Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Buster;708963]As long as Saden has an active password, personal attacks will fly...you should have known that. :D[/quote]

Serious question, have you ever been clinically diagnosed? It doesn't hurt to find out what is wrong with you, it's not the 1950s and there is no stigma associated with it anymore.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;708973]lol you knew the shitstorm you were creating. You started off with your typical attack on liberals.

Perhaps my take on the 50s isn't accurate. Things weren't all that much different in the 50s. People were just better at keeping things private.

I should have referred to the stone ages. You and buster can probably relate better to that time. ;)[/quote]

Of course, any criticism of disagreement with a liberal idea is "attacking".

Sounds like the President...disagree with him and he'll threaten to "kick our @ss".


I don't take offense to being called old-fashioned when it comes to morality or principles.

Interesting how so many of the non-parents here want to dictate the way kids are to be taught.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;708973]lol you knew the shitstorm you were creating. You started off with your typical attack on liberals.

Perhaps my take on the 50s isn't accurate. Things weren't all that much different in the 50s. People were just better at keeping things private.

I should have referred to the stone ages. You and buster can probably relate better to that time. ;)[/quote]

I few months ago I watched a few episodes of All in the Family and I Love Lucy....man, nothing has changed...same shit, different decade.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=saden1;708981]I few months ago I watched a few episodes of All in the Family and I Love Lucy....man, nothing has changed...same shit, different decade.[/quote]

Two great shows by the way.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Buster;708979]Of course, any criticism of disagreement with a liberal idea is "attacking".

Sounds like the President...disagree with him and he'll threaten to "kick our @ss".


I don't take offense to being called old-fashioned when it comes to morality or principles.

Interesting how so many of the non-parents here want to dictate the way kids are to be taught.[/quote]

Not trying to dictate anything. I didn't realize that having a kid was a prerequisite for chiming in on this conversation. If that's the case I'll bow out until I do have one, pretty sure my opinions aren't going to change though.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I was just thinking, how is a 1st grader supposed to use a condom in the first place? I mean what's he going to do, tie it in a knot?

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]I guess i think its okay. If you put a age limit on it, say 6th grade, then 6th graders are going to think its okay to or feel pressure into having sex. If you just make condoms available for all students then nothing changes from year to year and there wont be mentality of "im entering 6th grade time to get some condoms and bang Stacy". Same thing if you put parent notification on it. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Im not sure if schools should provide condoms in the first place though. Maybe a better solution would be to have a government facility (like fire station, or police station), give out free condoms no questions asked. At the end of day its a public health issue, and if they want to limit sodium in our foods then I guess they should be able to force condoms on us too. [/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I'll come back on this argument now. I had no idea such a shitstorm would ensue.

I'm not sucking up, but Matty really is right. It's not the 1950's anymore. It's gonna blow your mind, but kids know what sex is. they want to have it. they choose it for themselves.

I dont condone it, but if they are going to do it, they need to be safe and know the risks involved.

This bothers me personally because i see the girls around this neighborhood, they have to be no older than 14 and they parade around showing off their shit. And it's not that they don't know, they want to. They want men to check out their asses when they wear bikinis and show cleavage. they know exactly what they are doing.

Any boy who has discovered their private parts are gonna want in on it to, regardless of his age. it isnt hard to figure out.

Other people want to try and shelter their children and keep them "innocent", and that's nobile, but kind of foolish. Kids need to know the consequences of their actions, and the only way i would know of to hide them from the world is like to join some cult or something that teaches you everything is bad...

I'm not busting on anybody, but maybe sex education for kids is a good thing, if it prevents the spread of disease and middle school pregnancies...

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=budw38;708948]Exactly , the schools SHOULD NOT be monitoring , or" encouraging" sexual activity ... the school should not be undermining the parents . By giving the kids condoms , the school is monitoring , interfering with parenting . So , if a teacher gave a kid a bottle of seagrams to a student , but provided a seatbelt and buckled it for him before he drove on one of our public roads , we should be greatful for " service provided " ? We are talking about 6 year olds , if the school gives a 6 year old a condom , they are now the problem , just as a school giving a kid alcohol , cocaine or a loaded gun . Just curious to those who think the schools should be giving condoms to six year olds . If a 6 year old was getting bullied everyday , would you be ok with the school giving the kid a gun to protect himself ??[/quote]

We're talking about giving a safety device to a child, and you relate that to giving guns, drugs and alcohol to children? Reach a little farther...

[quote=Buster;708953]Absolutely not...but instructions and encouragement to try it should not be in their lives.

Knowing how Mommy and Daddy made their baby sister is a far cry from getting an "insert Tab A into Slot B" sheet and a free condom to further engage the curiosity.

Some lessons are best left to parents to teach. Religion, sex and politics are among them.

Let the schools teach math, English and how to play kickball.[/quote]

Nobody is encouraging sex -- they're encouraging safety, if anything.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I was going to chime in but any debate with 1st and Buster is like riding one of these:

[IMG]http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_g_4mPcMAn_y5M:http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/06/11_06_13---Merry-go-round--The-Hoppings--Newcastle-upon-Tyne_web.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;709001]We're talking about giving a safety device to a child, and you relate that to giving guns, drugs and alcohol to children? Reach a little farther...



Nobody is encouraging sex -- they're encouraging safety, if anything.[/quote]

Safety device ha ha ha ha :woot: I'm going to use that one tonight. Hold on baby, let me put on one of these "safety devices". Oh GD you liberals are a trip. Ha ha ha

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

P.S. I am running a pool for the rest of you: I will cover all bets at 2 to 1 against.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709014]I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.[/quote]

Children shouldn't be having sex.

No, the welfare of a child is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

#1 - kids no sexy time - agreed. There should be no problem reaching a group consensus on this one.

#2 - kids are the responsibility of parents and society at large. No way we will reach a consensus here.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709014]I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.[/quote]

Haha, nice. I can agree with both 1 and 2, but I have never really been arguing that point anyways.

If it makes any difference, the point I was arguing is censorship really. If/when I have kids, I will not be concerned about sheltering them from information, but instead I will strive to teach them critical thinking so they may be able to make their own reasonable conclusions. Exposure to information is not the problem as I see it. However, it is each parent's right to teach their kids how they like, and to shelter them if they like.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[url=http://wjz.com/national/school.condom.policy.2.1772020.html]Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick Asks Provincetown's School Committee To Revise Condom Policy - wjz.com[/url]

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

Just remember what's been done in the name of security and for the public good.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;709017]Children shouldn't be having sex.

No, the welfare of a child is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.[/quote]

And right out of the gate we have a fail. You even going to try TTE?

No.2 said that "sexual activity of children is a public health issue [I]that affects[/I] the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” If a child (however you define it) is sexually active, you don't think this has [I]any[/I] effect on the public health i.e. the transmission of STD's, increased poverty rates, higher educational costs?

Your statement about parental provision for the welfare of the child relates to the appropriate [I]solution[/I] to a public health issue. Before we get to the solution, however, I just want to see if we can agree on the problem. Do you see children having sex as a problem for society as a whole? Is it your belief that children's sexual activity has no [I]effect[/I] on our society's public health, that any ill effects from the activity will harm only those actually engaging in it? If kids start having sex, it will have no detrimental effect on the body politic?

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709023]And right out of the gate we have a fail. You even going to try TTE?

No.2 said that "sexual activity of children is a public health issue [I]that affects[/I] the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” If a child (however you define it) is sexually active, you don't think this has [I]any[/I] effect on the public health i.e. the transmission of STD's, increased poverty rates, higher educational costs?

Your statement about parental provision for the welfare of the child relates to the appropriate [I]solution[/I] to a public health issue. Before we get to the solution, however, I just want to see if we can agree on the problem. Do you see children having sex as a problem for society as a whole? Is it your belief that children's sexual activity has no [I]effect[/I] on our society's public health, that any ill effects from the activity will harm only those actually engaging in it? If kids start having sex, it will have no detrimental effect on the body politic?[/quote]
[IMG]http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_g_4mPcMAn_y5M:http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/06/11_06_13---Merry-go-round--The-Hoppings--Newcastle-upon-Tyne_web.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;709019]#1 - kids no sexy time - agreed. There should be no problem reaching a group consensus on this one.

#2 - kids are the responsibility of parents and society at large. No way we will reach a consensus here.[/quote]

No.2: As I said to TTE, before we talk about what the appropriate solution is and who's responsibilty it is, would you agree that child sex has an effect on the public health.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709027]No.2: As I said to TTE, before we talk about what the appropriate solution is and who's responsibilty it is, [B]would you agree that child sex has an effect on the public health[/B].[/quote]

of course

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;709031]of course[/quote]


Matty get out get out you are falling into their trap of endless blab.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

Kids got it tough these days. Not only do they have to draw inside the lines...now they have to worry about the clap.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=mredskins;709032]Matty get out get out you are falling into their trap of endless blab.[/quote]

who is "their"?

and why is trying to start a discussion from a point of consensus considered endless blab?

as for the discussion, good luck joe.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=mredskins;709032]Matty get out get out you are falling into their trap of endless blab.[/quote]

lol - quite frankly, and pretty obviously, I never thought Matty would be the problem.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709027]No.2: As I said to TTE, before we talk about what the appropriate solution is and who's responsibilty it is, would you agree that child sex has an effect on the public health.[/quote]

Do you agree that Jews and Slavs are detrimental to the racial hygene of the Aryan race? Do you agree that Christians are tools of the West to undermine the Party and should be eliminated? Do you think that Saddam Hussein has aerial vehicles cappable of spreading mustard gas all over the East Coast and should therefore be removed?

I don't subscribe to fear mongering. No, it doesn't take a village to raise a child. It takes a mother and father. Why is it people think they have the right and responsibility to stick their noses in other people's business? If they want condoms in Mass for their kids, fine. Dumb Northerners get what they deserve! While they're at it, how about a bong hit?

[url=http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3029689/Baby-bong-pic-sparks-fury.html#ixzz0rrsGMez2]Baby bong pic sparks fury | The Sun |News[/url]

Because children need to know about the dangers of drug abuse.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=souperbad;709035]Kids got it tough these days. Not only do they have to draw inside the lines...now they have to worry about the clap.[/quote]

:laughing-

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Buster;708950]Nice to see a voice of reason here. Hit the nail on the head. However, I'm not sure you're in as much agreement with Saden as your "exactly" statement would indicate...he seems to be open to handing kids condoms with their boxes of jumbo crayons and juice boxes.[/quote]
Thank you for the nice words . When I used the word exactly , I meant it as " exactly , the school should not be involved in parenting " . I understand to a degree condoms in high school < not saying it is right or wrong > . My feeling is more , schools teach math, english , science .... parents teach ethics , morels , tolerance ect.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;709036]who is "their"?

and why is trying to start a discussion from a point of consensus considered endless blab?

as for the discussion, [B]good luck joe[/B].[/quote]

Yeah, I know. Can't force anyone to agree. Was hoping, for a change, that people might [I]actually[/I] try looking at things differently.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I'm [I]the[/I] problem? :(

I'm playing along now.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;709036]who is "their"?

and why is trying to start a discussion from a point of consensus considered endless blab?
[B]
as for the discussion, good luck joe.[/B][/quote]

Seriously. Might as well resurrect the "Never Ending Thread" and just merge it with this, because it will go on forever.

Personally I think the notion of putting condoms in the hands of 6 year olds is waaaay beyond retarded. But every liberal on this site will just shake their head at anything else I have to say on the matter.

I'm somewhere in between Matty and Buster on this issue. I'll leave it at that. Delving into it any further will be wasted energy. I have and will continue to enjoy reading this thread though.

Happy Friday everyone. :)

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;709043]I'm [I]the[/I] problem? :(

I'm playing along now.[/quote]

Damn and I was trying so hard to be [I]the[/I] problem!

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;709014]I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.[/quote]

Parents want choice in what schools can teach their kids. I would support sending kids home with a letter telling parents what is going on in school and asking them whether they want their kids to attend informational session on sex education where condom use will be discussed and how to get a hold them for free at the school health clinic.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=saden1;709046]Parents want choice in what schools can teach their kids. I would support sending kids home with a letter telling parents what is going on in school and asking them whether they want their kids to attend informational session on sex education where condom use will be discussed and how to get a hold them for free at the school health clinic.[/quote]

That seems reasonable, but the Mass schools have circumvented the parents.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=GMScud;709044]Seriously. Might as well resurrect the "Never Ending Thread" and just merge it with this, because it will go on forever.

Personally I think the notion of putting condoms in the hands of 6 year olds is waaaay beyond retarded. But every liberal on this site will just shake their head at anything else I have to say on the matter.

I'm somewhere in between Matty and Buster on this issue. I'll leave it at that. Delving into it any further will be wasted energy. I have and will continue to enjoy reading this thread though.

Happy Friday everyone. :)[/quote]

The idea of a 6 year old with a condom is definitely way beyond retarded, but then again so is the idea of a 6 year old having sex in the first place.

I'm definitely not saying the answer is to hand out condoms like candy, but I also don't think the answer is to think telling kids "no" is going to stop them.

I'm more towards the middle of the argument than I may have let on. Either way, I just don't see an easy answer here.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

I actually don't have a problem with their policy:

[QUOTE]...which requires students to request the condoms from the school nurse, who will also provide counseling and information on birth control, including abstinence. The nurse can also deny condoms to students for many reasons, including age.
[/QUOTE]

But I do agree the parents should be notified and brought into the discussion as well.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

Sometimes I feel like I've crossed over into the twilight zone. I'm glad my grandfather didn't long enough to see this. He would've been so ashamed. :doh: To think we're actually talking about whether it's right or wrong to give children condoms. WTF? I'm out.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=Mattyk;709048]The idea of a 6 year old with a condom is definitely way beyond retarded, but then again so is the idea of a 6 year old having sex in the first place.

I'm definitely not saying the answer is to hand out condoms like candy, but I also don't think the answer is to think telling kids "no" is going to stop them.

I'm more towards the middle of the argument than I may have let on. Either way,[B] I just don't see an easy answer here[/B].[/quote]


There is no easy answer each child is a case by case basis. I will teach in my home about sex to my child and when the school does it to him it should be a refresher not a surprise. Sadly though many parents don't teach their children about sex and they learn either through experiment, pornography or from word of mouth, this is when schools need to step in at the correct age.

For the record I don't believe a six year old should have a condom but he/ she should know the correct terms for their genital and also understand how babies are made on a high level, not that they are flown in from a big bird.

I know I am getting sucked in but is a boring Friday afternoon at the office.

Re: Condoms For First Graders?
 

[quote=saden1;708971]I don't think encouraging is the right word...the school is there to interfere alright, to your benefit not detriment. Intent of the school was to give to all students...it's fine.

I don't know how we went from condoms to guns...maybe you were thinking "how I would feel about the school giving out guns to kids?"[/quote]
I think having adults < educators > giving anything to minors , especially under the age of 16 is asking for trouble . I will try and give a good example , if I as a parent were trying to keep my 6-12 year old away for the tempation/s to drink , have sex , fight , smoke , ect . My job would be much harder if the school were to make condoms , cig's , beer available . Maybe the school is not encouraging kids to have sex , however kids even up to 17 years of age will make bad choices , and giving them a reason to feel "protected "might drive them into a bad choice . I do not have kids , but I think we should leave kids under 12-13 alone < as far as the gov't / schools > , that is the parents responsibility as far as what age to have that type of discussion and what punishment might be handed out if they make the wrong choice . My point about the gun , was if the school is protecting a child by giving them condoms , then a kid who was getting beat up every day might need protection also , and I doubt any parent would be happy if the school said " you should be happy we are handing out guns , knives ect. to the weak kids ... its for their protection" . I know the comparison is a reach , just saying that IMO both would go to far , as the condoms were being given to six yr olds , 3 yrs removed from being a baby .