It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ontarians oppose the new graphic sex-ed program for schools

page: 15
19
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seamrog
This is another interesting comment...avoiding doing what is wrong, and trying to do what is right in this poster's mind sets one up for an ill-fated date with the god of karma.
I look at this comment and wonder 'what planet is this guy on?'

I come from the planet where one realises it's a mugs game trying to second guess their kids. The best that you, yourself, can hope for is that the lessons that you have imparted to yer young'uns stick. The irony is, that hope and those values, are very subjective, to say the least. You might just find...which was the essence of my comment...that you have not done them any favours.




posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Seamrog


There are currently more than 1.5 billion Roman Catholics - that number continues to grow.

I know that is meaningless to you, due to well, my previous comment.

Carry on.


No, it's meaningless because it is a false statistic.

Most of the people you are arguing with right here are officially considered "Roman Catholics" on the books. I am one of them.

There are not 1.5 Billion Catholics in the world, and the numbers of those who actually are is certainly not growing very quickly. Not that that would make a case for the validity of the religion, anyways. Islam is growing much more rapidly, for example. Does that mean we should be constructing curriculum based on Isalamic dogmatic bias, then?



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DeadFoot

The thing about being 'born into a religion' is actually more like 'being cornered into a religion' as whatever church one is baptized by, that's exactly what the person will remain to be 'on the book' for life, no matter what. This is because almost no-one actually goes through the legalese involved in changing it.

The Mennonites in my region do not force clueless babies to be baptized into the religion. They're allowed to ponder the pros and cons until they are old enough to choose for themselves at (I believe) 16. I think that's a great idea as I had no voice in the matter myself, doused with holy water almost at birth. Of course, they are pointed to the many benefits of being a part of that community and their school system is completely different from Ontario's public education.

I doubt they follow the new sex ed curriculum we're talking about here.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: masqua
a reply to: DeadFoot

The thing about being 'born into a religion' is actually more like 'being cornered into a religion' as whatever church one is baptized by, that's exactly what the person will remain to be 'on the book' for life, no matter what. This is because almost no-one actually goes through the legalese involved in changing it.

The Mennonites in my region do not force clueless babies to be baptized into the religion. They're allowed to ponder the pros and cons until they are old enough to choose for themselves at (I believe) 16. I think that's a great idea as I had no voice in the matter myself, doused with holy water almost at birth. Of course, they are pointed to the many benefits of being a part of that community and their school system is completely different from Ontario's public education.

I doubt they follow the new sex ed curriculum we're talking about here.


It is interesting to note, however, that the young people are basically forced to return to their communities because they are not given the tools (higher education and such) that are required in our society.

Any segregated community such as theirs will be following antiquated (hush hush) dogma and custom, which seems to not serve many young people and I would hazard a guess, especially gay et al. people and/or especially young girls and women.
edit on 28-3-2015 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-3-2015 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Guys and ladies, why you do not see the problem here?
If some one conducts sex act against 12 year old, his/hers excuse can be that 12 year old was fully educated on an issue and hence had known what the very act meant, giving unintentionally his/hers consent to the act based on school education program explaining to kids details of such engagement.

They are preparing grounds simply easing crime act defence.

I don't see any other reasons for such an early intro to adult engagement. My generation had no issues learning bit by bit about it as was needed by my psyche.

DO.
edit on 1-4-2015 by darkorange because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange
If some one conducts sex act against 12 year old, his/hers excuse can be that 12 year old was fully educated on an issue...


They also could claim that their religion told them to bone a 12 year old. Is either one of those lame ass answers going to get them excused for their crimes?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: darkorange
If some one conducts sex act against 12 year old, his/hers excuse can be that 12 year old was fully educated on an issue...


They also could claim that their religion told them to bone a 12 year old. Is either one of those lame ass answers going to get them excused for their crimes?


These day and age it will be difficult to build a defence based on religion grounds, but having a 12yo victim who was 'fully aware and educated' going to be tough since 12 yo would demonstrate in court nuances, and hence indirect "consent" to such an act.

Imp

DO.
edit on 1-4-2015 by darkorange because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-4-2015 by darkorange because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



They also could claim that their religion told them to bone a 12 year old. Is either one of those lame ass answers going to get them excused for their crimes?


If individual religious beliefs and freedoms trumps the laws of the land... then yes, claiming a religious belief is the perfect alibi/excuse for breaking said laws.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange
These day and age it will be difficult to build a defence based on religion grounds, but having a 12yo victim who was 'fully aware and educated' going to be tough since 12 yo would demonstrate in court nuances, and hence indirect "consent" to such an act.

...which is why we have statuary rape laws. As they have noted in some Mormon Fundy communities of late.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: darkorange
These day and age it will be difficult to build a defence based on religion grounds, but having a 12yo victim who was 'fully aware and educated' going to be tough since 12 yo would demonstrate in court nuances, and hence indirect "consent" to such an act.

...which is why we have statuary rape laws. As they have noted in some Mormon Fundy communities of late.


BS. If offender no older then a victim two years difference?

You can expect offender in his/hers 30th and older. Sex offenders against minors are 30 and older, for god sake.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
What are you defending, potential court case?
That was exactly my point above.

DO.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Leave kids be. Nature will take its course. The only proponents of the law in question are potential child molesters.
The end.


DO.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange
Leave kids be. Nature will take its course. The only proponents of the law in question are potential child molesters.
The end.


DO.


Better they play doctor.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange

These day and age it will be difficult to build a defence based on religion grounds, but having a 12yo victim who was 'fully aware and educated' going to be tough since 12 yo would demonstrate in court nuances, and hence indirect "consent" to such an act.


I see, so Canadian juris prudence is suddenly going to use the legal precedent that 'the 12 year old knows about sex so it is safe to molest them despite there being statutes on the books saying sex with minors is illegal'?

That about sum up your absurd point?



edit on 1-4-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: CranialSponge
If individual religious beliefs and freedoms trumps the laws of the land... then yes, claiming a religious belief is the perfect alibi/excuse for breaking said laws.


Since we are discussing Canada I was operating under the assumption we were using Canadian law.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange
BS. If offender no older then a victim two years difference?
You can expect offender in his/hers 30th and older. Sex offenders against minors are 30 and older, for god sake.

Yes, there appears to be some wiggle room for 12-14 year olds to have sex if there is no predation. You're right.
Your statement about '30 and older' makes no sense in relation to the above.

Further, when you say "The only proponents of the law in question are potential child molesters", are you referring to the legislation that this thread is all about? Because that's profoundly stupid.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
You know, if it already takes law disputes here on this board, imagine what law sharks pull when any of molesting case make it into reality?

Like I said, 'educating' the baby about sex matters will play into hands of child molesters.

It will give them more leeway to defend 'they knew about it' reasoning.

Are you all that thick?

DO



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange
You know, if it already takes law disputes here on this board, imagine what law sharks pull when any of molesting case make it into reality?

Like I said, 'educating' the baby about sex matters will play into hands of child molesters.

It will give them more leeway to defend 'they knew about it' reasoning.

Are you all that thick?

DO



Not thick enough to absorb your baseless slippery slope fallacy.

You literally just made this scenario up, it's not a call for alarm.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkorange

Like I said, 'educating' the baby about sex matters will play into hands of child molesters.



Like providing the child with knowledge and awareness?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadFoot

originally posted by: darkorange
You know, if it already takes law disputes here on this board, imagine what law sharks pull when any of molesting case make it into reality?

Like I said, 'educating' the baby about sex matters will play into hands of child molesters.

It will give them more leeway to defend 'they knew about it' reasoning.

Are you all that thick?

DO



Not thick enough to absorb your baseless slippery slope fallacy.

You literally just made this scenario up, it's not a call for alarm.



Lame respond.

You encourage me to wait and see. This is devious tactic.


DO.




top topics



 
19
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join