Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 12/19/2005 7:18:50 PM EDT
DO NOT HOTLINK!

http://www.takeissuetakecharge.org/


Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:19:39 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:21:38 PM EDT
Not In My State: Sample Letter
September 21, 2005

Dear Superintendent,

In recent years, the number of programs and schools teaching abstinence-only-until-marriage curricula has increased. Research shows that these curricula, which deny young people crucial information they need to prevent pregnancy and protect themselves from sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), are ineffective and dangerous. To ensure the health of young people throughout Missouri, we ask your assistance in keeping these unsafe programs out of our schools.



Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:22:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:22:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
DO NOT HOTLINK!

http://www.takeissuetakecharge.org/





actually, while phrased poorly, what it is trying to say is true.

That is, abstinence programs in schools correlate with a higher level of STD transmission and pregnancy among kids than standard "safe-sex" education programs.

The issue is: presuming one does not remain abstinent due to societal pressure, is one safer with a program that teaches effective tactics at avoiding STDs and pregnancy via condom and birth control use, or a program that basically just says,"okay kids, just don't do it".
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:23:35 PM EDT
Keep your damn legs closed.

I do.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:24:23 PM EDT
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:26:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:28:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.



Oh BS.

Uganda has one of the lowest AIDs rates in Africa, along with Senegal.

Abstience is huge there.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:29:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.



Oh BS.

Uganda has one of the lowest AIDs rates in Africa, along with Senegal.

Abstience is huge there.



maybe care to think that it is because abstinence is held up there with the threat and punishment of death by the Muslims and Christians there ?
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:30:18 PM EDT
Not that I have read.

There are big abstience only campaigns and people are smart.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:31:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.



I was born and raised in the South. My mother and father (and I) believe all that "claptrap".
I never had sex while I was a teen. I never got an STD.

Maybe you should shut your claptrap before you give everyone in this thread Gonorhea.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:34:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner: 0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Actually the reason why there is more STD and teenage pregnancy is because of ghettos and illegal aliens. The North has a declining population so we don't care what those unbelievers think.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:34:37 PM EDT
The point is you can control yourself.

The ACLU seems to think that kids should and can have sex anytime and everytime.


Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:35:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.



I was born and raised in the South. My mother and father (and I) believe all that "claptrap".
I never had sex while I was a teen. I never got an STD.

Maybe you should shut your claptrap before you give everyone in this thread Gonorhea.



Huh, interesting. I didn't screw around either. Neither did my sister, or my wife, or HER sister, or my brother-in-law. No problems with any disease or pregnancy.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:35:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:38:43 PM EDT by david_g17]

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.



I was born and raised in the South. My mother and father (and I) believe all that "claptrap".
I never had sex while I was a teen. I never got an STD.

Maybe you should shut your claptrap before you give everyone in this thread Gonorhea.



+1. same here.

we have katrina evacuee types down here raising our STD rates.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:36:03 PM EDT
STD and safe sex issues should be taught along side abstinence programs. Ignorance is a bad thing.

Let the kid have ALL the information and let them decide.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:36:10 PM EDT
Reminds me of the old saw about the only truly effective birth control (or STD prevention) is and aspirin.

Held firmly between the womans knees.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:37:02 PM EDT
It's easy:

'NO SEX= NO STDs'

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:39:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LonePathfinder:
STD and safe sex issues should be taught along side abstinence programs. Ignorance is a bad thing.

Let the kid have ALL the information and let them decide.



why not let the PARENT decide how to RAISE his/her own kids?
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:39:56 PM EDT
So I am going to get an STD by abstaining?

I'm going to cover myself in a 6ft tall condom with 1" thick walls and live in a cave for the rest of my life. Maybe I will avoid AIDS.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:41:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:42:15 PM EDT by The_Macallan]

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.

Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:41:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By LonePathfinder:
STD and safe sex issues should be taught along side abstinence programs. Ignorance is a bad thing.

Let the kid have ALL the information and let them decide.



why not let the PARENT decide how to RAISE his/her own kids?



I agree, but most parents don't want that responsibility.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:41:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By LonePathfinder:
STD and safe sex issues should be taught along side abstinence programs. Ignorance is a bad thing.

Let the kid have ALL the information and let them decide.



why not let the PARENT decide how to RAISE his/her own kids?



Most parents don't care if their kid screws around at 15
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:42:19 PM EDT
i don't see how anyone can be against teaching facts in sex-ed classes. they shouldn't say, "if you have sex, use a condom", but rather "condoms reduce the chance of spreading STDs"
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:43:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.


It's called self control. Any one worth a damn has it.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:44:28 PM EDT
Fuel man,

That just falsely gives the impression that condoms will prevent any problems with premarital sex.

Condoms reduce spreading STDs compared to what?
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:45:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
It's easy:

'NO SEX= NO STDs'


Yeah but what about all the great benefits of instant-gratification and sexual indulgence that teenagers having sex as much as they want can bring?

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:46:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
The point is you can control yourself.

The ACLU seems to think that kids should and can have sex anytime and everytime.





Exactly.
And saying otherwise is foolish.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:48:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:49:36 PM EDT by fossil_fuel]
no one is saying otherwise.

where i went to school, i was taught "the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, but if you do choose to have sex, please use a condom, they are NOT perfect but it is a lot less risky than to go without"

anyone who has a problem with that has some issues, because it's the TRUTH, and i damn sure want the truth to be taught in schools.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:48:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:49:27 PM EDT by CRC]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By CRC:
It's easy:

'NO SEX= NO STDs'


Yeah but what about all the great benefits of instant-gratification and sexual indulgence that teenagers having sex as much as they want can bring?




It's all temporary and hollow.

Sex was designed by God for marriage between 1 woman and 1 man as a gift to their relationship.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:48:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Keep your damn legs closed.

I do.




But you sure spend alot of time on your knees......
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:51:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Fuel man,

That just falsely gives the impression that condoms will prevent any problems with premarital sex.

Condoms reduce spreading STDs compared to what?



I heard once that research has proven that 5% of condoms fail. As STDs can be fatal, I wonder how many people would be willing to jump a parachute with a 5% chance of failure? Or partake in anything else that is life threatening....with a 5% failure rate.

Abstainence has a 0% failure rate.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:52:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:54:01 PM EDT by CRC]

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no one is saying otherwise.

where i went to school, i was taught "the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, but if you do choose to have sex, please use a condom, they are NOT perfect but it is a lot less risky than to go without"

anyone who has a problem with that has some issues, because it's the TRUTH, and i damn sure want the truth to be taught in schools.



Why should schools be promoting risky behavior?

It should be 'Don't have sex unless you get married!"

That's it. DO NOT HAVE IT PERIOD.

Condoms still have a chance for failure.



Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:54:18 PM EDT
however, the fact of the matter is that many of them are going to have sex no matter what they are taught in class. if they know how to properly use a condom, many cases of STDs and unwanted pregnancy can be prevented.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:55:34 PM EDT
i fail to see how it's promoting risky behavior at all. in health class i was also taught, "many IV drug users get HIV from dirty needles, but this can be prevented by using clean needles." did this knowledge make me any more likely to try IV drugs? i think not.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:56:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no one is saying otherwise.

where i went to school, i was taught "the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, but if you do choose to have sex, please use a condom, they are NOT perfect but it is a lot less risky than to go without"

anyone who has a problem with that has some issues, because it's the TRUTH, and i damn sure want the truth to be taught in schools.



Why should schools be promoting risky behavior?

It should be 'Don't have sex unless you get married!"

That's it. DO NOT HAVE IT PERIOD.

Condoms still have a chance for failure.






+1.

it's like teaching kids "drive slowly when you drive drunk" and complaining with the argument "they're gonna do it anyway, we may as well minimize the risk they take."
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:57:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2005 7:58:13 PM EDT by fossil_fuel]
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all, and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:59:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.

Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.



actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:59:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:

Originally Posted By CRC:
Keep your damn legs closed.

I do.




But you sure spend alot of time on your knees......





kneepads.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:00:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.



isn't the minimum drinking age 21?
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:00:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no one is saying otherwise.

where i went to school, i was taught "the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, but if you do choose to have sex, please use a condom, they are NOT perfect but it is a lot less risky than to go without"

anyone who has a problem with that has some issues, because it's the TRUTH, and i damn sure want the truth to be taught in schools.

Why should schools be promoting risky behavior?

It should be 'Don't have sex unless you get married!"

That's it. DO NOT HAVE IT PERIOD.

Condoms still have a chance for failure.


You're operating under the false assumption that those in charge of public education DON'T want children fucking each other.

If you simply correct your initial error and begin with the premise that Leftists in charge of Public Education WANT children fucking each other as much as possible, then it all becomes clear and the only question then is how to make those adolscent sexual encounters as "low-risk" as possible WITHOUT, of course, infringing at all on the promiscuity or frequency of teenage sexual contact.

Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:00:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.

Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.



actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.



no one's saying NEVER have sex.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:01:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
i fail to see how it's promoting risky behavior at all. in health class i was also taught, "many IV drug users get HIV from dirty needles, but this can be prevented by using clean needles." did this knowledge make me any more likely to try IV drugs? i think not.



Many WILL percieve this as a "safe" way to have pre-marital sex. "Safer" will become "safe" in their minds.


There is no "safe" sex outside of monogamy.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:03:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By olyarms:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:
So I wonder what the STD rate is among those who practice abstinence...



0%; however, expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.


It's called self control. Any one worth a damn has it.



apparently conservative teenagers have less self control that their liberal counterparts. Check out the STD and teenage pregnancy rates of any first world country, and you will see we lead by a clear margin.

Just because you and others here have self-control, doesn't mean that millions of teens in this country do not.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:03:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no one is saying otherwise.

where i went to school, i was taught "the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy is abstinence, but if you do choose to have sex, please use a condom, they are NOT perfect but it is a lot less risky than to go without"

anyone who has a problem with that has some issues, because it's the TRUTH, and i damn sure want the truth to be taught in schools.

Why should schools be promoting risky behavior?

It should be 'Don't have sex unless you get married!"

That's it. DO NOT HAVE IT PERIOD.

Condoms still have a chance for failure.


You're operating under the false assumption that those in charge of public education DON'T want children fucking each other.

If you simply correct your initial error and begin with the premise that Leftists in charge of Public Education WANT children fucking each other as much as possible, then it all becomes clear and the only question then is how to make those adolscent sexual encounters as "low-risk" as possible WITHOUT, of course, infringing at all on the promiscuity or frequency of teenage sexual contact.




That depends.

A lot of school districts in conservative areas promote abstinence only curiculums
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:03:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.



isn't the minimum drinking age 21?



of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:04:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.



isn't the minimum drinking age 21?



of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.



And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:04:34 PM EDT
hey, we can't stop it; might as well embrace it.

i don't see anything wrong with the following story.

http://www.wftv.com/news/5536541/detail.html

H.S. Students Accused Of Having Oral Sex In Classroom

POSTED: 3:39 pm EST December 14, 2005

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Three high school students are facing criminal charges after a teacher said they were involved in oral sex in the classroom.

Christopher Lemay, 18, is accused of paying a 16-year-old-girl to perform the act on another boy at Sandalwood High. The names of the underage students are not being released..

Sandalwood administrators said the act happened under a table in a large class full of students, so the teacher had limited visibility.

The news is catching even veteran educators by surprise.

"It is not indicative of any school in Duval County," said Acting Principal Jack Shanklin. "I've been in education a long time and I have never seen a situation like this in any educational setting."

All three students have been assigned to alternative schools.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:05:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
i fail to see how it's promoting risky behavior at all. in health class i was also taught, "many IV drug users get HIV from dirty needles, but this can be prevented by using clean needles." did this knowledge make me any more likely to try IV drugs? i think not.



Many WILL percieve this as a "safe" way to have pre-marital sex. "Safer" will become "safe" in their minds.


There is no "safe" sex outside of monogamy.



apparently you haven't been in a high school health class recently. at least where i went to school, the fact that "CONDOMS ARE NOT 100% EFFECTIVE, THEY DO FAIL SOMETIMES, THE ONLY WAY TO BE 100% SURE IS TO NOT HAVE SEX" was repeated DOZENS of times. even the spaced-out dumbasses in the class got the point.
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 8:05:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By fossil_fuel:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.



isn't the minimum drinking age 21?



of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.



And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.



exactly - so we should spend time/money training them to drive safely drunk.

I'd prefer they know and understand that they should drive more slowly.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top