mimartin Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 How exactly do you teach about an STI while remaining 'Age and Development level appropriate'? You don't. You only teach what is appropriate at any given level. I really don’t understand what is so difficult to understand or so awful about that. I should be outraged that the bill puts too much emphasis on abstinences. We all know how well only teaching that works with some children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I should be outraged that the bill puts too much emphasis on abstinences. We all know how well only teaching that works with some children. I nearly started an uprising in my class when I learned that the sex-ed course would be abstinence-based, if that gives you guys any idea of its effectiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Aww, how incredibly ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 I nearly started an uprising in my class when I learned that the sex-ed course would be abstinence-based, if that gives you guys any idea of its effectiveness. We needed to know that why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 6, 2008 Share Posted October 6, 2008 Aww, how incredibly ludicrous. Please, tell me how this is ludicrous. We needed to know that why? I felt that it was pertinent to the discussion at hand (It was supporting the idea that abstinence-based sex-education isn't the proper way to teach, in my opinion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I believe teaching kindergartners it isn't right for Mr. or Mrs. Pedophile to touch them there is appropriate , but I'm liberal like that thinking it is alright to protect our children from sexual predators. Unfortunately, I'm liberal like that too We needed to know that why? Wow, how personally offensive and uncalled for. Uh my problem with the bill has to do with sections 1-3. If it was restricted to only the stuff about people trying to sexually abuse them and how to recognize it, then it wouldn't be a problem. The other stuff in the bill is a bit a much, and that's what McCain is referring to. So at first you said the bill didn't contain those parts, then ChAiNz showed you and quoted it (twice), and now we're just disregarding it because you don't want to talk about it? _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I felt that it was pertinent to the discussion at hand (It was supporting the idea that abstinence-based sex-education isn't the proper way to teach, in my opinion). It was a little over the top though Litofsky. No offense was meant, just for a lot of people it was something that one generally wouldn't talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 It was a little over the top though Litofsky. No offense was meant, just for a lot of people it was something that one generally wouldn't talk about. But it's something that SHOULD be talked about. it keeps going around that "abistinence only" is the best way to teach people, now, if it comes down to the people being taught not feeling that their curriculum serves their best interests, say, having a good time without getting STDs or preggers, what recourse do they have? None really. So, if people who do have an affect, such as voters, hear that students feel their courses aren't teaching them what the students feel they need to know, isn't it our job to listen to them to provide them with the best education? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Little kids shouldn't be practicing anything other than abistinence, seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inyri Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I don't think Litofsky or the members of his class were "little kids" which, if you'll recall, is what Web Rider was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Little kids shouldn't be practicing anything other than abistinence, seriously. i'm pretty sure most of the members that partake in this forum aren't "little kids" though for all I know you could define a "little kid" as somebody 20 and younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 It was a little over the top though Litofsky. No offense was meant, just for a lot of people it was something that one generally wouldn't talk about. As stated, we should. This generation's education is laughable compared to most. Sure, we've got public schools galore, but many of them are trapped by a flawed system. I was merely protesting to my school say "Abstinence is the endorsed course, children!" With the AIDS problem, it's understandable, but I dislike the way in which it is enforced. I'm also irritated by a great many laws, but that's a different conversation for a different time. And who are you to tell anyone what they should and should not do? If two people want to practice abstinence, fine, but if they don't, meh. That's their choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.