homosexual men. If these homosexual men felt more included in safe sex practice discussions as teenagers, maybe more of them would take it to heart and practice regular safe sex.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #210
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Hopefully, sex ed isn't just taught in 5th grade. And I completely understand keeping a 5th grade sex ed class specifically on biology. I wouldn't even advance giving 5th graders condoms. Sex ed should be age appropriate. High schoolers, which are mostly teenagers 14-18, should get taught that there are different sexualities in sex ed. High school is generally where most people start recognizing who they are attracted to, not just going by what they are taught. If a person truly feels like they are sinning by being attracted to someone of the same sex as themself, then that is their choice. But it should be included in HS sex ed classes that there are some people who are attracted to members of their own sex and that there are people who are attracted to members of both sexes. Acting as if other sexualities besides heterosexuality are fetishes and/or should be ignored, adds to the problems. Especially if you consider the highest at-risk group for AIDS is homosexual men. If these homosexual men felt more included in safe sex practice discussions as teenagers, maybe more of them would take it to heart and practice regular safe sex.
    Yes - high school is very different than the traditional 5th/6th grade year at which children are first taught the basics of sex-ed.

    I'm considering this early exposure with my view. I have no quandaries with lifestyles and *sexuality* being introduced *lightly* in those later years when it is pretty much *not* news to anyone.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

Page 21 of 22 FirstFirst ... 1119202122 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •