Condoms For First Graders?

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Kids are "getting started" at younger and younger ages these days. That's the reality of it.

Thanks to schools' sex education starting as early as Kindergarten, as well as Hollywood/MTV/etc.

If you make them aware of it younger, of course they'll be curious earlier.

Parents also have a large chunk of the blame, but now the reality is that kids are purposely being introduced to it at an artificially young age before they'd even be interested in it. Even children of the best parents are still learning about sex before they SHOULD and good parents are also being forced to explain it and answer questions coming from the education system. Parents should not have to teach a 5 year-old about sex...but because they're having sex education forced on them in school, the parents have to counter it.

Handing condoms to kids is not protecting them, it's enabling them and pushing them into curiosity they should not even be aware of so young.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Buster

Thanks to schools' sex education starting as early as Kindergarten, as well as Hollywood/MTV/etc.

If you make them aware of it younger, of course they'll be curious earlier.

Parents also have a large chunk of the blame, but now the reality is that kids are purposely being introduced to it at an artificially young age before they'd even be interested in it. Even children of the best parents are still learning about sex before they SHOULD and good parents are also being forced to explain it and answer questions coming from the education system. Parents should not have to teach a 5 year-old about sex...but because they're having sex education forced on them in school, the parents have to counter it.

Handing condoms to kids is not protecting them, it's enabling them and pushing them into curiosity they should not even be aware of so young.

You're in the dark ages bro. Seriously. This is 2010 not 1950.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

You're in the dark ages bro. Seriously. This is 2010 not 1950.

The society was far better off in 1950.

If that's supposed to be some kind of insult, you actually weakened your argument.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Buster

The society was far better off in 1950.

If that's supposed to be some kind of insult, you actually weakened your argument.

Just saying your thinking isn't based on reality. Sex ed is being forced on young kids, really? A lot of schools don't even have sex ed to begin with and if they do they aren't teaching it to elementary kids.

Kids are exposed to sex at young ages more than ever. To counter that you need to educate them and give them the proper guidance. What do you propose? Keep them in the dark and preach abstinence?

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Just saying your thinking isn't based on reality. Sex ed is being forced on young kids, really? A lot of schools don't even have sex ed to begin with and if they do they aren't teaching it to elementary kids.

Talk about someone in the Dark Ages. 20 years ago, I had it in 7th and 8th grade.

Now they ARE beginning as young as Kindergarten in some school districts. They're also teaching homosexuality.

A local middle school had a "Gay Day of Silence" where no one was allowed to talk outside of answering teachers' questions in class, so they can "understand and empathize" with homosexual students who are "forced to hide". A kid who chose not to participate by simply talking at lunch time was SUSPENDED for a few days. The irate mother called into the local news radio station. Apparently, this was a nationally-organized event.

We saw kids get suspended on Cinco de Mayo for weaing an American flag shirt and not pretending to be Mexican for the day.

If you can't see the public school has an agenda, I feel sorry for someone so blind/naive/worse.

I'm not sure where you're finding schools that do not teach it, especially in New York.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Buster

Talk about someone in the Dark Ages. 20 years ago, I had it in 7th and 8th grade.

Now they ARE beginning as young as Kindergarten in some school districts. They're also teaching homosexuality.

I'm not sure where you're finding schools that do not teach it, especially in New York.

Facts on Sex Education in the United States

Sex Education: Teens’ Perspectives

• By 2002, one-third of teens had not received any formal instruction about contraception.[9]
• More than one in five adolescents (21% of females and 24% of males) received abstinence education without receiving instruction about birth control in 2002, compared with 8–9% in 1995.[10]
• In 2002, only 62% of sexually experienced female teens had received instruction about contraception before they first had sex, compared with 72% in 1995.[11]
• Only one out of three sexually experienced black males and fewer than half of sexually experienced black females had received instruction about contraception before the first time they had sex.[12]
• One-quarter of sexually experienced teens had not received instruction about abstinence before first sex.[13]

Sex Education: Teachers’ Perspectives

• Sex education teachers were more likely to focus on abstinence and less likely to provide students with information on birth control, how to obtain contraceptive services, sexual orientation and abortion in 1999 than they were in 1988.[14]
• In 1999, one in four sex education teachers taught abstinence as the only way to prevent pregnancy and STIs—a huge increase from 1988, when the fraction was just one in 50.[15]
• The majority of teachers believe that topics such as birth control methods and how to obtain them, the correct way to use a condom, sexual orientation, and factual and ethical information about abortion should also be taught by the end of the 12th grade. These topics are currently being taught less often and later than teachers think they should be.[16]
• More than nine in 10 teachers believe that students should be taught about contraception, but one in four are prohibited from doing so.[17]
• One in five teachers believe that restrictions on sex education are preventing them from meeting their students’ needs.[18]
• Eighty-two percent of adults support comprehensive sex education that teaches students about both abstinence and other methods of preventing pregnancy and STIs.[19]
• Only one-third of adults surveyed support abstinence-only education, while half oppose the abstinence-only approach.[20]

Sex Education Policy

• Currently, 35 states mandate either sex education or education about HIV/AIDS and other STIs, but their laws tend to be very general. Policies specifying the content of sex education are typically set at the local level.[21]
• More than two out of three public school districts have a policy to teach sex education. The remaining one-third of districts leave policy decisions up to individual schools or teachers.[22]
• Eighty-six percent of the public school districts that have a policy to teach sex education require that abstinence be promoted. Some 35% require abstinence to be taught as the only option for unmarried people and either prohibit the discussion of contraception altogether or limit discussion to its ineffectiveness. The other 51% have a policy to teach abstinence as the preferred option for teens and permit discussion of contraception as an effective means of preventing pregnancy and STIs.[23]
• More than half of the districts in the South with a policy to teach sex education have an abstinence-only policy, compared with one in five of such districts in the Northeast.[24]
Government Support of Abstinence-Only Education

• There are three federal programs dedicated to funding restrictive abstinence-only education: Section 510 of the Social Security Act, the Adolescent Family Life Act’s teen pregnancy prevention component and Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE). The total funding for these programs is $176 million for FY 2006.[25]
• Federal law establishes a stringent eight-point definition of “abstinence-only education” that requires programs to teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong and harmful—for people of any age. The law also prohibits programs from advocating contraceptive use or discussing contraceptive methods except to emphasize their failure rates.[26]
• Federal guidelines now define sexual activity to include any behavior between two people that may be sexually stimulating, which could be interpreted as including even kissing or hand-holding.[27]
• New federal restrictions have been expanded to target adolescents and young adults between the ages of 12 and 29.[28]
• There is currently no federal program dedicated to supporting comprehensive sex education that teaches young people about both abstinence and contraception.[29]
• Despite years of evaluation in this area, there is no evidence to date that abstinence-only education delays teen sexual activity. Moreover, recent research shows that abstinence-only strategies may deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of unintended pregnancy and STIs.[30]
• Evidence shows that comprehensive sex education programs that provide information about both abstinence and contraception can help delay the onset of sexual activity among teens, reduce their number of sexual partners and increase contraceptive use when they become sexually active. These findings were underscored in “Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior,” issued by former Surgeon General David Satcher in June 2001.[31]

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

You're in the dark ages bro. Seriously. This is 2010 not 1950.

What a shit arguement. Maybe we need to head back to the 50's and the morals that people had back then because the way things are going now don't seem to work all that great. The more and more we have this free thinking that everything is good and ok the more our society goes to shit.

I'm sorry I started this thread today because I'm heading to Nags Head today and leaving right now as my wife and daughter just walked into my office. You guys should not attack each other personaly.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by firstdown

What a shit arguement. Maybe we need to head back to the 50's and the morals that people had back then because the way things are going now don't seem to work all that great. The more and more we have this free thinking that everything is good and ok the more our society goes to shit.

I'm sorry I started this thread today because I'm heading to Nags Head today and leaving right now as my wife and daughter just walked into my office. You guys should not attack each other personaly.

As long as Saden has an active password, personal attacks will fly...you should have known that.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Buster

As long as Saden has an active password, personal attacks will fly...you should have known that.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

What a shit arguement. Maybe we need to head back to the 50's and the morals that people had back then because the way things are going now don't seem to work all that great. The more and more we have this free thinking that everything is good and ok the more our society goes to shit.

I'm sorry I started this thread today because I'm heading to Nags Head today and leaving right now as my wife and daughter just walked into my office. You guys should not attack each other personaly.

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.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Buster

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.

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.

[Trample the Elderly]

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?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

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.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by saden1

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.

Two great shows by the way.