Abstinence

[Trashionista]

I have no relationship with my father and I have no problem with promiscuity. I think that is nonsense though if it were true it would be because they're more easily influenced by peers influenced by media because they have no better influence.

Again, you can't blame the media as the "one" [or one of two] issue. There are too many issues at force. The oversexed media can't be used as the paradigm for all people - just as a lack of parental relationship, or hormones, or Paris Hilton can't be used.

Plenty of women read French Vogue. A majority, I'd hazard to say, don't walk around topless in leggings, despite the fact its portrayed in a magazine.

And I think the media argument, personally, is non-sense. I myself watched films I shouldn't have when I was younger. I listen to music that would probably be considered sacreligious by more conservative people. I am also not promiscuous.

So, to blame the oversexed media for the problems of youth today isn't a justifiable argument.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Again, you can't blame the media as the "one" [or one of two] issue. There are too many issues at force. The oversexed media can't be used as the paradigm for all people - just as a lack of parental relationship, or hormones, or Paris Hilton can't be used.

Plenty of women read French Vogue. A majority, I'd hazard to say, don't walk around topless in leggings, despite the fact its portrayed in a magazine.

And I think the media argument, personally, is non-sense. I myself watched films I shouldn't have when I was younger. I listen to music that would probably be considered sacreligious by more conservative people. I am also not promiscuous.

While it may not be the only factor it is the BIGGEST. Because face it, kids don't listen to their teachers or parents. In fact, if they were encouraging it, maybe less kids would have sex. I'm kidding. The media is something that gives kids what they want at little cost. They're going to listen to it more than anything. I'm going to school with these teenagers you're talking about. I see how they react.

 

[Digit]

While it may not be the only factor it is the BIGGEST. Because face it, kids don't listen to their teachers or parents. In fact, if they were encouraging it, maybe less kids would have sex. I'm kidding. The media is something that gives kids what they want at little cost. They're going to listen to it more than anything. I'm going to school with these teenagers you're talking about. I see how they react.

You can't make a blanket statement like that. There are many factors that contribute to it, in one area the largest may be the media, in another area it may be something else. I don't disagree that the media may be the largest in your area, but it's not the same the world over.

Digit

 

[flicka]

When I went to high school, we had a 'sex ed' day where someone came in and started teaching the kids about having oral and anal sex. and giving tips

I'd like more details. Did you have to have permission? What school district? Who came in to tell you about sex? Is it still happening or was it a one time mistake by the district? Seriously, I've worked at high schools and there has got to be more to this than what you have given here.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Eh, I don't think masturbation keeps peoples sex drives under control, it just leaves them wanting more. At least from what i've seen. To people who touch often(Around my age, younger too probably.) usually think the best thing in the entire world is having sex and that is the main thing they want out of life is to get "laid". Just what i've seen. But I agree that people should know the facts about sex. Otherwise they wouldn't use protection, right? (If they are completely ignorant, but it's rare for someone not to know this stuff beyond middle school. Encouraging abstinence(sp?) is nice and all, but it seems an alien concept these days.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

I'd like more details. Did you have to have permission? What school district? Who came in to tell you about sex? Is it still happening or was it a one time mistake by the district? Seriously, I've worked at high schools and there has got to be more to this than what you have given here.

I don't know if there was explicit permission from the school about the speech, but the school did set up that event. Perhaps they didn't know the contents of the speech beforehand. There were other similar events about other topics, like anorexia or drug abuse...those were pretty good. The person who came to talk to us, I remember them saying that they are a counsellor. It was a one time event, and it was just something set up by the school itself, it was the principal's idea. It took place around the whole school, in the lunch room and in the library, and wasn't really an 'official' event set up by the district. lol oki this was around exams, and I was pretty preoccupied and didn't even know the event was happening until I got to school...so I don't know a lot about the details.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

You can't make a blanket statement like that. There are many factors that contribute to it, in one area the largest may be the media, in another area it may be something else. I don't disagree that the media may be the largest in your area, but it's not the same the world over.

Digit

It almost always leads back to the media. Even with peers, you can guess where the peers got it from.

The media and individual urges and occasionally peers, are about the ONLY place it can come from. Kids don't listen to their parents. And this isn't just me.

I'd appreciate if you would stop the "the schools are just trying to get God out of the curriculum" propaganda.

 

[chaz345]

Most sex ed programs never say something like "You guys are going to have sex anyway."

Maybe not overtly, but the implication is there.

Look at a lot of the posts in this thread. There are numerous one that say that kids will have sex no matter what we teach. It is nuts to think that that attitude never makes to the kids.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Maybe not overtly, but the implication is there.

Look at a lot of the posts in this thread. There are numerous one that say that kids will have sex no matter what we teach. It is nuts to think that that attitude never makes to the kids.

What was the last sex ed class you were in?

 

[JWNEWMAN]

Maybe not overtly, but the implication is there.

Look at a lot of the posts in this thread. There are numerous one that say that kids will have sex no matter what we teach. It is nuts to think that that attitude never makes to the kids.

Well, if you look at history that is a fact, kids will have sex, regardless. That's factual historical reality. Should we teach abstinence? Absolutely! However, we shouldn't ignore facts, should we?

 

[Digit]

It almost always leads back to the media. Even with peers, you can guess where the peers got it from.

The media and individual urges and occasionally peers, are about the ONLY place it can come from. Kids don't listen to their parents. And this isn't just me.

I'd appreciate if you would stop the "the schools are just trying to get God out of the curriculum" propaganda.

What? Where did you get the schools are getting God out of the curriculum from?

Digit

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

What? Where did you get the schools are getting God out of the curriculum from?

Digit

This OP seems to give off the idea that parents and schools don't care if kids have sex which is another part of the "no God in schools" nonsense that I hear at church. Encouraging sex is one of the arguments they use.

 

[Digit]

This OP seems to give off the idea that parents and schools don't care if kids have sex which is another part of the "no God in schools" nonsense that I hear at church. Encouraging sex is one of the arguments they use.

Well there are two things here.

First is that you specifically asked me to drop the 'no God in schools' idea, which I had never mentioned in previous posts at all. So if you are going to quote me and direct a reply to me, please at least make it about something I actually said.

Two is that it's a secular humanist notion that instead of advocating abstainence, we instead educate in how to avoid the unwarranted side-effects of pre-marital sex.

Three is that abstainence was clearly ruled out as a completely unrealistic solution. In this I can only see one proponent which is that God is not being considered as He is obviously outdated and irrelevant.

Lastly, the whole God in schools issue is a very real concern, I wouldn't expect you to agree or understand as to be honest I find about as much kindship in Christ with people that think and act like you, as I do with a brick. That's the harsh truth of the matter, whether it bothers you or not is something only you know.

Digit

 

[irateional]

Well there are two things here.

First is that you specifically asked me to drop the 'no God in schools' idea, which I had never mentioned in previous posts at all. So if you are going to quote me and direct a reply to me, please at least make it about something I actually said.

Two is that it's a secular humanist notion that instead of advocating abstainence, we instead educate in how to avoid the unwarranted side-effects of pre-marital sex.

Three is that abstainence was clearly ruled out as a completely unrealistic solution. In this I can only see one proponent which is that God is not being considered as He is obviously outdated and irrelevant.

Lastly, the whole God in schools issue is a very real concern, I wouldn't expect you to agree or understand as to be honest I find about as much kindship in Christ with people that think and act like you, as I do with a brick. That's the harsh truth of the matter, whether it bothers you or not is something only you know.

Digit

Except the schools aren't Christian and never should be. hence why they're public. Not private.

 

[Digit]

Except the schools aren't Christian and never should be. hence why they're public. Not private.

It never fails to stun me how a Christian can prefer to not have God involved in something.

Digit

 

[irateional]

It never fails to stun me how a Christian can prefer to not have God involved in something.

Digit

Because schools have these wonderful people called "non-Christians" upon whom it's wrong to force a belief system. Schools are not for teaching a dogma.

I respect human freedom.

You apparently, do not.

 

[Digit]

Because schools have these wonderful people called "non-Christians" upon whom it's wrong to force a belief system. Schools are not for teaching a dogma.

I respect human freedom.

You apparently, do not.

I've heard this before. If you truly respected human freedom you would advocate multiple belief systems being taught in schools, yet you don't. I've heard a similar argument about God in museums. I find it quite prophetic that we now have a website without God, museums without a mention of God and schools without Him too.

One day you will wake up to a world without God and you will probably have the audacity to wonder how you got there.

Digit

 

[irateional]

I've heard this before. If you truly respected human freedom you would advocate multiple belief systems being taught in schools, yet you don't. I've heard a similar argument about God in museums. I find it quite prophetic that we now have a website without God, museums without a mention of God and schools without Him too.

One day you will wake up to a world without God and you will probably have the audacity to wonder how you got there.

Digit

bwahahaha

For one, I'm not saying religion can't be mentioned. But you want to abandon teaching comprehensive sex ed because of a religious dogma that says abstinence is the only thing kids should know of sex. Have fun when your children as 16 and 17 year olds are having sex like rabbits. It'll happen, because as I've noticed, the kids that are raised in bubbles tend to be the ones that corrupt easiest and quickest.

I'm all for a historical teaching of religion, IE religious studies. Not a dogmatic faith based teaching though. Schools are not to teach personal morality.

Secondly, God can't leave this world. He'd deny his nature. Either you believe he is omniscient and omnipotent, or you don't. God isn't leaving anytime soon.

 

[Dannager]

It never fails to stun me how a Christian can prefer to not have God involved in something.

Tell me, Digit, do you believe that freedom is the inherent right of an individual?

 

[Dannager]

I've heard this before. If you truly respected human freedom you would advocate multiple belief systems being taught in schools

Nonsense.

Talk about a waste of our children's time. They can learn religion on their own time, in the places best suited to it: the home and the place of worship. That's not what our schools are for.