Kansas to criminalize sex education...

[Belk]

Because children do not think and reason as adults do. Children do not possess the decision-making abilities nor the concept of consequences as adults do. Children don't possess the skills and maturity to make adult decisions. If you present a child with a "how to" on sex, then you are presenting them with knowledge that requires a decision on action. Namely "Will I or won't I try this?"

Well, first off I disagree that they are being presented a "How to". Again I admit it has been a while since I was in sex ed but I find it doubtful they have progressed to given children instruction manuals on the procedures involved in sex. From everything I have heard children at this age are simply being introduced to concepts so they are understood prior to more detailed concepts being presented later.

Secondly I don't agree that having been presented with said concepts that children are immediately presented with a "While I try this or wont I" choice. If they were then I would think the DARE service was doing as great disservice to drug abstinence.

On this we agree 110%.

I feel that sex education should be solely at the parents' discretion for elementary and middle schoolers. Even at the top age bracket for that group (12-13 years old) they're just beginning puberty and certainly aren't mature enough to require graphic sexual knowledge.

How about basic knowledge and terms that can later be expanded upon? Seems to me this is the basis of how we approach teaching and it has been successful.

If the parents want to teach it at home, that's their choice. I feel that sex ed should be an optional class offered to high schoolers, with parental consent required.

Well you are certainly entitled to that opinion. The real life consequence of that approach seems to be an increase in teen pregnancy and STD transmittal. At least as far as we can tell with the data we have. I do not find sex ed to be such a scary thing personally so I view it as worth doing to lower the negative impacts of uninformed sexual activity.

Regardless of where we stand on such topics, things like masturbation, premarital sex, and homosexuality are held as moral issues to millions of people.

Are things like masturbation, premarital sex, and homosexuality taught as being moral in sex ed class?

This is exactly what I did. But you're (sadly) correct that many, if not most, parents have little to zero clue of what their kids are learning in school every day. I know that my son's "health" class teaches about human reproduction without any parental notification. It was only the more controversial "Planned Parenthood assembly" that brought home an actual permission slip. Which most parents probably just signed off on, thinking "Oh ok, well, it's so awkward talking about condoms and stuff, just let the school handle it", not even realizing what other insanely inappropriate materials would be covered.

I have little doubt that we would disagree on what we consider "inappropriate".

 

[Hammster]

Bit of a tangent, but I have never understood the american tendency to label any kind of concentrated action towards an agenda as "war on xyz".

Do I need to post the mod hat again?

 

[Inkachu]

Bit of a tangent, but I have never understood the american tendency to label any kind of concentrated action towards an agenda as "war on xyz".

I'm an American, and I don't subscribe to that nonsense. It's nothing but a political/media catchphrase. Most Americans don't go around using it in everyday conversation lol.

 

[FreeSpirit74]

not taught in elementary or middle schools, and be optional, not part of the regular curriculum, for high schoolers.

You are aware that even pre-teens are having sex these days, right? And some girls are already getting their periods by the time they move from elementary to middle school. I started mine when I was 11, so I was in 5th grade, still in elementary school.

 

[Metal Minister]

You are aware that even pre-teens are having sex these days, right?

Yeah, how's that sex ed curriculum working out for us?

 

[MachZer0]

Sorry, I don't agree. This teaching everything that should become public knowage takes a lot of time that I don't have. Where do I get it? Out of the two hour commute I have since the closest house I could afford it out that far? Or out of the chores I do? Or out of work I need to do?

This catoring to everyones independent beliefs does not work, and the benifits are there in black and white in charts. The state should be looking at what works best, not what is unsupprotted belief.

Your time restraints don't mean that my [child should have to be subjected to controversial sexual content by the government. The solution to your problem is for you to hire someone to be a sex ed tutor for your child

 

[Inkachu]

Well, first off I disagree that they are being presented a "How to". Again I admit it has been a while since I was in sex ed but I find it doubtful they have progressed to given children instruction manuals on the procedures involved in sex. From everything I have heard children at this age are simply being introduced to concepts so they are understood prior to more detailed concepts being presented later.

Most kids know that sex involves one body part being inserted into another. Telling 10 year olds that some people "express their feelings" by inserting penises into anuses or by putting their hands on another persons' private parts is NOT appropriate. Most kids are also naturally curious and will try things they have no business trying. This is a long, long way from telling kids that a sperm and an egg create a baby.

Secondly I don't agree that having been presented with said concepts that children are immediately presented with a "While I try this or wont I" choice. If they were then I would think the DARE service was doing as great disservice to drug abstinence.

You don't think that kids involved with DARE have asked themselves internally "should I try drugs or not try drugs"? Hopefully, the answer is a resounding "No way! It's bad for me!" but make no mistake, the question is posed.

Do you have kids?

How about basic knowledge and terms that can later be expanded upon? Seems to me this is the basis of how we approach teaching and it has been successful.

That's already happening in most schools, so even if I say I don't agree with it, it's still a reality. Not like me disagreeing with it is going to suddenly threaten any child's access to sex ed right now.

But to go along with your question, I think that basic knowledge and terms need to begin at home.

Well you are certainly entitled to that opinion. The real life consequence of that approach seems to be an increase in teen pregnancy and STD transmittal. At least as far as we can tell with the data we have. I do not find sex ed to be such a scary thing personally so I view it as worth doing to lower the negative impacts of uninformed sexual activity.

Do you know of any research that shows that restricting sex ed classes to high school and removing them from middle school results in an increase in STD's and pregnancies? Remember that my goal here is not to produce ignorant, uninformed adults. It's to encourage responsibility in the home rather than in the school, and to keep the information optional (not snuck into the "health" curriculum without informing parents) and age-appropriate. But again, our society is already rapidly moving towards teaching more and more graphic information to younger and younger kids. So it's going YOUR way, not mine.

Are things like masturbation, premarital sex, and homosexuality taught as being moral in sex ed class?

If you're telling kids "this is what people do and it's OK", then you're placing a moral value on it. Obviously they aren't telling the kids "this is what people do, but it's wrong!" Remember, these are children. They accept what they're taught, because the teacher is the authority, the grown up, the one who knows what they're talking about.

 

[MachZer0]

Sorry, don't agree. I use to, until I saw how much my state pays out for public care and how much of that goes to child care, medical expences, etc.

I have been able to avoid all that becuase I was educated in a public school where I was taught about safe sex and STD's. I think the more students have this info, the more would avoid costing the tax payer money.

The solution to that is for the state to stop paying for it. Problem solved

 

[MachZer0]

Except when the solution you choose is abortion, then, in practice, it seems to become a public health issue again.

Take abortion away as an option and the problem will improve even further

 

[Fenny the Fox]

You are aware that even pre-teens are having sex these days, right? And some girls are already getting their periods by the time they move from elementary to middle school. I started mine when I was 11, so I was in 5th grade, still in elementary school.

And they always have. While the average age of loss of virginity has gone down since the 50s, it is still around 16 in most countries with sex ed (and still around 20 or so in most more reserved nations).

 

[FreeSpirit74]

This was material taught in a middle school. Middle schools typically range from 5th or 6th grade on. 5th graders are typically 9 or 10 years old. Regardless, this isn't appropriate for a 13 year old child, either.

When I was in school, elementary was K-5, and middle school was 6-8. The kids in my 5th grade class were 10 going on 11; I turned 11 one month into the school year (October). 9 years old is more typically 3rd grade age.

 

[Belk]

Most kids know that sex involves one body part being inserted into another. Telling 10 year olds that some people "express their feelings" by inserting penises into anuses or by putting their hands on another persons' private parts is NOT appropriate. Most kids are also naturally curious and will try things they have no business trying. This is a long, long way from telling kids that a sperm and an egg create a baby.



You don't think that kids involved with DARE have asked themselves internally "should I try drugs or not try drugs"? Hopefully, the answer is a resounding "No way! It's bad for me!" but make no mistake, the question is posed.

So if the exact same question is posed then why do you (I presume here) support DARE but not sex ED? Why is information and understanding appropriate in one context but not the other?

Do you have kids?

No. Nor will I as I have been fixed.

That's already happening in most schools, so even if I say I don't agree with it, it's still a reality. Not like me disagreeing with it is going to suddenly threaten any child's access to sex ed right now.

But to go along with your question, I think that basic knowledge and terms need to begin at home.

I agree they should begin there. But I do not have an issue with them being discussed in school.

Do you know of any research that shows that restricting sex ed classes to high school and removing them from middle school results in an increase in STD's and pregnancies?

I believe there is data that would support that but I do not have it on hand nor do I know where I would locate it.

Remember that my goal here is not to produce ignorant, uninformed adults. It's to encourage responsibility in the home rather than in the school, and to keep the information optional (not snuck into the "health" curriculum without informing parents) and age-appropriate. But again, our society is already rapidly moving towards teaching more and more graphic information to younger and younger kids. So it's going YOUR way, not mine.

And I think your goal is admirable. I don't think changing sex ed would have any effect that would help your goal. Changing sex ed will not help parents become more responsible.

If you're telling kids "this is what people do and it's OK", then you're placing a moral value on it. Obviously they aren't telling the kids "this is what people do, but it's wrong!"

I believe the statement should be "This is what some people do". Do you know for a fact that people are stating it in any other fashion and how widespread is it?

Remember, these are children. They accept what they're taught, because the teacher is the authority, the grown up, the one who knows what they're talking about.

I'm not buying that one. They might accept some of it but I doubt they accept everything they are taught.

 

[loveofourlord]

Also, the thread title is misleading. It says "Kansas to criminalize..." as if it's about to happen. It's not, it's just a bill that's been introduced.

It's also worth nothing that this bill would NOT just remove all sex education from schools (even though that seems to be what people are assuming, and hey, it makes a great excuse to argue with each other). It would prohibit sexual content that is NOT reasonably "scientific", etc... IOW sex ed that isn't showing overtly graphic sexual imagery would NOT be banned. At least, that's what I'm gathering from reading the article.

Senate Bill 56 would allow misdemeanor charges to be filed against teachers who present materials depicting “nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse” that the “average adult person” believes “lacks serious literary, scientific, educational, artistic or political value.”

IOW if it's content that has reasonable educational or scientific value, it doesn't fall under this bill.

What counts as offensive? Did you see the poster that started this all? If thats the kind of thing that creates this bill just imagine what they find offensive? A drawing or picture showing your genintals both male and female? Showing the proper usage of a condom?

 

[FreeSpirit74]

OK. Why are you against it for children at that age and at what age do you feel it should start?

She's already said she thinks it should be delayed all the way until high school. Never mind that most girls have already started their periods long before freshman year (I started in 5th grade), boys are already having wet dreams, having their voices change... puberty has been and gone by the time they are in 9th grade.

 

[MachZer0]

So if the exact same question is posed then why do you (I presume here) support DARE but not sex ED? Why is information and understanding appropriate in one context but not the other?

What if DARE was presented using the same philosophy as sex ed. Kids are going to use drugs any way so we have to teach them the safe way to use them. Perhaps make clean needles free in the classroom

 

[FreeSpirit74]

I know that my son's "health" class teaches about human reproduction without any parental notification.

If you are referring to reproduction as in what happens after intercourse, they also teach about it in high school biology class, at least they did when I was taking that class 25 years ago. Will you be expecting a parental permission slip then, too?

 

[loveofourlord]

I don't think my 10 year old needs to know what anal sex is. Nor does he/she need to learn about "expressing sexual feelings". No one is calling this "pornography" by the way. Pretty cheap tactic.

Again, this is something that would be much more appropriate for high schoolers.

Who is teaching 10 year olds that? Do you even KNOW what the sex ed course is? It starts at younger grades telling kids that there are boys and girls, telling them the bare minimm, it's not even till much later that they are taught other things. There is such a thing as age appropriate sex education, it's just not the old, "Your not 16 here is what sex is goodbye." education I grew up on.

The problem with this bill is having been watching this for years, I know alot of things that set parents off.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] they taught that some kids are gay STOP IT!!.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] they taught kids about Condoms, that will just force kids to have sex.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] they taught kids what sex is BURN THE SCHOOL!.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] they didn't teach kids that having sex before marriage will cause you to die!! *yes some schools teach this that use abstinence only*

and considering many have the missunderstanding of what sex education that you apparently do, I don't see this bill going well, it will be like evolution all over again where it wasn't banned but teachers were till scared to bring it up, you will destroy education because people will be afraid of what will get them in trouble, and considering where this bill is it probably will if it's anything but have sex and die.

 

[loveofourlord]

I actually don't think this is a bad idea. Although, the bill just seems to be re-affirming common sense. Surely if a teacher were to show a porn film, for example, surely they'd get fired?

your looking at it wrong, the question is what would the people making this bill consider pornographic? My sex ed video we had talked about sex, and how it worked, does showing a education video on how sex works count as pornographic? Given the mentality of many people that hate sex education probably.

 

[loveofourlord]

Yeah, how's that sex ed curriculum working out for us?

Great, you do know it's the states without a comprehensive sex ed curriculum that have the problems right?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Take abortion away as an option and the problem will improve even further

Not really if someone want an abortion bad enough, they will do it themselves. The news said someone discarded two dead fetus in the street on Jan 5, 2015 . I'm sure someone found a cheaper way of aborting. Maybe teaching kids about birth control and teach them how to get them will be a better solution.