How about teaching them to change the world, not just their condoms?
Excerpted from Illinois Review :
Yesterday, the Illinois Senate HHS committee passed along partisan lines SB 2267, a bill demanding Illinois schools teach "age-appropriate" sex education to our kids.
The so-called "age-appropriate, comprehensive sex ed" Planned Parenthood and Senator Carol Ronen is advocating with SB 2267 includes classroom demonstrations of applying condoms on two-fingers or genitalia reproductions, taking field trips to local drug stores to shop and compare condom price and varieties, suggesting grocery items such as jelly and maple syrup to be used as sex act lubricants and arousing kids with alternatives for "non-intercourse" sex, such as bathing, reading porn and masturbating together.
. . . .
Look, no one wants our children to be ill-informed on sex. Conservatives aren't prudes. Teach the facts of life if you must -- but leave the hands-on demonstrations and the graphic displays and fantasies out of the classroom.
. . .
"No one argues that abstinence is the best, but what about those kids who won't make that choice?" Senator Ronen asked in committee.
I don't know, Senator, but how about the radical approach of encouraging kids to think about how they can change the world, not just change their condoms?
Cross-posted at www.illinoisreview.com
8 comments:
Wow...I am not sure where to start.
I would be very interested to learn where "arousing kids with alternatives for "non-intercourse" sex, such as bathing, reading porn and masturbating together" came from.
I read the link that was included in the post, and I found nothing offensive. The website specifically states that any education program must include the teching that "abstinence is the only way to avoid pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases".
The bill also says that any education program must be appropriate to the community it is in. I imagine there may be different standards in urban Chicago than down in Cairo, but I have no idea what community you live in that would consider "suggesting grocery items such as jelly and maple syrup to be used as sex act lubricants" as appropriate.
Also, ALL sex education classes have age appropriate guidelines. You post seems to gloss over that fact. I have no problem with an 18 y/o high school senior learning how condoms work. Of course, I would consider that inappropriate for my 4 y/o son.
Why not offer more than one sex ed clss and let the parents decide which one they want their kids to take? If parents want their kids to learn how condoms work and where to buy them, then they can learn that. If parents just want their kids to learn the basic biology, they can learn that. If parents want their kids to learn about abstinence, then the kids can learn about that. What the heck is wrong with that?
Look, no one wants our children to be ill-informed on sex. Conservatives aren't prudes.
That is the single funniest thing I have read in months. Conservatives aren't prudes? Really? You might want to talk to those conservatives who oppose the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine (HPV, a sexually transmitted disease, is a cause of cervical cancer in women, among other ailments). Apparently they think the availability of such a vaccine--which will save lives--condones sexual activity and is therefore harmful to their abstinence-only message. In other words, protecting the (mistaken) ideology is more important than saving women's lives. By the way, Bush appointed the former medical analyst for James Dobson's extreme right-wing Focus on the Family to the FDA's advisory panel on immunization. But I'm sure he'll leave his ideology at the door.
If conservatives weren't so prudish, and were truly interested in public health, they'd give up on abstinence-only education, which evidence shows actually leads to MORE unsafe behavior by kids/young adults than curricula which cover safe sex and birth control methods.
This legislation is desperately needed and long overdue.
Here it comes from a liberal democrat and Christian. I disagree with the comments about Dr. James Dobson being an extreme right-wing person. His stands are what we need more of. Why are private and religious based schools growing rapidly? You probably still don't get it. Many churches have far better schools than our public schools and turn out brighter students day after day. Why do you think that is? Will they be required to teach these idea? Is this an unfunded mandate? Lots of questions but I would like to know more about it. If it were sponsored by anybody other than Carol Ronan it would be better. Talk about a left wing nut case, she is a major wacko!
"maple syrup to be used as sex act lubricants"
Ick. I can't even stand getting it on my hand, much less my 'wedding tackle'.
Reminds me of a poem -
'There once was a couple named Kelly,
Who mistook super glue for petroleum jelly
...(snip)...
And now they dance belly to belly!'
middle 2 lines available via google...
Here it comes from a liberal democrat and Christian. I disagree with the comments about Dr. James Dobson being an extreme right-wing person. His stands are what we need more of. Why are private and religious based schools growing rapidly? You probably still don't get it. Many churches have far better schools than our public schools and turn out brighter students day after day. Why do you think that is?
I suspect an alleged Christian is 'bearing false witness'. Sounds more like someone attempting black propaganda. (If this is really how you feel, perhaps you should rethink that whole 'liberal democrat' thing.)
As to performance of private schools vs public, private schools have the luxury of refusing students. Public has to take on all comers.
Alleged Christian, thats a good one! Lets see now, who are YOU to judge your fellow man? My idea of Christianity could be completely opposite of yours as my idea of liberal could be different that yours. The point is we each have the right to our own beleifs, or is that something we can expect legislation on next? So yes, I do consider myself a liberal democrat. I am interested in how you know so much about black propaganda though? That old argument of why private schools do so much better than public is worn out. Instead of looking at how they do things it is much easier to just say oh, they can refuse who they want to. Guess what Bucko, I have also been a public school teacher in Illinois. I have bothered to do some comparisions. Private schools like the rest of us don't do everything right, but they do a lot of things right. My point is we are often focusing on social issues in public schools and that has its place. But we should also be focusing on educating our children in other areas too. Thanks for your comments though, I do like to see what others think.
Just sounds like a false appeal to authority. Now you're bringing in 'PS Teacher' who has 'done comparisons' to add to the pile. All I'm really trying to say is that the whole 'I am X, but I believe the opposite of what X's are generally agreed on' construction makes you sound insincere. Call me jaded, but I've seen it too many times to not react with skepticism. It seems more likely that you are a Dobson acolyte trying to pull liberal dems into the fold. Why even bring it up, otherwise?
"Lets see now, who are YOU to judge your fellow man?"
Someone who doesn't believe the passage you are referencing takes away my responsibility to call wrongs and rights as I see them. IF you were lying, that would of course be wrong. I can make that simple judgment call w/o going on to the full judgement of how you will spend eternity based on that act.
Post a Comment