If kids really want to be scared straight about the evils of sin, they can always go to one of those “Hell Houses” that spring up at Halloween. Among lots of other truly horrific things, they show “a homosexual dying from AIDS,” showing not only the evils of sex, but of homosexuality to boot! It’s two-for-one day at your local church-sponsored haunted house… :rolleyes:
Esprix
When I posted my question, Billy, you had not posted the information, or confirmed that Aeryn’s link was relevant to your allegations.
Upon review, I would not say this qualified as “misinformed nonsense.” I would say “mischaracterized” would probably be more accurate.
Yes, and that the conclusions of that approach ‘working’ to disuade kids from a life of crime were faulty. Further, that a balanced approach, vs. ‘let’s scare’em’ did work.
**Bill, ** unless your children never go outside, never read any books or watch TV, there will be some ‘mixed messages’ about sex.
Regarding what specific rights you have as a parent? well in my state/school district, the materials and information used in the sex ed classes are always available to be viewed by the parents, before the classes are taught. If I wished that my son not be included in the sessions, there was a simple form for me to fill out and he wouldn’t be there. I would suspect the same kind of thing is available in your state as well.
So, the set up is: we all seem to want to reduce:
SOME also seem to want to
3. Reduce the number of teens engaging in sexual behavior (frequency)
4. Advance the age of first sexual experimentation among teens.
Data exists that suggests the balanced approach discussed here does significantly advance the first two aims, but admittedly does not effect points 3 and 4. The same data, however, also suggests that the scare tactics and abstinance only programs do not reduce points 1 &2, nor do they have any effect on 3 & 4, either.
Absent any other suggested program, it seems prudent, that since we all agree that # 1 and 2 are things we wish to accomplish and one of these approaches actually works with that, that we should use that approach, especially since the other approach doesn’t seem to work for ** any** of the objectives.
Ben,
Rape is horrible thing. If people would pratice Christ’s teaching(even if not Christian) of Love thy neighbor as thyself), then we wouldn’t have rape.
The rest of your post made absolutely no sense to me. You want to teach kids anal sex…what?
Dogsbody,
Thanks for the nice words I try to raise my kids as good as possible. See I have two pretty girls so I am very concerned about this topic. I mean heck I remember what it was like when I was a boy in puberty. Sheesh I wish I could lock my girls up until get married.
Anyway I going to make sure that I am cleaning my guns when guys come over to see my girls. And I think I will even tell em if you hurt my daughter in anyway, I don’t care how much trouble I get in but I am going to hunt you down like the Arnond did Sarah Conner did in the Terminator GOT IT. My daughters are going love me for that huh. 
Anyway I understand alot parents have kids that shouldn’t be parents vicious circle huh? As a way of finding out what parents do and don’t want the kids taught about sex. Why not have the parents sign a form telling the school not to teach their kid sex ed?
wring
Sorry, but I don’t think that was borne out by the studies I’ve cited.
“Prevention programs that include information about delaying intercourse and about contraception can delay the onset of intercourse, reduce the frequency of intercourse, and decrease the number of teens’ sexual partners”
“In fact, six studies showed that sex education lead either to a delay in the onset of sexual activity or to a decrease in overall sexual activity.”
“overwhelming majority of studies over time, despite various methodologies and country of study, found no evidence that sex education encourages sexual experimentation or increased activity. If any effect was observed, it was virtually always delayed sexual intercourse or increased effective use of contraceptives, including condoms.”
Mithras the Sun-God
Is a solar myth they say,
But the Gnostics know
He obeyed the crow
And he killed that bull one day.
I think, Bill that the thing that frightens me the most about that last post of yours is how much you sound like my father. Well, except that he never had to threaten anyone, and the whole Christian thing.
I think that, rather than locking them away or threatening any boy they go out with, though, that you should try trusting them. Trust that they believe in the values you have instilled in them as they were growing up, and that they’ll live by them as adults.
And as both wring and I said, you can choose not to have your kids educated about sex by the state. I presume most states have such programs; if not, I imagine that we’d have heard about the ACLU case on it by now. 
Oops, I sit corrected, sorry Gaudere, so ** Bill** re- read my above post to say that ONE approach has a positive effect on **all ** objectives, and the other doesn’t.
Saw your latest posting, Bill - um, actually what you’re suggesting is what is **in ** effect, most certainly in my state, one other poster’s state, and most probably yours, as well. Now, you see, if you get the information first before you start believing your radio shows, you won’t get so riled.
**
Yeah, and if everyone were driven by intellectual curiosity, we wouldn’t have schools. What is your point?
I never said anything of the sort. What I meant is that you have promoted abstinence-only education on the grounds that abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control, and the only 100% effective way to prevent STDs. But there are two problems with that:
Abstinence isn’t really 100% effective, so your argument is based on a falsehood.
Once you admit that abstinence isn’t so special, you find that several other methods of birth control might compare favorably with it. If your concern is with preventing STDs and pregnancy, why not teach kids that masturbation is ok? For that matter, why not teach them to watch each other masturbating, and to put off actual sex for marriage?
Just out of curiosity, what is your objection to teaching kids about anal sex? I’m not advocating it by any stretch- it’s just that in terms of what you’ve talked about thus far, you’ve voiced no objection (AFAICT) to sex ed which would automatically exclude anal sex ed.
Also, do you feel that schools should be teaching kids to abstain from sex even within marriage? After all, most of the time, most married couples are using birth control.
-Ben
Wildest Bill, you said that you didn’t understand any of my post, except for the part about rape.
What part of the section quoted above did you not understand? What can I do to clarify these issues for you?
-Ben
[hijack]
What is frottage?
[/hijack]
Rubbing against one another while fully clothed. (Sometimes practiced by creepy guys on the bus.)
*Originally posted by Ben *
I agree with this. All I wanted to do when I was kid was play and sleep late.
I never said anything of the sort. What I meant is that you have promoted abstinence-only education on the grounds that abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control, and the only 100% effective way to prevent STDs. But there are two problems with that:
I think you are reaching this one Ben. Think about it if you taught a girl all day long about how to put condom on a dude I can bet money the rapist isn’t going to let her put one on him. “Excuse me Mr. hard up loser rapist dude before you rape me will please put on a condom.”
Man dude what kink of weird liberal crap is this. Are you trying to shock me? You want teachers to teach kids how to masturbate and watch each other. You have got to be just messing with my head.
Nope. Sex in marriage is awesome cause you don’t have to use a condom. Let’s be honest sex with a condom isn’t that great of sex for the guy.
Um, boy, Bill, where the heck did I put my clue-by-four? **Pre-marital Sex and Rape are not the same thing! In no wise does teaching a girl how to put a condom on (or a boy, for that matter) are you teaching them to protect themselves from getting a STD through rape. You’re changing the terms of the discussion, and I for one am not going to stand for this.
Ben isn’t reaching. You are.
Aargh! Preview preview preview…
[hijack]There was in fact at least one case I know of where the woman begged her rapist to put on a condom, and he did. The rapist’s lawyer tried to argue (unsucessfully, I believe) that the sex was consensual becuase they guy wore a condom at her request. I suppose you could tell the rapist you had AIDS or something to induce him to wear a condom–better than nothing. I doubt it would make the guy not rape you, though; from what I’ve heard that’s an ineffective tactic.[/hijack]
Hold on Dogsbody,
He was saying abstinence is a falsehood because of rape can spread sexually transmitted disease. What I was saying that abstinence only or abstinence with sex ed(showing the importance of condoms) are not going to help in a rape situation. In our skydiving analogy a rapist is kinda of like some whaco jumping besides you and cutting your cords that hold your chute.
While this is no doubt true, you still haven’t answered my question. How many times do I have to ask a simple question before you answer it?
**
You’re just putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say that we should teach kids to use condoms so that they can be raped more safely. I said that your claim that abstinence is 100% effective is false.
Would you care to address what I actually said?
Would you care to even read what I actually said?
**
Again, either you are just putting words in my mouth, or you played hooky on the day they taught logic.
You have made an argument. If that argument is valid, then it applies equally well to abstinence and to watching each other masturbate. Since you only consider the argument to be valid for one and not the other, then you have a double standard, and your argument collapses.
Sigh…
again, more evasions and distortions. In marriage, one can get pregnant. You maintain that the only 100% effective form of birth control is abstinence. Should married couples abstain from sex, rather than risk having an unplanned pregnancy?
Anyway, why don’t married couples have to use condoms?
-Ben
Actually, I thought the formatting came out nicely in the end. Consider it to be art trouvee…
Look, am I just not expressing myself well, or have I asked clear and simple questions which WB has simply failed to answer, and in some cases has even failed to acknowledge?
I’m getting an uncomfortable feeling of deja vu…
-Ben
I don’t know what to say after reading Gaudere hijack. Except that it was more evidence that the lawyer proffession is going down the crapper.
I didn’t quite understand. What were saying again about women telling rapist they have AIDS? Does it work or not? I think I am going to tell my daughters that one as a last ditch effort to escape the assault. It least the bastard(I’m sorry but if anyone ever raped one my kids they would never get to court)he would have to wonder later if he was going to die or not.
And Ben adequately defends his own point.
Because, Ben, if a married couple is not planning on having a child then it’s clearly the wife’s responsibility to take care of the birth control. :rolleyes: