That would be at about the age of 21 or so, when the "fetus" graduates from college and can hold down a job and not have to be supported by mommy and daddy. In some cases the fetus NEVER becomes self-sufficient.

No child can survive on it's own without assistance. That's what makes it a child rather than an adult. They need food, clothing, shelter, and basic human contact from a parent. A 5-year-old would starve to death without mommy or daddy to make dinner.

Now... based on your argument, is a baby born full term that is born needing an incubator to survive "alive"? How about a baby born full term with a hole in its heart or lungs? How about a baby born prematurely that needs medical intervention to survive? Are these babies alive?


The whole "survivability" argument is ridiculous, because no child is self-sufficient and can survive without intervention of some sort, and even full-term babies can have issues that lead to questions about whether they are really "alive" by that definition.

Elliot

Hello again, El:

And THIS has to do with getting married how?? It's like saying that a woman who lost her ring finger can't get married either...

Nobody is denying your premise either. Homosexual couples are NOT the same as hetrosexual ones are... So what?

As long as they're consenting adults, the reasons they want to get married are entirely their own, and is of NO concern of yours OR the government.

excon

PS> Aren't you the small government, leave the people alone righty?? I guess not.

I don't have all the free time like you do so I'll just mention that I was referring to breathing on its own, not earning wages and paying mortgage like you refer to. Nice try though.

What do you think that is in the womb, fruit flies? A virus? Bacteria? That's the problem NK, the pro-choice crowd has dumbed human life down to cells no different than those that that might be growing in labs all over the world. Too many of you refuse to do as that guy you called a right-winger did and sincerely ask themselves an honest question.

It's not just any life, it's human life. You were a fetus once weren't you?

Excon,

As usual you bring in issues that are not part of the topic at hand. The issue at hand is sex ed in the school system, and the fact that sex ed in schools is teaching kids that homosexual couples are the same as heterosexual couples. My point has been to prove that basic concept WRONG, which is is. I have made no connection between sex ed in schools with gay marriage. That is your insertion to the topic, not mine.

Furthermore, being the small-government conservative that I am, I am advocating that the government get out of my kids' classrooms with their sex ed syllabus. What part of that is inconsistent with my conservatism?

As SailorMark said recently, game, set and match.

Elliot

So... since homosexual couples are biologically different than heterosexual couples---could that argument NOT be made for ANY couple? I got a different set of genes than you did--that makes us biologically DIFFERENT! And really, I'm more biologically different than my husband than I would be different from another woman.

It comes down to the fact that reproduction has NOTHING to do with marriage. If it did, you'd still be forcing people to get married when they accidentally reproduced at 13 and 14 because their parents refused to give them birth control.

As far as rich versus poor for public schools, I have to say this: Every single person that CAN vote has the same voice as every other person in this country that can vote. Yes, the wealthy have more options than the poor---how is that going to change if we allow the wealthy to get a voucher that gives them MORE money for their kids to go to school elsewhere? It will just become that the vouchers are not enough for the BEST private schools, where only the wealthy can afford to send their kids.

You want change in the school systems? Let teachers TEACH without red tape. Stop telling them what they can and cannot talk about. Stop telling them they have to teach to standardized tests. Pay them more than you pay football players. Hold them accountable for their actions, by all means, but stop treating the teaching profession like a bunch of underpaid babysitters, and I'll bet you get a HELL of a lot more results.

That's where private schools REALLY are different---they pay teachers more and don't dictate to them EXACTLY how they should teach.

And the Pro-life crowd forgets that the MOTHER is a life too, and that it's not exactly an EASY choice.

However---I would STILL choose my own life over that of a stranger.

That's the thing though, its not Sex Ed, right- wingers think it is, but like someone said they think the worst. There is no middle ground for them. It's either their way or no way.

Like I said before. Schools should teach FACTS. If you don't want your children to learn FACTS then find a way to send them to a school of your choosing or home school them. That's it. YOU DO HAVE A CHOICE AS A PARENT. This is freedom.

It's a FACT homosexual couple is a type of family. That's all I am saying.

And on the topic of abortion--If you are Pro Life---

You also should be Anti-War, Vegetarian, Anti-Fur.

Why abort when you can raise them until they are 18 when they can murder innocent people and end up being murdered?

Synnen, we're not talking about marriage. We're talking about sex education in the schools system. And biology is SUPPOSED to be a part of sex ed. Or so they say. Please try to keep up and stop trying to mix up the topics into one big mishmash. Our topic here is sex ed in schools. There is already another thread for gay marriage.

The basic premise of sex ed in the public school system is that all marriages are the same, whether homosexual or heterosexual. That basic premise is FAULTY because of the biology involved. Ergo, sex ed is teaching something that is OPINION, not fact. It differs from MY opinion and the values that I wish my children to learn vis-à-vis sex education. Therefore, I want it eliminated from the public school education program... same as those who want creationism eliminated from the public school curriculum. Only, I have a lot more science on my side to back up my argument than the anti-creationists do. (And let's not get into that argument in this thread eather. Let's stick to the topic of sex ed.)

Elliot

Wrong again. Private schools, especially religious private schools have very precise curricula. They do NOT teach the same sex ed courses that public schools do. In fact, the yeshivas that I went to as a kid had NO sex ed whatsoever, in deference to the Orthodox Jewish values of the families who's kids they were teaching. My sister is currently an AP science teacher in a private school, and her curriculum sticks to FACTS not OPINIONS regarding biology and chemistry. You do not get to choose your own curriculum in a private school. You teach what you are told to teach, no more no less. And if you do other than that, you get you butt fired. There is no tenure in the private school system in elementary or high school like there is in the public school system. If you don't follow THEIR rules, you're OUT.

Yeah, the pay's a little better (though city benefits for PS teachers are nothing to sneeze at). But the rules are tighter in terms of what teachers can and can't do. The REAL benefit for private school teachers is that the kids who are there want to be there, are generally better behaved (less criminally inclined) than public school kids and have better achievement results. The teachers accomplish more because the kids want to learn more. THAT's the real advantage to teachers in a private school.

Elliot

Synnen, if you've paid any attention at all to the debate over the years you have to know that's nonsense. We all know the mother has a life and we all know it's not an easy decision to make. I guarantee I bear that in mind every time the subject comes up and I'm sure most pro-lifers do as well. Both sides agree on that.

Being pro-life means being anti-fur and vegetarian? How so? What does consumption of animals have to do with protecting innocent humans?

(BTW, I have a friend who is a vegetarian. Not because he loves animals, but because he hates plants.)

What I am is pro-protection-of-the-innocent. That is why I am pro-life. It is also why I am pro-capital-punishment, pro-cop, and why I support the US military. As a point of fact, no organization in the world has provided more disaster relief, protection of the innocent and elimination of guilty parties than the US military. The US military has provided more emergency rations, water, blanket, shelters, medical aid and general clean-up services after natural disasters than any other organization on the planet, including the Red Cross and all it's affiliates combined. They also kill the badguys who cause "man made disasters" (as they are now being called in the Obama government).

What does any of this have to do with sex ed in public schools?

Elliot

I am so glad my wife and I decided not to have any kids. I would hate to be in person having this argument at a PTA meeting or where ever this stuff is decided.

LOL, very funny Elliot.

Around here it's decided at the school administration building. The parents don't really have a say.

Oh OK speech wasn't sure how that was decided. ET that was one of the funniest things I have read in awhile!!

You are taking a deliberate ridiculous definition of the word "same" here. YOU KNOW the word refers to "as valid as" and not identical to. Sure a hetero couple and the gay couple don't look the same. But they can have the same level of love and commitment as any other couple.


Only when you use the word "same" as you did to drive home your point.


Why don't you say to your kids. "kids, as you know we have taught you OUR values concerning sex ed. We are not naive enough to think that you will not be getting additional info in an number of ways. There is a high probability that what you hear "on the street" is not accurate, so don't depend on it. At school, in sex ed class, you will hear every thing there is to know about sex. Some of the options and practices will not be in line with what we, as your parents have determined to be your values.

"Now my precious children, many kids don't have parents that teach them the important facts about sex. Because of that, it is for the greater good of our society that you get a double dose of knowledge of sex ed. Because other wise there would be many others going without ANY knowledge. There would be more teen pregnancies, abortions, STDs, heartache, or unwanted babies of teen parents. BUT, no matter what else you hear, you know how we feel about the different options and I want you to stay true to our/your values.

(BTW, I have a friend who is a vegetarian. Not because he loves animals, but because he hates plants.)

HUH?:confused: He eats veggies because he hates plants? Is that the plants punishment? To be eaten by this person?

Yes, they teach what is in the curriculum. However, PRIVATE and PAROCHIAL schools do not teach to a specific test, the way so many public schools do.

Look, I grew up in Wisconsin. I had a GREAT public education. I've also worked in academia in Texas. They have a really SUCKY public education, in comparison. Does that mean that Wisconsinites have a bigger advantage over Texans because they get a better education? Should Texans be able to get "vouchers" to go to a Wisconsin school, if their parents want them to get a good education?

Of course not!

Texans should find out how Wisconsin does things differently to achieve a higher standard of education, and take those ideas home and implement them.

PS--the reason homosexual and heterosexual sex ed should BOTH be taught is that you need to teach the people in your audience about THEMSELVES. ALL parents have the options of obtaining a child in the same ways: natural conception (which, by the way, I am starting to believe ONLY happens to poor, stupid teenagers), adoption, IVF, egg/sperm donation, surrogacy, and foster care. EVERY couple has those options. Just because someone cannot conceive naturally with their partner does not make them "defective" sexually. It just means their options are more limited. Besides--sex is not solely about procreation, and I think it's important that teens realize that. It's not solely about "getting off", either. Yes, parents SHOULD be having this conversation with their kids. But those parents who cannot afford private school because they're too busy working 2-3 jobs to make ends meet are NOT going to have the time to have that conversation with their kids.

So! Those parents that are STUCK with the "poor education" in public schools because they cannot afford private are ALSO the parents who have limited time with their children. Don't you think THOSE parents WANT the schools to teach their kids sex ed---and everything else?