YES!!!!!
Keep that moonbat liberal crazy train going....ALL ABOARD...
What I was interested in was a section where someone said the only thing young people need to hear about is abstinence.
This is an issue where both sides are wrong.
Up until about 5th grade, you should be preaching abstinence only education. Period. I did research on this, I wrote a thesis on it, period. Why the hell does a 5 year old need to hear about sex? If you keep a constant message of waiting until marriage or atleast until 18 (you drop your risk of STD's and pregnancy by 50% if you do), then it will sink in with kids.
Now, around 5th grade you start slowly introducing contraception.
The Right is wrong that you should NEVER teach about contraception.
The Left is wrong that you need to ONLY talk about contraception and how awesome it is to be gay.
A curriculum that talks about abstinence, dating, healthy relationships and contraception is the best method.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Sex Ed for Kindergarteners 'Right Thing to Do,' Says Obama
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
"Up until about 5th grade, you should be preaching abstinence only education."
So you support sex ed in kindergarten too.
Crazy moonbat liberal.
Obama's record in Springfield is to the left of Karl Marx. The Democrats will wisely choose Hillary, though I have still the audacity of hope they'll nominate the buppie Walter Mondale.
"Up until about 5th grade, you should be preaching abstinence only education."
"Preaching" and "educating" are two different things, and doing either about human sexuality to kids at that age seems ridiculously early anyway.
Incidentally, are you a devotee of the "moonbattery.com" hate site?
I've noticed many extremist neocon blogs use the topics they post over there as a template, and a lot of the topics here seem to parallel what is discussed there.
anon...didn't mean that you even talk about sex in K...
around 3rd and 4th grade you start talking about the nuclear family, then a bit about dating...little by little...
So you have to read all the way down to the last two paragraphs to find out that Obama is NOT talking about teaching kindergarteners how to put condoms on your boyfriend without using your hands:
"When Obama's campaign was asked by ABC News to explain what kind of sex education Obama considers "age appropriate" for kindergarteners, the Obama campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story from the Daily Herald in which Obama had "moved to clarify" in his Senate campaign that he "does not support teaching explicit sex education to children in kindergarten. . . . 'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said. 'If they ask a teacher 'where do babies come from,' that providing information that the fact is that it's not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing Although again, that's going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards.'"
In addition to local schools informing kindergarteners that babies do not come from the stork, the state legislation Obama supported in Illinois, which contained an "opt out" provision for parents, also envisioned teaching kindergarteners about "inappropriate touching," according to Obama's presidential campaign. Despite Obama's support, the legislation was not enacted."
So, the first 3/4 of the article made it seem like Obama was advocating teaching kindergarteners about sexual relationships, when in fact he was just talking about "the facts of life" a.k.a. "the birds and the bees". Additionally, the legislation included an opt out option for parents.
Be honest for once, game. If this was about a republican, you'd be screaming bias.
This is the talking point of the day on the christianist media that has been taken over by false churches and bad theology....this whole shtick was recited chapter and verse, so to speak by Kevin McCullough on his "cultural conservative" (read: evangelical nutjob) radio program, as well as all the usual suspect blogs.
This "synchronization" of message is not unusual....I've encountered it on at least four seperate occasions here, and it is worth pointing out.
"Incidentally, are you a devotee of the 'moonbattery.com' hate site?"
Nah, I doubt that he is, as he gets all the moonbat hate you can dish out right here on this blog. But that was a good question.
And I completely agree with your assessment of what needs to be taught at the age mentioned. Nothing but: these are girls and these are boys. And they already know that.
Honestly, where do you see any hate on this page? Or do you not know the meaning of that word either?
Hash
I can't decide if you're a 14 year old with no sense of recent history, or just a plain old hypocritical party hack.
Your charges of "synchronization of message" for instance. I've noticed a trend these last several years. It's like all the howling moonbats got together and decided their standard ops were being brought to light, so they best whip out another of their tried but true weapons: misdirection.
Charges by the left of Conservatives employing revisionist history, alarmism, manipulation of the media, a government overstepping its bounds, and now synchronization. All technicques used constantly and honed to perfection by the left these last 4 decades.
And you want to make a big deal about your perception that conservatives, are, what, stealing your modus operandi?
Pathetic!
Frankly, hash, I've never heard of moonbattery.com, or that it was a hate sight.
But you come in here and allege that game is in sync with "extremist neocon blogs", whatever the hell they are, and I didn't figure you were pouring out your love when I read your post.
But, of course, not knowing you, perhaps that is your personality. But that is the perception you project, and perception is what part of reality? See, you are perceived by me and others as a hater, someone here to disrupt, not honestly debate.
Templar, have you ever posted on topic, or do you exist soley to insult?
Sex Ed for Kindergarteners need only be deflective in nature. The teachers are the ones who need to understand sexuality on the level of a 5 year old. They need to be trained to determine if the question posed by a student is a real query or just a brief thought that will pass and not be thought of again, so common in kids that young. Inapropriate touching should be brief and simple such as, "don't let strangers or other kids touch you there, and tell you parents AND teachers if they do." From there, the teachers need to be aware of tell-tale signs of abuse and monitor closely for some confirmation. But the kids themselves don't have much care for such things and it generally is confusing. Kids generally need to be shielded from such discussions as it is beyond their comprehension.
Obama suggesting that due to the alleged 50% of teens between 15-19 being active requires proper info is also a sign of his leftist cut and run attitude. (It shows up in areas other than war.) Our culture has begged for these percentages by our insistance that sex is "beautiful and a good thing between consenting adults", which isn't quite the case. The "Sexual Revolution" of the 60's has made us all victims and the kids are who suffer most, as usual. A return to a more character driven sense of chastity and virtue is the best hope for our kids. To say that they're going to do it anyway is such blatant abdication of parental authority and responsibility that is sickening to behold. Kids respond to the proper parenting. They are stronger than lefties are prepared to give them credit for. Cut the crap and guide the kids.
"Obama suggesting that due to the alleged 50% of teens between 15-19 being active requires proper info is also a sign of his leftist cut and run attitude."
How do you figure?
"beautiful and a good thing between consenting adults", which isn't quite the case."
Oh? Really? It's not?
"The "Sexual Revolution" of the 60's has made us all victims and the kids are who suffer most, as usual."
Oh? I'm no "victim" of any revolution, sexual or otherwise.
"A return to a more character driven sense of chastity and virtue is the best hope for our kids."
I agree, but I certainly don't believe that neocon philosophies promote chastity and virtue (and one need only look at the parade of unrestrained sexual debauchery, child molesters, and perverts within the ranks of the Republican Party for proof...and those are only the ones CAUGHT...)
I believe your heart might be in the right place...however, the children are our nation's future and your stone jungle morals just won't cut it right now.
OH NO Obama has incited some real comedians here today.Still,its better when its humorous and jumbled rather than the attitude taken with this post.One thing looks accurate.Oh no Obama really isn't saying anything as usual.
"...Obama really isn't saying anything as usual..."
Agreed.
Or, perhaps more accurately, the actor hasn't yet learned the lines they want to hear...
So, we're just supposed to tell the kids that the stork brings babies?
What does that accomplish, exactly?
Game, you were doing pretty good until... The Left is wrong that you need to ONLY talk about contraception and how awesome it is to be gay.
Nobody on the left has ever said that abstinence should not be part of the sex education curriculum. And you'll have to provide some kind of proof that any sex education class ever offered that it is awesome to be gay.
Simply absurd, but what is one to expect?
Jim,
There are various levels of pro-homo education in schools across America, with some starting at Kindergarten levels. Some even teach teens to explore this part of themselves as if they are the least affected by raging hormones. And yes, for the sake of argument, they are saying it's awesome.
Hashbrown,
I figure this way because of the lefty penchant for caving to the worst in human nature rather than encouraging the best to come out. Roe v Wade and porn as free speech are just two examples of this.
"Oh? Really? It's not?"
It's a beautiful thing between a man and the woman to whom he is married. For everyone else, its caving to the worst in human nature rather than encouraging the character that requires one to wait until they can enter into the above relationship.
"Oh? I'm no "victim" of any revolution, sexual or otherwise."
Of course you are, unless all you do is masterbate. If you should ever enter the dating worlds, STDs had better be a concern. It has also played a part in increased health care costs to treat all the various STDs that weren't even a factor in the 60's when the revolution began.
"I agree, but I certainly don't believe that neocon...etc" Of course they do if they are actually followed, lived, encouraged repeatedly in all phases of our culture. And you certainly don't find anything near such lofty goals amongst the party that simply says "they're just going to do it anyway". In addition, I don't give a flyin' rat's ass what party SEEMS to have the most perverts. That's a dodge that doesn't fly. You either believe people are capable of better or you're a part of the problem.
"...your stone jungle morals just won't cut it right now."
I guess you're part of the problem. But your choice of adjectives is curious considering its in the jungle where we find creatures living according to their urges. As people, we should be transcending such. Is it easy? Let's put it this way: it ain't that difficult. But this is what happens when people pretend that right/wrong is subjective.
Post a Comment