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.

 

Wis. DA Threatens Arrest for Local sex-Ed Teachers

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
I'm not sure which forum this belongs in, but since I strongly suspect this DA's motives are political and religious, I'm posting it here. Mods, fell free to move it if you like.

Wis. DA Threatens Arrest for Local Sex -Ed Teachers


" April 7) -- A Wisconsin district attorney is urging schools to drop their sex-education programs, warning that the teachers involved could be arrested if they follow a new state law requiring them to instruct students on how to use condoms and other contraceptives."
Well how about trhat! A local DA disagrees with a duly passed State Law, so he threatens teachers that comply with it, and on dubious ( if not ridiculous), legal grounds? I do not KNOW, but I SPECULATE that he is motivated by his personal political and religious beliefs. Sorry MR DA, but your job is not to inflict your personal beliefs on the public! THIS IS INSANE!
What say you ATS?




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
How exactly can you be arrested for following the law?




In his letter, Southworth told school district leaders the new law promotes sexual assault of children, and warns that teachers who follow the law could be charged with misdemeanor or felony delinquency of a minor, with maximum punishments ranging from nine months in jail to six years in prison.




"For example, if a teacher instructs any student aged 16 or younger how to utilize contraceptives under circumstances where the teacher knows the child is engaging in sexual activity with another child -- or even where the 'natural and probable consequences' of the teacher's instruction is to cause that child to engage in sexual intercourse with a child -- that teacher can be charged under this statue," Southworth wrote.


Obviously two ideas in conflict of interest.

Laws meant to protect children from actual harm, this DA wants to use to prosecute people tasked to teach children to protect themselves when they engage in certain activities.

[edit on 4/8/2010 by eNumbra]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 


"For example, if a teacher instructs any student aged 16 or younger how to utilize contraceptives under circumstances where the teacher knows the child is engaging in sexual activity with another child -- or even where the 'natural and probable consequences' of the teacher's instruction is to cause that child to engage in sexual intercourse with a child -- that teacher can be charged under this statue," Southworth wrote.

Hmm Be careful there!
The above is the DA's interpretation of the law, not the law itself!
If the DA, or anyone else, wants the law interpretated, he is free seek clarification from the Legislature and the Courts. That's their job, not his.
I think his legal "reasoning" is pure BS, just a rather cheesy attempt to circumvent a law he disapproves of. I STRONGLY suspect his motives!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
It promotes sexual assault in the same way that bullet manufacturers promote murders.

Makes sense no?


seriously though, this makes me worried. I hate when people who are supposed to uphold the law try to twist it for their own gains. Mainly because they no doubt get supporters.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Yeah man! If this dude is motivated by RELIGION, HE SHOULD BE JAILED AND MAYBE SHOT!

Relgion has no place in America - NONE especially in GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOLS!

RELIGION IS FOR OLD PEOPLE AND WINGNUTS! STUDENTS NEED TO LEARN HOW EVIL RELIGION IS AND WHY IT'S BETTER TO HAVE SEX AND PARTY!

HOW DARE THESE RELIGIOUS FANATICS TELL ME WHAT I CAN OR CANNOT DO!

Sarcasm off.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 


I find this worriesome indeed.
It seems to be part of a wider trend ( and I'm speculating here), that extreme right wingers and Fundamentalist "Christians" can simply ignore any law or policy them choose.
I think MR DA will get his heanded to him on a silver platter when/if this goes to court!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


To be fair, I feel that an extremely liberal person in the right mindset would be capable of the same thing.

Say a law says no sex ed ever ever again. A liberal DA could threaten any school official that follows the law.

I know a law like that would hopefully never pass, but you get what I'm saying.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Who are you to decide who gets charged with a crime? Prosecutors are duly elected people that decide who gets charged with crimes. The Jury decides if the statute is lawful and if the person committed it.

Or do you not believe in our justice system?

Can't go cherry picking the legislation you like and dislike can we now? /s

This is a trained lawyer you know, one just like the ones you people elect day in and day out to be your representatives that write the laws.

See how that works?



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
Or do you not believe in our justice system?

He's threatening to prosecute people for following a law.


The state law, called the Healthy Youth Act, took effect in March. Starting this fall, it requires schools with sex-education courses to teach students medically accurate, age-appropriate information, including how to use birth control and prevent sexually transmitted diseases. It also requires the classes to include information about how to recognize signs of abuse and how alcohol can affect decision making.

Following this law, in his eyes, violates another law,


In his letter, Southworth told school district leaders the new law promotes sexual assault of children, and warns that teachers who follow the law could be charged with misdemeanor or felony delinquency of a minor, with maximum punishments ranging from nine months in jail to six years in prison.

If legislation can be passed that requires you to commit a crime then no, I do not believe in this system.



Someone needs to get off their ass and clearly define the grounds where being a sex-ed teacher does and does not cross the legal lines of contributing to the delinquency/sexual assault of a minor.


[edit on 4/8/2010 by eNumbra]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 


I think what this DA is trying to say is if the kids know how to use a condom, know what sex is, know how to do it the "right" way, then they will totes be sex offenders.

I think we can all agree this way of thinking is clown shoes.

I know how to use a condom perfectly, but I'm not out there going all rape-y on every female I see. I also knew how to use one before my sex ed class, never once, even at that "young, impressionable age" did I think of going out and getting all sex crime-y.

Side note: I went to a Catholic school. Our book didn't mention condoms, but our teacher did. He was required by the administration to say they cannot "support" this, but condoms exist for reason X Y and Z. The church says it's a sin to use them, but they exist.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 


And I would object just as strongly.
It's a trend I see on the right, simply my observation.
I think I made it more than clear when I was speculating.
I just object to a public servant using his/her position to advance his personal beliefs, no matter what those beliefs might be.
ANY public servant is elected to serve the interests ( as best they can), of all the people, and the many viewpoints of the citizens. Liberals should serve the interest of their conservative public, and vice versa.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by eNumbra
 


I think what this DA is trying to say is if the kids know how to use a condom, know what sex is, know how to do it the "right" way, then they will totes be sex offenders.


I was getting the impression that he thinks showing kids how to use a condom will make them think that they no longer have to worry about the consequences and start being more and more promisquous.

IE training them in condom use is like giving them a loaded gun and a target to fire at.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OldDragger
 


Oh, I had no intent to deny that this type of behavior is more prevalent on the right, if it came off that way, I retract.

I agree with the rest of your statement though. Public officials need to remember they got that little word "Public" in front of their name.

eNumbra,
You could be right about that. I still think it's just as stupid.

I know how to control my car. Doesn't mean I'm going to drive it into other cars on purpose.

Yes, some will become more sexual, I'm not naive, but you give a kid a toy gun, doesn't mean he will go out and start killing people with a real one. Yea some crazy ones do, but I think they are the exception, not the norm.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by OldDragger
 



eNumbra,
You could be right about that. I still think it's just as stupid.



I'm not saying it wasn't, didn't mean to come off that way if I did.

What I find patently ridiculous here is the idea that a law could be passed that would force one to commit an act that breaks another law.

Thankfully the notion that it even does such exists only in this DAs (and hopefully a small minority of others') head. Even if he does prosecute it and win, the outcome should be easily appealed by the very notion I've mentioned. One law contradicting another.

Maybe I should have said it earlier, sorry, just got my thoughts all in a row now.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 


No worries, you came off exactly as you intended.

I was just reaffirming that I still disagreed with this clown.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The problem is too many laws, too many interpretations, and not enough parenting!

I don't believe the state should have mandated this education. I also don't believe the DA should be prosecuting teachers for teaching?

The parents should decide if they don't want their children getting this type of education, and they should change their lawmakers, or change their state, or pull their kids from those schools.

Lets look at it this way. If a pretty young 16 year old girl comes to my house and I instruct her on how to use a condemn, complete with diagrams and photos, and a banana to practice on, would I get prosecuted? Probably!! If I video taped the whole episode, no nudity or physical contact with myself, and I posted it on the internet, would people get off on it? Probably! Would I get prosecuted for that as well? Definitely!

So, what is obscene? I don't know, but I know it when I see it? Sound familiar?

Sex education is good, but it can go to far, and I personally believe this is too far, but the teachers are now having to choose between doing their job and going to jail? The laws are out of control!

SACK THE INCUMBENT - SACK THE INCUMBENT - SACK THE INCUMBENT

DON'T VOTE FOR ANY POLITICIAN OR POLITICAL PARTY. VOTE FOR COMMON FOLKS THAT PROMISE TO DO A JOB AND THEN COME BACK HOME TO THEIR COMMUNITY. DON'T VOTE FOR ANYBODY THAT YOU WOULDN'T SEE AT YOUR LOCAL GROCERY STORE OR HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL GAME!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


May I ask why you feel the sex ed in WI has gone to far?

I'm a bit conflicted: I think parents should be teaching their kids what's what as far as sex goes, but some of them just plain are not comfortable with it. My mother wasn't. All I got was: "If I find out you are having sex while living in my house, you will be in a world of hurt. If you do have sex, use a condom because if knock anyone up you are dead" Honestly, that wasn't enough of an "education"

Schools exist to teach our children things our parents are not capable of doing. We send our kids to professionals for a reason. I can't open up a school in my apartment for a reason ya know?



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
The problem is too many laws, too many interpretations, and not enough parenting!

I don't believe the state should have mandated this education. I also don't believe the DA should be prosecuting teachers for teaching?

The parents should decide if they don't want their children getting this type of education, and they should change their lawmakers, or change their state, or pull their kids from those schools.


From the article.


Parents will be permitted to remove their children from sex-education classes, as they could under previous state law. Schools also will be allowed the choice of whether to offer sex education, but must notify parents if they decide not to.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Juneau County, the one in question here, has a population of only 24,000. More people live in a a single block of downtown Milwaukee than in all of Mauston, the county seat of Juneau county.

I doubt this DA is some distant and impossibly rich politician backed by international businessmen. He is however, abusing his powers, something that anyone elected to an office should be called on.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
The main problem with ATS is that the majority of the membership is juvenile and are led by hormones. Consequently, they cannot think.

Thank the selfish and grossly overindulged Baby Boomers for this state of affairs, as they managed to break the linkage between civilization and procreation. "It's all about ME" is the slogan of their spoiled brat children - the bulk of ATS membership.

They will learn too late that sex is a powerful force and easily manipulated for end-goals they cannot even imagine. Well, it doesn't matter. Thanks to birth control, unrestricted and unproductive sex, we as a race are dying and will cease to exist within the lifetime of the sex-obsessed here.

Well maybe some will survive. To paraphrase Stalin, "We shall have fewer Americans but better Americans". I suppose it's nature's way of cleaning the gene pool.

Thank God for that small consolation!


Originally posted by endisnighe
Who are you to decide who gets charged with a crime? Prosecutors are duly elected people that decide who gets charged with crimes. The Jury decides if the statute is lawful and if the person committed it.

Or do you not believe in our justice system?

Can't go cherry picking the legislation you like and dislike can we now? /s

This is a trained lawyer you know, one just like the ones you people elect day in and day out to be your representatives that write the laws.

See how that works?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join