Ah, yes. Pat Bagley is an underappreciated national treasure. If you can, get his books of editorial cartoons. Or browse his website.
I got most of my education of LDS culture from Bagley’'s and Calvin Grondahl’s editorial cartoons. And from Orson Scott Card’s Saintspeak Dictionary.
Makes more sense, because young people can get in all sorts of romantic trauma ( <3 ) that doesn’t directly involve inserting tab A into slot B but is still serious stuff.
Here is a link to the Moontgomery County, Maryland, Grade 8 Health Education Curriculum. The “Family Life and Human Sexuality” section says:
Some of those (“Describe the process of pregnancy and birth”) are fairly described as biology.
I would dispute that “Discuss the social, emotional, and economic impact of teenage parenting,” is a biology subject.
No.
The answer is that calculus is uncontroversial. No one disputes that the first derivative of y=x[sup]3[/sup]+x[sup]2[/sup]+1 is y=3x[sup]2[/sup]+2x.
But “Sex outside of marriage is wrong,” and “Exploring your sexuality as a teen with different partners is natural,” are both concepts that different people might defend as accurate. Parents may not wish to have their values and morals in the area of sexual behavior contradicted by anything the public school would teach. No one, so far as I’m aware, has any unique or differing values and morals associated with contour integration.
My kids sex Ed is carefully structured to avoid value judgements. Teenage pregnancy is discussed in terms of the economic impact the teens will experience should they become parents while still in high school.
I think you misread me. Probably my fault, let me try again: The appropriate answer to a person saying, “Parents should teach their kids about sex,” is “No, that wouldn’t be good, because parents are largely ignorant about sex.” In the same way, the appropriate answer to a person saying, “Parents should teach their kids calculus,” is, “No, that wouldn’t be good, because parents are largely ignorant about calculus.”
Besides, there’s nothing controversial about luteal phases, menstruation cycles or how babies are conceived, either. This proposal isn’t to limit sex education to “just the facts, ma’am,” but teachers are given a global gag order instead. These people want a biology teacher to teach about the digestive system, the skeletal system and the nervous system, and then completely ignore the reproductive system so that people who don’t know anything about it can “teach it at home”.
Of course I understand WHY, I’m just saying it’s stupid.
Agreed, I think. The problem is that sex, as a domain, touches both biology and morality. The physical effects of a penis ejaculating in a vagina are uncontroversial; the moral and spiritual effects, not so much. So parents who are concerned about moral education object to certain teachings about sex, and even efforts to limit things to “just the facts” raises concerns because of the nexus between those facts and other, touchier subjects.
Couldn’t the same be said of teaching The Civil War? That to teach just the facts brings up moral education (slavery = bad) because the one is so intimately linked with the other?
I agree it’s incredibly difficult to divorce the two, and I do think teachers should take a cautious “some people” approach to treading those waters. “Some people believe that sex is so special it should be saved for after marriage and some people believe it’s okay to have sex with someone you’re not married to. Talking to your parents about that is the best way to learn what your family, community and maybe church has to say about that.”
I just don’t think completely silencing the subject is the answer to the problem of it being a really difficult subject to teach.
Heh. “Touchier.”
I would say the social, emotional & economic impact of teen parenting is either a social studies, health or economic subject. I would not be opposed to any of the three issues being raised in those classes, although, as I said, if a public school is going to discuss issues of morality, I would want to hear from a broad sampling of the public. I’m not entirely opposed to raising those three subjects in biology class, if the teachers think it would be more productive to provide a cross-curriculum approach.
What I am opposed to is a law preventing any discussion of the biology of sex, including the basics of sexual intercourse, sexual stimulation, and pregnancy and the prevention thereof. It’s one thing to say you want to teach the importance of certain social behaviors. It’s another thing entirely to forbid discussion of certain topics.
Here, by the by, is the bill in in question:
I suppose, except the proposition that slavery is bad is itself relatively uncontroversial.
One hole, plus two elaborate and elongated indentations.
It’s basic topology, people! 
The Bible says otherwise.
Yer from *Northern *Virginia, aintcha? Bless yer heart.
(It was still pretty controversial among some of my Georgian extended family not 10 years ago when I was still talking to them.)
Spiff, I think I love you. Yes, you are absolutely correct. There is only one hole through the human body, until people add their own. Everything else is cul-de-sacs.
Well, if you stick your dick in an actual beehive, I think THAT could count as birth control. At least for a while.
And of course, when more kids start having babies due to no sex education, Utah will double down and place even more restrictive sex ed limitations in order to curb the epidemic :rolleyes:
Are you kidding? Utah loves babies. The entire state is [del]indoctrinated[/del] taught that large families are the only way to get into heaven. Of course they want to get rid of all sex education, they want any knowledge that it’s possible to NOT have babies to be suppressed.
One thing about sexuality education is that your kid WILL get it from multiple sources. Only you are going to be a complete and consistent communicator of your values.
And some sources are better and worse than others. Some are great for certain topics. I.e. I wouldn’t have wanted to have heard about anal sex from my mom, but learning about it from friends for the first time, not a horrible source. My kids get that information in church :eek:, but I’m certain they don’t get it in the school curriculum, and while my friends weren’t the worst source, there are better. . On the other hand, depending on your friends for accurate contraception information, not great. Parents may, or may not be, good sources for the relationship part of the deal…but I hope my kids primary source for that part of it is not television.
I don’t trust the schools to be my kids only source of sexuality information, but I don’t trust the parents of my kids potential partners to be accurate and complete sources either. Exposing my kids, and their friends to a number of sources, and communicating our values, seems like the best for them developing a healthy sexuality.
Out of curiosity, I looked up the statistics.
Utah’s Vital Statistics
Births and Deaths
2010
Of the 52,164 live births in Utah in 2010, 9,891 were to unwed mothers (19% of the total number of births), and of which 2,270 were to teenagers (up through age 19), 4.25% of the total. If you include women through the age of 24, the total number is 5,851 or 11.2% of the total number of births. While this is below the national average, these are still not insignificant numbers.
IIRC, the percentage of those who receive the “abstinence only” education and remain virgins until marriage isn’t terribly great.
“Basic biology”??? But that sounds like…like…SCIENCE! Nooooooooo!
This is satire, right?