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: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by joeofthemountain
 


Yes, mandated sex education. Next mandated reasoning of eugenic programs.

I find it all to be just a big Orwellian nightmare.

600,000+ statutes and counting. Of course there are going to be conflicting laws and statutes. Hell, you have to confer with a damn lawyer if you want to open a beauty salon. Got to make sure you have the licensing down right on those nail manicurists.

Licenses needed for clipping nails.


I am just finding this world turning into a tragic comedy.

Oh well, the cliff is just ahead, no turning back now, might just as well put the pedal to the floor and see how long the flight can be maintained.




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 





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


Yes you may.


It isn't just WI, it is sex education in general. I agree with the old health classes we used to get that pointed out the functions of our reproductive organs, how they operate, where they are, etc.

I don't agree with teaching how to use condoms, or contraceptives, or the pamphlet contained in another thread detailing how to explore and provide pleasure, and encouraging exploration with your partner.

I have a couple of problems with it.

1. It gives the impression that sexual exploration and experimentation up to and including intercourse is perfectly acceptable at young ages, while most of our laws say the opposite. Do I think it is wrong for teenagers to have sex. . . no. But, I personally know some teenagers that were arrested shortly after turning 18 because they were still having sex with the same person they were having sex with for the past 6 months, and all of a sudden it became illegal? So, there is a problem with the mixed messages.

2. It takes away some of the innocence and experience of a young person. I remember fumbling around and not knowing how everything operated and fit together, and it was a life lesson, a growing experience, and I got to experience it with a partner, not an adult at the front of a classroom?

3. If I were the parent of a daughter, I had spent 13 or 15 or 16 years raising that daughter and teaching her a certain set of morals and respect for herself, I would not want a perceived authority figure at the front of a classroom telling her, "we all know you are doing this anyway, everyone is doing it, so we are going to show you how to do it correctly." It might give her the impression that she was doing something odd by not participating in that behavior.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 





Oh well, the cliff is just ahead, no turning back now, might just as well put the pedal to the floor and see how long the flight can be maintained.
--> endisnigh

Making that my new signature!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 





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


Yes you may.


It isn't just WI, it is sex education in general. I agree with the old health classes we used to get that pointed out the functions of our reproductive organs, how they operate, where they are, etc.

I don't agree with teaching how to use condoms, or contraceptives, or the pamphlet contained in another thread detailing how to explore and provide pleasure, and encouraging exploration with your partner.

I have a couple of problems with it.

1. It gives the impression that sexual exploration and experimentation up to and including intercourse is perfectly acceptable at young ages, while most of our laws say the opposite. Do I think it is wrong for teenagers to have sex. . . no. But, I personally know some teenagers that were arrested shortly after turning 18 because they were still having sex with the same person they were having sex with for the past 6 months, and all of a sudden it became illegal? So, there is a problem with the mixed messages.

2. It takes away some of the innocence and experience of a young person. I remember fumbling around and not knowing how everything operated and fit together, and it was a life lesson, a growing experience, and I got to experience it with a partner, not an adult at the front of a classroom?

3. If I were the parent of a daughter, I had spent 13 or 15 or 16 years raising that daughter and teaching her a certain set of morals and respect for herself, I would not want a perceived authority figure at the front of a classroom telling her, "we all know you are doing this anyway, everyone is doing it, so we are going to show you how to do it correctly." It might give her the impression that she was doing something odd by not participating in that behavior.


I will address your 3rd point first:
I understand where you are coming from with that, but, as far as this case is concerned, parents have the right to pull their child from these classes. I'm not sure how much I agree with that, I think it sets a slippery slope. Example: A fundamental christian does not want their child learning about evolution. But regardless, there is a rule in place to protect this very issue.

Your second point...I'd beg to differ. I would have rather had the knowledge of putting on a condom, instead of fumbling around...but that seems like a personal opinion more than anything else.

The first, I understand the slippery slope there. Those stories always make me angry, but I don't think sex ed classes are to blame for that.

Thanks for explaining though. It was enlightening.

I'm editing to add this which I think sums up my post better: I don't subscribe to the ideas that if you tell a kid what's going on down there that it will mean they will have sex.

[edit on 4/8/2010 by iamsupermanv2]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by iamsupermanv2
 


The right to pull your children from the classroom is a hollow gesture. Most parents have no idea the curriculum exists. The ones that do know the class is taught, probably don't know what is being taught or how the teacher is teaching it. If they really wanted this to be an honest alternative, they would make the kids have a parental permission slip signed to attend the class. That would make me very comfortable that they were concerned with my opinion.

On the second point, it might have been nice to have a little more knowledge before getting to that point, but I wouldn't change the memory for anything, and I hate to take that opportunity away from my kids.

Now, as for the case at hand, and the DA. I refer to my first post in this thread. If I was teaching high school girls how to put condoms on bananas in the back of my convenience store, with the assistance of graphic diagrams and nude photos, the DA would find a way to prosecute me for it.

Either it is ok or it is not ok, but it shouldn't be fine for a teacher and illegal for everyone else. I think the DA is certainly flexing a little here, and trying to make a political statement, but it seems like a fair approach. Hell, in some states you can work as a stripper at 16, while in other states you get arrested for looking at a 16 year old in a bikini at the park?



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Well I see in another thread on this subject that the nitwit DA mentioned is an evangelical "christian".
BIG FREAKIN SURPRISE HUH?!
I reall y wish fundies would some day LEARN TO MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS!:



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Well I see in another thread on this subject that the nitwit DA mentioned is an evangelical "christian".
BIG FREAKIN SURPRISE HUH?!
I reall y wish fundies would some day LEARN TO MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS!:



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join