I think you misunderstand what sex ed is, Bill. I took sex ed; it is NOT a how-to manual. Kids can probably figure out how to do oral sex on their own and schools shouldn’t be teaching them techniques, I agree. What schools should teach is what oral sex is (I’m not kidding, some kids think “oral sex” is talking dirty. If they don’t know what oral sex is, all the teaching you do about protection and risks is useless; they may know they should use a condom during oral sex, but that does them NO good if they don’t know what it is!), and what the risks are. The same goes for anal sex and masturbation. Not how to do it, but what it is and the risks involved.
Gaudere,
Can I have some time to ponder your last post? I say this because it was a good argument but I am tired and do not want to have Ben thinking I am weasleing out by not answering you ok?
WHAT?!? If this is your honest belief, then you are in desperate need of more help than the posters on this board can ever give you.
Catholics and Protestants are Christian. They may not practice the exact same system that you or I do, but they are still Christian.
Oxford Modern English Dictionary, second edition, hard cover, page 168, defines Christian as: of, following or believing in Christ’s teaching or religion (** so far so good for the Caths and Prots**); the religion of Jesus Christ (still ok); kind, fair, decent (** a stretch, but I give it an 85!**); an adherent of Christ’s teaching (yep, still all-inclusive).
And Bill, get it through your noggin that all other Christian denominations besides Catholic are generally referred to as Protestant. You see, back in history, there was something called the Protestant Reformation, and… oh never mind.
Frankly, I am appalled at the level of ignorance you continue to exhibit. I won’t even comment of the evolution issue, because as it has already been pointed out, you have proven your inability to rationally debate this issue in other threads.
Jeez, this makes my head hurt.
EJ -
Unless you’ve accepted Jesus as your personal savior (been “saved”), you’re not REALLY Christian.
sighs FWIW, I agreed with your post above this. Very well said. However, I been down that road before, so I’ll refrain from adding in TOO much. 
Hmm… that’s a lot different from my figure. Could you direct me to the original?
BTW, a little math:
assuming WB’s two daughters were intentional, and that he is using withdrawal in a fashion consistent with your 19% figure, then his and his wife’s chance of going for 14 years with no pregnancy is about 10% (ie 100% minus 19%, raised to the 14th power.) This means, in essence, that for every 9 couples saying “What fools we were!” we have 1 couple saying, “Hey- works fine for us!”
-Ben
This is all I ask- that if one replies to some arguments but not others, one should acknowledge that the other arguments have been made.
-Ben
Ej,
What Falcon said and thanks falcon.
Anyway actually EJ post concurred what I said about there not being as many Christians(the ones that believe that Jesus died for their sins)and they believe just because they are a member some religion it makes them a Christian. And that is not true.
And yes I know about Martin Luther and the protestant movement.
Bill, Falcon was being sarcastic.
You are dead wrong. Protestant denominations are just that, denominations, not religions.
And frankly kid, anyone who calls themselves a Christian, IS a Christian, I guess. I mean, no-one here seems to agree with you, yet some of us are Christians, and you claim to be a Christian as well, so…?
Whatever. Go play with the other fundamentalist ass-wipes.
Well, they could be Christians, just some people aren’t TRUE Christians, like we always say. People like Pat Robertson and Fred Phelps may belong to the religion, but they aren’t true Christians who follow the belief about doing unto others.
[Moderator Hat ON]
::sigh:: TAKE IT TO THE PIT IF YOU WANT TO INSULT. I mean it. This is my third warning in this thread, and I’m going to start deleting/editing posts if this keeps up.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Ben, I’ll see if I can rustle up the demographics stats I found. I don’t know if I kept the links, though.
Perhaps a hijack, but I saw this over at the onion, and it made me think of this thread:
http://www.theonion.com/onion3644/vatican_warns.html
A few random thoughts, since I’ve been wanting to post to this thread for a while and haven’t had the chance.
–You can mess up a good sex ed program in a hurry by focusing on HIV/AIDS. As was pointed out earlier, kids are not stupid. They know that their chances of contracting HIV through sexual contact with their peers is ridiculously small. (Bringing in a speaker from outside really doesn’t change that.) So when the prototypical STD in their mind is AIDS, it seems like a remote possibility.
Gonorrhea and chlamydia, on the other hand, are ridiculously prevalent in teenage populations, so much so that sexually active teens are to be screened routinely. (I’ve heard figures as high as 1/3.) Sure, they won’t kill you, but they can lead to some pretty serious sequelae–PID, infertility, etc. Multiple sexual partners and early intercourse are also independent risk factors for cervical cancer. There is plenty to talk about that is much closer to home.
Oddly enough, the hyperemphasis on HIV satisfies both sides of the political spectrum. Liberals can’t argue with HIV/AIDS awareness, and conservatives like hammering home the idea that sex=death.
–Bill, a straightforward question–if your daughters ask you for information about birth control, what are you going to tell them? Of course you’ll say that abstinence is the only foolproof method, as you should, since it’s pretty much true (aside from the outlying situations mentioned before). But would you be willing to give them more information than that? You should realize that by the time most kids would ask their parents about something like that, it’s a little late to be talking abstinence.
Another question–your (let’s say) 15YO daughter comes to Dr. J’s office for a routine physical. She asks me for birth control pills, and I prescribe them for her. You discover the pills in her bathroom, with my name on the package. What gague of shotgun do you use to shoot me?
(I can do that, by the way. I don’t have to prescribe them if I don’t feel it is appropriate, but I don’t have to have parental consent. Personally, I would prescribe BCPs to any teenager who asked me for them and who I thought was mature enough to understand the benefits/risks and to take them properly.)
–One of the doctors I’m working with right now gives a great bit of advice to parents around the time of the 2YO checkup. Kids around that age start to ask the names of various body parts, and it’s really important that you use the correct terms for them. Healthy attitudes about sex begin early, and generally do not include discussions of putting one’s hoo-hoo-dilly into another’s cha-cha.
Dr. J
Haven’t read beyond this post yet, but I have to go on record here. I am a parent of two daughters, and I absolutely oppose abstinence only or an evolutionless curriculum. I am certainly not sanguine about my daughters having sex in their teens, although it is statistically highly probable. Nevertheless, I am far less thrilled with the idea that they might, through ignorance, contract a potentially fatal STD or become pregnant. Yes, *I will make sure that they get the information. However, I also don’t want anyone else’s kids falling prey to ignorance, so I will also use my vote to try and make sure that all the other kids in my district get that same information too.
As for your right to have your children taught what you want them taught: You have the same right that every other parent has, the power of your vote and the opportunity to write letters or engage in protest. You can even exempt your daughter from sex ed classes if you like, at least in some places. (Hopefully her friends will pass the information along that she should have anyway, but I digress.) Beyond that, no. You do not have any sort of veto power of school curricula, nor should you. You can either send them to private school, provided you can find one to your tastes, or home school. But you simply cannot force your faith based notions of propriety on the children of all those other parents, many of whom actually want their children to receive, you know, an education.
Nothing to add here, I just snorted hot chocolate through my nose after reading this little gem.
Oh, and everything else you said was, uh, good.
FTR: yes, I am a parent, too, Bill. So, your assumption about ‘all those folks arguing against me weren’t parents’ was wrong.
My last post to you got lost in the latest hijack, too. In it, I asked that you look at the message that you’re giving your daughters:
- all boys want to get into your pants
- all boys will lie to girls in order to achieve #1.
- allgirls should wait til they’re married 'cause otherwise the boy will have gotten what he wanted and not marry her.
- But your mom and I really love each other.
Aren’t you concerned about the very direct conflicting message that you’re giving your daughters here? That every other male in the universe has these awful tendancies and shouldn’t be trusted, but trust your dad???
In other words, “When I grow up, I want a husband like my dad- one who is smart enough to realize that he’d better buy the cow, because he’s not getting the milk for free.”
WB, I will address your post to me later, but for now let me ask this:
- You have asked me whether I will teach my children about the Gospels. What would you have me teach them, precisely?
-Ben
I’m sorry Gaudere.
Won’t happen again. Just watch.
Does anyone else find WB’s handle to be a tad ironic?
“Wooooooo! I’m Wildest Bill, the most bible-readin’, abstinence-lovin’, God-sanctioned-sex-with-the-wife-for-the-purpose-of-procreation-havin’ cowboy in the West!”
Since my position is being covered prety well by the educated people here, this is all I have to contribute to the discussion.
Thank you, Varlos, you’ve inspired a thread. Well done. 
Esprix