Against abortion for any reason? What about the death penalty?

[England my lionheart]

What is "it"?

If you wish to respond to my post, respond to my post. Distorting it so that you might babble self-righteously is a bit ridiculous.

Lol,your amusing at times Jay,not many times but hey,i guess a person of your abundance of knowledge could work out what "it" is but i will explain if you need me to.

 

[Kathryn]

As a teacher, this is of question interest to me.
What would you consider explicit and agenda-driven sex education?
What do you think that sex ed -should- contain?

Just to give you some background for comparison: In Norway the pupils get their first class of sex ed in fifth grade (10-11 years old) and it includes a rather clinical introduction to the process of human reproduction and the reproductive organs. They also learn about things like puberty and what happens to one's body during that period, including girls getting their period. In addition there is usually a part discussing same sex relationships, on the level of 'sometimes a boy can fall in love with a boy or a girl can fall in love with a girl'.
During either the 6th or the 7th grade they also get a rather clinical introduction to contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases, and how to avoid them. A lot of emphasis is put on personal boundaries and not getting into situations they might regret.

All that sounds reasonable to me.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I'm not sure there are many examples of redeemed serial or Child killers and i for one wouldn't like to gamble on them not re offending.

Which is why we have the option of containment.

I agree its not about vengeance,for myself its whats best for society,a dead murderer can no longer murder,a dead murderer will not cost the price of a good Teacher or Nurse to keep a year,to me thats whats best for society not keeping someone in a small cell for the rest of their lives for 23 hours a day with protection for Child killers,i think they should at least be given the option to commit suicide.

For me it comes down to two main points.
The chance that the courts have convicted an innocent person, and the fact that I would rather not live in a state who actively takes the lives of its citizens.

Admirable but Norway has a small population of around 5 million,Britain has around 60 million,thats a big difference,the USA has a population of over 300 million so its not going to work for everyone.

True, there are differences, but given the statistics, don't you think it would be worth looking into?
I mean, we have about one third the recidivism rates of Britain and the US.

 

[jarofthoughts]

All that sounds reasonable to me.

Alright, so we agree that informative sex ed is acceptable, and, in my view, necessary.

What is considered explicit and agenda-driven sex education then?
What is it that has people up in arms over this issue?

 

[England my lionheart]

Which is why we have the option of containment.

OK

For me it comes down to two main points.
The chance that the courts have convicted an innocent person, and the fact that I would rather not live in a state who actively takes the lives of its citizens.

Understandable consideing how many have been wrongly executed,there are though,murderers where there is absolutely no doubt that they commited the crime.

Is a convicted murderer more important than the other citizens,the ones that do not carry out pre meditated murder,can such a person be a citizen when they are a public enemy.


True, there are differences, but given the statistics, don't you think it would be worth looking into?
I mean, we have about one third the recidivism rates of Britain and the US.

Of course its worth looking into.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Understandable consideing how many have been wrongly executed,there are though,murderers where there is absolutely no doubt that they commited the crime.

Not many of those around.

Is a convicted murderer more important than the other citizens,the ones that do not carry out pre meditated murder,can such a person be a citizen when they are a public enemy.

That is a false comparison.
A convicted murderer might be innocent.
They might have been a victim themselves, which might have led to their actions.
They may have been a victim of circumstance.
And so on and so forth.
Also, just because someone has committed a murder, that does not make them a permanent public enemy.

PS: You really should learn to use the quote function properly. Makes it a lot easier to reply if you do.

 

[England my lionheart]

Jaro

Like i said,there is a difference between pre meditated murder and a crime of passion,there are many guilty as charged pre meditated murderers in our prisons,sorry about using the quote fuction incorrectly Sir

 

[jarofthoughts]

Jaro

Like i said,there is a difference between pre meditated murder and a crime of passion,there are many guilty as charged pre meditated murderers in our prisons,sorry about using the quote fuction incorrectly Sir

Sure, but since our legal systems can make mistakes, and they do, I don't see execution as a reasonable response.
And like I said, I prefer to live in a state that does not actively kill its citizens.

 

[Kathryn]

Alright, so we agree that informative sex ed is acceptable, and, in my view, necessary.

What is considered explicit and agenda-driven sex education then?
What is it that has people up in arms over this issue?

I speak as the mother of five kids who are now ages 18-28 - so my experiences with public school sex education are pretty recent.

I want the logistics only. I don't want the school handing out condoms or the address to Planned Parenthood when I can't even send my own child to school with an aspirin.

I want children to be taught to be tolerant and respectful of other lifestyles, but I don't want them taught that there is nothing WRONG with some other lifestyle choices. It's not the school's place to make that judgment call, just as it's not the school's place to give religious instruction.

I don't want abstinence-only sex miseducation, but I do want abstinence to be, not only given as an option, but shown to be the healthiest option - because it IS the healthiest option for pre teens and teens. I want abstinence to be supported and encouraged, from a health perspective.

I want my kids and grandkids to learn about the "basics" of sex (biological), the benefits of responsible sexual activity, and the dangers of irresponsible sexual activity. I want them to be taught the full possible ramifications of their actions, not only to themselves, but to others.

I want the parents' right to review the curriculum before it's taught to be supported. I want parents' rights supported.

My experiences with sex education in Texas (as a parent) were positive.

 

[Crystallas]

Can I be pro-life and pro-choice at the same time? I sure as hell don't want the government to make laws that dictate morality.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I speak as the mother of five kids who are now ages 18-28 - so my experiences with public school sex education are pretty recent.

Alright, let's see how this matches up with what I'm used to in Norway.

I want the logistics only. I don't want the school handing out condoms or the address to Planned Parenthood when I can't even send my own child to school with an aspirin.

In Norway we don't hand out condoms in class (at least I've never heard of it being done). However, if approached by a student, school nurses in high school (16-18 years of age) will sometimes do that, and can also help the students get in touch with relevant doctors should they need further advice/contraception.

I want children to be taught to be tolerant and respectful of other lifestyles, but I don't want them taught that there is nothing WRONG with some other lifestyle choices. It's not the school's place to make that judgment call, just as it's not the school's place to give religious instruction.

In Norway the point is made, though usually not emphasized heavily, that, for instance, a same sex relationships are okay, and that there is nothing wrong with that or the people who engage in such.

I don't want abstinence-only sex miseducation, but I do want abstinence to be, not only given as an option, but shown to be the healthiest option - because it IS the healthiest option for pre teens and teens. I want abstinence to be supported and encouraged, from a health perspective.

Abstinence is usually not mentioned explicitly, but an emphasis is put on setting one's own boundaries with regards to one's own body, and respecting other people's boundaries. Rather than 'wait until you get married' the policy is more along the lines of 'wait until you know that you are ready'.
For the record; I agree that waiting at least until your late teens is the better option.

I want my kids and grandkids to learn about the "basics" of sex (biological), the benefits of responsible sexual activity, and the dangers of irresponsible sexual activity. I want them to be taught the full possible ramifications of their actions, not only to themselves, but to others.

Sounds about right.

I want the parents' right to review the curriculum before it's taught to be supported. I want parents' rights supported.

In Norway the curriculum in public elementary schools is decided by the Department of Education and it applies to everyone attending, meaning that there is no option to opt out. Parents are, of course, free to send their children to private schools or tutor them at home, although this last option is usually frowned upon as most parents are unqualified for the task and it could lead to the child getting an inferior education.

My experiences with sex education in Texas (as a parent) were positive.

Glad to hear that.

 

[gnosisofthomas]

I'm against both... they both amount to murder.

 

[waitasec]

in theory i'm against both but i've never been in a position where i can actually have an opinion based on any experience.