hahahhahahah

quote:

---

The schools want to teach sex

---

Hands up the teachers in the room who want to teach sex education?

quote:

---

denying the existance of a creator

---

I thought you had seperation of church and state? So is that element the choice of the school or them following the Constitution?

Here's news for you, buddy - sex within marrige leads to those things, too.Because those issues are based on who you're having sex with, not in what context you're doing it. If your sexual partner is a person who makes you feel guilty or angry, or has a disease or is going to get pregnant, those things are going to happen regardless of the two of you having rings on your fingers and cake in the freezer.I mean, do you really believe that a little gold ring is going to cure you of STD's, advance your maturity level about 10 years, prevent you from ever being angry or guilty, and magically act as a perfect contraceptive? Cuz, man, if so, I need to send my wedding ring back in, cuz it must have been broken when I put it on. It never has before. Keep in mind that we did it your way for about 2000 years, and the result was teenage pregnancy, overcrowded orphanages, society's ostracism of young mothers and raped women, rampant STD's, backward, dangerous sexual practices, and the casual dismissal of hurtful male promiscuity.If it's rigid sexual mores that you think will save us all, why don't you take a look over in the Middle East at how well those work? How's that working for them? Oh, right. Fathers kill their own raped daughters, abuse of women is endemic, AIDS is out of control because condoms are viewed as sinful, and men marry 12-year-old girls, regardless of the girl's wishes, in legalized pedophilia.In our own culture, clerics (and yes, that word refers to the authority figures of any religion) of the most sexually restrictive Christian sect sexually abuse young girls and boys and, reliably, are shielded from prosecution by their superiors at all levels, including the feted religious leader who often meets with our President.Abuse of women and the restrictive, ignorant sexual practices you describe go hand-in-hand. They're inextricable, being born as they are of the same attitude that sex needs the imprimatur of religion.

I've not noticed too much "puritanism" in our popular culture lately.We might could do with a little.

how you figure?

Scarlet letters are sexy.

A

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

LOLOLLOLI dunno why, but your post really made me laugh

Popular culture--tv, movies, etc. From the 60s on. Seems rather unhealthy.

I agree with you about promoting sexual activity - though I think we may disagree on what constitutes promoting.I feel strongly that schools should teach about condoms, as I had a friend in highschool who got into a bit of trouble when "put it on wrong". Can't go into much more detail, since years of nagging couldn't drag it out of him.On the topic of condoms, I'm split about handing them out in school.My primary position is this: If you can't afford a 3 dollar box of trojans, you can't afford a baby. Keep it in your pants. If you are too embarissed to go buy condoms, you aren't ready for sex. Keep it in your pants. If you don't want to have deal with the responsiblity, etc. You see where I'm going with this.The counter point is a strong one: Kids are stupid and irresponsible and society as a whole ends up paying for their mistakes, so if we can spend a few dollars here and save thousands over there, we should.

Ah ha! Off topic, but AH HA! You are saying you disagree with evolution based on what it implies about your life, not based on any evidence. This is the core Fundie argument which so rarely surfaces! POTM! POTM!!

My problem with parents teaching kids sex is a lot like my problem with homeschooling.Parents are not always suited to be teaching the subject.There is a wide range of knowledge available in the study of sex, from mechanical to spiritual to medical. I doubt that you (certainly not me) have a strong foundation in all aspects. This is something that a ciriculum can teach.

Those damn liberals! They're even worse than those imaginary commies! They won't be happy until they've gone and destroyed everything. First Civil Rights, now this! Where will it end?!

It's a double edged sword. I agree there is plenty of the naughty, but just the same, there is plenty of people being punished for being "naughty".

There is something to be said for the prude. I, for example, am a prude. Am I ashamed of being a prude? Nope.If one is a prude, one is still capable of being shocked. The immature feel that only a neophyte is shocked. Here they go far wrong, because to be shocked proves that you are still sensitive.And to be insensitive, in my mind, is a very bad thing to be.For example, one might consider--indeed, I consider-a woman's breast to be a great marvel. But if seen too frequently, a woman's breast becomes a gland, and I'm not interested in glands.

But do you think that because you are denied breasts?There are cultures where necks or ankles are on par with America's perspective on breasts. And, as anyone who's seen Discovery channel can tell you, there are cultures where the breasts are not something which needs to be covered.Is one of these cultures better than the other. Certainly not.Your perspective on anatomy is based on the culture in which you reside.Personally I don't think that nudity should be the big deal that it is.Try to distance yourself from your cultural identity and ask - does it really matter if I see someone naked? I'm not talking about strip clubs and sexual gratuity. I'm saying, what if everyone was naked at the supermarket?Does your seeing someone naked demean them? You? Does it reduce your ability to become aroused? If so, what does that say about the emotional / spiritual aspects of sex?

No teacher I've had is anything but another parent. To expect that they have some ability above any other parent is assumptive. Yup, and there are multiple books/websites, or other learning sources, on any one of these aspects. OK, but without the teacher being something other than another parent, I don't see how the curiculum is any stronger than the one teaching it, so we can still leave it to the biological parent, who can look up, or come up with a curriculum on their own.The curriculum, assuming it's from a public school, should have nothing to do with the spiritual knowledge of sex. The spiritual part (please note that I've wrote that the biological part of sex should be taught) isn't even recognized by science, so IMO, there is an entire aspect of sex that is being left out of public schools.But it isn't up to me what is taught in public schools.So.. as you said... Which I agree with on the biological level, but there is something else about sex that people recognize, and this is the aspect that I want to be left up to the parents.