• 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

Erod said:
I've never considered the merits of a teenager's hairy snatch, as apparently you have by your quotes earlier.

No I was just talking about hairy snatches in general.

You're the one that brought up teenage vaginas. :shock:
 
Last edited:
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.



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.

Not chess, it was D&D,and later became world of warcraft...perhaps you've heard of that game? Anyway, as a freshman my girlfriend was a sophomore, we later were married for 10 years before divorcing, but that's another issue.

I learned how much unwanted pregnancies can **** up a teen's life because I did it. I realize this must be hard for some to accept, but there are more options available then 'you either agree or you have no live experience'. Some of don't live through a cookie-cutter life.

So sure, condoms can reduce the risk of pregnancy, just like filters can reduce the risk of lung cancer, which happens to be exactly why Marlboro Lights were my example instead of reds, cigars or pipe tobacco.
 
Last edited:
Thing is - I don't know how it is in other public schools, but the one where I work? There are irresponsible parents that probably would NOT speak with their children about these things.. however... these SAME parents are the same ones that won't sign the permission slip that allows their student to sit in on this human sexuality class.

Do other public schools have something like this, where the parents/guardians have to sign a form allowing the school permission to allow their children to participate?


Our school makes parents sign a permission slip and sets a time where parents came come in and watch the video they present to the kids and hear exactly what will be discussed...before it is presented to the kids.
 
Not chess, it was D&D,and later became world of warcraft...perhaps you've heard of that game? Anyway, as a freshman my girlfriend was a sophomore, we later were married for 10 years before divorcing, but that's another issue.

I learned how much unwanted pregnancies can **** up a teen's life because I did it. I realize this must be hard for some to accept, but there are more options available then 'you either agree or you have no live experience'. Some of don't live through a cookie-cutter life.

So sure, condoms can reduce the risk of pregnancy, just like filters can reduce the risk of lung cancer, which happens to be exactly why Marlboro Lights were my example instead of reds, cigars or pipe tobacco.

Oh so because you were dumb and got a girl pregnant, other kids shouldn't have reasonable sex education to help prevent your mistakes from happening to them.
 
The best means of sex education in my mind is still abstinence focused education that informs about birth control.

I won't use the absolutely idiotic rhetoric talking point of the "abstinence only" people. However, yes...if someone does not have sex they will not get pregnant and are far less likely to get an STD. There's no reason we should not have a focus in sex education about the risks, in a realistic and truthful display of them not some overblown propoganda, both physically and emotionally with regards to sex at young ages and outside of a committed relationship.

However, recognizing that almost everyone in class will at some point have sex, even if its in a committed relationship, where it may be important to prevent pregnancy and possibly STD's it is also intelligent to teach them about condoms, or the pill, etc. Yes, how to properly put on a condom isn't something that should be stricken from such a discussion. There is a LONG berth between "When using these make sure you're rolling down the correct side" and "How to give a blow job 101". HUGELY different. The strawman of an "infection" is idiotic as well based simply on the huge disproportion of likely risk of that happening compared to applying a condom incorrectly.

I firmly believe there are kids that, when having the risks clearly and realistically placed before them by adults in authority, will make a choice based on that information to abstain from sex while they're still rather young. All kids? No. A majority of kids? Probalby not. A decent portion? Yes, I think so.

I also firmly believe that is abstinence is only a minor portion of the curriculum and focus that many of those kids that would've chosen to abstain will instead not, thinking its a condonable and perfectly safe thing if they just "do it safely".

Finally, I also completely believe that there are kids that are going to have sex regardless. Sometimes they think they won't and then something happens, sometimes they're just not caring about authority, sometimes its not by choice at first and then it just becomes the norm, and I'm sure there's other reasons. To not give them education on the safety risks and how to minimize them would be a derelict of our duty to them and oes them a grave disservice.

Finally, I think there's a group of kids that are going to go either way on the issue regardless of what kind of education that's there and will figure it out for themselves.

In my honest opinion you discourage the most kids from having sex too early while giving the most kids the best chance of being the safest possible by having an honest and realistic abstinence focused program that educates about birth control and other ways to make it as safe as possible, physically and emotionally, once you have it.

I think its ridiculous that they're attempting to arrest teachers for doing something the law is requiring them to do.
 
Our school makes parents sign a permission slip and sets a time where parents came come in and watch the video they present to the kids and hear exactly what will be discussed...before it is presented to the kids.

Most schools have this.
 
Our school makes parents sign a permission slip and sets a time where parents came come in and watch the video they present to the kids and hear exactly what will be discussed...before it is presented to the kids.

Which creates a whole different issue. Then you have kids escorted out of the classroom before the "movie" starts, then brought back in wondering what in the hell they missed.
 
Our school makes parents sign a permission slip and sets a time where parents came come in and watch the video they present to the kids and hear exactly what will be discussed...before it is presented to the kids.

Which creates a whole different issue. Then you have kids escorted out of the classroom before the "movie" starts, then brought back in wondering what in the hell they missed.
 
And sex ed classes convince them that it's perfectly okay and natural, so as long as you have a box of condoms, **** to your heart's content.

That's nothing but your own uninformed opinion. That's NOT what happens and is taught.
 
That's nothing but your own uninformed opinion. That's NOT what happens and is taught.

That's the underlying message, even if not intentional.

"We know kids will be kids and we all do it, so here, use this and it'll all be okay."

That's what the kids hear in their teenage minds.
 
And sex ed classes convince them that it's perfectly okay and natural, so as long as you have a box of condoms, **** to your heart's content.

What the hell is unnatural about people going through sexual development exploring the sexuality that comes along with it?
 
Last edited:
What the hell is unnatural about people going through sexual development exploring the sexuality that comes along with it?

At 14? Really?
 
Okay...seriously...is the assumption here that high school aged boys aren't going to be thinking about sex if they're not talked to about condoms?

REALLY?
 
Okay...seriously...is the assumption here that high school aged boys aren't going to be thinking about sex if they're not talked to about condoms?

REALLY?

Ok, that made me laugh.
 
Sorry, looking at my words, it appears there's a turd in the punch bowl. I repeat, a turd in the punch bowl.
 
Okay...seriously...is the assumption here that high school aged boys aren't going to be thinking about sex if they're not talked to about condoms?

REALLY?

Of course not. I think I had a woodie my entire teenage existence. LOL

However, doesn't talking about sex in a classroom of teenagers somewhat excuse it in a "you can't help yourself, so this is how you do it correctly" kind of way?
 
Of course not. I think I had a woodie my entire teenage existence. LOL

However, doesn't talking about sex in a classroom of teenagers somewhat excuse it in a "you can't help yourself, so this is how you do it correctly" kind of way?

When you find a single classroom where that actually happens, let us know.

You have no idea what the curriculum actually is.
 
Of course not. I think I had a woodie my entire teenage existence. LOL

For some reason, math classes were particularly hard on me.

However, doesn't talking about sex in a classroom of teenagers somewhat excuse it in a "you can't help yourself, so this is how you do it correctly" kind of way?

Not necessarily. It can also be taken in a "We all know you're curious about this stuff so we're going to tell you how it all really works so you don't hurt yourselves or anyone else" kind of way.
 
Meanwhile, we fall further and further behind in basic mathematics, language skills, science, and history.

Kids these days are stupid. But they know the proper way to **** without getting pregnant, even though they don't follow that either.

What makes you think teaching basic mathematics, language skills, science, and history are mutually exclusive from teaching comprehensive sex education?
 
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.

Education and endorsement are two very different things.
 
Teens are gona smoke, too, so it follows you support free Marlboro Lights handed out at the school..."they're going to smoke anyway...

Actually, the better analogy would be, "Teens are gonna smoke, so let's give them some nicotine gum to quit." We're talking about education in the use of contraceptives for prevention in pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease. It's important to remember that.
 
Of course not. I think I had a woodie my entire teenage existence. LOL

However, doesn't talking about sex in a classroom of teenagers somewhat excuse it in a "you can't help yourself, so this is how you do it correctly" kind of way?

I think it depends how you teach it honestly.

If you teach it going, literally "Look, we know you kids are going to have sex. We know you're going to do this. All we ask is you do it safely, and this is how", yeah, that excuses it. You're going to have a number of kids that would've previously possibly abstained for longer than they will now because of it.

HOWEVER

I also think if you go there and say "Having sex is bad. Abstinence works every time. Just don't have sex and you're fine. IF you have sex you're almost definitely going to get the girl pregnant and probably going to get an STD. Just don't have sex, okay, sex is bad unless you're married. Don't do it." then you'll also have problems. There's going to be kids that do it now just to spite authority, to be rebels. There's also going to be kids that honestly were trying but puberty, hormones, and being a kid get the best of them and opportunity arises and not only do they not know what to do but they become so paranoid over it it makes the situation more unhealthy for them mentally.

NEITHER way is optimal. Both I think are pushed by people who...to be frank...don't give two ****s about the kids and actually care about their side "winning" the political point.

What is optimal is telling kids that abstinence is the best way to avoid the legitimate and realistic consequences, emotionally and physically, that can come with sex and abstaining until later in life will be of benefit. However teaching them that when that time comes that they do engage in it that they should go about it in a safe manner, both in regards to birth control and actions. By actions I'm not talking about "how to give a blowjob", but the risks of overly promiscuous sex, the fact some STD's can be transfered in other ways than conventional sex, the benefits of a committed relationship, etc. Finally, stressing that while sex is a large responsibility and can have life altering impacts that it is not bad, or evil, or wrong, but simply something that is not to be taken lightly and frivolously.

Those that have a legitimate chance at being inspired by an abstinence message are in large part likely to still be inspired by it in such a course. So for those kids, you do them a service by not forgoing suggesting that abstinence at a young age is best.

Those that are unlikely to be touched by an abstinence message are given knowledge on how to be safER when/if they do what they would've done anyways under abstinence only education, which does a service to them by increasing the likelihood that a portion of them does it safER.

Those that are likely to do it simply to rebel have less of a rally point now than in abstinence only. Those that are easily influenced by the acceptance of adults wouldn't be as apt to go forth and sow their wild oats than in a primarily birth control focused curriculum. And those that could honestly go either way but are average teenagers, filled with hormones, that may not even plan for it to happen but it does have knowledge at least on how to do it safER and remove some of the possible mental issues of them torturing themselves for doing something horrible, evil, wrong, etc.

Notice I use safER because it should be stressed that "safe sex" is not guaranteed, but is more akin to air bags and seat belts. They offer protection and increase the likelihood that the bad stuff doesn't hit you, but that doesn't mean it is full proof.
 
At 14? Really?

Yes. At 14. 'Really'. Explain what is 'unnatural' about it if you please. Explain why it is more 'unnatural' than say 'talking' or 'walking' or taking a ****.
 
What is optimal is telling kids that abstinence is the best way to avoid the legitimate and realistic consequences, emotionally and physically, that can come with sex and abstaining until later in life will be of benefit. However teaching them that when that time comes that they do engage in it that they should go about it in a safe manner, both in regards to birth control and actions. By actions I'm not talking about "how to give a blowjob", but the risks of overly promiscuous sex, the fact some STD's can be transfered in other ways than conventional sex, the benefits of a committed relationship, etc. Finally, stressing that while sex is a large responsibility and can have life altering impacts that it is not bad, or evil, or wrong, but simply something that is not to be taken lightly and frivolously.

You just reminded me of one more reason why I support comprehensive sex education for our teenagers - it's so that they'll be better prepared to make decisions when they're adults.

While having sex as a teenager with a teenager may be illegal in a number of states, two adults having sex isn't illegal. And the reason why I want teenagers to have comprehensive sex education is so that they will be fully educated and prepared when they reach adulthood.

I mean many opponents of comprehensive sex education say, "Oh, it'll increase pregnancy rates of teenagers!" Well, I'm more worried about pregnancy rates of young adults aged 18-25. I don't think people should be having kids when they're teenagers and I don't think they should be having kids when they're 18-25 because that's when they're starting out on their own and learning about the real world and trying to establish a foundation for independence for themselves. They have to go to college or apprentice to a trade. And that means either student loans which means a lot of debt or earning minimum wage which isn't enough to cover all the bills.

That's another reason why I want people to gain comprehensive sex education as teenagers - so they can practice it as adults.
 
Back
Top Bottom