• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

sex education

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
I agree and I have done this with my teens and will do so with my younger ones when the time is right.
However, I am saying that Draka is right to a point.
"Everyone is doing it." doesn't really apply to everyone. I wasn't having sex in my teens and I knew of only 10 in a school of 500 that were known to be sexually active. It was my experience that more kids were drinking and/or do drugs than they were having sex, though in most cases those activities do go hand in hand.

I thought I agreed with her too. My high school was statistically higher on the sex side than yours but there were plenty of kids not getting any. Strangely enough, the band was very promiscuous. All my friends and my girl friend were in the Band, bunch of party animals.
 

Rakhel

Well-Known Member
I thought I agreed with her too. My high school was statistically higher on the sex side than yours but there were plenty of kids not getting any. Strangely enough, the band was very promiscuous. All my friends and my girl friend were in the Band, bunch of party animals.

I must have misunderstood what you were saying. I'm sorry
 

Simurgh

Atheist Triple Goddess
T……………Personally I am in favor of comprehensive sex education starting as early as elementary school, perhaps even younger. …………………..Also with the possible exception of abortion(though ideally that too) all of these topics would be required course work the way math and science are required.
When I went to school in the 60/70s, sex ed was part of biology class. That means adolescents would have been approx. 11/12 years of age when they came across it first.

Sexuality was taught as a biological function; the expectation was that you learned morals from you parents. You could learn about everything starting with the mysteries of puberty and hormones, the workings of the reproductive system, including pregnancy and pregnancy prevention, STDs, gestation etc. It hurt no one and as far as I can tell it never –in and of itself—motivated kids to go out and have sex just because that was the first time they had ever heard of it.

Sex ed does not make you have sex, just as the availability of abortion does not make you run out and get one either. There are other factors at work in that regard.

Here is the major problem I have with your ideals. Who's ethics and morality is being taught? Yours? Mine? Are you assuming we will all agree in one moral system? Surely you jest, The public school system in the USA does what the government wants it to do not what parents want for their kids. That is why parents must take back the control and teach our kids sexual moral conduct at home not rely on others to teach them their views on the matter.I am not against health class, I had it in 6th grade and I was fine learning of std's and other risks, no problem with that at all, but when the schools pass out condoms and condone promiscuity as long as it is latex controlled, no thanks!
Regarding the American school system it should also be pointed out that it is school boards that decide what happens in individual schools more so than that that impersonal entity—the government. It is local people who lord it over those who do not have the power to influence decisions made by the school boards.

I totally agree that parents have to instill morals in their kids. But that certainly does not mean I want other kid’s parents to determine what my kids morality ought to be, and that’s why I want school to teach the biology and leave the rest to the parents. Then they have only themselves to blame when things don’t go as planned.

There are way too many religious right-wingers making decisions in schools. Bad enough they force creationism on us, their morals I certainly do not want foisted upon my kids either. Their attempt to pass off their ideas of what is moral, derived from their own repressed sexuality, presented with coercive and hypocritical methodology as science and /or morals is repugnant.
 
What are your thoughts on sex education? Should it be done in schools? left to the parents? Why? If it is taught in schools what should be covered, what should be avoided and when should it start?

I think sex education must be thought in schools considering that most parents nowadays are busy and some even don't know that much when it comes to sexuality though they had sexual experiences already. Another thing, it will be better if experts, like doctors who have specialization in reproductive health and science teachers, are to teach sex education to students at school. At least, they know what they're going to tell to students.

When teaching sex education in schools, unnecessary things must be avoided. (Honestly, I don't know what unnecessary things am I talking about. Hahaha.) As of this unnecessary things, I leave the discussion about that to others. Hahaha. :D

Teaching of sex education must be started as soon as possible to students who are capable already of being taught sexuality. As of those who are capable already, I also leave the discussion about that to others. Hahaha. I really can't form an opinion on this matter and also on the issue being discussed by the paragraph preceded. :D

Just my thoughts. :) :) :)
 

bandress

Member
Well Ithink that it should be taught in schools as when the children are growing sexually they are very much about their physical changes so in this case they should have the information about what is going on with them But another thing would be important that there should be more professional and experts like psychiatrists should involve such study so they they could explain easily about the sexuality with appropriate way.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
[/I]

I cannot answer that because we are dealing with teenagers and how is promiscuity possibly properly managed ? I have worked with teenagers in crisis situations after promiscuity and I fail to see a success story. Maybe you could define what a properly managed promiscuity looks like?

You do everything in your power not to get pregnant or catch a bug from it, and never end up in a crisis centre. That's what it looks like.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
To answer the OP, I think comprehensive sex education from an early age is the best policy. It should cover the nuts and bolts and leave moral questions to the child's own conscience. After all, teenagers are not children. You're not going to be able to just tell them what to do and expect that they will do it, whether you're promoting healthy, safer sex or forbidding sex entirely.

I had this type of education growing up, both at home and at school from age twelve upwards. I waited until I was 17. Knowing how to put a condom on years earlier did not cause me to rush out and try it, but the information came in handy eventually.

I have no problem with pointing out that abstinence is the most reliable way to prevent unwanted consequences. After you're done pointing that obvious fact out, there is a hell of a lot of territory to cover, and repeating the obvious is going to be a waste of valuable class time.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Teaching is best done by appropriately trained teachers. Not owners of agendas.
Sex education should be taught in the "Context" of relationships.

  • Children do experiment with sex... educated or not.
  • It is hard to understand why personal or sexual relationships amongst peer age groups should be regulated by law.
  • Rape and inappropriate physical attacks are illegal at what ever age.
  • Relationships out side peer age groups should be permitted if they are found to be genuine and appropriate by a juvenile court. (in the same way underage marriage can be in some countries)
  • there should be a single legal age of "maturity" covering all laws and regulations. drinking, driving, contracts, voting, enlisting, relationships.....People are either "Adult" or they are not.
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
To answer the OP, I think comprehensive sex education from an early age is the best policy. It should cover the nuts and bolts and leave moral questions to the child's own conscience. After all, teenagers are not children. You're not going to be able to just tell them what to do and expect that they will do it, whether you're promoting healthy, safer sex or forbidding sex entirely.

I had this type of education growing up, both at home and at school from age twelve upwards. I waited until I was 17. Knowing how to put a condom on years earlier did not cause me to rush out and try it, but the information came in handy eventually.

I have no problem with pointing out that abstinence is the most reliable way to prevent unwanted consequences. After you're done pointing that obvious fact out, there is a hell of a lot of territory to cover, and repeating the obvious is going to be a waste of valuable class time.

As repressed as I was with struggling with my orientation growing up, I was thankful I was educated enough by my mother on sex and on contraceptives (I think it was her desire to have a daughter from Second Wave Feminism). She discussed freely on birth control and lectured frequently to me about how it was more important to her that I practiced safe sex than if I waited until I was 30 to get married and have sex at all. She believed in choice and education.

I still remember the time when I was 19 or so, I had already moved out of the house, and she asked me to come over to her house to go through my old closets full of clothes. She pulled out a jacket of mine, searched the pockets, and pulled out a condom. I looked up and giggled out of embarrassment, and she asked me, "Have you really been carrying protection around like this?" I said, "Yes."

And she wrapped her arms around me and told me how proud she was of me. I didn't realize how seriously she took those lessons until that moment. She has since been privy to more activities I have partaken in, and every time she's mentioned that as long as I've been using contraceptives or have been on the pill, she takes no issue with my consensual activities.

I've passed on that knowledge to my kids. Our family heritage passed from mother to children has been education and resolve, it seems. :)
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Ideally, sex should be taught by parents, so I guess schools will teach it. What we need to add to sex education is responsibility. Since people are against teaching abstinence at all, we can at least teach children that having sex with multiple partners can cause- unwanted pregnancies, the spread of STDs-including HIV, and many other things. Sex, to me, is supposed to be a beautiful thing between two people who love each other- I won't try to push that value on anyone else, but that is the way I see it. My thought is that multiple partners cheapens it.
Sorry about my soap box.
I am not against sex education.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Ideally, sex should be taught by parents, so I guess schools will teach it. What we need to add to sex education is responsibility. Since people are against teaching abstinence at all, we can at least teach children that having sex with multiple partners can cause- unwanted pregnancies, the spread of STDs-including HIV, and many other things. Sex, to me, is supposed to be a beautiful thing between two people who love each other- I won't try to push that value on anyone else, but that is the way I see it. My thought is that multiple partners cheapens it.
Sorry about my soap box.
I am not against sex education.

Sorry, but who is against teaching abstinence "at all"? I didn't see that post.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Ideally, sex should be taught by parents, so I guess schools will teach it. What we need to add to sex education is responsibility. Since people are against teaching abstinence at all, we can at least teach children that having sex with multiple partners can cause- unwanted pregnancies, the spread of STDs-including HIV, and many other things. Sex, to me, is supposed to be a beautiful thing between two people who love each other- I won't try to push that value on anyone else, but that is the way I see it. My thought is that multiple partners cheapens it.
Sorry about my soap box.
I am not against sex education.

I think you haven't properly expressed yourself in this post.
Children should be taught that having sex with pretty much anyone carries the risk of STDs including HIV ( multiple partners increase the risk ), and that sex with fertile people also carries the risk of unwanted pregnancy.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
People say that teaching abstinence is ineffectual. I know I am jumping to conclusions, but in my mind, that is what I come up with.

Teaching ONLY abstinence is ineffectual.

Thats not the same as saying that teaching abstinence is ineffectual.

Some will abstain, but if we trusted only on that to limit babies, how much would you think demographics would spike up? :p
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
I think you haven't properly expressed yourself in this post.
Children should be taught that having sex with pretty much anyone carries the risk of STDs including HIV ( multiple partners increase the risk ), and that sex with fertile people also carries the risk of unwanted pregnancy.

And how do you know who is fertile and who isn't? (just kidding);) And even if a person can't get pregnant (Oral sex, sodomy, someone infertile), there is still the threat of STDs from unprotected sex. Protection doesn't always work. If the couple is monogamous, then it will be much less a threat- pregnancy is still a risk if they are fertile. (Since I am pro-life, abortion would never have been an option for me)

I think abstinence should be taught as at least an alternative. I am sure most of you agree with that- thanks for pointing it out.

The whole thing is that the risks of having sex with someone should be taught along with everything else- sure it's pleasurable, but we have to be careful- we have to ask ourselves if the pleasure of a short time is worth what could happen later down the road.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
People say that teaching abstinence is ineffectual. I know I am jumping to conclusions, but in my mind, that is what I come up with.

I am pretty sure most people are saying teaching "abstinence only" is ineffective. After you point out that not having sex at all is the most reliable way to prevent diseases and pregnancy, what else is there to teach? And without supplementary information on birth control, STDs, biology, reproduction, etc. how are you helping those who decide to have sex anyway? Or decide not to have sex but get raped?

I think the public statements made by certain public figures - for example that you can't get pregnant from rape - demonstrate that religious sex education is very poor and misleading.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
I think the public statements made by certain public figures - for example that you can't get pregnant from rape - demonstrate that religious sex education is very poor and misleading.

Not "rape," but "legitimate rape." Not "date" rape, or "spousal" rape, or "you had some drinks so you're a drunk **** asking for it" rape, or "you were asking for it wearing that skirt, you ****" rape, but rather legitimate rape - like a married, white, christian woman being brutally gang-raped by a pack of savage, dark-skinned minority youths in a back alley. You know, legitimate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top