• 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?

  • Yes, its important for their future safety.

    Votes: 16 42.1%

  • No, this sort of thing should not be encouraged.

    Votes: 22 57.9%
  • Total voters
    38
I've taught sex ed, before. In my view the following needs to be part of any sex ed. curriculum:

1) Anatomy of the sexes.
2) Biology involved in inpregnation
3) STD's
4) Birth control
5) Pregnancy and STD prevention
6) Relationships

Gay sex was not part of what I presented...but then again, neither was heterosexual sex. The only reason I presented penis-vagina intercourse was in the context of pregnancy. When discussing STDs, all types of sex, vaginal, anal, and oral were discussed, but not in the context of whether they regards homo- or heterosexual sex, since this point is irrelevant.

Sometimes point #6 would bring up discussions of straight or gay relationships. If it did, I would foster a discussion based on what was presented.

So, the answer to the question is both yes and no. The presentation of the types of sex should be presented in the proper context, but the labeling of gay or straight sex is inaccurate, since both types of pairings can perform almost any of the types of sex identified. Gay relationships could be discussed under the auspices of relationships in general.
 
Last edited:
The pro-gay sex agenda doesn't want it to end there. They want it presented as normal and acceptable, not just some generic discussion. Otherwise they wouldn't be fighting so hard to get it in schools. Because no sex ed course in the country teaches that gay sex is bad and evil. It's just like CC described it, generic. It probably says little or nothing at all about it. When I had it in the early 70's I don't remember any discussion of it.
 
American said:
The pro-gay sex agenda doesn't want it to end there. They want it presented as normal and acceptable, not just some generic discussion. Otherwise they wouldn't be fighting so hard to get it in schools. Because no sex ed course in the country teaches that gay sex is bad and evil. It's just like CC described it, generic. It probably says little or nothing at all about it. When I had it in the early 70's I don't remember any discussion of it.
Click to expand...

The slippery slope falacy is not a good one here. Just because an extreme example COULD happen or is something people WANT to happen doesn't mean it automatically WILL happen nor does it mean that something else shouldn't happen just because it has a slight chance of leading to it.
 
celticlord said:
Relationships being not an academic subject, they should never be "taught" in the public school system.
Click to expand...

But they are. How sex is carried out and relationship related things work where all taught to me during my sex education.
 
celticlord said:
Relationships being not an academic subject, they should never be "taught" in the public school system.
Click to expand...

So where is a marriage consular to get their start?
 
American said:
The pro-gay sex agenda doesn't want it to end there. They want it presented as normal and acceptable, not just some generic discussion.
Click to expand...

Well, exactly. We teach in schools, either directly or by example, that being Jewish is both normal and acceptable. We would never teach that it is 'abnormal' despite the fact that the 'norm' in most of our schools is Christianity. And no one would stand for any teacher in any public school teaching students that Judaism is unacceptable.

Of course, Christian parents are free to teach their kids that Jews will go to hell and that Jews, Muslims, or Hindus are abnormal and unacceptable. Those teachings are properly done at home.

So yes. I suppose it's completely fair to say that gays want the schools to teach that they are both normal and acceptable.

:2wave:
 
kaya'08 said:
But they are. How sex is carried out and relationship related things work where all taught to me during my sex education.
Click to expand...
So? I said it should not be. That it is merely demonstrates the dereliction of the public school system.
 
American said:
Are you trying to promote gay sex?
Click to expand...
I am trying to promote gay sex. For gay people anyway. The popular alternative promoted by conservatives is to force gay people into being ashamed of who they are (because of how the good lord made them) and living sad, miserable lives. That being the alternative, gay sex sounds great! Gay sex rules! ...Don't take that the wrong way... :)
 
celticlord said:
So? I said it should not be. That it is merely demonstrates the dereliction of the public school system.
Click to expand...

Why shouldnt it be? Whats so aweful about it, or offensive about it? Is it not PC enough? What seems to be the problem?
 
kaya'08 said:
Why shouldnt it be? Whats so aweful about it, or offensive about it? Is it not PC enough? What seems to be the problem?
Click to expand...
Public schools should teach scholastic subjects. How billy bob should persuade mary sue to drop her knickers is not a scholastic subject. Relationships are not scholastic subjects. There is no "how" of relationships that schools have any business teaching.

Teach how to engage in sexual acts without spreading or contracting disease, and teach about contraception. That is all that sex education should be. Any content beyond that is an overreach and should be excised from the curriculum.
 
It's impossible to teach sex ed without attractions being mentioned. Someone in the class will ask a question geared towards heterosexuality, or even homosexuality. It can't be so sterile that they aren't allowed to talk about human things. I say it shouldn't be a policy to discuss attractions or who your partner is, but if it's brought up then it can be addressed.
 
celticlord said:
Public schools should teach scholastic subjects. How billy bob should persuade mary sue to drop her knickers is not a scholastic subject. Relationships are not scholastic subjects. There is no "how" of relationships that schools have any business teaching.
Click to expand...

What I find amusing is that immediately after you said that, you said this:

Teach how to engage in sexual acts without spreading or contracting disease, and teach about contraception. That is all that sex education should be. Any content beyond that is an overreach and should be excised from the curriculum.
Click to expand...

The second is clearly contradictory of the first. You think school should have only scholastic subjects yet you think contraception and safe sex should still be taught.

You said schools shouldn't teach the "how," but you still think they should teach "how to engage in sexual acts without spreading or contracting disease."

What if students ask about gay sex? Do you just ignore it? That's not professional in an educational atmosphere. What if parents and others cannot teach the students about gay sex? Who does the student have to turn to? The school.
 
Orius said:
It's impossible to teach sex ed without attractions being mentioned. Someone in the class will ask a question geared towards heterosexuality, or even homosexuality. It can't be so sterile that they aren't allowed to talk about human things. I say it shouldn't be a policy to discuss attractions or who your partner is, but if it's brought up then it can be addressed.
Click to expand...
Hogwash squared, cubed, and multiplied by 10.

If the topic of attractions comes up, the teacher says something witty like "that is beyond the scope of this class. Questions like that are best asked of your parents."

It SHOULD be a policy not to discuss attractions or who your partner is. Schools have no business weighing on attractions, relations, likes, or dislikes. Makes no difference whether the question is about heterosexual or homosexual relations or attractions--the emotional dimension is outside of what is appropriate in the school
 
celticlord said:
Teach how to engage in sexual acts without spreading or contracting disease, and teach about contraception. That is all that sex education should be. Any content beyond that is an overreach and should be excised from the curriculum.
Click to expand...

Reading your description of how a classroom should operate I almost imagine a room full of robots... or zombies. "Insert peg A into slot B." Nothing more. No mention of love. No mention of commitment. No mention of the humanity of it all.

No morals. No values.

Odd.

..
 
celticlord said:
Relationships being not an academic subject, they should never be "taught" in the public school system.
Click to expand...

Two things. Firstly, I did not teach sex ed in a public school system. Secondly, the discussion of relationships and how they influence sexuality needs some coverage as questions will abound.
 
I didnt read all of the posts, but has anyone suggested the following?

Teach Oral, and Anal safety.

That covers both straight and gay sexual health and education. There's no need to be a prude when it comes to sex ed. If you don't teach it because you don't like it you may as well be spreading diseases yourself.
 
Grateful Heart said:
Reading your description of how a classroom should operate I almost imagine a room full of robots... or zombies. "Insert peg A into slot B." Nothing more. No mention of love. No mention of commitment. No mention of the humanity of it all.

No morals. No values.

Odd.

..
Click to expand...

Forgive me, I may be a bit... different? But what business does a school have "teaching" morals and values?

School is for education. Values are instilled by parenting and social observation.
 
Cilogy said:
You said schools shouldn't teach the "how," but you still think they should teach "how to engage in sexual acts without spreading or contracting disease."
Click to expand...
Of course. The topic isn't how to have good sex but how to have safe sex.

Cilogy said:
What if students ask about gay sex? Do you just ignore it? That's not professional in an educational atmosphere. What if parents and others cannot teach the students about gay sex? Who does the student have to turn to? The school.
Click to expand...
Ok, let's try this one more time.

Anal sex is not gay sex.
Oral sex is not gay sex.
Vaginal sex is not gay sex.
Mutual masturbation is not gay sex.

These acts are "gay" only when all the participants are of the same sex. These acts are "straight" only when both men and women are involved. The health and safety issues are the same regardless of the genders of the participants (except for matters of pregnancy, naturally). The health and safety issues are the only matters suitable for teaching in the public schools.
 
celticlord said:
Of course. The topic isn't how to have good sex but how to have safe sex.
Click to expand...

You don't need to restate what you already stated.

Ok, let's try this one more time.

Anal sex is not gay sex.
Oral sex is not gay sex.
Vaginal sex is not gay sex.
Mutual masturbation is not gay sex.
Click to expand...

Wow, that was pointless, I don't automatically think these are homosexual in nature.


These acts are "gay" only when all the participants are of the same sex. These acts are "straight" only when both men and women are involved. The health and safety issues are the same regardless of the genders of the participants (except for matters of pregnancy, naturally). The health and safety issues are the only matters suitable for teaching in the public schools.
Click to expand...

Again, thanks for the unnecessary info about what constitutes as gay sex, but gay sex still fits into the health and safety categories because of AIDS and all that "fun stuff."

So then I ask myself, are you FOR or AGAINST gay sex being taught about in schools?

By typing this post you have only extended your assertion, yet you STILL have not yet answered my question.

What if the students ask about gay sex in school, should the school ignore it?

It almost seems as if you are responding to someone else's post but you accidentally quoted mine.
 
kaya'08 said:
Whats your ideas?
Click to expand...

I say no.It is the parents job to teach their children about those things. Besides Schools do not need to mention that a very minor insignificant part of the population are sexually attracted to the same sex to teach about stds,pregnancy and safe sex. As celticlord stated those things are not exclusive to one group of people. Unprotected sex is still unsafe sex no matter what orifice you choose to stick it in.

A very minor insignificant part of the population is sexually attracted to animals,prepubescent children,robots, their relatives and are into all kinds of other sexual fetishes. Should we teach about beastiaility/Zoophilia ,pedophilia,technosexuality, genetic sexuality/incest and a whole bunch of other sexual attractions and desires?
 
Cilogy said:
So then I ask myself, are you FOR or AGAINST gay sex being taught about in schools?
Click to expand...
I find it odd you need to ask. My opposition has been clear and categorical throughout.

I am against it being taught, because, from a health and safety standpoint, it is not relevant. It matters not whether the actors are heterosexual nor homosexual, and injecting the sexuality dimension puts the teacher in the position of saying that something is "ok" or "not ok" from a moral rather than a health/safety perspective. Calling sex "gay sex" or "straight sex" injects a level of moralization that is incompatible with the proper role of the public school system. Schools should not be teaching morals either one way or the other. Teaching "gay" anything is necessarily incorporating a moral content into the curriculum and is wrong; teaching "straight" anything is necessarily incorporating a moral content into the curriculum and is wrong. Schools should refrain from moral content of any kind in any subject.

Cilogy said:
What if the students ask about gay sex in school, should the school ignore it?
Click to expand...

If you were to read, you would have seen my response to Orius on this:
celticlord said:
If the topic of attractions comes up, the teacher says something witty like "that is beyond the scope of this class. Questions like that are best asked of your parents."
Click to expand...

A physics teacher would not entertain questions on English, a history teacher would not entertain questions on biology, why should a sex education teacher entertain questions on relationships and sexuality (and "gay" anything falls into that topic, which is separate and apart from sex education)?
 
I want to throw something else into this debate.

Distinguishing "gay sex" from "straight sex" is discriminatory, and is dismissive of the very real emotional bonds that form within homosexual couples. Being "gay" or "straight" is not a simplistic question of with whom one wishes to fornicate. Calling any sexual practice "gay" or "straight" puts undue focus on the sexual expression of attraction, and thus minimized the multivariate and multidimensional aspects of attraction, sexuality, and relationships.
 
celticlord said:
I want to throw something else into this debate.

Distinguishing "gay sex" from "straight sex" is discriminatory, /QUOTE]

Dont you mean teaching straight sex only and leaving out gay sex is discrminatory?
Click to expand...
 
kaya'08 said:
celticlord said:
I want to throw something else into this debate.

Distinguishing "gay sex" from "straight sex" is discriminatory,
Click to expand...

Dont you mean teaching straight sex only and leaving out gay sex is discrminatory?
Click to expand...
No, I do not.

I mean that characterizing any sex as either "gay sex" or "straight sex" is discriminatory. The sexual orientation aspect is simply not relevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom