[NeedKarma]

Abstinence-Only Education Ruined By Trip To Zoo | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

[ETWolverine]

But it would work if it were taught correctly.

For the past 40 years, sex ed has been taught in our schools. For the past 40 years, it has failed to do what it said it would do; prevent teen sex, teen pregnancy and STD spread.

Suddenly now, we are supposed to assume that it can work IF WE TEACH IT CORRECTLY?

Who decides what is "correctly"? Because whoever is making that decision right now is getting it wrong. On that point I think we are in agreement.

Also, there are certain subjects that should not be taught in a classroom. Not because it is immoral to do so, but because the subject itself is not conducive to classroom learning. You can teach math and reading in a large classroom setting. But sex ed is a subject that is best taught one-on-one. A parent knows the best way to teach this subject to his/her child and can tailor his lessons to the particular child. In a classroom setting, the lesson is not tailored, but rather given in a wholesale method... and that method is likely not to be the best way for everyone in the class.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

you cannot punish the children for something they knew no much better to do if their parents are not teaching them it is not their fault that their parents suck ... and I think that it is GREAT that the schools pick up the parents slack ... I for one took my sex ed serious I am now 20 yo with an infant but I have a career (Army) a house, and 2 card.. I had a father who said I dont care what you do condom or a casket.. never explain to me the results and at school they did and it spooked, I am now very successful and glad that I listened

First of all, Kaseyatim, are you married? Does the baby have a father?

Second, with all due respect, you are 20 years old. You are NOT successful. You haven't had time yet to be successful. (I'm guessing that at age 20 you are a low-level non-com, perhaps a PFC, or a Spec1. Maybe a CPL. Somewhere between E2 and E4. That constitutes a person who is on her way to BECOMING a success, but you aren't there yet. Let me know when you hit Sgt1CL or Mstr Sgt. And we'll talk.) I'm twice your age and haven't had time yet to be considered a success, even after having been at the top of my proffession at my most recent job. I strongly approve of your career choice, but CHOOSING a career is not the same as being a success at that career. Success takes time. I hope that you become a success, but you are not there yet.

Third, you say that you listened to your teachers in school who taught sex ed. Yes, I'm sure you listened to your teachers... but what is it they said? What they likely said is "If you are going to have sex, use protection". Which you did. You had sex as a teenager, but it was with a condom.

My point is that the people who wanted sex ed in the school system told us that sex ed would prevent teen sex. I'm betting that you had sex as a teen, but that you did it "safely". You did listen to your teachers. Good girl. But what they were SUPPOSED TO BE TEACHING you (according to their own statements) was NOT to have sex. Instead, they taught you how to have sex safely.

Yes, you listened to your teachers. But what your teachers taught you was NOT what they told the world they were going to teach you. They lied. You did what you were taught. But they didn't teach you the right things.

Thus, sex ed failed in its stated goal, to PREVENT teen sex. You are proof of the system's FAILURE, not it's success.

You would have been better off with the fear of your father. That fear would have kept you from having sex as a kid, just like it kept Wondergirl from having sex as a kid.

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

For the past 40 years, sex ed has been taught in our schools. For the past 40 years, it has failed to do what it said it would do; prevent teen sex, teen pregnancy and STD spread.

Suddenly now, we are supposed to assume that it can work IF WE TEACH IT CORRECTLY?

It's not just that we need to teach it correctly whatever that means, we must start teaching them "medically accurate, age appropriate comprehensive sex education" when they're 5-years-old... whatever that means. I've said it time and again, let kids be kids. Sure parents should teach them early on about inappropriate touching and such, but let the parents be the parent and work to restore an atmosphere where kids can be kids again WITHOUT all the sexual influence.

[kaseyatim]

First of all, Kaseyatim, are you married? Does the baby have a father?

Second, with all due respect, you are 20 years old. You are NOT successful. You haven't had time yet to be successful. (I'm guessing that at age 20 you are a low-level non-com, perhaps a PFC, or a Spec1. Maybe a CPL. Somewhere between E2 and E4. That constitutes a person who is on her way to BECOMING a success, but you aren't there yet. Let me know when you hit Sgt1CL or Mstr Sgt. and we'll talk.) I'm twice your age and haven't had time yet to be considered a success, even after having been at the top of my proffession at my most recent job. I strongly approve of your career choice, but CHOOSING a career is not the same as being a success at that career. Success takes time. I hope that you become a success, but you are not there yet.

Third, you say that you listened to your teachers in school who taught sex ed. Yes, I'm sure you listened to your teachers... but what is it they said? What they likely said is "If you are going to have sex, use protection". Which you did. You had sex as a teenager, but it was with a condom.

My point is that the people who wanted sex ed in the school system told us that sex ed would prevent teen sex. I'm betting that you had sex as a teen, but that you did it "safely". You did listen to your teachers. Good girl. But what they were SUPPOSED TO BE TEACHING you (according to their own statements) was NOT to have sex. Instead, they taught you how to have sex safely.

Yes, you listened to your teachers. But what your teachers taught you was NOT what they told the world they were going to teach you. They lied. You did what you were taught. But they didn't teach you the right things.

Thus, sex ed failed in its stated goal, to PREVENT teen sex. You are proof of the system's FAILURE, not it's success.

You would have been better off with the fear of your father. That fear would have kept you from having sex as a kid, just like it kept Wondergirl from having sex as a kid.

Elliot

Yes I as married to my sons father ans the asme word does not touchthe every person the same and nobody will be alble to eradicate teenage sex nor pregnancy but the pointis the kids being safe and graduating and doing good for themselves instead of being nothing but strippers and hustlers trying to make a way... that's the way that I feel we should carry things... no one will stop teens completely but at least they may be saving a few lives and a few children from being born into broken home all you people are worried for is the statitics and things that are completely impossible think about the teens and how it affects them when they get an std and how it affects that child that they are pregnant with and that should be the main concern in my eyes... I will not reply too much as to what you have to say about my career because I am going to carry myself as a Soldier, but please know that you are very wrong about me and I was "on my way" to being successful @ 15 , I have been in my career 3 year and have done for myself what very few peope my age even think of doing... I think having everything I ever dreamed of is a success and right now that's me house cars bills paid family.. yeah Im successful in my eyes I am sorry you don't believe the same (now if I only I could keep fish alive :() and I never had the fear of my father he just said use a condom or die from aids (condom or a casket) this is the millennium guys it's a whole new era!! Teens are going to do it so why not protect and educate them the best that we can as parents and leaders and school staffs and WHOEVER IT TAKES its not about they lied and said that they were teahcing this ITS ABOUT THE FREAKING KIDS!! Its like if you see a toddler run into the street are you doing to run and grab them, or say no her mom should have taught her better than that so just let her get ran over, when she knew no better and even if her mom did tell her once sometimes it takes more than one voice.. yes these teens think they are adults and think they know everything but they don't and even I don't but I'm smart enough to see and learn from my mistakes and try to pass on my knowledge and even if it only touches one person/teen that's great if I touch 5,10,50,100 that even better but I'm off this thread you guys I will alwaysbe striving to teach not only my son my but adolescent popluation as far as I can reach them the best that I can reach them to make their future and the future of their children the best that it can be. With no obstcles getting in the way of their goals... another thing teens don't open up, or listen to people who they feel they can't trust...

[Wondergirl]

You would have been better off with the fear of your father. That fear would have kept you from having sex as a kid, just like it kept Wondergirl from having sex as a kid.

It was "fear" of my mother, not my father. And the fear was not being scared and worried about punishment, but of disappointing her and of causing a family crisis. Big difference. I am totally against instilling that other kind of fear in a child.

[NeedKarma]

I will not reply too much as to what you have to say about my career because I am going to carry myself as a Soldier, but please know that you are very wrong about me and I was "on my way" to being successful @ 15 , I have been in my career 3 year and have done for myself what very few peope my age even think of doing...I think having everything I ever dreamed of is a success and right now thats me house cars bills paid family .. yeah Im successful in my eyes I am sorry you dont believe the same.

Don't let those people bring you down. If you take good care of your child, are a good spouse, are financially independent, and treat yourself and others well then you are indeed successful. Keep up the good work.

[kaseyatim]

Also, there are certain subjects that should not be taught in a classroom. Not because it is immoral to do so, but because the subject itself is not conducive to classroom learning. You can teach math and reading in a large classroom setting. But sex ed is a subject that is best taught one-on-one. A parent knows the best way to teach this subject to his/her child and can tailor his lessons to the particular child. In a classroom setting, the lesson is not tailored, but rather given in a wholesale method... and that method is likely not to be the best way for everyone in the class.

Elliot

COMPLETELY AGREE... except sometimes the parrents can't get through it does take a 3rd party

[kaseyatim]

Thanks karma I dontknow how to push agree on these boards I am still new!!

[NeedKarma]

thanks karma i dontknow how to push agree on these boards i am still new!!!

You can't on these Member Discussion boards. It's a place for people to post their opinions without worrying about people giving them "reddies".

[excon]

You would have been better off with the fear of your father.

Hello again, El:

I don't think fear is a good motivator. But, you're in good company. One of your righty wierdo Republican congresswoman, thinks HUNGER is a good motivator for kids too. That's why she voted against giving poor kids breakfast.

Nope. Hunger, fear, and all that right wing crap doesn't teach a thing. Telling kids what's so works pretty good, I've found.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, El:

I don't think fear is a good motivator. But, you're in good company. One of your righty wierdo Republican congresswoman, thinks HUNGER is a good motivator for kids too. That's why she voted against giving poor kids breakfast.

Nope. Hunger, fear, and all that right wing crap doesn't teach a thing. Telling kids what's so works pretty good, I've found.

excon

Haven't I already discredited this woman's moronic statement? Yes I'm quite sure I did, but again you seem to have taken to that "if we have one moron we're all morons" point of view.

[ETWolverine]

COMPLETELY AGREE...except sometimes the parrents can't get through it does take a 3rd party

But who decides who the 3rd party is? The government? The same guys who screw up the mail and social security? Or should PARENTS make that decision for their kids?

THAT is my point.

As for your prior points, the stated goal of sex ed is to prevent teen sex, teen pregnancies and STD spread. YOUR goal is for kids to be safe and happy, but that is NOT what the goal of sex ed is. And sex ed has failed in its STATED GOAL.

Now... if you want to argue that the stated goal of sex ed is wrong, I'll be happy to discuss that issue with you. But that is NOT my point. My point is that sex ed has failed to do what it said it would do. The statistics on teen sex, teen pregnancy and STD spread prove that they failed.

You have argued that we can't stop teens from having sex, so we might as well make them safe and teach them the right way to do it.

I disagree with that.

For years people said that we can't stop kids from smoking, drinking and doing drugs. Then there came various government and private organizations that started advertising programs to keep kids from drinking, smoking and doing drugs. These programs have been very successful. Teen drinking, drug use and smoking are all down by HUGE numbers compared to what they were a decade ago. Drunk driving accidents are down too. Are they wiped out? No. But they are better than they were. We are seeing with teen drinking, teen drug use, and teen smoking, what affect we can have if we use the power of the media to teach kids the right thing.

So, if it works for teen drugs, drinking and smoking, why can't it work for sex? Why can't we have an anti-teen-sex advertising campaign similar to the anti-drug and anti-tabaco campaigns? If it worked and is continuing to work in those other areas? Why not teach abstinence in a media advertising campaign? Why have we given up teaching kids about not having sex when we don't give up on drugs and smoking and drinking?

Do you understand what I'm saying, kaseyatim? We have decided to do sex ed in schools because we supposedly can't stop kids from having sex. But we haven't even really tried to stop them. We haven't tried the same techniques to teen sex that we have to teen drug use and teen drinking and teen smoking. We've just given up for no good reason because it is a good excuse to allow sex ed in schools. Shouldn't we try something besides sex ed in schools to stop kids from having sex in the first place?

Elliot

[excon]

Haven't I already discredited this woman's moronic statement? Yes I'm quite sure I did, but again you seem to have taken to that "if we have one moron we're all morons" point of view.

Hello again, Steve:

You did, and you're a good man for it. I'm just waiting for the Wolverine to agree with you, but I think he's going to throw you under the bus.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, El:

I don't think fear is a good motivator. But, you're in good company. One of your righty wierdo Republican congresswoman, thinks HUNGER is a good motivator for kids too. That's why she voted against giving poor kids breakfast.

Nope. Hunger, fear, and all that right wing crap doesn't teach a thing. Telling kids what's so works pretty good, I've found.

excon

First of all, I have no idea what you are talking about with regard to school breakfasts. I have no problem with the school breakfast program. If schools are taking responsibility for the care of kids during the daytimes, that responsibility comes with supplying meals for the kids. I see no problem with that.

Second, telling a kid what's so only works if you are actually telling them what's so. Telling kids that they will be safe having sex if they use a condom or birth control is NOT the truth. They are telling kids something that isn't so. And kids get in trouble with that supposed "knowledge" every day.

But if you tell kids that the only way to be 100% sure to prevent pregnancy is to not have sex, and then you tell them what happens when they get pregnant and what happens to the fetus in an abortion, they learn not to have sex in order to avoid pregnancy. If you tell them that the only way to avoid STDs is to avoid having sex, and if you tell them what happens when you get various STDs, they tend to avoid sex in order to avoid STDs. They learn to fear the consequences of having sex out of wedlock, and so they avoid sex out of wedlock.

The problem is that sex ed doesn't teach that. Not these days anyway. Sex ed proponents actually try to avoid any discussion of abstinence as being too "religious based". Instead, they tell kids how to use condoms, how to use birth control, and where to go to get their free abortion. And they hope that kids will actually remember these lessons (many don't and end up having uprotected sex anyway despite the free condoms being handed out to them). And when kids end up becoming pregnant, getting sick, having abortions, and having babies out of wedlock, the same sex-ed proponents tell us how we need a "more comprehensive" sex ed program... which almost always continues to leave abstinence and consequences out of the lesson plan. Which means that it isn't very comprehensive at all.

They deliberately take the fear factor OUT of the sex ed classes, and the result is that these kids have no fear of sex.

The problem in a nutshell, excon, is that sex ed DOESN'T tell kids how it is or what's so. Not all of it, not the really important parts. It only tells kids the best ways to get away with having sex without getting caught. If sex ed actually DID tell it like it is... well, I would still have a problem with it as a parental rights issue. But I would be less worried by it. At least the lessons themselves would be conducive the goal of decreasing teen sex, pregnancy and STD spread. Right now it's not.

Elliot

[excon]

They deliberately take the fear factor OUT of the sex ed classes, and the result is that these kids have no fear of sex.

Hello again, El:

Correctamundo. They, like me, don't think fear is a good teaching tool. You do. I only mention the other whacko, because she, like you, believes that NEGATIVES are good teaching tools and motivators...

I couldn't disagree more. I think TRUTH is a better teacher than FEAR.

excon

PS> Besides, I don't think teaching a fear of sex bodes well for a healthy, happy and satisfying sex life.

[NeedKarma]

I always wondered why the US mentality was geared toward "viewing violence is ok but nudity is bad".

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, El:

Correctamundo. They, like me, don't think fear is a good teaching tool. You do. I only mention the other whacko, because she, like you, believes that NEGATIVES are good teaching tools and motivators...

I couldn't disagree more. I think TRUTH is a better teacher than FEAR.

excon

PS> Besides, I don't think teaching a fear of sex bodes well for a healthy, happy and satisfying sex life.

The problem that you are refusing to see is that SEX ED isn't teaching the truth. They are teaching kids that condoms and the pill will make them safe. That is NOT the truth, and I don't think that even YOU say that it is. YOU know that condoms break, the pill doesn't always work, and neither of them stop STDs from spreading. Sex ed courses don't teach that FACT. They don't teach the truth.

The truth includes talking about consequences. Sex ed deliberately eliminates talk about consequences. They don't talk about what happens when you get an STD. They don't talk about what happens to the fetus in an abortion. They don't talk about what happens to a child who has a baby out of wedlock and the effects on the rest of her life.

It is fear of consequences that keep people from doing bad things. If people don't know the consequences and have no fear of those consequences, they will make mistakes due to lack of KNOWLEDGE and a lack of healthy fear.

You have heard of healthy fear, haven't you? You know, the type of fear that keeps you from crossing the street in the face of oncoming traffic, that keeps you from driving drunk, that keeps you from playing with fire. Healthy fear is a good thing. Psychologists throughout the world all recommend healthy fear. You should read up on the concept of healthy fear.

Sex ed eliminates the possibility of healthy fear by not talking about the consequences of sex. Kids, not knowing those consequences, perform the action and end up in trouble. A healthy fear of STDs, pregnancy and abortion could have prevented that from happening.

I'll bet you that every single kid, boy or girl, who has ever gotten in trouble from teen sex, has said one of two things: "I wish I knew" or "I wish I had listened".

Sex ed makes sure that they don't know, because it doesn't really tell the truth at all. It only tells the rosy parts and leaves all the nasty stuff about consequences out of the lesson plan. It takes out all the healthy fear.

Elliot

[NeedKarma]

Sex ed makes sure that they don't know, because it doesn't really tell the truth at all. It only tells the rosy parts and leaves all the nasty stuff about consequences out of the lesson plan. It takes out all the healthy fear.

Sex ed that doesn't tell kids that sex results in pregnancy? What sex ed is this??

[excon]

The truth includes talking about consequences. Sex ed deliberately eliminates talk about consequences. They don't talk about what happens when you get an STD. They don't talk about what happens to the fetus in an abortion. They don't talk about what happens to a child who has a baby out of wedlock and the effects on the rest of her life.

It is fear of consequences that keep people from doing bad things.

Hello again, El:

I can't figure you out. On the one hand, you don't like MORALS being taught along side sex education, unless they're YOUR morals.

What happened to your earlier suggestion about letting the parent teach the morals, and let the schools teach what goes where, like 2 + 2 = 4?

The problem is, as you have stated before, you think teaching them what goes where IS teaching them morals, AND it's cluing them in on something they would NEVER try if they weren't taught. BOTH of those propositions are actually quite silly.

excon