States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pregnancy rate

[Lights]

Originally posted by ~Canuck~
Heh thats all fine and dandy while kids are 13-18, but once they become sexual active and their out of school, then they sorta would need that information, so it would sorta a waste of time.

Meh, thats why its in schools.

 

[Tempest Storm]

Originally posted by Lights
Well, abstinence is the only 100% way to keep from becoming pregnant and getting STD's (aside from drugs), so I see where they are coming from. Their arguements are valid and even needed, but as many have said, it need to go along with the "how to's".

Saying that abstinence only programs cause a higher risk of HIV isnt logical, as it is the only way to definantly stay away from it. The logic is this: "If we tell these kids that abstinence is the only way and they follow it, we dont have to worry about condoms because there would be no sex out of marriage." Its really quite a logical logic , but is just doesnt work in the real world. Kids will have sex, there is no stopping it. Thus, we must provide the information on condoms and other methods of "safe-sex".

Well, in thjeory, everything is a good ****ing idea. Problem is, 'abstinence only' ignores the 3 simple truths about kids, thy're dumb, they're hory, and they don't listen to a damn thing adults have to say if it goes against what they want to do.

So really, it's actually pretty damn illogical.

 

[Lights]

Originally posted by Spike~
Well, in thjeory, everything is a good ****ing idea. Problem is, 'abstinence only' ignores the 3 simple truths about kids, thy're dumb, they're hory, and they don't listen to a damn thing adults have to say if it goes against what they want to do.

So really, it's actually pretty damn illogical.

You cant fault the responsible adults for trying to show teens a healty lifestyle. If the teens wont listen, then it is their problem, but they cant complain about lack of information. Case in Point: Kids are stupid.


I guess it is like communism...

 

[dust601]

wait, we just got done complaining that adults only give out absitence only information and not ways to be safe if they do have sex but we can't complain about lack of information?

 

[Tempest Storm]

Originally posted by Lights
You cant fault the responsible adults for trying to show teens a healty lifestyle. If the teens wont listen, then it is their problem, but they cant complain about lack of information. Case in Point: Kids are stupid.


I guess it is like communism...

Denying kids vital information is not responsible.

And yes, they can complain about lack of info. That's what abstinence only is, denying kids information.

 

[Nuts]

Originally posted by Spike~
As a young person, I think it's completely asinine to tell young people "don't have sex," and then proceed to withhold information from them that could potentially save their lives or prevent unwanted pregnancy and abortion (such as proper condom usage) if they do choose to have sex.

The fact of the matter is, if you provide children with the tools to enjoin in sexual activities, they are going to assume that this is a form of approval. "Now Johnny, don't have sex, but if you do... here's a condomn." It's passive resistance at best.

Not everyone is religious, and we shouldn’t hold every young person in a public school to the same religious standard. We shouldn’t impose our religious beliefs on these people, and deny them knowledge.

Religion plays a very small role in this senario as I'll explain further in this post.

In fact I would go so far as to call “abstinence only†sex ed criminally negligent.

I consider graphic sexual education to be criminally negligent, so I guess we're of varying opinions.

Obviously abstinence is the best way to prevent STD and unwanted pregnancy,

Yet you claim that teaching this is criminally negligent?

but make no mistake, the rate of abortion will go up and not down if our country’s teen and unwanted pregnancy rate(s) slows in it's decline or even reverses from the implementation of these idiotic policies.

Increased teen pregnancies are the cause of sexual education programs, not the result. Sex education in the 1950's consisted of a biology lesson, nothing more, yet teen pregnancies were rarely heard about.

Some kids live in poor areas and don’t have the resources such as the Internet or even proper libraries to read about contraception. I believe it’s immoral to deny a young person common lifesaving knowledge that they would learn in any other Western country that uses comprehensive sex ed, and I believe we should be following Canada, England, Sweden, France, and other countries’ examples that have less than 50% our teen pregnancy rate.

Throughout your entire post, I was muttering the same statement, over and over again. WHERE ARE THE PARENTS? Why are you looking to the school system to teach children about sex? This is a subject that should be taught in the home, not schools! Where do you learn manners, grooming and language? Yes, at home. Yet for some odd reason we feel the need to teach sex at school?

Why don't you direct your anger towards the parents? These low life career driven individuals who pop out children then proceed to fullfill themselves with a 60 hour per week career while poor Johnny stays at home by himself till 6 pm. watching the Playboy channel! Take some damn responsibility for yourself for a change and stop blaming everything on the establishment.

If you're looking to the government to raise your children (you) then you had better give up and move to Communist China where they will be happy to provide you with a hut and a bowl of rice.

 

[Tempest Storm]

Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pregnancy r

Originally posted by Nuts
The fact of the matter is, if you provide children with the tools to enjoin in sexual activities, they are going to assume that this is a form of approval. "Now Johnny, don't have sex, but if you do... here's a condomn." It's passive resistance at best.

Since when do kids need approval? Many of them are going to have sex anyways, regardless of whether or not you say it's ok. So, why not prepare those non-abstaining kids for reality?

Religion plays a very small role in this senario as I'll explain further in this post.[/quote[

Funny, since the Christian Right is a big supporter of abstinence only programs...

I consider graphic sexual education to be criminally negligent, so I guess we're of varying opinions.

Why do you consider giving kids all the information criminally negligent?

Yet you claim that teaching this is criminally negligent?

 

[~Canuck~]

Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pregnancy r

Originally posted by Nuts
The fact of the matter is, if you provide children with the tools to enjoin in sexual activities, they are going to assume that this is a form of approval. "Now Johnny, don't have sex, but if you do... here's a condomn." It's passive resistance at best.

If you tell them its alright and prepare them for it, well they go ahead and do it, if you tell them its bad, and prepare them for it anyways, they go ahead and do it, if you tell them its bad, and don't prepare them for it, they go ahead and do it anyways. Which option is better?

Originally posted by Nuts
I consider graphic sexual education to be criminally negligent, so I guess we're of varying opinions.

Yet you claim that teaching this is criminally negligent?[/B]

How is showing someone picture criminally negligent? What sort of negligence does this cause? As well the person before claimed it was criminally negligent to not teach them. Which i have to agree with, in school we are taught not to do drugs, shown what happens, and if the school finds out, they have a legal responsaility to help you, or atleast try. Then it should be just the same principles with sexual education.

Originally posted by Nuts Increased teen pregnancies are the cause of sexual education programs, not the result. Sex education in the 1950's consisted of a biology lesson, nothing more, yet teen pregnancies were rarely heard about.[/B]

In the 1950's your family name was shunned if your daught preformed in pre-marital sex, let alone got pregnant, i wonder why it was un heard of. . . As swell just because information is not publically known, does not mean it is truthful to say it rarely occured.

Originally posted by Nuts
Throughout your entire post, I was muttering the same statement, over and over again. WHERE ARE THE PARENTS? Why are you looking to the school system to teach children about sex? This is a subject that should be taught in the home, not schools! Where do you learn manners, grooming and language? Yes, at home. Yet for some odd reason we feel the need to teach sex at school?

Why don't you direct your anger towards the parents? These low life career driven individuals who pop out children then proceed to fullfill themselves with a 60 hour per week career while poor Johnny stays at home by himself till 6 pm. watching the Playboy channel! Take some damn responsibility for yourself for a change and stop blaming everything on the establishment.

If you're looking to the government to raise your children (you) then you had better give up and move to Communist China where they will be happy to provide you with a hut and a bowl of rice. [/B]

First of all, i have discussed objects of sexuality and general sexual information with numerous people, neighbours, friends, cousins, my doctor, teachers at school, etc. The two people i have avoided at all costs discussing the issues with, are my parents. The majority of young adults feel the same way. Also the subject is a point of embarassment for many teenagers, so asking others about the subject is mental torture for them, having the subject discussed in front of them, without them facing their own fear has positive results.

Originally posted by Lights
Meh, thats why its in schools.

Highschool is supposed to prepare you for your life after
highschool, the real world, in the real world people have sex.

People need to remember that in highschools we are preparing people to go off and partake in the many paths the world has to offer, the schools are literally training the future leaders of the world. People are learning all sorts of complex mathamatics, dulging into science, and shifting through history. If someone who is 16 can handle and absorb that, why can't the handle something as simple as "if you have un protected sex theres a great chance your going to **** shit up for yourself". All this dancing around the bush does more bad then it does good. Once people accept that wether or not they want them to, teenagers will have sex, they should then realize its better for them to be informed.

 

[Lights]

Re: Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pr

Originally posted by ~Canuck~

Highschool is supposed to prepare you for your life after
highschool, the real world, in the real world people have sex.

People need to remember that in highschools we are preparing people to go off and partake in the many paths the world has to offer, the schools are literally training the future leaders of the world. People are learning all sorts of complex mathamatics, dulging into science, and shifting through history. If someone who is 16 can handle and absorb that, why can't the handle something as simple as "if you have un protected sex theres a great chance your going to **** shit up for yourself". All this dancing around the bush does more bad then it does good. Once people accept that wether or not they want them to, teenagers will have sex, they should then realize its better for them to be informed.

...

Hence why I said it should be done with sex education, not alone. I believe both are equally important. To have sex is a choice (aside from rape) and a person who knows the benefits from abstinence can receive those benefits by staying abstinent.

Likewise, a person who chooses to be sexually active needs to know how to take care if him/herself and needs to know the benefits, or more correctly the negatives, of being or not being safe.

We need the best of both worlds, so a person can make the right choice for themself and can see the whole picture. And my post about it being in schools, was talking about middle and below, aside from it being a joke.

 

[dust601]

Why don't you direct your anger towards the parents?
lemme think about this for a moment.
The schools TEACH us absitence is the only safe thing.
The schools tell our parents they are teaching us how to be safe.
But were suppose to be angry at our parents for them thinking the schools are teaching us all that?
i'm gonna be angry about the way schools/goverment handles it till they explain everything to us or butt out and tell our parents there not going to teach us.

my parents have allways been real open about it, they know i've had sex in my room a deal of times and they explained to me how to be safe as possible if i was going to do it, because they aren't ignorent enuff to bealive that if they say its bad i'm not gonna do it.

 

[~Canuck~]

Re: Re: Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pr

Originally posted by Lights
...

Hence why I said it should be done with sex education, not alone. I believe both are equally important. To have sex is a choice (aside from rape) and a person who knows the benefits from abstinence can receive those benefits by staying abstinent.

Likewise, a person who chooses to be sexually active needs to know how to take care if him/herself and needs to know the benefits, or more correctly the negatives, of being or not being safe.

We need the best of both worlds, so a person can make the right choice for themself and can see the whole picture. And my post about it being in schools, was talking about middle and below, aside from it being a joke.

Sorry i missed that, im not good at judging sarcasm n stuff from peoples posts. Yes now that you put it that way, i've got nothing, i 100% agree with you. People can only make a good decision if they see the pros and cons from both first, then decide.

 

[Nuts]

Re: Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pregnan

Originally posted by Spike~

Since when do kids need approval? Many of them are going to have sex anyways, regardless of whether or not you say it's ok. So, why not prepare those non-abstaining kids for reality?

Originally posted by ~Canuck~
If you tell them its alright and prepare them for it, well they go ahead and do it, if you tell them its bad, and prepare them for it anyways, they go ahead and do it, if you tell them its bad, and don't prepare them for it, they go ahead and do it anyways. Which option is better?

Shouldn't the parents make this decision? Or would you prefer that the schools (which have some of the worst standards in the free world) raise our children? If they can graduate illiterate students, just imagine what they can do for sex education! *sigh*

Why do you consider giving kids all the information criminally negligent?

Because it's not the schools place to educate our children about sex. Many families are highly offended by this practice, and frown upon the idea of placing a rubber on a cucumber in the middle of class.

In the 1950's your family name was shunned if your daught preformed in pre-marital sex, let alone got pregnant, i wonder why it was un heard of. . . As swell just because information is not publically known, does not mean it is truthful to say it rarely occured.

Yes, they were shunned, and rightfully so. Having a child out of wedlock is one of the most grevious things a parent can do. You might note that crime and child rates have increased right along side the rate of divorce. Coincidence? I think not.

First of all, i have discussed objects of sexuality and general sexual information with numerous people, neighbours, friends, cousins, my doctor, teachers at school, etc. The two people i have avoided at all costs discussing the issues with, are my parents. The majority of young adults feel the same way. Also the subject is a point of embarassment for many teenagers, so asking others about the subject is mental torture for them, having the subject discussed in front of them, without them facing their own fear has positive results.

It's not your job to ask your parents, it's your parents job to ask you! I am terribly sorry to inform you of this, but if your parents have discussed sex with you, then they are falling down on the job miserably. Your discomfort with sex talk with your parents is natural. It's not natural to let that stand in the way of the truth.

Once again, the school should not be raising children, parents should. If you can't grasp this simple concept, then perhaps you're already too far gone at this point.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

You will pay more attention to what school says about sexual precautions than what you're parents say. School has the knowledge and equipment to deal with this. Parents have jobs and can't be home schooling you all the time. maybe in america they can graduate illiterate students but over here... What does divorce have to do with crime?

 

[Tempest Storm]

In schools, at least everyone has the opportunity to learn about sex ed. The same can't be said if left up to the parents.

 

[~Canuck~]

Re: Re: Re: Re: States with highest rate of "abstinence only" sex ed have highest teen pre

Originally posted by Nuts
Shouldn't the parents make this decision? Or would you prefer that the schools (which have some of the worst standards in the free world) raise our children? If they can graduate illiterate students, just imagine what they can do for sex education! *sigh*

Maybe american schools have the worst standards in the free world, but in canada, as well as most of Europe, we tend to not to graduate illiterate students. As well they do alot for sex education, alot of parents feel embarrassed discussing the issues with the children, which is why it is often just ignored, when the school does it, the student atleast receives the information.

Originally posted by Nuts
Because it's not the schools place to educate our children about sex. Many families are highly offended by this practice, and frown upon the idea of placing a rubber on a cucumber in the middle of class.

Again i can only speak from my own experiences, but when i was learning about sex ed in school, the school first of all informed the parents that this would happen, and asked if they would object to their child participating. Any parents who objected, their children were excused from class at that time, and giving the ability to work on homework.

Originally posted by Nuts
Yes, they were shunned, and rightfully so. Having a child out of wedlock is one of the most grevious things a parent can do. You might note that crime and child rates have increased right along side the rate of divorce. Coincidence? I think not.

All that proving is its hard for one parent to raise and support their kids. . .

Originally posted by Nuts
It's not your job to ask your parents, it's your parents job to ask you! I am terribly sorry to inform you of this, but if your parents have discussed sex with you, then they are falling down on the job miserably. Your discomfort with sex talk with your parents is natural. It's not natural to let that stand in the way of the truth.

As you already posted, divorce rates have gone up, when you have two parents, one who works like hell to support their children most of the time, then one who gets to see them once a week, there is no time for the birds and the bees talk. The first parent is so busy providing a life, and the second is so busy making up for missing the last 6 days.

As well it should be the job of the individual who wishes to partake in the act, to inform themself, saying that most people don't, but parents still assume that if their son/daughter had some questions or concerns that they would ask. And for saying your parents should be the ones to instigate the "talk" most kids just ignore them, or just get away from it. As for teenagers it is easy to ignore something then deal with it.

Originally posted by Nuts
Once again, the school should not be raising children, parents should. If you can't grasp this simple concept, then perhaps you're already too far gone at this point.

Well since you seem to connect telling someone that if they have un-protected sex, they could get aids, any of the other stds, or get pregnant or pregnate someone, with raising a child, perhaps it is you who has gone to far, and can't grasp the simple concept that not ever life is perfect, and can designate the time, to what for many is a difficult, personal issue.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

alot of parents feel embarrassed discussing the issues with the children, which is why it is often just ignored, when the school does it, the student atleast receives the information.

I agree and in a lot of cases the parent/guardians doesn't even know the information him/herself.

Again i can only speak from my own experiences, but when i was learning about sex ed in school, the school first of all informed the parents that this would happen, and asked if they would object to their child participating. Any parents who objected, their children were excused from class at that time, and giving the ability to work on homework.

If the parent offered to teach the child her/himself I would agree with this but I think its imperative that they know this information. Also a test for the parent to make sure they know the information is needed if they want to raise their child about sex education themselves. It shouldn't be optional whether they learn it or not.

As well it should be the job of the individual who wishes to partake in the act, to inform themself, saying that most people don't, but parents still assume that if their son/daughter had some questions or concerns that they would ask. And for saying your parents should be the ones to instigate the "talk" most kids just ignore them, or just get away from it. As for teenagers it is easy to ignore something then deal with it.

At school its not as easy to ignore, most people laugh at what is being taught but laugh or not they still get it drilled into them. Nuts face it, school is much more able to teach this and they have the sort of facilities, they can deal with it in a group so nobody feels uncomfortable or pressured.

 

[Nuts]

Of all the drivel in the prior posts, the only conclusion I can see that warrants any attention is this; "Parent don't have enough time."

What the hell? Are you being serious? Parents don't have enough time to raise their children? Holy Hell people, wake up! If you're parents are too busy working to spend a few minutes with you, then your parents are lousy miserable degenerates! If you don't have time for children, then don't have them in the first place!

You people are absolutely dense, you can't even see the circular behavior in front of your very own eyes! Those parents of yours who don't have time to raise you because they're always working.... these are the same people who endured the lack of parenting that caused them to have unwanted children in the first place.

If your parents are too embarrased to speak to you about sex, then once again, it's their own damn fault. Looking to the school to teach your child about sex is almost as stupid as letting the IRS do your taxes, it makes no sense.

Wake up kiddies, schools are corrupting kids, not helping them.

 

[~Canuck~]

Originally posted by Nuts
Of all the drivel in the prior posts, the only conclusion I can see that warrants any attention is this; "Parent don't have enough time."

What the hell? Are you being serious? Parents don't have enough time to raise their children? Holy Hell people, wake up! If you're parents are too busy working to spend a few minutes with you, then your parents are lousy miserable degenerates! If you don't have time for children, then don't have them in the first place!

You people are absolutely dense, you can't even see the circular behavior in front of your very own eyes! Those parents of yours who don't have time to raise you because they're always working.... these are the same people who endured the lack of parenting that caused them to have unwanted children in the first place.

If your parents are too embarrased to speak to you about sex, then once again, it's their own damn fault. Looking to the school to teach your child about sex is almost as stupid as letting the IRS do your taxes, it makes no sense.

Wake up kiddies, schools are corrupting kids, not helping them.

So your only arguments appear to be that, if the school teaches children about sex, its a) raising them, and b) [sarcasm]giving them permission to engage in sexual activity[/sarcasm]?

Well since the school is partially responsible for the education of a child, and sexual education, is education. . . then you can see the logical conclusion. A parent should teach their child to read, but since they don't always do that, we've got school. As well, even IF sexual education was banned from schools, the same number of kids would have sex(if not more) so that would solve no problems.

And again like i said, NOT all children live in an ideal environment were they have time to discuss such things with their children. In todays age, parents are working overtime so they can send there kids to school, put food on the table, and pay the bills. While kids on the other hand are working a part time job, getting involved so their college applications look good, and trying to keep their grades up. Now if the parents can find time inbetween all of this to talk to their children about every little issue, then someone needs to give these parents an award, as the truly are accomplishing something. But untill i see the number of households with such a great in home atmosphere greatly increasing, your argument does not provide much depth, as many children still go un eduacated.

Then of course there is the simple, under looked idea that the parents themselves might be un educated about the issue at hand, or they may even have trouble understanding it.



Just one little flaw i'd like to point out in your argument, would you say that Doctors who inform their teenage patients the dangers of sexual activity, and educate them on it, also are raising your children?

 

[Nuts]

Interesting, did school teachers get 8 years of medical school? I think not.

I love it, I just love it! Parents who take time with their children should get awards? I'm dying on the inside from laughter. How about we give dunce caps to all those parents who don't find time, hrmmm? How about these people stop for a moment, and talk to their kids, ask them what's going on in their lives? But instead we're too busy watching Jerry Springer or the Simpsons. If parents have no time to raise their children, then they should be taken away and placed with families who actually want a child.

There are 24 hours in a day, 8 of which are spent sleeping. Are you trying to claim that most, or perhaps just many parents are working 16 hour days 7 days a week? I would really love to meet the person who is working so very hard. You're either dellusional or insane, but there are perhaps a handful of people who work these types of schedules, the rest are simply irresponsible if they can't find time for their children.

To have a child for the sole purpose of fullfillment is idiotic.

 

[CelestialBadger]

Originally posted by Nuts
Of all the drivel in the prior posts, the only conclusion I can see that warrants any attention is this; "Parent don't have enough time."

What the hell? Are you being serious? Parents don't have enough time to raise their children? Holy Hell people, wake up! If you're parents are too busy working to spend a few minutes with you, then your parents are lousy miserable degenerates! If you don't have time for children, then don't have them in the first place!

You people are absolutely dense, you can't even see the circular behavior in front of your very own eyes! Those parents of yours who don't have time to raise you because they're always working.... these are the same people who endured the lack of parenting that caused them to have unwanted children in the first place.

If your parents are too embarrased to speak to you about sex, then once again, it's their own damn fault. Looking to the school to teach your child about sex is almost as stupid as letting the IRS do your taxes, it makes no sense.

Wake up kiddies, schools are corrupting kids, not helping them.

By your logic people with bad parenting are doomed to be bad parents themselves. With no outside intervention (i.e. schools) the extinction of the human race is inevitable. That kind sucks, but at least now I know that we're all going to die. Maybe I can spend my last couple years having wild uneducated sex.