Everyday, I hear about more and more things that piss me off, confuse me, or just make me sad. I figured I might as well write my opinions about such things, even though nobody probably cares. Oh Well.
I'm going to start off by saying that I am a Christian. The democratic party is not the Godless party because I am proof that you can be socially liberal and still believe in God and have Christian morals.
Today in my sex class (college has all sorts of fun things for you to take), we talked about the extremely depressing condition of sexual education in America. Now, I think that abstinence is the best and only way to truly prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, but I don't think that only teaching about abstinence in schools is going to help the increasingly high numbers of STIs in teens, unintended teen pregnancy, or HIV/AIDS cases. I think there has been sufficient evidence proving that abstinence-ONLY until marriage education doesn't prevent or decrease these problems.
People who think that teaching abstinence only until marriage in schools will prevent teens from having sex are sorely mistaken. They will have sex. Teenagers have hormones, and while I don't agree that teens should sleep around or are mature enough to engage in such activities, it's going to happen. Students who aren't exposed to comprehensive sex ed are less likely to use contraception during their first sexual encounter. This happens for a variety of reasons. They were never taught how to properly use contraception, such as condoms. They were also taught that it doesn't prevent disease, because abstinence-only educators only teach the failure rates, but forget to say that when used correctly, condoms are 99% effective against pregnancy and some STIs.
In a video we saw today, a student asked the educator what would happen if he decided to have sex before he got married.
What was her answer? I guess you should be prepared to die.
That isn't healthy for young people, and they aren't going to miraculously love sex when they get married. Teaching like that will instill fear into teens for the rest of their lives.
Now, I could go on and on about the subject, but you probably don't want to read anymore, so I'll stop. But let me just say that in no way am I advocating sex before marriage. I just feel as if teenagers have a right to information so that they can make the decisions on their own. That's it.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I fully agree with your stance on how sex ed should be changed. The way it is right now..it's unrealistic. Teens should just be given the facts about safe sex, including ALL forms of contraceptives besides just abstinence. Thanks for your views.
<3 Scribble
Should stay out of the public education system; it is the job of the parents not Uncle Sam.
They don't teach abstinence only in Sex-Ed.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
There are sex-ed programs called "abstinence only." Those are the ones supported by the federal government. They teach abstinence only.
This is in varying degrees, I guess it should be abstinence mostly. Most at least mention condoms and the pill, but they only highlight when they fail. They aren't presented as safeguards or alternatives to abstinence. Some programs outright lie and mislead so they don't have to mention or acknowledge birth control at all.
These programs also tout "virginity pledges," that don't work and end up with teens using protection less often while having sex at nearly identical rates. Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are the only programs that receive federal funding. They pretty firmly exist. If you meant that Abstinence only programs aren't education, then you were right.
Res ipsa loquitur.
memor mori, mahalo.
I hadn't given thought of this side of the argument until you mentioned it. It is good to see another point of view to a controversial issue, and I feel that I your thoughts seem logical and reasonable, though those with stricter views may feel you are approaching this incorrectly. I do feel that sex should not be promoted among teens, but, in agreement with your statement, the facts should be noted- abstinence, protection, statistics (of both sides), etc.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
Sex Education should be taught in schools because it is legitimate information that teens and adolescents have the right to know about. And the government funds abstinence only sex ed:
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=295988&page=1
Why should the government teach anything at all? What is important to be taught in schools and why?
Res ipsa loquitur.
memor mori, mahalo.
I'm happy to know that there is people like you outside in this world! I really think that all your saying is true, although I think that teens have the knowlege to know what's good for them and what's bad. Personally I think that most of the teens know about preservatives, and they have good knowlege of them, and like in most of the cases is their decision eather have sex or not. (Which thats what can't be control)!
Let's take an average classroom full of children in middle school. Every student will be at a different maturity level, and not all of them will be ready for sexual education. However, the goverment decides to inform them.
Sexual education is the job of the parents; it is not the job of the goverment. If parents want their kids to be taught sex-ed in schools, they should have to sign their children up for the classes, and choose whether or not they want an abstinence only class.
In a perfect world, the parents should have to pay extra for these classes, as they are abdicating their responsibilities, and handing them over to the taxpayer.
What should be taught in schools? Those subjects that are benificial to the children in expanding their understanding of the world. These subjects should be ranked, from most important to least important. Furthermore, nothing should be taught to any particular child that is against the will of the child's parents, unless the lack of knowledge would undoubtably be harmfull to the child in a very grave manner.
There are many subjects more important than sex-ed.
1) Mathematics
2) Science
3) English (grammer literature writing)
4) History
6) Civics
7) Economics
8) Other social sciences (Sociology anthropology)
9) Logic-so libs disapear (pardon the joke I could not resist)
10) Philosophy
11) Other languages
Given the absolute whipping our nation is recieveing in Science and Math, should we not focus more attention on those areas? It might not be a bad idea if children could do math without a calculator. Maybe it would also be a good thing if nationaly four years of math was necessary to graduate high school. Maybe it would be a good thing if students were prepared for mathematics in middle school.
English. Am I the only one that was forced to diagram scentences is my youth? When my brother was in seventh grade, there were students that did not know what a verb was. In college there are students that do not know what the word dexterity means. In college there are studentsthat write papers that suffer in comparison to those of my homeschooled 9th grade sister. Many of the bloggers on this site show a clear inability to articulate their thoughts.
Finally, since when is it cool not to read. I am not sure if reading books destroys ones coolness quotient, but I am sure that not reading makes one a moron.
It would be a good thing if we had an educated voter that understood are system, and understood are past as well as the past of other nations.
I personally would like to see education privatized. That way parents can choose what they prefer; a math and science program or a most prestigious sex-ed program.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
You say that there are many more subjects which are more important than sex-ed, but having sexual relations as a teenager comes with many responsibilities. Not only can you get pregnant, but the number of STI instances in teenagers is rapidly increasing. In fact, HIV and AIDS cases in youth are growing at an enormous rate mainly because of the trend in oral sex among teenagers. Public schools are allowed to teach about evolution, which can be and is contested among religious persons, and can teach about physical well-being, but cannot teach about biological instincts within ourselves? In all sex-ed classes in public schools, the parents have the option of removing their child from that portion of the class without any repurcusions to the child. I am not talking about privatized education, but rather what teenagers have a right to know. Schools do not have the legal right to teach morals in school, and having an abstinence-only method of teaching sexual education only misinforms students. Teenagers who are subject to these types of education are more likely to have sex before marriage and less likely to use a condom during their first sexual encounter. Statistics show that. If a parent wants to teach their own child about sex and sexual health, then that is their right, but if they feel that the responsibility is the school's, then the school has the obligation to fully inform students. It is the parent's obligation to teach morals, not the school. It isn't a problem if the public school wants to teach about other diseases or biology or physical fitness. The problem comes when a taboo subject, sexuality, is brought up. It shouldn't be a taboo subject because it is a fact of life. I never said that the government shouldn't teach students about sexual education. My argument is about how they should fully inform students if they do decide to have a sex ed program. You are not addressing my main argument, but are rather arguing a point which I didn't bring up in the first place.
Sex comes with resposibilities, but it is not the schools job to teach about sex and the responsibilities that come with sex.
There is a lot of debate regarding what kind of sex-ed classes are best for kids (if any), but there is no debate that excessive drinking, drug use, and smoking are unhealthy.
Evolution is a scientific theory. Public schools are obligated to teach it.
In teaching about sexuality, the school is teaching about morals. Morals are the responsibility of the parent, but shouldn't the school be allowed to explore the works of Hegel and Kant, Aquinas and Augustine, and so on down the list.
If goverment is going to teach about sex, it should be after school. The program should include more than just abstinence, but it should also show the correlation between pre-marital sex and divorce. The course should delve into philosophy and moral ethics, and not just be a course of how to. I do not think a goverment program could ever be comprehensive enough.
I've answered your question, so why don't you answer mine.
Shouldn't sex-ed stay out of schools? Or better yet, should't education be moved to the private sector?
Addendum: At my college they are having a sexual responsibility week, with free condoms. What a glorious waste of tax payer money.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
In a middle school (I actually started "sex ed" in 4th grade) classroom everybody is ready for sex EDUCATION. None are ready for sex, but they aren't so immature that they can't handle education. And even in your system abstinence only should not be an option presented to parents. Abstinence only programs are full of lies and misinformation. Any education, privitized or not should at least teach reasonably honestly. Signing your kids up for a class in outright lies and stamping your feet with hands over their ears isn't going to help them.
I really have to disagree with the idea that parents should control almost totally what their children learn. There are too many parents out there who would either shelter their children too much or teach them outright lies. If anybody decides what a child learns it should be the child. Natural curiosity and encouraging interest in learning will get most children to explore a wide variety of subjects without allowing parents to act as intellectual tyrants. Kids can handle far more than we give them credit for, it is when we try to keep them from the realities of the world that problems occur, and parents try far to hard to keep children from the realities of the world.
I was forced to diagram senteces too. Prepositional phrases in compound sentences... fucking awful. Likely beneficial, but no fun at all.
I noticed you have absolutely no art (does literature count?) on your list of things to be taught. Excuse my bleeding heart, but creativity and art are important. We judge lost civilizations on their art, not just their civics. Art reflects and encourages all of the intellectual advancements we make. The value of the individual and importance of the human body have all been spread through art. Look back a couple hundred years and the public is almost never depicted in any work of art, and if they are they are just cartoons. Think what kind of mentality that reflects. Then some big thinkers, many of them artists as well as politicians or philosophers, start talking about and depicting the common man. Art is important, and some music appreciation classes might improve the top 40 around here.
Liberals and conservatives (the cream of the crop anyway) don't differ in logic skills, they differ in values. ;)
Res ipsa loquitur.
memor mori, mahalo.
I would rather err toward giving parents too much power, than giving power unto the goverment.
I agree that art is a huge benifit to an education.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
We had a discussion last week with my english teacher that she legally wans't allowed to say anything in class but "abstinence." She cannot even mention condoms.
And Dr. Gonzo, I'm definitely with you on the art and music front. I have learned a lot more about life from my 3 music classes and 1 art class than I could possibly learn from my other IB/AP classes.
My sex ed teacher in high school was awesome. She taught us everything that you need to know. Then she taught us more than what we knew exsisted. Yes, she did use scare tactics, but they were in moderation. One day and several mentions in class, she told ue how effective everything was. On that day I learned of at least 12 new methods of prevention. I guess I was a lucky one.
I completely agree. Teachers need to hilghlight abstinence as the 100% method of not getting pregnant or contracting an STD. When you use scare tactics, people react negatively. It is simple reverse physcology. If you tell somone not to have sex, they will. Most of the time it is curiousity.
Though, there are the unfortuante cases where you need help from home, church, school, and friends to keep people from pre-marital sex. Truely, they are the ones in need of great help.
____________________________________________________________
God gave you a brain. America gave you a vote. Use them together and wisely.
The only case in which we have had upfront sex-ed was in 9th grade our biology teacher (not health, mind you- that was basically abstinence only) gave us the low-down on everything.
It's quite obvious that the scare tactics are not working at our school- everyone's getting it on (is that p.c. enough for this board?). the teen pregancy class is getting bigger and bigger this year.
At the moment, America is pushing Math, English and Science to raise test scores. But I think they are missing some important things. I'm not saying that any "class'' is more important than another, because I think they are ALL important to our well being and functioning in this world.
Some people say that sex education should be taught by schools, some say by the parents. I think Sex Education should be what it says. Education about sex! It's a part of life, we learn the reproductive systems in biology and how they function. In Chemistry, we are not just taught about chemicals and their interactions, we are given the tools and how to use them, and WHAT PROTECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN! Why should sex education be any different?
I'm not saying we should have a "sex education lab" that would just be silly. But I do think that all the realms of sex should be taught. We all know it's not just "making babies," and that there is a lot more to it.
You are right when you say teenagers are going to do it if they want to. Especially if it's "forbidden." Haha. It's like trying to tell kids they can't go into the woods because they'll get lost or hurt. What do they do? They go into the woods. Sometimes they are fine, sometimes they are not. Maybe if we took the time to teach and show them how to be safe.
Sex shouldn't be something that is labled a "bad" thing in society. It's here! It's not going anywhere! So let's deal with it instead of pushing it under the rug.
~Jess
At the moment, America is pushing Math, English and Science to raise test scores. But I think they are missing some important things. I'm not saying that any "class'' is more important than another, because I think they are ALL important to our well being and functioning in this world.
Some people say that sex education should be taught by schools, some say by the parents. I think Sex Education should be what it says. Education about sex! It's a part of life, we learn the reproductive systems in biology and how they function. In Chemistry, we are not just taught about chemicals and their interactions, we are given the tools and how to use them, and WHAT PROTECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN! Why should sex education be any different?
I'm not saying we should have a "sex education lab" that would just be silly. But I do think that all the realms of sex should be taught. We all know it's not just "making babies," and that there is a lot more to it.
You are right when you say teenagers are going to do it if they want to. Especially if it's "forbidden." Haha. It's like trying to tell kids they can't go into the woods because they'll get lost or hurt. What do they do? They go into the woods. Sometimes they are fine, sometimes they are not. Maybe if we took the time to teach and show them how to be safe, we would worry about them less.
Sex shouldn't be something that is labled a "bad" thing in society. It's here! It's not going anywhere! So let's deal with it instead of pushing it under the rug.
~Jess
As for the concept that it should be left up to the parents, should teaching advanced physics, biochemistry and AP psychology be up to them to? Probably not, because there are people educated in the process of teaching each of these subjects; while my sex ed class in HS was a joke, my human sexuality class in college was freakin' amazing, and there is no way my mother knew anything at all about half of the stuff i learned in Human Sexuality.
And besides, how many parents actually WANT to tell their children about sex? It's so awkward, would you want your mom going into details about break through bleeding, the g-spot, premature ejaculation? My God, I would die.
The fact of the matter is, teens are going to have sex. You can deny it all you want, and pretend that if you tell them "no" they won't, but at the end of the day when I have children, I would rather want my teenager to know EXACTLY what she/he is getting into, what to expct, and most importantly how to be safe, and learn it from an expert, someone they won't be afraid to ask questions to, than to be a fool and pretend like I have a little virgin saint who has no hormones or desires. Also, I would much rather my teenager be capable of maing decisions regarding safe sex than to be able to preform a quadradic equation. I use my safe sex knowledge more than I ever used any math formula in my life.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis