Condomns and Candy for Kintergarten Kids

[Care4all]

Which reminds me. When I was looking for information on this bill (which has essentially been buried by the press, btw) I came across a really interesting factoid: The federal government offers funds to states for the purpose of including abstention as a part of sex ed.

Did anyone realize that many states are REFUSING that money, and refusing to teach it? I find this sort of interesting. While the left whines, "Why do you want to deny your children KNOWLEDGE" they're actually turning away funds which would enable them to better educate kids.

They are committed to turning babies into sexual figures who are without rights, without standing, and who are considered expendable.

as many as 48 states i had read, took the federal money at one time or another, for an abstinence only program....it is now down to around 25 states, 13 of thise states offer BOTH the abstinence only course along with the comprehensive sex ed program, which still qualifies for the money....

alaska is NOT one of the states with an abstinence program so it does not get the federal money, but in 2009, they will be offering the abstinence course and get the fed money....

i read that states have dropped the program because their results showed it was not stopping or even reducing, teenage pregnancies....? But also read, that abstinence only courses can be taught along with comprehensive sex ed and the states would still qualify for the money and states are still refusing to take this money, more as their own statement and rejection of the abstinence program....

 

[AllieBaba]

But also read, that abstinence only courses can be taught along with comprehensive sex ed and the states would still qualify for the money and states are still refusing to take this money, more as their own statement and rejection of the abstinence program....

That's what I read, too.

In other words, they're withholding information from children, which is what the left always accuses the right of doing when the right attempts to de-sexualize children and remove sex from the classroom.

They're withholding information when they refuse to include abstinence in the program.

And they wonder why schools are going downhill, why parents don't want to participate any more, and why more and more are finding alternatives to public schooling.

 

[rayboyusmc]

They are committed to turning babies into sexual figures who are without rights, without standing, and who are considered expendable.

Total bullshit again Ali.

 

[Ravi]

Total bullshit again Ali.

Of course it is, but don't expect the McCain parrot to stop using kids to further her agenda.

 

[AllieBaba]

You guys think that since perverts see kids sexually, we should teach them about sex.

Go ahead and say that isn't sexualizing children.

 

[MalibuMan]

Why spend government money on something that should be the parents resonsiblity?

 

[dilloduck]

Why spend government money on something that should be the parents resonsiblity?

Amen --I think the idea is that some here are worried about some other kid infecting or impregnating their kid. We got to get them all taught the same thing.

 

[jschuck12001]

Which reminds me. When I was looking for information on this bill (which has essentially been buried by the press, btw) I came across a really interesting factoid: The federal government offers funds to states for the purpose of including abstention as a part of sex ed.

Did anyone realize that many states are REFUSING that money, and refusing to teach it? I find this sort of interesting. While the left whines, "Why do you want to deny your children KNOWLEDGE" they're actually turning away funds which would enable them to better educate kids.

They are committed to turning babies into sexual figures who are without rights, without standing, and who are considered expendable.

Because its a waste, they know abstinence is illogical.

 

[dilloduck]

Because its a waste, they know abstinence is illogical.

Then why does the plan Obama supports suggest it ?

 

[jschuck12001]

Amen --I think the idea is that some here are worried about some other kid infecting or impregnating their kid. We got to get them all taught the same thing.

Because there are people like Sarah Palin who dont get the message across to their kids. Its funny how this could be spun but I will spare the keyboard strokes.

 

[jschuck12001]

Then why does the plan Obama supports suggest it ?

he supports abstinence education? Are you sure about that?

 

[dilloduck]

he supports abstinence education? Are you sure about that?

it"s part of the plan you might try reading it

 

[jschuck12001]

it"s part of the plan you might try reading it

Exactly, "Part" not the basis behind the education. When I was talking about abstinence not working I was referring to another post about the government giving extra funds for states that want abstinence training. I dont think we are on the same page. We definately should talk about abstinence but the reality is young people will have sex so make sure they have condoms.

 

[AllieBaba]

However, it's ILLEGAL when young people have sex, so why the hell are we subsidizing illegal behavior, and making it easier and easire for perverts to get away with abusing kids?

And do 5 year olds really have sex? And if they do, should we simply "prepare" them for it, instead of simply teaching them that it's just wrong at their age?

If we're teaching them it's wrong, then we don't need sex ed.
Which brings us back to square one. Sex education for kindergartners is condoning sexualization of children.

 

[dilloduck]

Exactly, "Part" not the basis behind the education. When I was talking about abstinence not working I was referring to another post about the government giving extra funds for states that want abstinence training. I dont think we are on the same page. We definately should talk about abstinence but the reality is young people will have sex so make sure they have condoms.

not all of em--it's worth encouraging. Expect failure you will get failure.

 

[Ravi]

However, it's ILLEGAL when young people have sex, so why the hell are we subsidizing illegal behavior, and making it easier and easire for perverts to get away with abusing kids?

And do 5 year olds really have sex? And if they do, should we simply "prepare" them for it, instead of simply teaching them that it's just wrong at their age?

If we're teaching them it's wrong, then we don't need sex ed.
Which brings us back to square one. Sex education for kindergartners is condoning sexualization of children.

How do you tell them it's wrong if they don't know what it is? I don't know about your experiences in life, but little kids do like to play doctor. Why would you not want to tell them that adults shouldn't be playing that shit with kids?

 

[AllieBaba]

If they don't know what it is, why do you support educating them?

Oh, yeah. Because the pervs see them sexually..therefore everyone else should, too. I forgot.

 

[Ravi]

If they don't know what it is, why do you support educating them?

Oh, yeah. Because the pervs see them sexually..therefore everyone else should, too. I forgot.

You are the one advocating that they should just be told that it is wrong. Follow your thought to it's logical conclusion. What exactly do you plan on telling them is wrong?

 

[jschuck12001]

not all of em--it's worth encouraging. Expect failure you will get failure.

The only teens (16-19) that wont have sex are the ones that cant find anyone to have sex with them and thats a small percentage. If this was your kid then congrats, your kid was Mcclovin from Superbad.