He believes that sex education turns kids into rutting little beasts.
Speaking as one knowledgeable about 9 year olds receiving sex education in the classroom…
I can assure your from my anecdotal knowledge, that if a 9 year old “tried to get it on” with an 8 year old after hearing how babies are made…
I would advise a psychological counselling session. 100% of the boys in my son’s class reacted to the sex ed in two ways: “meh” or “yuck”. To react the way SA did is, IMHO, aberrant.
SA, just because you are wired in a screwed up way does not mean the rest of the population is equally screwed up.
Well, as goes Starving Artist, so shall go America.
Thank God you didn’t stumble onto Last of the Mohicans or the poor girl would have been scalped.
In teh 50s, kids didn’t know how babby formed. They need to do way instain 9 year olds who maek babby pragnent.
Sure looks like it.
That’s supposed to be a death panel? The Palintards are right, govenment can’t do anything right! Death panel? More like Nerf Pussy Panel.
I’m sure all the Palintards have already sent this poor girl a check - and they’re probably getting so much money from spaghetti dinners that she’s already ordered gold rims for her Escalade.
-Joe
In fairness, SA’s experience occurred during much more permissive times. Today’s helicopter parents would never let the pubeless horndog anywhere near their little angel.
Starving, were you molested as a child?
If it was, it was bad, and was therefore was done by a liberal. I didn’t know they had porn available to children in the 50s. One tiny crack in utopia it seems.
-Joe
If they didn’t have pr0n in the 50’s, then what did they use the internets for?
All they had was the native women in National Geographic, their fathers’ Playboy hidden under the mattress, and the lingerie ads in the Sears catalog. Do take pity.
World of Suburbia
You’d think Starving Artist’s example would make him MORE in favor of proper sex ed – Dad didn’t sit him down and explain to him exactly what happens – just hands him off some vague book and lets him figure it out himself. :rolleyes:
(If that REALLY happened. Which I highly doubt. I’m guessing he’s exaggerating, big time)
And once again, making alcohol illegal Starving Artist – they TRIED that, dumbass. It doesn’t look like “your generation” was taught much about history. As for drug culture, it’s obvious you never heard of the opium trade. And yes, drug addiction WAS EXTREMELY COMMON. Just different drugs.
Ha!!! Yeah right! I learned all those words from my grandmother!!! I remember her flipping people off in traffic all the time.
(And before Starving Artist starts shooting his mouth off, let me inform you that she was an extremely devout Catholic and a devoted mother and grandmother. She was a nurse’s aid and she volunteered at the local food bank. But she had a vocabulary that would make a sailor blush. God, I miss her. :()
I think I advised you to read the book, “Inventing the Victorians” by Matthew Sweet. Have you done so yet?
My cousins and I would look at my uncle’s Penthouses – at least, I THINK it was Penthouse – and giggle hysterically. “Ohmygod – boobs!!! Hehehehehe!!!” Back then, sex meant kissing when you were naked. And raise your hand if your first reaction to finding out the REAL meaning was, “Eeeew – my parents did THAT??? EEEEEEEEWWWW!!!” (Bonus points if you have siblings – which meant THEY DID IT MORE THAN ONCE!!!) 
I can’t remember - has SA addressed the fact that the example in his link happened under the current system that Republicans want to keep rather than the new eeeevil Obamacare system?
LOL
Oh wait…
First, it’s not uncommon for children to experiment with varying degrees of sexual behavior. It doesn’t mean that they are abnormal or perverted, and it didn’t start in the 60’s due to stashes of porno mags. Stages of sexual development have been described for over a century now.
What is abnormal is trying to retrospectively blame it on your father’s ham-fisted sex ed attempts in some pathetic effort at condemning all sex education efforts.
SEcondly, I thought it was weird that the article talked about “Medicare’s universal health care policy”. If it were universal, it wouldn’t be needs-based. After a little googling, it appears that Universal is the name of that service line for Florida Medicare, and the authors of the article were extremely careless or downright ignorant in repeatedly implying that it was “universal” rather than “Universal.” You can almost see how a rightarded person would pick it up and run to a message board in frothing outrage over “universal” health care.
Finally, I really love that Starving for Attention’s mea culpa re-reading of the matter was based in part on the fact that she had cobbled together money from friends and community members. Now that’s health care we can support! Spaghetti dinners for all! Can you pay for and eat enough spaghetti dinners to keep your community in good health?
He sure learned his lesson, though. Hasn’t cracked a book since.
See, this is the problem with blaming The Government. Because in this case The Government took control of her healthcare and is getting her the operation.
I’d bash SA a little bit at this point but it’d just be adding to the pile-on.
Oh, and jjimm, it’s Medicaid we’re dealing with here and not Medicare. Medicaid is a state-level government-run healthcare system for **poor **folks, Medicare is a national-level government-run healthcare system for **old **folks.
A point on this. American taxpayers do not fund public schools because they are parents. The rationale for “universal schooling” (so to speak) is that the society as a whole is better off if a certain minimum level of education is provided for all children. If a parent chooses to send his child to a private school, or to homeschool–or if he has no children–that really has nothing to do with the postulated social benefit that he receives from everyone else’s children receiving at least minimal schooling.
Now, I understand there are many problems that could be raised about the American public school system. I happen to disagree with the specific way that taxes to support schools are assessed, and funding allocated. There are many, many obvious failings in the operation of the schools themselves. Those are separate issues.
As it happens, I have a child in public school currently, and another who will be going next year. They are fortunate to attend what is reckoned a very good school, for our area. But my taxes aren’t to pay for their education; they’re to pay for the education of all the kids. That much of our system, at least, is exactly as it should be.