Click on title for full story...
A few highlights:
The Legislature is on the verge of passing a bill that would require school districts with human growth and development classes to teach sexual abstinence until marriage as the preferred behavior.
How can this not be the preferred message??? They are not say it is the ONLY message...then it would be wrong. Just because some kids (and it is only SOME when they start HS) are sexually active, why can't that be the main message. If parents and teachers did expect the right thing from kids, they more of them would want to meet that standard. Yes, there will be kids who will be sexually active no matter what we tell them, and for them we need to have a comprehensive sex education curriculum. I have FOUR pregnant girls in ONE of my classes...that is 50% of the girls...obviously the contraception talk didn't work for them...
The bill (SB 286) touched off a firestorm at a public hearing Tuesday, where abstinence was called the only "100% effective method" of avoiding pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease. Opponents said the move would ignore the fact that many teens already engage in sexual activity.
Why is it controversial to say abstinence is the only 100% effective method to stop pregnancy and STD's (that is the exact wording of my class and thesis by the way...man am I a genius)...IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO GUARANTEE YOU WILL NOT GET PREGNANT. What is wrong in that statement...why is it wrong to teach that fact.
Legislators would "stick our heads in the sand" by requiring schools to teach abstinence first, Grigsby said, because 60% of teens are sexually active by age 18.
You can teach contraception, but why make it the focal point? Shouldn't teachers try and convey what is in the best interest of the child? And I hope there are no parents in here that think teenage sex is in the best interest of the child.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Abstinence bill gaining momentum
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Dude, I tend to keep my comments brief(yeah even the long ones)cuz its your blog, not mine. So, I can add from the last one.
The point of a school is education. The most successful way of preventing young people form having sex is through educating them. You cant force them, or try and keep them ignorant of it. Even the thickest kid is going to be curious about it. It all boils down to control. If you stop trying to control kids, and teach them what everything is and how it works, and (most impotantly) what happens when they fuck up, it makes an impact. Its the main reason why rural teens from conservative communities have a much high sexual activity rate amongst teenagers than urban kids. Yes, I will find the stats if you want. Think about it. Who the fuck TOLD you what to do when you were 16(its rhetorical)? Not your teachers, thats for sure. Schools educate, they shouldnt delegate morality.
Sorry Rhyno, I don't think you understand what is being proposed...or maybe I don't...
they are saying that abstinence needs to be included. There is nothing wrong with talking about abstinence..and if you want to be informed you HAVE to include that abstinence is the ONLY was to be 100% safe.
A good comprehensive program then will also talk about STD's, health risks, emotional risks and pregnancy as well...abstinence is apart of a good, well-roounded curriculum
If by abstinence being taught you mean Abstinence-Is-The-Only-100%Safe-Sex, then fine. I guess I should have elaborated more. I have little faith that the proposal and the action will be the same.
It's kind of a different avenue of discussion, so I'm not going to post it here, but I started making a list of some direct effects of a widespread embrace of abstinence... Ideas? comments?
The government doesn't need to be teaching your kids about the birds and bees... you need to be teaching your kids about the birds and bees. Really... why are we constantly relying on the government to raise our kids?
Post a Comment