Comments on: Sex ed (or the lack thereof)

By: Neffs

Neffs — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:36:41 +0000

Hey, what do you guys make of this? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29546030/

By: Neffs

Neffs — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:22:52 +0000

And I’m sorry, I have a problem with the idea of the 10 percent of people who might be asexual also being the 10 percent who make the cut to go to heaven. Seems like a convenient collision of fractions. I’m pretty sure God doesn’t work like that. If He does, I’ll just take my seat on the hell tram and shut up about it.

To go back to the teenage pregnancy issue, I find it pretty interesting that Bristol Palin of all people now thinks that abstinence education is ridiculous. And the anti-abortion folks need to understand that a certain portion of the population only hears that you want to limit the rights of women by outlawing abortion–for as long as women can be impregnated against their will, they will need a reliable way out of that, or equality between the sexes can’t really happen. I think the two groups could come together over reducing unwanted pregnancies in the first place by providing reasonable and effective sex education–the only reason it’s in the schools is that’s the only way you can reach the populace of a certain age. Then once you have that and it’s just the homeschoolers getting pregnant, then there you go. /me runs off

By: Becca Burley

Becca Burley — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:06:27 +0000

Also, Neffs, I hadn’t really thought much about the asexuality issue. I’ve heard that 10% of humans are asexual, so I find it odd that it’s not talked about more. You don’t actually hear people talking about being asexual. Maybe it’s not a big deal for them and they don’t feel the need to talk about it, but it does lead to asexuality being an almost forgotten about part of humanity.

By: Becca Burley

Becca Burley — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:03:07 +0000

i just don’t see many societal benefits coming from increased public funding for elementary school sex-ed.

For about six years, I lived in a town where it wasn’t scandalous to have 5+ 7th grade girls pregnant every year, where being a grandmother by 30 was the norm. All anyone tried to do to fix it was preach Jesus to these girls, and we all know how well that works. The poverty in Monticello is ridiculous because of all these girls dropping out of high school to raise their kids. It wasn’t just the occasional white trash family having to deal with babies having babies.

By: Neffs

Neffs — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:05:55 +0000

But that’s related to our cockeyed view of sex on a societal level. Why it’s okay to consume the amount of violence we do every day from TV and movies, etc. and have the limitations we do on sex makes no sense. Unless this is one of those ‘where my heart is, there shall my treasure be also’ kind of things. We likey the violence.

By: Jane

Jane — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 12:11:09 +0000

Another thing I never understood is why they allow comprehensive Drug education and awareness in public schools, but are hush hush about sex education?

Are we encouraging students to use drugs by teaching them about them and what they do?

Just like we wouldn’t be encouraging our students to have sex by teaching them about it and telling them what it does.

It really comes down to the fact that parents are more afraid of there kids having sex then they are taking drugs.

By: Jane

Jane — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:20:37 +0000

“Also, the whole idea about how teaching kids about sex will lead to them having lots of sex is like saying that teaching kids about the holocaust will lead them to become members of the nazi party.”

This is by far one of the funniest things I have ever read. Bravo.

The problem with NOT having comprehensive sex ed in public schools is that those kids will have sex, not be prepared, get pregnant, and raise children in a home environment that isnt healthy.

By: iantrevor

iantrevor — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:25:37 +0000

Latest news: The story is a sham or at least may be a sham.

By: j_ball

j_ball — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:00:08 +0000

sorry becca, but i don’t think i can fully agree with you on this one. i just don’t see many societal benefits coming from increased public funding for elementary school sex-ed. sure, someone should warn the students about pedophiles, molestation, etc., but it sounds like you’re asking for a more comprehensive sex-ed program for these kids. aside from the political firestorm that this would create, i just don’t think it’s worth it. we would spend an extra couple million dollars a year for this stuff, and for what? the possibility of keeping some white-trash family out of the tabloids every couple of years?

i just think that if we’re going to lay the blame for this incident at someone’s feet it’s got to be the parents’ (or possibly the 15 year-old cougar-mom). perhaps, though, there isn’t anyone to blame. maybe this is just one of those really weird random things that happens somewhere in the world every couple of years that could not, and will not ever be prevented?

By: Becca Burley

Becca Burley — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:31:09 +0000

Haha, oh, my list!