Sex Ed: Ethics and Effect

[Ada Lovelace]

I didn't know that toddlers touch. If they do it wouldn't be sinful because they aren't at the age of reason.

I think that even teens may touch without much culpability--i.e. they are not very responsible for their actions-- since their emotions may not be adequately connected with their reason, and especially if the've been taught that masturbation is fine.

Likewise with any emotions. Anger, for example. Some people take some time to learn how to integrate their feelings of rage and respond appropriately. In the meantime they may do some bad things without really choosing to do so freely

As far as Pediatricians, Psychologists, and Educators favoring masturbation... I don't see why that makes masturbation morally acceptable.

Toddlers are naturally curious about their bodies and begin to explore them; then they realize that certain areas and touches feel pleasurable they repeat the action. http://www.babycenter.com/0_masturbation_11558.bc

Pediatricians, psychologists and educators are knowledgeable about what behavior is normal, appropriate, healthy, and beneficial to children. What does or does not constitute what's morally acceptable varies by culture and beliefs. Last month a a 20-year-old woman died an agonizing and unnecessary death by drowning because her father prevented lifeguards from rescuing her from the waters when she was in distress. They could have saved her and they tried to, but he intervened because he didn't want her to be "dishonored" by unrelated men touching her. To him, it was preferable for her to die an "honorable" death in her youth than for his code of sexual morality to be broken by allowing rescuers to save her.

You and the Catholic Church are also not the universal arbitrators of what is morally acceptable, nor are you the only ones who have the right to speak for all Christians as many of us disagree with you on this matter.

No, the Bible doesn't explicitly condemn a number of things which are wrong, including marital rape and abortion. But marital rape and abortion are still extremely wrong.

The Canon of the Bible isn't in the Bible either, and many other doctrines also are not explicit in Scripture--which says to hold fast to the oral traditions and obey the leaders of the Church-- so I don't see how that argument works.

Clearly, the Bible teaches us to be pure and not engage in impurity.

Again, the oral traditions and teachings have varied and evolved throughout the ages. For centuries the Catholic church believed left-handedness was sinful, and that people who persisted in using their left hand were servants of the devil. They also believed that females needed to segregate themselves from their families and society during menstruation because they were unclean. The infamous Magdalene Laundries operated by the Catholic church harshly unwed young women, some of whom were the victims of rape and incest, as punishment for their fortification and coerced them in giving their babies away for adoption. I respect the Vatican on many matters, but I feel like there needs to be vigorous disagreement with them on some. I also do not think non-Catholics should be compelled to follow the Catholic teachings.

All humans are fallible and finite, and I'm far more interested in what the Bible states and what I believe are God's intentions. To make the argument that something not in the Bible is morally unacceptable simply because of tradition is incredibly flawed thinking to me. As for what is and is not impure, there have been so many varied beliefs. Personally I believe in purity of the heart.

I don't want to impose anything on anyone. I just want children and all of us to find true peace.

And yet you've made repeated statements to the effect of wanting to impose your views of sexual morality on sex education and the treatment of others who act in a way that is not in accordance to your beliefs. You've stated that teens who've engaged in private sexual activity should have that made known not just to their parents but to their public communities, without realizing how traumatizing and humiliating such an action would be. There have been numerous teenage girls who've committed suicide because they've been shamed publicly for private activities relating to sexuality (not specifically to sex in all cases.)

I think it was inappropriate to compare me to JimBob Duggar who screamed at his kid for masturbating and then abusively disciplined him, called my attitude "strange" and said that thinking masturbation is wrong is "grossly ignorant".

First of, I didn't compare your actions or your personality to Jim Bob Duggar's, and it's inaccurate and histrionic for you to repeatedly state that I did. I specifically wrote about how your attitude regarding masturbation as impure and immoral reminded me of Jim Bob's Duggars attitude about it. That belief fueled his reaction to his son, and his cruel treatment of him. If Jim Bob did not also think that it's impure, immoral, and sinful, do you think he would have punished and publicly shamed his son for it?

It was not inappropriate for me to express my own belief that your attitude is very strange. It's accurate to describe it as grossly ignorant. I stand behind that and do not apologize, but I am sorry if your feelings were unduly hurt.

I know very good, intelligent, Christian people who would treat you very well and whom I think you would respect who also agree that masturbation is wrong.

There are good Christian people who believe that the universe is geocentric. I have a lovely friend who believes there were baby dinosaurs on Noah's Ark. Me liking someone and having respect for them as a person doesn't mean that their belief on something is correct or respectable.

You are completely free to disagree, obviously, as I am. It's just I don't personally criticize or psycho-analyze people publicly because I think it is unkind.

You've publicly criticized and made presumption psychological-based comments others in many of your posts; the only difference is that you did so in general terms rather than specific ones. I haven't psycho-analyzed you, and even if I did, why would that affect you? I'm a teenage girl probably less than half your age on an internet forum. I think it's substantially more unkind for you to propagate damaging beliefs and make comments that could be detrimental to others. I'm a very kind and caring person by nature which is why I've made the effort to even write here. I don't think that sugaring and sanitizing your words to ensure they don't inadvertently offend someone is an act of kindness.

No. I just said they don't in my last post.

That was my point. You were wanting to publicly call out those who commit one "sin" but not call out all other sinners.

I agree entirely. That's why it's ridiculous to condemn others. Children should know that we all fall and that, as it says in the movie Batman Begins, we fall to learn how to stand up again.

And yet the actions you advocate would invariably lead to the condemnation of others.

Cool. I was using "child" in a more general sense. I think, also, that childhood is extending itself... more and more people are taking longer to develop, I believe, because of the lack of affirming love and the amount of spoiling. Just a thought. Conrad Baars, MD, the Christian psychiatrist is one of my favorite authors and wrote about this.

Yes, people have taken longer to mentally and socially develop into autonomous adults, which is one of the reasons why views regarding sexual morality have evolved. In the Biblical era it was common for teens to marry shortly after puberty, so there was a relatively short amount of time between when their primal desire for sexual intimacy developed and when they wed. Today of course it's abnormal and in most places illegal for a 13-year-old to marry. In some fundamentalist cultures 16 and 17 year olds will get engaged and marry simply to have sex within the context of marriage, but I personally think that's a colossal error. For one the divorce rate is substantially higher for couples who marry in their teens. Where I live most people marry between the ages of 28 and 38, and it's uncommon for them to still be virgins by that age.

I take it you mean "made public". I think that the parents have a right to know, but not the community, even though it does affect the whole community seriously.

Of course. I edited my response to correct the typo more than 30 minutes before you wrote this response. I'm writing from my phone in the car so yes I'm going to make more careless mistakes.

As to whether parents have the right to know whether their teen is having sex, that depends hugely on the circumstances. A girl who just turned 13 is an entirely different developmental stage than a 17-year-old three months away from being a legal adult. The extent to which it impacts a community can often be very minimal, especially if the teen is having consensual and legal sex and using protection.

Likewise a teenager, I would suppose, has the right to know if their father or mother is having an affair.

I disagree. Unless there is a pressing reason to inform teens, they should not be burdened with that knowledge.
My parents are very ethical and not the types to have affairs, but if they did I absolutely would not want to know, nor would I feel entitled to that information. That would be between them to work out because it is their marriage.

Do you agree that fornication is wrong?

No. I do have strong views about sexual morality but simply having sex outside of the confines of marriage is not wrong to me. There's also Scriptural justification for this belief if you study them in their original languages and in historical context.

Oh, no, I remember the conversation, I just didn't recognize your screen name at first because your avatar was changed.

Okay. Then good.

I don't understand this talk about trying to "force" people to agree. How could anyone possibly do that?

It's not an actual, literal forcing but a metaphoric one with the insistence that all views that don't agree with yours are therefore morally wrong.

 

[patricius79]

And yet you've made repeated statements to the effect of wanting to impose your views of sexual morality on sex education and the treatment of others who act in a way that is not in accordance to your beliefs. You've stated that teens who've engaged in private sexual activity should have that made known not just to their parents but to their public communities, without realizing how traumatizing and humiliating such an action would be. There have been numerous teenage girls who've committed suicide because they've been shamed publicly for private activities relating to sexuality (not specifically to sex in all cases.)

I've never stated that teens who have engaged in private sexual activity should have their behavior made know to their public communities. I've repeatedly said that this should not be made known publicly and have repeatedly rejected any kind of abuse of minors, regardless of what they have done. As I've said over and over, we're all sinners, and the emphasis needs to be on mercy.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

I've never stated that teens who have engaged in private sexual activity should have their behavior made know to their public communities. I've repeatedly said that this should not be made known publicly and have repeatedly rejected any kind of abuse of minors, regardless of what they have done. As I've said over and over, we're all sinners, and the emphasis needs to be on mercy.

You have, though you frequently edit your posts not just to clean up any obvious typos but to alter content so there's no use combing through the lengthy thread to show evidence. I am glad that you don't believe in making personal matters about sex public and perhaps there was misunderstanding that happened due to typos and such.

Abuse isn't just physical in nature, and I believe that some of what you've stated throughout this thread, if applied, could be detrimental. I realize that's not your intention, though. I do agree that the emphasis should be on mercy.

 

[patricius79]

Toddlers are naturally curious about their bodies and begin to explore them; then they realize that certain areas and touches feel pleasurable they repeat the action. http://www.babycenter.com/0_masturbation_11558.bc

Pediatricians, psychologists and educators are knowledgeable about what behavior is normal, appropriate, healthy, and beneficial to children. What does or does not constitute what's morally acceptable varies by culture and beliefs. Last month a a 20-year-old woman died an agonizing and unnecessary death by drowning because her father prevented lifeguards from rescuing her from the waters when she was in distress. They could have saved her and they tried to, but he intervened because he didn't want her to be "dishonored" by unrelated men touching her. To him, it was preferable for her to die an "honorable" death in her youth than for his code of sexual morality to be broken by allowing rescuers to save her.

You and the Catholic Church are also not the universal arbitrators of what is morally acceptable, nor are you the only ones who have the right to speak for all Christians as many of us disagree with you on this matter.



Again, the oral traditions and teachings have varied and evolved throughout the ages. For centuries the Catholic church believed left-handedness was sinful, and that people who persisted in using their left hand were servants of the devil. They also believed that females needed to segregate themselves from their families and society during menstruation because they were unclean. The infamous Magdalene Laundries operated by the Catholic church harshly unwed young women, some of whom were the victims of rape and incest, as punishment for their fortification and coerced them in giving their babies away for adoption. I respect the Vatican on many matters, but I feel like there needs to be vigorous disagreement with them on some. I also do not think non-Catholics should be compelled to follow the Catholic teachings.

All humans are fallible and finite, and I'm far more interested in what the Bible states and what I believe are God's intentions. To make the argument that something not in the Bible is morally unacceptable simply because of tradition is incredibly flawed thinking to me. As for what is and is not impure, there have been so many varied beliefs. Personally I believe in purity of the heart.



And yet you've made repeated statements to the effect of wanting to impose your views of sexual morality on sex education and the treatment of others who act in a way that is not in accordance to your beliefs. You've stated that teens who've engaged in private sexual activity should have that made known not just to their parents but to their public communities, without realizing how traumatizing and humiliating such an action would be. There have been numerous teenage girls who've committed suicide because they've been shamed publicly for private activities relating to sexuality (not specifically to sex in all cases.)



First of, I didn't compare your actions or your personality to Jim Bob Duggar's, and it's inaccurate and histrionic for you to repeatedly state that I did. I specifically wrote about how your attitude regarding masturbation as impure and immoral reminded me of Jim Bob's Duggars attitude about it. That belief fueled his reaction to his son, and his cruel treatment of him. If Jim Bob did not also think that it's impure, immoral, and sinful, do you think he would have punished and publicly shamed his son for it?

It was not inappropriate for me to express my own belief that your attitude is very strange. It's accurate to describe it as grossly ignorant. I stand behind that and do not apologize, but I am sorry if your feelings were unduly hurt.



There are good Christian people who believe that the universe is geocentric. I have a lovely friend who believes there were baby dinosaurs on Noah's Ark. Me liking someone and having respect for them as a person doesn't mean that their belief on something is correct or respectable.



You've publicly criticized and made presumption psychological-based comments others in many of your posts; the only difference is that you did so in general terms rather than specific ones. I haven't psycho-analyzed you, and even if I did, why would that affect you? I'm a teenage girl probably less than half your age on an internet forum. I think it's substantially more unkind for you to propagate damaging beliefs and make comments that could be detrimental to others. I'm a very kind and caring person by nature which is why I've made the effort to even write here. I don't think that sugaring and sanitizing your words to ensure they don't inadvertently offend someone is an act of kindness.




That was my point. You were wanting to publicly call out those who commit one "sin" but not call out all other sinners.



And yet the actions you advocate would invariably lead to the condemnation of others.



Yes, people have taken longer to mentally and socially develop into autonomous adults, which is one of the reasons why views regarding sexual morality have evolved. In the Biblical era it was common for teens to marry shortly after puberty, so there was a relatively short amount of time between when their primal desire for sexual intimacy developed and when they wed. Today of course it's abnormal and in most places illegal for a 13-year-old to marry. In some fundamentalist cultures 16 and 17 year olds will get engaged and marry simply to have sex within the context of marriage, but I personally think that's a colossal error. For one the divorce rate is substantially higher for couples who marry in their teens. Where I live most people marry between the ages of 28 and 38, and it's uncommon for them to still be virgins by that age.




Of course. I edited my response to correct the typo more than 30 minutes before you wrote this response. I'm writing from my phone in the car so yes I'm going to make more careless mistakes.

As to whether parents have the right to know whether their teen is having sex, that depends hugely on the circumstances. A girl who just turned 13 is an entirely different developmental stage than a 17-year-old three months away from being a legal adult. The extent to which it impacts a community can often be very minimal, especially if the teen is having consensual and legal sex and using protection.



I disagree. Unless there is a pressing reason to inform teens, they should not be burdened with that knowledge.
My parents are very ethical and not the types to have affairs, but if they did I absolutely would not want to know, nor would I feel entitled to that information. That would be between them to work out because it is their marriage.



No. I do have strong views about sexual morality but simply having sex outside of the confines of marriage is not wrong to me. There's also Scriptural justification for this belief if you study them in their original languages and in historical context.



Okay. Then good.



It's not an actual, literal forcing but a metaphoric one with the insistence that all views that don't agree with yours are therefore morally wrong.

Hey Artemis,

I'm glad you're a kind person by nature.

Maybe pediatricians and psychologists are accepting masturbation because they don't understand that we are fallen creatures whose desires--though basically good-- are flawed due to Original Sin.

Also, as I mentioned, kids aren't culpable for things until they are old enough to freely choose between right and wrong.

I agree that we shouldn't be fearful of hurting other people's feelings. You're right. And obviously you are very intelligent and articulate.

I don't think it is reasonable to act as though I'm bullying anyone. As far as I know, pretty much everyone on the thread disagrees with me. But I try to never personally criticize anyone.

Obviously, we would differ on some things, including our understanding of the Catholic Church.

And I believe that the Bible condemns fornication. I guess when I say that, you hear me judging people.

I don't mean it that way at all. I deserve Hell myself but trust in the Mercy of Christ.

I don't think that believing things like masturbation, or inappropriate contentography are wrong causes us to overreact to them or abusively parent.

You are right about the issue of an affairs. Kids should be shielded from knowing that. I was wrong.

 

[patricius79]

You have, though you frequently edit your posts not just to clean up any obvious typos but to alter content so there's no use combing through the lengthy thread to show evidence. I am glad that you don't believe in making personal matters about sex public and perhaps there was misunderstanding that happened due to typos and such.

Abuse isn't just physical in nature, and I believe that some of what you've stated throughout this thread, if applied, could be detrimental. I realize that's not your intention, though. I do agree that the emphasis should be on mercy.

Thank you, Artemis. I agree that abuse isn't just physical in nature. I think that moral teaching should be presented in the right way, and at the right time, so that the child is able to process it without developing any psychological disorders.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Hey Artemis,

I'm glad you're a kind person by nature.

Maybe pediatricians and psychologists are accepting masturbation because they don't understand that we are fallen creatures whose desires--though basically good-- are flawed due to Original Sin.

Also, as I mentioned, kids aren't culpable for things until they are old enough to freely choose between right and wrong.

I agree that we shouldn't be fearful of hurting other people's feelings. You're right. And obviously you are very intelligent and articulate.

I don't think it is reasonable to act as though I'm bullying anyone. As far as I know, pretty much everyone on the thread disagrees with me. But I try to never personally criticize anyone.

Obviously, we would differ on some things, including our understanding of the Catholic Church.

And I believe that the Bible condemns fornication. I guess when I say that, you hear me judging people.

I don't mean it that way at all. I deserve Hell myself but trust in the Mercy of Christ.

I don't think that believing things like masturbation, or inappropriate contentography are wrong causes us to overreact to them or abusively parent.

You are right about the issue of an affairs. Kids should be shielded from knowing that. I was wrong.

I think we've both articulated our beliefs on specific issues adequately enough by this point, so I'm not responding to each one in your newest posts. I just wanted to clarify that I don't feel like you've behaved like a bully here, and have not tried to portray you as one. There's a significant difference between writing statements that others disagree with and see flaws and potential detriment in, and deliberately setting out to disparage or harm anyone. People have objected to what you've written, but I don't think they object to you as a person, or believe that you have any malice in your motives for writing your posts. My comments have only been about your posts here; they are not about you as a person. Please don't take anything to heart.

 

[quatona]

patricius, I would like to help this thread get more productive and realistic.

Let´s, hypothetically, envision the second step before discussing the first:
Let´s assume that a good fairy fulfills your first wish and has all relevant persons and institutions coming to the conclusion that school is the appropriate place to teach children morality in general and sexual morality in particular. There´s a new subject "morality" (not as in "comparative morality" or "discussing morality", but as in "teaching morals"), and sex ed is being taught as part of this subject.

Now that the foundations are layed, how do you think they should go about determining which or whose morals are taught?
(And, yes, it´s obvious that your wish would be "mine" - but now the good fairy has disappeared).
So the situation is: They have a great variety of conflicting moral ideas to their disposal, and they need to decide which exactly is "being taught".
What´s the process you suggest for doing that?

 

[Cush]

Personally, my current position is that kids should be taught about sexual biology.

We wouldn't have this problem if people would stop breeding with liberals.

 

[Dave-W]

That's really awful. I think that my mama was taught the same kind of thing in her very strict upbringing. When my sister had her sons, our mama would tell her that she should get them up early, out of bed, because who knew what they might be doing there? :O My sister believed differently and left them to their privacy.

Good for your sister.

Oh, a few years ago, on a different Christian forum - I just remembered this - a teenager was posted asking questions about whether the erotic dreams she was having were sinful. She was genuinely curious, as they had come out of nowhere. But she was a teen, and you know - hormones (been there too)! But people just crushed her. It was horrible. I can't imagine what damage that may have done to her.

I can believe it. On another forum a few years ago there was a guy who was struggling in this area and could never get "victory" over this "sin." He was absolutely ruthless on himself as were the other posters there. One day he put up a bunch of really weird posts and then just disappeared. His damage was to himself.

My wife grew up in a house that was like that, plus she was repeatedly molested (age 8-12) by a teen relative that lived close-by. After 38 years of marriage she still has a lot of scars to deal with.

 

[Dave-W]

In the Biblical era it wasn't uncommon for 13-year-olds to marry and have children.

Quite right. 12-14 was the typical age of marriage in Judean culture in the first century. But the Mishnah records that occasionally marriages were earlier and said the marriage was binding on a betrothed couple (as arranged by the parents) if they had intercourse and reached the age of "nine years plus one day..."

 

[patricius79]

Good for your sister.

I can believe it. On another forum a few years ago there was a guy who was struggling in this area and could never get "victory" over this "sin." He was absolutely ruthless on himself as were the other posters there. One day he put up a bunch of really weird posts and then just disappeared. His damage was to himself.
.

He might have had a repressive disorder (obsessive compulsive disorder) which prevented his emotions from being guided by reason. According to the Christian psychiatrist Conrad Baars, Martin Luther also had such a disorder. These disorders in the area of sexual feelings used to be much more common than they are today. But as you suggest I'm sure they're still out there.

Usually I think they go back to kids being made to feel irrationally afraid of things by parents who themselves aren't integrated.

 

[KCfromNC]

As far as what we should teach kids: you believe there are situations where rape is morally acceptable?

Where have I even hinted at that? I was replying to a post where you said you didn't know exactly how to define rape and somehow that led you to believe that I was talking about teaching kids something? Hope you warmed up before posting because that's quite a stretch.

Anyway, if you're looking to convince people that some things are objectively absolutely wrong asking about people's individual subjective opinion on the matter probably isn't the best place to start.

 

[patricius79]

KC,

Here's my post:

I don't know what the options are for how to define rape exactly.

But I'm thinking of cases where the woman--or man--says no or stop and/or physically tries to stop the other person but is overpowered by force.

I don't know too much about whether there are cases that are more ambiguous. I was just thinking of cases where it is obviously rape, and I'm saying that it is absolutely evil.

I think kids should be taught that if they is any doubt about whether the other person is freely consenting, they need to stop.

And of course if they are not married they should stop anyway.

 

[patricius79]

Where have I even hinted at that? I was replying to a post where you said you didn't know exactly how to define rape and somehow that led you to believe that I was talking about teaching kids something? Hope you warmed up before posting because that's quite a stretch.

Anyway, if you're looking to convince people that some things are objectively absolutely wrong asking about people's individual subjective opinion on the matter probably isn't the best place to start.

Do you agree with me that rape is absolutely wrong, and that kids should be taught that?

 

[KCfromNC]

Do you agree with me that rape is absolutely wrong, and that kids should be taught that?

Have you figure out how to define rape yet?

And more importantly, are you implying that I'm your God? That's where you think these absolute morals come from, right? If you're looking for my opinion to know whether or not something is absolutely true that's giving me an awful lot of power over your belief system.

On the other hand, if something else is making things absolutely right or wrong it doesn't matter if I agree with you or not. They simply are.

 

[KCfromNC]

KC,

Here's my post:

Yes, I agree. You posted that.

 

[xpower]

Hey Artemis97 check your inbox.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Hey Artemis97 check your inbox.

I read it. I didn't keep up with my email inboxes when I was on vacation and have 14,491 messages there to get through so I'm sorta burned out on emailing / PMing. But don't worry I will respond! Just give me a wee bit of time. Thanks for writing.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

ON!

Thread permanently closed!

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not attack another member's character or actions in any way, address only the content of their post and not the member personally.
● NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad.
● Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.
● Only the person to whom the post is addressed may report the other. Anyone may report generalized flames or goads which are addressed to a group of members.
● Moderators have the right to report egregious violations of flaming or goading.
● Clear violations of the flaming rule will result in bans.

OFF!