Sex Ed: Ethics and Effect

[patricius79]

I went to a public school. I think being told by your government teachers that it's a part of "God's plan" is a little inappropriate in that situation. The rest I don't have a problem with, provided they can explain the basis for each statement if someone has questions.

It sounds like we agree on some important things then. Would you also agree that our culture is a rather low level of psycho-sexual maturity (i.e. knowing how to receiving sexual feelings without any compulsion to get into inappropriate content or act on them), and that this is a serious problem?

 

[patricius79]

You're going in a circle. The answer to this is exactly what I just said. This is what people want to know, and what they want their children to know. It's the best way because it fulfills the two goals that you mentioned, and others.

I feel like your argument is circular too.

So, is comprehensive sex ed "best way" because people want to know how to reduce STDs and teen pregnancy without necessarily foregoing fornication?

Btw, on a random, note, i like your avatar

 

[Cearbhall]

So, is comprehensive sex ed "best way" because people want to know how to reduce STDs and teen pregnancy without necessarily foregoing fornication?

Yes, exactly.

 

[quatona]

Are you presupposing empiricism?

What´s that got to do with anything?

 

[Cute Tink]

It sounds like we agree on some important things then. Would you also agree that our culture is a rather low level of psycho-sexual maturity (i.e. knowing how to receiving sexual feelings without any compulsion to get into inappropriate content or act on them), and that this is a serious problem?

For the most part, I am not worried about adults engaging in whatever sexual antics they choose with other consensual partners. It's none of my business at all. I think some people treat supposedly dedicated relationships too lightly, but I think that has to do with them rushing into a relationship they weren't ready for than having psycho-sexual maturity.

 

[patricius79]

Yes, exactly.

So you're saying that comprehensive sex ed is the best of way of teaching sex ed because people want to know how to reduce teen pregnancy and stds without necessarily foregoing fornication.

Why does that make comprehensive sex ed the best way?

 

[patricius79]

What´s that got to do with anything?

Because I'm wondering if the "totally different idea" you are starting with is the assumption of empiricism?

 

[patricius79]

For the most part, I am not worried about adults engaging in whatever sexual antics they choose with other consensual partners. It's none of my business at all. I think some people treat supposedly dedicated relationships too lightly, but I think that has to do with them rushing into a relationship they weren't ready for than having psycho-sexual maturity.

If a person is stuck in psycho-sexual adolescence--for example, they view inappropriate content--do you think that affects their children, spouse, coworkers, etc?

 

[Paulos23]

Modern feminism is about reducing female personal responsibility at every turn. Given your statements--in light of legalized abortion and the female "my body, my choice," thing--I'm hazarding a guess you're a male feminist since you place the responsibility of a female becoming impregnated solely on the dude?

I was talking about personal responsibility. Yes, it takes two to tango, but both sides have to say yes. I am just as responsible as she is, but I don't have the legal rights to the child if I am not married (at least that was the case at the time). I don't get to say what happens to the child, and even if we where in love at the time of the tango, that doesn't mean we will be at the time of the birth. At the time, it was easier for a guy to walk away. Not something I wanted to do knowing how much it would effect her. Call that being feminist if you want, I call it being responsible for your actions.

How about "The two of you have changed her life..." rather than "You have..."? And how about "Plus, you both have a child that you both should be responsible for..."

I was talking from by teenage self viewpoint. The idea of being in a couple was still a strange concept to me. At the time, if I got 'lucky', it would have been a pity tango or a reward for something. Dating wasn't working of for my introverted self at the time.

How about that kind of sexual equality. We all know that if a 30 year-old female teacher "rapes" a 16 year-old male student of her's that he's financially responsible for the child born from that sexual union until that child becomes age 18. Assuming his so-called "rapist" does not "choose" to have an abortion per "her body her choice" religious dogma.

Please don't bring your issues into this...

 

[Cearbhall]

It's a tough thing. How do we know whether the "scientists" doing these surveys are unbiased?

You can read the methodology if you so wish.

Clearly there is an agenda among scientists and social scientists as there is among Christians.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Scientists are not the antithesis of Christians. Many of them are Christian, for starters.

I don't necessarily trust something from the CDC or the media. But I don't want to completely write it off either.

The CDC is probably the most objective source there is.

 

[quatona]

Because I'm wondering if the "totally different idea" you are starting with is the assumption of empiricism?

No, I don´t.
But it seems like you pretend that you are looking for empiricistically valid reasons to justify your moral preconceptions.

 

[Cearbhall]

Why does that make comprehensive sex ed the best way?

Why are you asking me this question again and again when I've already answered it? You demonstrated in post #102 that you understood what I was saying. I'm not going to say it again.

 

[quatona]

So you're saying that comprehensive sex ed is the best of way of teaching sex ed because people want to know how to reduce teen pregnancy and stds without necessarily foregoing fornication.

Why does that make comprehensive sex ed the best way?

Well, apparently nobody wants teen pregancies or the spread of STDs. Thus, if there is an effective way of reducing these, this would at least be a good method (in that the effect matches two agreed upon goals).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which is pretty impressive, since the teen pregnancy rate was so much higher in the 1950s than it is today. I suppose a higher percentage of them were teen brides and didn't stand out. Some were simply sent away, though. I'm glad we don't do that today.

It's a many-faceted subject.

Marriage, and motherhood, right after high school was pretty common back then. Also there was no birth control other than self control. The use of the 'rhythm method' just ensured a good supply of musically inclined kids.

 

[Cearbhall]

It's a many-faceted subject.

Marriage, and motherhood, right after high school was pretty common back then.

Yeah, I just found a chart that shows both trends for teens:

(x)

 

[patricius79]

You can read the methodology if you so wish.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Scientists are not the antithesis of Christians. Many of them are Christian, for starters.

The CDC is probably the most objective source there is.

Why is the CDC "probably the most objective source"?

 

[patricius79]

Yeah, I just found a chart that shows both trends for teens:

(x)

I looked at that link, and am trying to process it. It claims that the decline in birth rate is not connected to abortion. But I find that hard to believe.

Also, the statistic only goes back to 1950, when the sexual revolution--I suspect, in many ways--was already getting going.

I know that the percentage of babies born out of wedlock has incresaed from 5% to 40% since 1960.

 

[Cearbhall]

One of my favorite authors, Mary Rosera Joyce, talks about how girls will give sex in order to get love. And that boys will give words of love (not actual love) in order to get sex.

Some girls just want sex, though.

 

[patricius79]

No, I don´t.
But it seems like you pretend that you are looking for empiricistically valid reasons to justify your moral preconceptions.

So what is your standard for evaluating evidence, specifically in regard to what should be taught in sex ed?

 

[patricius79]

Why are you asking me this question again and again when I've already answered it? You demonstrated in post #102 that you understood what I was saying. I'm not going to say it again.

It seems like your argument is circular. It seems like your argument is just assuming that sex ed should simply reflect what the majority of people want, and then getting frustrated when I question this.