• 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!

What kind of twisted explicit sexual perversions are schools now teaching?

Gus Fring said:
It's not a matter of being conservative but of common sense. I am the total opposite of a conservative yet I don't think exposing kids to sex is a good idea, and the whole anti-pedophilia legislation agrees with me.
Click to expand...

Sex education, not sex.
 
Peter King said:
There is no god, the bible is not accurate it is only the ramblings of people 2 centuries ago. And the values of 2019 are thank goodness a lot different from those of 2 thousand years ago. We are not ignorant anymore and that is how simple it is.
Click to expand...

You are welcome to post your unsupported ramblings here also.
 
marke said:
You are welcome to post your unsupported ramblings here also.
Click to expand...

That is hilarious of course for you to say that, because if there is one thing that is not supported by any facts, it would be religion.
 
Evilroddy said:
In the digital age, life has accelerated. Wee kiddies and teens are now exposed to the most graphic pornography at the stroke of some keys or some taps on a smart-screen. Better to arm them with age-appropriate knowledge of what they're going to see and talk about with their peers then to cast them into the sexual wilderness of an adult world without any preparation. As long as the sexual education informs, but does not promote sexual behaviour and as long as those teaching are well prepared and without an agenda, I think the earlier loss of innocence can be justified by the prospect of better protection for the children and teens.

Sexual education should be carefully crafted to be age-appropriate for the students receiving it. Elementary children do not have to know about how to put on a condom or how to safely take birth control pills. But they should be able to figure out when they are the target of others' sexual advances and how to get help if such a situation ever emerges. Very young children (Grades 4-6) should learn about their bodies and what sexual reproduction is and why it is necessary and natural. This should be done in conjunction with teaching them about plant and animal sexual reproduction. They should also learn about the consequences of sexual behaviour and the dangers of premature sexual activity. Finally young children should be made aware that some people choose or feel compelled to adopt alternative lifestyles without going into too much detail about the "plumbing" and social implications of those lifestyles.

By middle school and high school the curriculum should expand to include specific eduction about abstinence, contraception, prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, sexual hygiene, abortion, parenthood, fostering and adoption. They should also be counselled in the emotional and psychological implications of entering into the adult sexual world when they are ready. They should be educated about the personal and social pressures they will experience or are experiencing in order to become sexually active and then taught appropriate strategies and coping mechanisms to avoid unwanted sexual activity until they judge themselves ready for it. They should be encouraged to talk to their parents or wider family before making any monumental decisions about their sexual lives. They should be fully informed about their rights, responsibilities and consequences of an active sex life and be fully informed of all medical options, rights and responsibilities available to them. They should study non-binary sexual situations/lifestyles in order to demystify (and perhaps make less attractive) these other sexual lifestyle alternatives (due to attraction to the forbidden and teen rebellion) but should also be fully informed of the legal, social, professional and biological challenges which go along with choosing or feeling compelled to adopt any of these lifestyles. They should also be educated in baby care, basics of parenthood, medical responsibility for infants, vaccinations, first aid and CPR, etc.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

That's good point. If you don't teach kids about sex we've learned about it from pornography.
 
marke said:
Well said. However, the goals I listed were taken from the source I listed. I did not make them up.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to convey the impression you made them up.
 
marke said:
Men define science and establish its parameters. They exclude God because God cannot be scientifically apprehended or measured. The common mistake men make is to assume God must be either unreal or insignificant because He cannot be scientifically measured. That is wrong. God is true and science remains ignorant about supernatural entities and issues. Science is extremely limited and unavoidably ignorant about a huge number of issues pertaining to life.
Click to expand...

Though I wouldn't put it quite that way, it is true that science is a method and that it is intended to be used to solve some, though not all problems. It is very effective, however, at figuring out how to use things to fulfill our desires and needs.

marke said:
Humans make themselves fools when they assume God does not exist because they cannot apprehend Him or force Him into their extremely limited concepts of what they like to call 'science.'
Click to expand...

It is perhaps your turn, Marke, to ponder the reason why someone reasonable might adopt this point of view.
 
Evilroddy said:
In the digital age, life has accelerated. Wee kiddies and teens are now exposed to the most graphic pornography at the stroke of some keys or some taps on a smart-screen. Better to arm them with age-appropriate knowledge of what they're going to see and talk about with their peers then to cast them into the sexual wilderness of an adult world without any preparation. As long as the sexual education informs, but does not promote sexual behaviour and as long as those teaching are well prepared and without an agenda, I think the earlier loss of innocence can be justified by the prospect of better protection for the children and teens.

Sexual education should be carefully crafted to be age-appropriate for the students receiving it. Elementary children do not have to know about how to put on a condom or how to safely take birth control pills. But they should be able to figure out when they are the target of others' sexual advances and how to get help if such a situation ever emerges. Very young children (Grades 4-6) should learn about their bodies and what sexual reproduction is and why it is necessary and natural. This should be done in conjunction with teaching them about plant and animal sexual reproduction. They should also learn about the consequences of sexual behaviour and the dangers of premature sexual activity. Finally young children should be made aware that some people choose or feel compelled to adopt alternative lifestyles without going into too much detail about the "plumbing" and social implications of those lifestyles.

By middle school and high school the curriculum should expand to include specific eduction about abstinence, contraception, prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, sexual hygiene, abortion, parenthood, fostering and adoption. They should also be counselled in the emotional and psychological implications of entering into the adult sexual world when they are ready. They should be educated about the personal and social pressures they will experience or are experiencing in order to become sexually active and then taught appropriate strategies and coping mechanisms to avoid unwanted sexual activity until they judge themselves ready for it. They should be encouraged to talk to their parents or wider family before making any monumental decisions about their sexual lives. They should be fully informed about their rights, responsibilities and consequences of an active sex life and be fully informed of all medical options, rights and responsibilities available to them. They should study non-binary sexual situations/lifestyles in order to demystify (and perhaps make less attractive) these other sexual lifestyle alternatives (due to attraction to the forbidden and teen rebellion) but should also be fully informed of the legal, social, professional and biological challenges which go along with choosing or feeling compelled to adopt any of these lifestyles. They should also be educated in baby care, basics of parenthood, medical responsibility for infants, vaccinations, first aid and CPR, etc.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

That is the problem: the absence of an agenda.
 
TheEconomist said:
That is the problem: the absence of an agenda.
Click to expand...

TheEconomist:

This response of yours can be read and understood two ways. Thus it is an ambiguous statement which needs clarification. Do you mean that there is no place in sexual education for agendas or that the problem is an absence of an agenda from the teaching of sexual education?

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
CLAX1911 said:
That's good point. If you don't teach kids about sex we've learned about it from pornography.
Click to expand...
Just because kids will pick up bad instructions from the gutters of society is no reason to think we should deliberately cram the specifics of gutter sex down their throats before they reach puberty.
 
marke said:
Just because kids will pick up bad instructions from the gutters of society is no reason to think we should deliberately cram the specifics of gutter sex down their throats before they reach puberty.
Click to expand...

What's 'gutter sex'?
 
marke said:
Just because kids will pick up bad instructions from the gutters of society is no reason to think we should deliberately cram the specifics of gutter sex down their throats before they reach puberty.
Click to expand...

It's better to teach teens about sex, and to teach them how to have it safely, than for them to pick up unrealistic notions of it like in porn, or walk into it blind. Plus, to have them know how to properly consent, or say no when in an uncomfortable situation.

Your abstinence screed, does absolutely nothing besides hiding the problem.
 
Last edited:
marke said:
Homosexual sex is wrong. It is perverted and destructive. It should be considered a very bad thing for society.
Click to expand...

Awww.. I love me some homophobia. It's so adorable. It's like going to a 1950's museum :roll:
 
TheGoverness said:
It's better to teach teens about sex, and to teach them how to have it safely, than for them to pick up unrealistic notions of it like in porn, or walk into it blind. Plus, to have them know how to properly consent, or say no when in an uncomfortable situation.

Your abstinence screed, does absolutely nothing besides hiding the problem.
Click to expand...

Kids need to be taught safe sex. Sex outside of marriage is not safe and can lead to disease, psychological problems, behavioral problems and even sometimes, death
 
marke said:
Kids need to be taught safe sex. Sex outside of marriage is not safe and can lead to disease, psychological problems, behavioral problems and even sometimes, death
Click to expand...

Sex outside of marriage is perfectly safe. Plus, marriage is not some guarantee of sexual safety. You just need to know what how to do it safely, the boundries and limits, especially in regards to consent, and the protection options available (if need be).
 
marke said:
Just because kids will pick up bad instructions from the gutters of society is no reason to think we should deliberately cram the specifics of gutter sex down their throats before they reach puberty.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending that. You seem to think any discussion about sex at all is pornography.
 
TheGoverness said:
It's better to teach teens about sex, and to teach them how to have it safely, than for them to pick up unrealistic notions of it like in porn, or walk into it blind. Plus, to have them know how to properly consent, or say no when in an uncomfortable situation.

Your abstinence screed, does absolutely nothing besides hiding the problem.
Click to expand...

I think it's important to teach them how to protect themselves from STDs. Some people think that STDs are punishment for lust.

Such an approach is idiotic.
 
Evilroddy said:
TheEconomist:

This response of yours can be read and understood two ways. Thus it is an ambiguous statement which needs clarification. Do you mean that there is no place in sexual education for agendas or that the problem is an absence of an agenda from the teaching of sexual education?

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

It can be considered ambiguous, though I am rather perplexed by your hesitation. In my experience, the kind of people who believe a political agenda should be pushed on children through education never quite put it that way. The normative aspect of the questions involved is brushed aside by these people, their vision is pushed forward. It is declared consensual and all disagreements are seen as the remnants of an antiquated way of being, a few last roots of evil that need to be stamped out of existence.

I have profound disagreements with conservatives and religious people, but I don't think it gives me the right to impose my views on their children. And that is my only problem with sexual education. The government has no business telling kids what is morally acceptable or not, what should be tolerated or not, and what should be valued or not.
 
TheEconomist said:
It can be considered ambiguous, though I am rather perplexed by your hesitation. In my experience, the kind of people who believe a political agenda should be pushed on children through education never quite put it that way. The normative aspect of the questions involved is brushed aside by these people, their vision is pushed forward. It is declared consensual and all disagreements are seen as the remnants of an antiquated way of being, a few last roots of evil that need to be stamped out of existence.

I have profound disagreements with conservatives and religious people, but I don't think it gives me the right to impose my views on their children. And that is my only problem with sexual education. The government has no business telling kids what is morally acceptable or not, what should be tolerated or not, and what should be valued or not.
Click to expand...

TheEcnomist:

The clarification was sought by me because I was not sure what your position was and was loathe to respond without greater certainty about what you meant.

I have been teaching Human Biology including human sexuality and reproduction for over thirty years to Grade 9 students. The only two agendas which I am aware of having in my classroom are to ensure that my students fully understand how their bodies work and interact with others during sexual contacts at all levels of intensity and how to prevent unwanted and/or dangerous consequences from sexual behaviour, should they decide after reflection that they are ready for it. We do deal with what in America are "hot-button issues" but we do so with clinical restraint, with academic impartiality and with respect first for the student and their family and secondly for anyone else the student might speak to about the topics covered. We frankly discuss and learn about the emotions, the psychology, the interpersonal challenges and consequences, the social consequences, the biology and the pathology/epidemiology of all types of sexual behaviour and lay out the risks and rewards of choosing to engage in such behaviour clearly and without an agenda. We also cover what today is called non-binary relationships and sexual behaviour with the same clinical and dispassionate approach as more common sexual behaviour.

The teaching is about information, understanding, understanding consequences and probabilities and developing the notion of risk management in these teenagers so that they can make informed and wiser decisions even when their passions are running high. At all times the students are encouraged to talk to family and to their peers and to ask questions both publicly in class or privately to either myself or to guidance counsellors. The teaching also covers the biology of human development, self-control, the biology of contraception, the biology of pregnancy, the demands child rearing and parenting, the biology and ethics of abortion and adoption.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Evilroddy said:
I have been teaching Human Biology including human sexuality and reproduction for over thirty years to Grade 9 students. The only two agendas which I am aware of having in my classroom are to ensure that my students fully understand how their bodies work and interact with others during sexual contacts at all levels of intensity and how to prevent unwanted and/or dangerous consequences from sexual behaviour, should they decide after reflection that they are ready for it. We do deal with what in America are "hot-button issues" but we do so with clinical restraint, with academic impartiality and with respect first for the student and their family and secondly for anyone else the student might speak to about the topics covered. We frankly discuss and learn about the emotions, the psychology, the interpersonal challenges and consequences, the social consequences, the biology and the pathology/epidemiology of all types of sexual behaviour and lay out the risks and rewards of choosing to engage in such behaviour clearly and without an agenda. We also cover what today is called non-binary relationships and sexual behaviour with the same clinical and dispassionate approach as more common sexual behaviour.
Click to expand...

Ideally, people would exhibit such restraint. It is great if you can provide clear information, tips and manage to discuss issues openly. However, this is unfortunately not universal. Moreover, when talking about normative aspects of a problem, there is a clear bias on what kind of arguments will be deemed acceptable by parents, employers or the media if it is eventually shared outside of the classroom.

Suppose you talk about homosexuality during a course. If you believe, as I do, that there is nothing wrong with it, you might be able to express this view in class. It has the advantage that it doesn't put you at odds with any kid who might experience homosexual desires or any kid who have homosexual parents or relatives. The worst that can happen is the one very devout couple, parents of one of your pupils will call the administration and be annoyed you provided information that conflicts with their values. However, what if you or one of the kids has opposite views? Even playing Devil's advocate to mount a case against homosexuality to fill a hole in the discussion might get you fired. I wouldn't be surprised if you received death threats the minute this story becomes public. A maliciously edited video of you might make matters worse by showing the most irritating moments of your speech to increase the popular ire against you. Maybe you got lucky and it never happened to you, or anyone you know... but how many such events do you need to get in very serious trouble? Just one.

Now, how about we talk about abortion? Or rape? Or just about any contentious issue related in one way or another to sexuality. I suspect nothing will ever happen because you took a liberal or libertarian position on these issues. If something bad happens, it's because you took a socially conservative position. As far as I can see, it's hard to talk about sexuality without questions or comments eventually leading to "okay, but what should I do" and I don't see how you can get a fair coverage of the debate in a classroom. Teachers heavily lean to the left as a group, and as much can be said about the people managing them or the media covering any issue that gets out of hand. There is a risk that the coverage of anything touching on the ethics of sexuality will be quite slanted on average and some very normative claims will parade as positive claims.
 
Evilroddy said:
The teaching is about information, understanding, understanding consequences and probabilities and developing the notion of risk management in these teenagers so that they can make informed and wiser decisions even when their passions are running high. At all times the students are encouraged to talk to family and to their peers and to ask questions both publicly in class or privately to either myself or to guidance counsellors. The teaching also covers the biology of human development, self-control, the biology of contraception, the biology of pregnancy, the demands child rearing and parenting, the biology and ethics of abortion and adoption.
Click to expand...

The goal of teaching is to provide information, improve understanding and reduce both the incidence or gravity of the consequences of any problems. This is what we hope to get out of educating people. Whether it actually leads to anything like this is a different story. The truth is that we replaced one set of decision makers (parents and relatives) with another (teachers, school administrators, and bureaucrats). They do not face the same incentives, do not possess the same information and might not even share the same goals. Parents do not necessarily have the capacity to procure adequate feedback to the decision makers involved. In the US, public schools are tied to geographic areas and some of the school curricula directly flow from Washington. In Quebec, the directions flow from the provincial government through state commissions that control school districts. Either way, decisions are typically made far (very far) from where the consequences are felt. How much freedom do you have to make some adjustments in what your children learn or how they learn it? Just about none. Sexual education is just one of many examples of this.

I have nothing against you trying to make the best of your options. Kudos to you if you manage to air things out in the open, discuss ideas from many points of view and manage to cope with the concerns of parents adequately. I just suspect that this might be more the exception than the rule.
 
marke said:
Kids don't need sex ed apart from being told that engaging in sex outside of marriage brings problems, some of them very serious and even fatal, like AIDS, for example. Jealousy over the sexual misconduct or unfaithfulness of partners causes acts of violence. STDs can cause serious lifelong problems. Sexual activity in young children can cause mental illness. Rape is caused by obsession with sex. Divorce is often caused by unfaithfulness ion marriage. And yet bozos want to teach kids to enjoy sex and not worry or even think about the negative consequences. Modern sex education advocates typically teach that Christian values are wrong and those who promote them are to be despised, especially if they have Christian parents.
Click to expand...

Are you hoping that abstinence only sex ed will reduce teen pregnancy rates? Because if so, it probably won't work.
Teenage pregnancy in the United States - Wikipedia

As you may notice, the bible belt has a higher rate of teen births than the rest of the country.
 
Masterhawk said:
Are you hoping that abstinence only sex ed will reduce teen pregnancy rates? Because if so, it probably won't work.
Teenage pregnancy in the United States - Wikipedia

As you may notice, the bible belt has a higher rate of teen births than the rest of the country.
Click to expand...

The answer is not to open the sex crime floodgates to teach all kids everything there is to know about sex, both normal sex and perverted sex, from 6 years of age and upward.
 
marke said:
The answer is not to open the sex crime floodgates to teach all kids everything there is to know about sex, both normal sex and perverted sex, from 6 years of age and upward.
Click to expand...

But maybe at least have comprehensive sex ed in middle or high school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom