That's a very succinct accounting of the situation from the science-minded instrumentalist point of view. From that point of view it appears there is no other point of view. Sex is completely divorced from its cultural and moral historical framework and treated as nothing but a biological phenomenon and physical health issue.
yes because stds are purely cultural and moral and have nothing to do with the health risks involved.
You are speaking for one of the "cultures" of the "two cultures" that are in perpetual combat these days, that I've been trying to illuminate. All the descriptions of the problem and solutions to it from your side of the cultural divide have this pragmatic biological focus that to someone on the other side of the divide appears dehumanizing and culturally suicidal.
there arn't two cultures theres just one with many points of view, trying to polerize the issue is just wrong faith
abstinece-only sex eduducation will limit or flat out stunt children when it comes to sex and how to deal with it. what if we teach only abstinence and the person ends in a situation that abstinence doesn't cover? they will be lost and get into problems they have no way to deal with
but if we give them the knowelege to handle sex in an intellegent fashion with all the facts, both good and bad, they should be able to decide not to have it with out safty precautions
i tihnk you are adding baggage to something that shouldn't have it, you are making the leap it seems of thinking that if people know how sex works, that they will do it, which you have no evidence of this
i mean come on humans have been having sex for thousands of years but they didn't have a clue how it works - look at religions from any age before modern medencin
abstinece-only sex-ed shows that people do not think children are smart enough to think for themselves about thier bodies and should be afraid of them
™ Version 4.2
