Yeah, you tell 'em kid... Hey, WTF do you need a condom for?

Lol!
{{{smoke}}}

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Using financial leverage? Hardly--he's just not going to waste funding on a program that promotes teenage sex. That means what exactly? That schools will no longer be handing out free condoms, telling teens that the government says it's ok to go ahead and start shacking up, potentially creating another high-school dropout, single mother, or abortion? I have to say, I can agree with this on principal alone.

Federal guidelines stipulate that any sex ed program that teaches safe sex will not receive federal funding. How is that not financial leverage? Do you think telling kids that "if you're going to have sex, this is the safe way to do it," is tantamount to governmental approval of sex and promoting pregnancy? I assume you're suggesting that the high-school dropout, etc. bit comes from pregnancy. But that's something else condoms prevent. I recall a few studies indicating that teenagers who are educated on safe sex are wait long to become sexually active and are less prone to unplanned pregnancies when they do. I'll post the link when I find the study, I'm having no luck now.

quote:

Younger people obviously don't like the policy because they don't like the thought of the government entering their bedroom (I don't blame them!). I repeat my position that it's fine for the government to promote abstinence--the parents should get more involved again and teach their kids about life. That's what parenting is all about!

I repeat my position: abstinence education is great, but not exclusively abstinence education. Parents should be more involved, but they're not. Should the government not bother trying to bring up to speed children whose parents don't get involved with their education?

quote:

Politically, this is an easy way to save money on the budget and thus help trim the deficit. If you're funding a program that promotes a negative result, you're really not helping the problem, ultimately you're just wasting money at an increasing rate.

Trim the deficit by increasing STD infection rates? By not teaching teenagers how they can save themselves from contracting HIV? I don't see how encouraging safe sex practices is a negative thing. You said yourself that people are going to have sex anyway.

quote:

On principal I think it's a sensible idea, provided the people care enough.

Communism was a great idea, in principle. And that's an awfully hefty provision you have there.

Go back and reread some of my earlier posts. It's not that I have any problems whatsoever with teaching kids about safe sex--I simply don't think it's the government's responsibility to do so--God knows how much money simply gets thrown away every year on these programs that probably teach kids something they know alrady, or should be getting from home in the first place.

Young people will protest the decision because they tend to view the governent as being repressive.

i think the christian priests are doing a great job in teaching our kids about sex, they even give the kids practical lessons!

maybe we also need Micheal Jackson to help teach the kids?

quote:

Originally posted by tathi i think the christian priests are doing a great job in teaching our kids about sex, they even give the kids practical lessons! maybe we also need Micheal Jackson to help teach the kids?

ya whats up with that, micheal jackson going to the brotherhood of islam (or whatever its called, i forget now ) he would have been wiser to convert to being a catholic priest

but anyways as shakka says, i too belive the more education a child gets about sex the better, i just dont think it's wrong for the government to favor abstenance.

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSaenz I think it should be clear by now that Bush cares nothing about human rights or human health, and I don't see how that makes him a Christian.

Actually, it's rather well known that Bush is a Christian, and in fact, feels uncomfortable in company that doesn't have faith. It is a widely known fact that the president prays before each speech and uses comments such as “It was God’s plan” when he referred to his mission to make the world safe for democracy, and “You believe in the Almighty, and I believe in
the Almighty. That’s while we’ll be great partners” (click here for that article) Gregg Easterbrook, an extensive writer about the modern search for meaning, suspects that “Bush takes the view (which may prove right) that the ultimate argument will be between people who believe in something larger than themselves, and people who believe that it’s all an accident of chemistry" (quote from the same article). But, on to the actual argument here... (I love how I get sidetracked here)

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka People under 18 will always have sex, but I think the message is that they shouldn't have to worry about the baggage that comes along with sex. Why should they be rushed to grow up? Why don't the youth of America cherish their youth?

I'm sorry, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's only become more popular within the last few decades that people under 18 were having sex. It was not always. With pop stars and movies that are being shown now a days, there's no hope for a child to get to age 12 without knowing what a blow job is, for example. If the "youth" is going to know about sex one way or another, at least educate them on the dangers and hazards of having it, and the correct ways to protect themselves. Whether it be from school or from parents, they need to understand the potential health hazards they create for themselves when acting like an adult while still a child from somewhere.

quote:

I think in the end it just shows how uninvolved parents have become in raising their kids, family values are shit, the divorce rate here is over 50%. Suddenly people care because the government doesn't want kids (I read this to be people under 18) running around having sex. I say fine! Keep the idiots from creating more idiots.

It's also the influence of schools, peers, television, movies, the internet...

I agree that parents need to take more responsibility, but I know for a fact I learned all the bad things at school. I learned about the real information about sex from peers at the high school I went to. (I'm amazed at what children know these days.... I didn't know half the stuff they know now at almost twice the age they are at!) It's not necessarily just the parents fault. My family was very involved, very loving. Along with many other families around this area. But, you learn the "stuff" about life at school. You can't always blame the parents when a lot of the problems come from our schools. I agree that parents should be the ones teaching their children about abstinence and safe sex, however.

quote:

Go back and reread some of my earlier posts. It's not that I have any problems whatsoever with teaching kids about safe sex--I simply don't think it's the government's responsibility to do so--God knows how much money simply gets thrown away every year on these programs that probably teach kids something they know alrady, or should be getting from home in the first place.

I repeat. A lot of parent's do teach their children about sex. Unfortunately, it's the outside influences (aka the internet, tv, peers, etc) that give the youth a more provacative, sex appeal side to the whole issue. I think it's ridiculous that some of the ads on billboards on a regular highway!!!!! promote strip clubs/prostitution! I mean, come on, this is getting ridiculous.

As daffodil said, teaching the youth abstinence is good. Teaching only abstinence is bad. I was educated quite well on sex, the hazards, abstinence, etc etc etc, and it made me wait longer to have it, for fear of pregnancy, HIV, STDs, etc. Giving the youth a good education on the risks of engaging in sexual activities at such a young age, at any age, with one or multiple partners, is direly needed. If it has to come from school, let it. They need to know somehow.

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

anuneventrade, daffodil - what's this jew crew all about and can i be a part of it?

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy anuneventrade, daffodil - what's this jew crew all about and can i be a part of it?

We are going to take over the world!!!!!!! MUAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.......



Damnit.. I just revealed the top secret plans....

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

quote:

Originally posted by anuneventrade We are going to take over the world!!!!!!! MUAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA....... Damnit.. I just revealed the top secret plans....

i hate to burst your bubble, but most people for the past 2000 years have already known that we are going to take over the world still it's best we play it off and keep it on the down-low....

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy i hate to burst your bubble, but most people for the past 2000 years have already known that we are going to take over the world still it's best we play it off and keep it on the down-low....

rock and roll izzy i'm not jewish, but i'm jew crew anyway.

safe sex 4eva!! seriously, it's absurd that federally funded programs can't teach safe sex without losing their money.

If I was misunderstood before, sorry. I think that abstinance should definatly be taught along with the other forms of contriception. Also, the parents should definatly have a big role in the education of their children, but as anun. stated, the outside forces are really the ones that matter. Also, what if the parents are say, devote Christians for example, and believe only in Abstinance and Abstinance alone? Where are the kids suppose to learn about methods such as condoms etc... And don't make the arguement that the kids will also be devote christians and not have sex anyways, because we all know that would not be even skimming the truth.

I think the government should play some role, especially with Sex Education in the school. I still remember my sex education when I was in 5th grade, and it has stuck with me ever since.

Waste funding, we are wasting the funding on the abstinance programs that are proven not to work (see link in second post I believe). And I don't see how it promotes sexual activity is contraception is taught. Along with contraception, I still learned about the diseases on a shock basis. I'm still a virgin, but definatly not against sex. IMHO I think that the government should definatly play at least some role in the sex education process, because if we rely specifically on the parents, I would expect to see even more of a rise in the STD/HIV/Pregnancy rates. And this is coming from someone who lived in one of the states with the highest teen pregnancy rates.