Forums | MacLife

First and foremost:  What type of idiot would blame the government?  Oh, the type of idiot that thinks parents have no responsibility.  I forgot.

Now that I got that out of the way, it's a new policy.  Give it time to see what the results will be. 

I don't blame teaching abstinance.  If the students actually followed the practice it would drastically effect the rate of HIV and unwanted pregnancy.

So it appears that kids are just not paying attention to the class.  I seriously doubt talking about rubbers would make the class any more exciting.

Seems to me that the church(es) have been preaching abstinence for centuries.  And it's still not working.

But this should not be a government responsibility, it's the parent's responsibility.  The best thing to do is to tell your children everything you can about sex, the "do's" the "don'ts" and how too protect themselves.  Because what your kids don't know...will kill 'em.

First and foremost:  What type of idiot would blame the government?  Oh, the type of idiot that thinks parents have no responsibility.  I forgot.

It's not a question of "blame" but of responsibility on the governments part to tell the truth-to all regardless of how it may not please some conservative supporters. Of course the parents have primary responsibility in this educational effort but everybody needs to be on the same page as far as what the realities are.

Now that I got that out of the way, it's a new policy.  Give it time to see what the results will be.

Time? Time for what? For more kids to become infected with HIV, or to have more unwanted pregnancies (and higher abortion rates). Teenagers are going to continue to have sex, regardless of how their parents feel about it, always have always will. Why not prepare them with the truth as opposed to polly-anna pie-in-the-sky morality lectures? Mis-information never helped anyone.

One of the most amazing aspects of this is that the rate of unplanned teen pregnancies has not significantly declined since 1983-84 when condoms were first advised for HIV prevention. What are they thinking? That they're immortal? That this is "only a gay disease"? They should use their school provided internet connected computers to Google and type in "AIDS in Africa" sadly those people initially thought it was a gay only disease too.

It may not be unsafe, but it certainly is unrealistic.

Sometimes history suggests that it'd be better to pull one's head out of one's posterior fundamental orifice.

'course if yer head's too far in you can't hear history calling.

Abstinence unsafe? What? Are STDs airborne nowdays?

I agree that ultimate responsibility falls on the parents, but if schools are going to provide any form of sex education, then they should do so in a fair and comprehensive manner. I wouldn't like my kid learning "abstinence only" in Sex Ed., just like I wouldn't like my kid reading only Brit Lit in his English class, or only learning to play football in gym (ultimate frisbee is much cooler).

In the realm of parental responsibility, I'd rather see individual communities make decisions about their school's curriculum, instead of having it dictated from the federal government. A parent's job is difficult and the responsibility is enormous (not that our society is too demanding about parents living up to it), so I think parents have a right to come together as a group and establish institutions that will help them with their parenting responsibilities.

May I point out that teaching how to use rubbers in school (an AP class, I believe) hasn't eliminated unwanted pregnancy and spread of STD?  All it has done is lowered the rates, but that's hardly a fair example as it was really the first and only sex education in publis schools to be widely adopted.  And apparently, it doesn't work either or we wouldn't have the STDs and unwanted preganancies that you are referring to.  (got any numbers by the way?)  So rather than abandoning a new system in its infancy how about you come up with a system that would work to replace both systems with?

It's not a new system. It's a system that deliberately refuses to teach a subject in its entirety. It's the deliberate promotion of ignorance.

May I point out that teaching how to use rubbers in school (an AP class, I believe) hasn't eliminated unwanted pregnancy and spread of STD?  All it has done is lowered the rates, but that's hardly a fair example as it was really the first and only sex education in publis schools to be widely adopted.  And apparently, it doesn't work either or we wouldn't have the STDs and unwanted preganancies that you are referring to.  (got any numbers by the way?)  So rather than abandoning a new system in its infancy how about you come up with a system that would work to replace both systems with?

It's not a new system. It's a system that deliberately refuses to teach a subject in its entirety. It's the deliberate promotion of ignorance.

Telling someone, "Don't have sex and you won't get pregnant." is incorrect?

Telling someone that abstinence is the only way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is incorrect.

May I point out that teaching how to use rubbers in school (an AP class, I believe) hasn't eliminated unwanted pregnancy and spread of STD?  All it has done is lowered the rates, but that's hardly a fair example as it was really the first and only sex education in publis schools to be widely adopted.  And apparently, it doesn't work either or we wouldn't have the STDs and unwanted preganancies that you are referring to.  (got any numbers by the way?)  So rather than abandoning a new system in its infancy how about you come up with a system that would work to replace both systems with?

It's not a new system. It's a system that deliberately refuses to teach a subject in its entirety. It's the deliberate promotion of ignorance.

Though abstinance itself is not a new system, teaching it in the sex ed classes as is illustrated in this thread is.  I'm not saying it's going to work, but I don't think it's inherently any more flawed than the previous system, which has, IMHO, failed.

btw, I love your sig.  I remember when that was posted, and thought to myself that it should be somehow preserved.  Thanks for taking to the task!

May I point out that teaching how to use rubbers in school (an AP class, I believe) hasn't eliminated unwanted pregnancy and spread of STD?  All it has done is lowered the rates, but that's hardly a fair example as it was really the first and only sex education in publis schools to be widely adopted.  And apparently, it doesn't work either or we wouldn't have the STDs and unwanted preganancies that you are referring to.  (got any numbers by the way?)  So rather than abandoning a new system in its infancy how about you come up with a system that would work to replace both systems with?

It's not a new system. It's a system that deliberately refuses to teach a subject in its entirety. It's the deliberate promotion of ignorance.

Telling someone, "Don't have sex and you won't get pregnant." is incorrect?

Telling someone that the only way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is incorrect.

Its the only 100% sure way. Do you dispute that?

No, I don't dispute that. I do dispute that the people making these comments are considering the issue in any sort of depth -- they seem to favor making glib remarks instead. I also dispute that teaching abstinence only is not a fair and comprehensive form of education, and I dispute that teaching abstinence only is any way to address the reality of the situation.

May I point out that teaching how to use rubbers in school (an AP class, I believe) hasn't eliminated unwanted pregnancy and spread of STD?  All it has done is lowered the rates, but that's hardly a fair example as it was really the first and only sex education in publis schools to be widely adopted.  And apparently, it doesn't work either or we wouldn't have the STDs and unwanted preganancies that you are referring to.  (got any numbers by the way?)  So rather than abandoning a new system in its infancy how about you come up with a system that would work to replace both systems with?

It's not a new system. It's a system that deliberately refuses to teach a subject in its entirety. It's the deliberate promotion of ignorance.

Telling someone, "Don't have sex and you won't get pregnant." is incorrect?

Telling someone that abstinence is the only way to avoid pregnancy and STDs is incorrect.

Are they saying that, or are they saying it is the best way?

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I believe they are saying it is the only way. At the very least, but refusing to educate children regarding contraception, etc. they are certainly promoting the kind of ignorance that will make abstinence the best and only way.

I say pass out condoms during lunch. Grab a 1/2 pint of milk and take a condom...