Teaching Children About Sex In School -- A Comparison

Originally posted by redhorse
For the record, I am a staunch advocate FOR teaching safe sex tactics in school. However...

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Saw this today:

What are you thoughts ATS? Is this imagine an appropriate comparison?

~Tenth

Nope. Not even sort of.

Comparing a fundamental biological drive with a HUGE postive chemical pay off (sex, for those who may be confused), to having an life threatening, generally painfull, nearly always expensive and ultimately negative accident with a motor vehicle is one of the most absurdly asinine comparisons I have ever seen.

Completely illogical, transparantly propaganda-ist, and (IMO) not even sort of funny. Any one on the opposite side of this argument doesn't even need to try to shoot holes in this; it started out as swiss cheese.

Is it fun to drive a car fast and recklessly? Yes. Many people get a thrill from it and that is seated in physiology. You never think you're going to wreck and you don't always wreck, but there is a chance.
Just like sex and conception. Doing something fun with a possible negative outcome.

Not absurdly asinine if you think about it for a minute. Weak? Possibly, but not totally wrong.

Edit: If someone thinks there is a safety net then they won't fully grasp the potential consequence. That's the whole argument of the cartoon.

Even Ramen noodles come with instructions and everything these days has a warning label why should sex be any different.

Originally posted by spinalremain
Sadly thoguh, we have many parents who simply teach their children to resist their humanity and that sex is evil and God forbids it.

I can't speak for other religions but, that is not what the Catholic Church teaches.

The Church teaches that sex is a beautiful thing that allows us to take part in the creation of new life. The Church does not believe that sex, in itself, is evil but, that it must be done under the proper circumstances; that being within a marriage.

Sex outside of marriage results in children with only one parent, can lead to sexually transmitted diseases if one is promiscuous and causes people to look at each other as a means of sexual gratification, rather than as fellow human beings and persons made in the image and likeness of God. Studies have shown that children of unwed parents suffer from numerous disadvantages and are more prone to depression, drug and alcohol abuse, criminal behavior and even becoming single parents themselves, thus continuing the cycle.

The Church has good reasons for its condemnation of sex outside of wedlock because of the many social ills that this causes for society.

Maybe if people had listened to the teachings of the Church instead of writing them off as puritanical or dismissing them because they conflicted with what they wanted to do at some particular moment, we would live in a more civil society in which people were able to care for themselves and for their fellow man instead of seeing humanity as a commodity to be bought and sold.

reply to post by FortAnthem


Nah, I don't buy that.

The church is a patriarchy that not only oppresses women and the sexual identity of mostly anybody who isn't straight and married, but who also does really stupid stuff.

Such as the Pope going to Africa and telling them to not use Condoms cause that will make AIDS worse. If those people had listened to the church, the HIV rate would skyrocket in those areas more so than it already is.

See the problem with blindly following religion?

~Tenth

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by FortAnthem

 

The church is a patriarchy that not only oppresses women and the sexual identity of mostly anybody who isn't straight and married, but who also does really stupid stuff.

Such as the Pope going to Africa and telling them to not use Condoms cause that will make AIDS worse. If those people had listened to the church, the HIV rate would skyrocket in those areas more so than it already is.

See the problem with blindly following religion?

~Tenth

Wow! You've got a serious grudge on for the Church, don't you?

The Church doesn't try to oppress anyone, what they do instead is they try to liberate us by providing us with the tool of self control. The Church teaches us that using our intellect and willpower is more improtant than giving in to our baser instincts, like animals.

A man can become a slave to his baser instincts such as lust, greed or gluttony but, only through use of the will and reason can he overcome these base addictions. The Church teaches us to hone our willpower by denying to ourselves the things that we want, sometimes even over just small things. This helps us to grow in our self control so that when presented with greater temptations, we are able to use our will to make decisions rather than just giving into our momentary lusts or greed and the consequences that could arise from not exercising self control.

The Church teaches us to think of the consequences of our actions BEFORE we commit ourselves to a course of action, especially when it may be our baser instincts that are attempting to guide our decisions. This doesn't only apply to sexual situations, it applys to regular, real world situations as well. By exercising our will, we can turn away that extra slice of pie after dinner that could lead to weight gain or we can decide not to take a wad of cash left unattended on a counter which could lead to us being arrested.

The Church is not only about denying sexual things, it is about controlling our impulses and doing the right thing in all situations. By taking control of our own willpower and controling our baser impulses, we actually free ourselves from the slavery of giving in to every wild impulse that comes upon us.

That is not to say that the Church doesn't want us to have sex, quite to the contrary; the Church wants us to have lots and lots of sex but, only with our own spouse in the context of marriage. You have to remember that one of God's first commandments was to "Go forth and multiply and fill the Earth", a commandment that up until recent times, men had no problem in obeying .

Originally posted by Mr Headshot
The average American teenager doesn't need to be educated about sex. They know what it is, they know what condoms are, and they know that you don't want a baby.

The problem that needs to be taken care of is the baby crazy girls. The ones who, at 16 or 17, will go to great lengths to have a baby. They just want to get pregnant. That is your problem.

That is PART of the problem. teen pregnancy is exponentially higher in those who live near or below the poverty line. It isnt just about being "baby crazy", it is absolutely about education and availability of safe methods.

But I do agree that shows like "teen mom" or whatever are compounding the issue.

Schools should teach what they are supposed to be teaching .. the basics ... Math, Reading, Science, History. They aren't doing a very good job of teaching the things that they should be, so I can't see giving them even more to screw up.

I suppose if they want to have some kind of sex education in science class ... like the basics of boy + girl = baby .. and if you don't want a baby then dont do it or 'cover it' ... then that's fine. But considering the very low test scores that the city schools here in the USA are getting .... well ..... they should spend more time on the basic things they are supposed to be teaching.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Schools should teach what they are supposed to be teaching .. the basics ... Math, Reading, Science, History. They aren't doing a very good job of teaching the things that they should be, so I can't see giving them even more to screw up.

I suppose if they want to have some kind of sex education in science class ... like the basics of boy + girl = baby .. and if you don't want a baby then dont do it or 'cover it' ... then that's fine. But considering the very low test scores that the city schools here in the USA are getting .... well ..... they should spend more time on the basic things they are supposed to be teaching.

This is a bit off topic, but part of the reason for the low test scores is the methods used to teach, and to test what is taught.

It is a proven fact that people retain less when trying to take a test than when using the knowledge in applicable situations.

reply to post by FortAnthem


Yes, I do have a problem with indoctrination.

Any kind of it. Organized religion is in my opinion, a cult that serves to divide us, not help us.

Sure, some of the stories and fairy tales have good morals. But the Pope is a relic of the old world. And you never addressed that point I made about him going to nations and spouting off really ridiculous things.

In any case, it's not about the church, so I apologize for my diatribe, it's just you can't use "well if you just followed the church, everything would be ok".

That's the same as saying " well if you listened to the government, your life would be great". We know that doesn't work.

~Tenth

reply to post by spinalremain


You mean like the electronic babies that teach about proper parenting skills?

the best way to prevent people from making mistakes is to give them all of the appropriate knowledge, ensuring they make the right choice for themselves.

I have no problem with teens learning about sex, perhaps even slightly younger, however, in the uk they are teaching kids about sex from the word go! That in my opinion is sick and is stealing the childrens childhood! Let them be children for crying out loud! To clarify we are talking about 4-5 year olds here, it's just wrong in my opinion.

One of the many many many reasons I home educate.

reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz






Whenever i get anything that needs putting together and i enlist the help

of the teen's in the family to help me... and i produce the instructions to get the job done

properly they just laugh..."i won't be needing them" they say !! ...so much

for following instructions!

reply to post by FortAnthem


What are you saying? We had sexual education in my old European Grammar school when we were aged 12 as part of our Biology lesson and that was almost 30 years ago, cannot believe some people still think that such important, life saving topic should be excluded from Biology lessons. Check out statistics of how many teenagers are aware that oral sex can get them a STD too, or know how to safely use a condom, or practising coitus interruptus is not a safe birth-control method. Obviously as a parent I have the responsibility to discuss all of these topics with my child. So better twice (at home and in school) than sorry and by the way the same goes for drug prevention.

The school system should have absolutely no involvement in the teaching of information regarding sex. I oppose both teaching of "safe sex" and abstinence. Neither should be taught in schools. The responsibility of teaching children about this subject should be entirely with the parents; they know their child best, what to and not to tell them, and how to best address their questions. Are we to assume parents do not know enough about sex and safety to properly educate their own children, conceived through the act?

In 5th grade I had to learn about it in my school, then again in 7th grade. The lesson in 5th grade was about your body and the coming, or current, changes. The lesson in 7th grade was about STDs. In 8th grade I became home schooled so, whatever they teach in High Schools is not of my knowing. I do not object to the teaching of the biologic side of this subject, such as the composition of the diseases, how and why particular changes to the human body occur, and things such as that. But once they cross that line, it does offend me.

reply to post by Misoir


Some passages of the Old Testament are more offensive than any sexual education you can ever get in an entire school life. I will never put man made and written religion above the health and safety of my own child

Norway has co-ed PE classes with boys and girls showering together from the first grade.

there is little sex ed teaching in the schools as little is needed.

sex crimes and teen sex is a lot lower then in the US.

and the same is true among children raised as nudist in the US little to no sex crimes or teen sex.

Originally posted by Misoir
The school system should have absolutely no involvement in the teaching of information regarding sex. I oppose both teaching of "safe sex" and abstinence. Neither should be taught in schools. The responsibility of teaching children about this subject should be entirely with the parents; they know their child best, what to and not to tell them, and how to best address their questions. Are we to assume parents do not know enough about sex and safety to properly educate their own children, conceived through the act?

In 5th grade I had to learn about it in my school, then again in 7th grade. The lesson in 5th grade was about your body and the coming, or current, changes. The lesson in 7th grade was about STDs. In 8th grade I became home schooled so, whatever they teach in High Schools is not of my knowing. I do not object to the teaching of the biologic side of this subject, such as the composition of the diseases, how and why particular changes to the human body occur, and things such as that. But once they cross that line, it does offend me.

Sex education is not just taught for the hell of it, its a public health issue. Most schools that teach sex education do so to prevent teen pregnancy and the transmission of sexual transmitted diseases. Something like this should not be left up to the parents because they might have ideological differences that would put their children and society at risk.

Sexuality was in my life before I even got to school. It was brought to me by the neighbor kids who were one year older and weren't in school either. Now with the internet, it's even harder for parents to put up a facade for their kids, thus any attempts to do so just let kids know their parents/teachers are full of crap and will lie to them.

This idea that schools should be teaching it, or that kids aren't going to find out about it before ANY age you set as the "right age to learn about it" is absurd. Whatever age you set, that age will quickly inform those younger than them without you ever hearing about it.

Sex is a community/family issue and only a community/family can actually deal with it. Problem is the community, families and individuals are so caught up in their lies and confusions about their and others true sexual nature, they can't honestly teach anyone else.

So they (we) try to pass the buck to someone else, who is probably ALSO lying to themselves and/or confused regarding others about what's *really* going on with sexuality. In the end kids wind up just teaching themselves while under the confusion of all sorts of distortions and seemingly irrational pressures. Which works out *great* right?

And no, Government != Community.

The more we try to pretend we're something we're not, the more destructive we become to ourselves and our community. We then create people who are trying to live up to false standards based on lies rather than honest dealing with the *real* challenges and nature of human sexuality.

You think Native American children had many illusions and deceptions to "protect them" about their parents sexuality?

All that said: I love the comic in the OP and agree with the sentiment.

Namaste.

Sex is a natural part of being human. It doesn't matter how much we want to act like it isn't, all normally-fuctioning people have sexual thoughts and desires, and their bodies work as they are intended to.
People who try to pretend the subject doesn't exist or that speaking about it is evil or wrong are a bunch of idiots and have no place "teaching" anything to anyone.