Maybe if they stopped hopping into bed at the slightest flirt, they wouldn't have this issue.
Sex is not "casual" - and education should start at home.
Any student (under the age of 18) that ends up pregnant in high school, should have a paternity test - then charge the father with RAPE as the student is an under age minor, under the age of consent. Any student over the age of 18 should be adult enough to accept responsibility as an ADULT for their actions.
Maybe if they stopped hopping into bed at the slightest flirt, they wouldn't have this issue.
Sex is not "casual" - and education should start at home.
Any student (under the age of 18) that ends up pregnant in high school, should have a paternity test - then charge the father with RAPE as the student is an under age minor, under the age of consent. Any student over the age of 18 should be adult enough to accept responsibility as an ADULT for their actions.
MT's Post is a classic example of the Right's desire to punish kids for having sex. MT assumes that any "underage girl" is being "raped" by an older man... (It never occurred to MT that the 'father' may also be underage.) The age of consent to have sex in NY is 17. Most kids will at some time be in high school and be 17.
Finally MT's post: "Sex is not "casual" - and education should start at home" was discussed at the beginning of this thread... Sex Education is primarily the responsibility of the parents. Some parents view PP's class as them informing their children about sex... yet MT wants to take this services from these parents.
Some parents are incapable or unwilling to inform their kids about sex. MT would throw those kids on the STD, or unwanted pregnancy heap, because of the actions of their parents. MT would punish these kids for omissions of inept parents. (MT would fit in well in Puritan times... Don't inform the child... Punish the sinner!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Some parents are incapable or unwilling to inform their kids about sex. MT would throw those kids on the STD, or unwanted pregnancy heap, because of the actions of their parents. MT would punish these kids for omissions of inept parents. (MT would fit in well in Puritan times... Don't inform the child... Punish the sinner!
Some parents are incapable of or unwilling to inform their kids about a WHOLE LOT of life’s problems. You might as well hand the kids over to the state at birth. Leaving such a responsibility like teaching children up to parents is WAY too much to expect. Just keep on herding them down the social services building to receive the helping hand out from the unionized government employee, since they are sooooo smart, they were actually able to achieve low level bureaucrat.
Maybe we should charge a surcharge to any Grandparent of any child who gets pregnant under the age of 18? $37 each occurence. Oh and a surcharge for the landlord of any said offender. Make it $74.
The problem is the society. Survival of the weakest. We provide incremental "assistance" to the "needy" when they have children or more children. More tax deductions, more section 8 assistance, more food stamps.......etc. Some of these women think their girl private is a clown car.
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid - John Wayne
TIP TO NEW VISITORS TO THIS FORUM - To improve your blogging pleasure it is recommended to ignore (Through editing your prefere) the posts of the following bloggers - DemocraticVoiceofReason, Scotsgod08 and Smoking Bananas. They continually go off topic, do not provide facts and make irrational remarks. If you do not believe me, this can be proven by their reputation scores or by a sampling of their posts.
For some reason, if ANYONE questions PP or their wording, they are right wing conservatives, they simply can't be an educated, concerned individual pointing out a blatant mistake.
In my opinion, the Shen parents ARE involved in their childrens lives which is evident by the low pregnancy rates of the school. These are pro-active parents and when they sense something is incorrect, they seek to correct and remedy the situation.
Planned Parenthood is in the Schenectady schools and they seem to have one of the highest pregnancy rates in the State. Is that PP failing or parents who don't care?
Again, there is a fact that there are women who use abortion as a means of birth control and someday that might be the 'lingo' which teens can relate to according to Box.
For some reason, if ANYONE questions PP or their wording, they are right wing conservatives, they simply can't be an educated, concerned individual pointing out a blatant mistake.
In my opinion, the Shen parents ARE involved in their childrens lives which is evident by the low pregnancy rates of the school. These are pro-active parents and when they sense something is incorrect, they seek to correct and remedy the situation.
I'm glad when someone points out a mistake in a serious matter like this. All I've heard is gossip... not the mistake. She said, that he said that some student said... I'd like to know the facts before I banish PP. I have yet to hear the official "mistake" that caused PP to be discontinued.
Some people think that PP is unnecessary at Shen, because they have such a very low rate of teen pregnancy... or Do they have a very low rate of teen pregnancy at Shen because of Planned Parenthood.
Comparing a rich (Shen) school system to a poorer (Schdy) school system is apples and oranges. IMO, PP is needed as a source of information and instruction in most school districts.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Shenendehowa fails sex ed January 8, 2012 at 6:01 am by TU Editorial Board Our opinion: A school district misses some key lessons of sex education: act responsibly, not rashly, and don’t give in to pressure to do things you shouldn’t.
Here’s a pop quiz for the Shenendehowa School District: You’re in a stable, long-term relationship with an organization that provides sex education. Some parents, though, are pressuring you to dump your longtime sex ed partner because of something they say your steady may have sort of said.
Question: Do you (A) succumb to pressure, or (B) get all the facts, consider what’s best for students and health education, and weigh whether a few distressed voices really reflect community sentiment?
The district chose “A” in a flap over Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson. After two decades of lecturing in Shenendehowa middle and high school classes, this widely respected organization has been dismissed over complaints from a couple of dozen parents, recruited through a church bulletin.
This looks a lot more like another culture war skirmish over sex ed than a legitimate complaint. The abrupt ouster of an organization that has served with no other major controversy in 46 schools in 12 counties suggests Shenendehowa acted precipitously and inappropriately.
Shenendehowa parents who want schools to teach responsible, accurate sex education would do well to show up at Tuesday’s Board of Education meeting and demand an explanation.
The fuss started in the fall when some parents pushed the district to get rid of Planned Parenthood, whose guest speakers talk to students, depending on their grade level, about abstinence, sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy prevention, sexual orientation and bullying. According to the complaining parents, some students were told that abstinence allowed for oral sex, and some high school classes had condom demonstrations without parents being advised they could opt their child out of the coursework.
Planned Parenthood says its curriculum, including, yes, condom demonstrations at the high school level, has been developed with the district and its health teachers over 20 years. The group doesn’t teach that abstinence does or doesn’t include oral sex; it encourages students to talk about what they think abstinence is, resulting in a wide range of definitions.
Although the district says it’s evaluating the issue, Planned Parenthood says it was abruptly terminated in October.
We realize some parents don’t want other people, and Planned Parenthood in particular, providing sex ed in public school. The district, however, should not be limiting curriculum to suit a few people. And if some parents were caught off guard, perhaps the district has communication problems to fix that have nothing to do with Planned Parenthood.
We suspect the vast majority of Shenendehowa parents recognize that comprehensive, realistic, fact-based sex ed is the best way to reduce teen pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The district, it seems, has forgotten that lesson. We suggest parents give it some remedial help when the school board meets at 7 p.m Tuesday at Gowana Middle School.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"The group doesn't teach that abstinence does or doesn't include oral sex, it encourages students to talk about what they think abstinence is resulting in a wide range of definitions."
Again, there is only one definition of abstinence.
Also, this definition of abstinence is all encompassing to both the straight, gay and bisexual community.
As well, check out PP's "Living with HIV" statements. No where does it state that a person who knowingly does not disclose their illness with a sex partner could be engaging in a crime. PP doesn't even state that a person with HIV has to disclose their illness prior to having sex with another person. Check it out - it's pretty disheartening.
"The group doesn't teach that abstinence does or doesn't include oral sex, it encourages students to talk about what they think abstinence is resulting in a wide range of definitions."
So, no "teaching" , just discussion leaders ... gotcha.
"The group doesn't teach that abstinence does or doesn't include oral sex, it encourages students to talk about what they think abstinence is resulting in a wide range of definitions."
Again, there is only one definition of abstinence.
Also, this definition of abstinence is all encompassing to both the straight, gay and bisexual community.
As well, check out PP's "Living with HIV" statements. No where does it state that a person who knowingly does not disclose their illness with a sex partner could be engaging in a crime. PP doesn't even state that a person with HIV has to disclose their illness prior to having sex with another person. Check it out - it's pretty disheartening.
I keep finding that Rachel's thoughts on PP don't match PP's own literature.
Rachel~ "The group doesn't teach that abstinence does or doesn't include oral sex, PP~ And some people define abstinence as not having any kind of sex play with a partner. This is the definition we use on these pages. Sounds pretty accurate to me. Being continuously abstinent is the only way to be absolutely sure that you won't have an unintended pregnancy or get a sexually transmitted disease (STD).
Rachel~ " PP doesn't even state that a person with HIV has to disclose their illness prior to having sex with another person." PP~ What If I Have HIV/AIDS? Consult a health care provider who has experience treating HIV/AIDS. Inform sex partner(s) who may also be infected. Protect your sex partner(s) from HIV by following safer sex guidelines.
I wouldn't expect to read a History text book and get all the answers about history. A teacher TEACHES. I wouldn't expect to find every possible answer to every question in a PP text either.
Because Rachel doesn't find certain passages that fit her view in a PP text, she assumes PP doesn't teach about that particular issue.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The only issue I have with PP is that they are confusing students with multiple, erroneous definitions of abstinence which inexplicably has only one definition.
That's my only issue here.
I brought up the issue with the HIV article because it does NOT inform HIV infected individuals that they could face criminal charges if they have unprotected sex with unknowing partners. Wonder why?
The only issue I have with PP is that they are confusing students with multiple, erroneous definitions of abstinence which inexplicably has only one definition.
That's my only issue here.
Abstinence, My medical dictionary says: 1 : voluntary forbearance especially from sexual intercourse or from eating some foods 2 : habitual abstaining from intoxicating beverages
While Dictionary.com defines it as: 1.forbearance from any indulgence of appetite, especially from the use of alcoholic beverages: total abstinence. 2.any self-restraint, self-denial, or forbearance. 3.Economics . the conserving of current income in order to build up capital or savings. 4.the state of being without a drug, as alcohol or heroin, on which one is dependent.
PP Defines abstinence as: Not having any kind of sex play with a partner.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
AND PP list 2 other definitions of what 'other people' think abstinence is...
PP says "it's the definition we use on these pages"..not the definition they chose, not the definition per the AMA....just the definition 'used' on the following pages.
Please, they can't even commit to the definition....
Again, good for Shen for taking a stand and I applaud parents for taking a stand where an error has been found.
AND PP list 2 other definitions of what 'other people' think abstinence is...
Yes they do. Many of the kids in the class may have that "OTHER PEOPLE" definition... as compared with PP who defines abstinence as NO SEXUAL CONTACT.
(Actually the PP site uses "SOME PEOPLE", not OTHER PEOPLE)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
