Agreed, but if they are going to be required BY LAW to teach it in school, they should not water it down due to religious pressure.

Yep, and we all pay the price for teen pregnancy. Maybe the school should be involved... and if they are, they should do their part competently.

Geeze Leatherneck918, I didn't know that. NO KIDDING, but it also the ONLY method that ignores reality.

How does teaching only some of the facts help? It doesn't.

Abstinence used in reality is 100% effective. 80% is not better than 100%.

People should teach their own children. The people that bitch about the government taking over their lives are the same ones bitching about how the same government does their parenting for them.

Abstinence used in reality is 100% effective.

Since we're examining reality, how often is abstinence used these days? Like half of high school seniors are still virgins? I'm guessing the number I pulled out is probably higher than the truth as well.

Most parents don't have enough information or knowledge to teach this, they have the exact same amount of information as they were taught by their parents, which is zilch.

Abstinence used in reality is 100% effective.

People who rely upon "abstinence" for birth control, as a group, have more teenage pregnancies than people who rely upon other methods of birth control. Because, no matter what, people are having sex, even if they say they won't.

I'm all for abstinance in highschool. But realistically, some teens will be active, and those that are need to know how to protect themselves.

I agree that it is the parents responsiblity to explain the 'facts of life' to their children. The Reality is that some parents do and some parents do not. If Sex Education (in schools) PREVENTS 1 unwanted pregnancy or 1 S.T.D. then I support Sex Education in schools. Prevention is the best medicine and education is the best defense.

Kevin sorry to say even if they taught these kids how to uses a condom and about sexually transmitted diseases and how to be safe it will never help. Sorry, but it just goes in one ear and out the other with theses kids.

Empirical evidence suggests otherwise. Comprehensive sex ed does decrease the rate of teen pregnancy and STDs. Abstinence only does not.

Abstinence used in reality is 100% effective. 80% is not better than 100%.

And how are you planning on enforcing abstinance?

Kevin sorry to say even if they taught these kids how to uses a condom and about sexually transmitted diseases and how to be safe it will never help. Sorry, but it just goes in one ear and out the other with theses kids.

@Leatherneck918, So you just give up, and don't even try? WOW, pretty weak argument.

Kohler and colleagues examined the results of the 2002 national survey and focused on heterosexual teens ages 15 to 19. The findings — based on responses from 1,719 teens — appear in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

After reviewing the results, which researchers weighted to reflect the U.S. population better, the researchers found that one in four teens received abstinence-only education. Nine percent — particularly the poor and those in rural areas — received no sex education at all. The other two-thirds received comprehensive instruction with discussion of birth control.

Teens who received comprehensive sex education were 60 percent less likely to report becoming pregnant or impregnating someone than those who received no sex education.

The likelihood of pregnancy was 30 percent lower among those who had abstinence-only education compared to those who received no sex education, but the researchers deemed that number statistically insignificant because few teens fit into the categories that researchers analyzed.

While they also did not reach statistical significance, other survey results suggested that comprehensive sex education — but not abstinence-based sex education — slightly reduced the likelihood of teens having engaged in vaginal intercourse. Neither approach seemed to reduce the likelihood of reported cases of sexually transmitted diseases, but again the results were not statistically significant.

The findings support comprehensive sex education, Kohler said.

“There was no evidence to suggest that abstinence-only education decreased the likelihood of ever having sex or getting pregnant.”

LOL lets look at this based on responses from 1,719 teens ONLY. So you telling me that a very accurate study was done just based off of 1,719 teens only. Hell the High School I went too had over 3000 Teen's. I bet you I could get a different result from just from the High School I went too then this study. In the four years I went to that school only 4 Teen Girls got pregnant.

Schools are meant to educate children...not how some idiot fundamentalist wants to see life but how it really is...period!!

This is just another case where some religious fanatics in their warped sense of values have deemed that other humans aren't ready for this and for that reality so we should bullshyyt them and keep em in church where all will be well in the mind of a sick fundamentalist. It will go hand in hand with the museum in Kentucky or Tennessee where they are lying to children that people and dinosaurs co existed at the same time!!

School is for the truth and only the truth...save your religious stuff for home...leave these kids alone!!

sex ed only works if you stuff their pockets with condoms. because when it comes down to it, if the kids are in the position to have sex, they'll probably do it, with or without condoms, educated or not.

Leatherneck918, all that tells me is that you lack any understanding of statistics or statistical analysis.

1,719 is in fact a number of respondents large enough to draw some conclusions, but understanding the limits of those conclusions requires an education in statistics. I suggest you hit up your local community college and take one or two classes. The irony of you commenting on an issue of public education is pretty thick.

@Leatherneck918, it is inconclusive based on your own quote, so again, I say: You just give up? Weak.

GrooTheWanderer: 1,719 is in fact a number of respondents large enough to draw some conclusions= Wrong. Its not even close enough to draw any real conclusions from it. That would be only about .0000001 of the teen population. Unless you get to about 25% of the teen population then the numbers would be more accurate and conclusive.

Kevin the only thing weak is the thing you call a brain that sit between your ear's.

Last census I can find there is between 25 to 28 million teens, reports say only about 3 out of 10 are sexualy active.

So from that data how many teens are sexualy active Kevin?

Now I've heard it all - parent's blaming the SCHOOLS for not teaching THEIR kids about sex and pregnancy.

Parent's - get off the couch, turn off Oprah and The People's Court and TALK to your kids!! It is NOT the government's responsibility to teach your kids about sex, teach your kids how to handle money, or teach your kids what to eat and not eat. If you aren't adult enough to be a parent then DON'T be a parent!!

From a legal standpoint, teaching children about how to use condoms an contraceptives can be considered a criminal action - since having sex with a minor even if you are a minor is considered statutory rape, teaching them how to do it could be considered rendering criminal assistance and contributing to the delinquency of a minor among other things. Its equal to saying, "we don't recommend that you rob a bank, but this is how you do it.."

You sure that teaching children how to use condoms is a criminal action? Are you a lawyer Jim Trimble?

1,719 is in fact a number of respondents large enough to draw some conclusions= Wrong.

Leatherbrain, a little rudimentary statistics. With a sample size of 1,719 for a population of 28 million teens, the margin of error would be 2.36% (at 95 confidence interval). Please go back to school.

OMG!!!! It's official, people will sue for any damn thing. Are you serious?

Two California moms are suing a Central Valley school district over its abstinence-only sex education, saying the policy puts students' health at risk by failing to give teens information about condoms and contraception and about how to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.

So let me make sure I am hearing this "ish" correctly. You DO NOT want to have anything to do with teaching your teens about safe sex. This way if someone else (like a teacher or sex ed class) mis-informs your child you're going to sue the pants off of them for not doing your job well enough. What part of "YOU'RE THE PARENT" seemed fuzzy for ya? People these days got sue-itis. smdh.

Abstinence only is a good idea for California, that should decrease the welfare rolls.

Leatherneck918: And yet the mainstay of the right's drive toward abstinence is the Bible. The Bible's main story concerns a virgin birth. This further mandates that abstinence does NOT guarantee no pregnancy. Or is the document the far right extremists use to support their agenda incorrectly applied?

People have had sex without the benefit of marriage since the beginning of our existance. Teens are especailly interested what with all the hormones raging. Teaching abstinence only is a wasted effort. Prevention of pregnancy and STDs should be included in a sex ed class.

More importantly, parents teaching their children this is even more important. When they are in sex ed class they are more interested in the girl/boy next to them than the teacher. And they can see everything on the internet.

Unfortunately, a vast majority of parents will not discuss this with their kids. Since they fail in that area, schools should cover all the bases.

Leatherneck918

"failing to give teens information about condoms and contraception and about how to prevent sexually transmitted diseases."

Note to all idiot parents out there: THIS IS YOUR JOB, NOT THE ****ING SCHOOLS JOB.

Leatherneck - you are ignoring that in this country, it's entirely possible AND highly probable that the parents don't know enough of the actual facts to be able to teach them honestly and fully enough to meet the same level of factual information that the law requires the school to provide.

so where are most kids going to get those facts and HONEST FULL DISCLOSURE unless the schools do it?

I would agree with you if we adults didn't have these pathetic hang ups and personal/religious biases that prevent TRUE HONEST DISCUSSION of the science and factual information.

Seriously people, WAKE UP!

Telling your child to not have sex is about as effective as telling your child to not do drugs. They act like they are listening when you say it, but when they go out with their friends they take on the pack mentality with peer pressure.

You can only do your best to assure your child makes the best decision when the situation comes up.

Study: Teen marijuana use on the rise

Teen Pregnancies Highest In States With Abstinence-Only Policies

The fact that they are suing the school district is absurd. If you, as a parent, rely solely on public education to teach your children about sex.....where does your responsibility lie? I'm not against sex education in school. I also do not hold the schools accountable for instilling MY morals and values in MY children. There's more to sex education than "If you have unprotected sex, here's what your genitalia will look like (insert herpe, wart pic)" I do believe it's unrealistic to expect them to wait until marriage, but I also don't want them thinking that if they use birth control, there's no consequences....there's more to sex than std's & babies, especially when you're younger.

Guess these moms were hookers and are looking for a fast buck. Both my children graduated school at the beginning of this decade. The sex ed classes they had taught abstinence-only however, they also taught the contraceptives available, the human processes for pregnancy and everything else of the birds and bees. I taught my children the same at home but I didn't think I would protect them from the temptations in today's world. When I went to school, there was no such thing as sex education. Physical-Ed was it. Parents taught their children abstinence from sex and birth control at HOME. Never saw or heard of many pregnant teens much. Now, there are day care centers for teen moms at all schools here from grade 6 and up, plus shows like Teen Moms and more sex on television then I ever got out of all the issues of Playboy magazine thru the sixties (oh, can't forget National Geographic either). Pornography was there as it has been for centuries, but it was so underground we didn't even know it existed until the seventies. Now there are porn stores everywhere, free porn sites online that most parents aren't even aware their children are surfing to! So it seems that sex and teen pregnancy is now glorified and the right and "cool" thing to do. Morality has taken a good healthy @!$%# in this country because it is not being taught where it needs to be taught...AT HOME!

@

Leatherneck918 Comment collapsed by the community

Kevin C-752389: abstinence is the only method that is 100% guarantee of not getting pregnant or getting any sexually transmitted diseases.

Condoms and other methods do not have a 100% guarantee.

Technically, if you follow your scripture, abstinance is not 100% either, else how do you explain how Jesus was born? Just sayin.

Leatherneck918 Comment collapsed by the community

Kevin C-752389: abstinence is the only method that is 100% guarantee of not getting pregnant or getting any sexually transmitted diseases.

Condoms and other methods do not have a 100% guarantee.

Leatherneck

Here's another 100% guarantee. Abstinence only sex education will not work 100% of the time. Will it work 75% percent of the time - no. Will it work 50% of the time - doubtful. It will, however, satisfy the self-righteous church lady crowd who pressures the school board into foolish unproductive curriculum decisions. This ridiculous unworkable "education" plan is a waste of time and energy, but it will give the students a humor break in their school day.

This is almost as silly as the Dover, PA, school board decision to teach "intelligent design" in science class. Fortunately, that decision was overturned by a federal court who overruled the church ladies.

@leatherneck, no, having taken orthodox hebrew in Jerusalem, you are full of crap. Virgin flesh or virgin woman has always meant "that which is untainted by sexual intercourse." Strike 3, you're out.

don97524: I could careless about the ****ing Church or any ****ing Religion. One way is no better then the other moron. Got a great idea how about we teach all the different **** and let the kids decided what they think is the best one for them. Instead of what YOU THINK IS BEST for them.

All I been saying to the ****ing ignorant on here is that you can teach them all about *** you want, it will not be any better then saying just dont do it. Why no matter what, no matter what they uses, engaging in SEX can lead to Pregnancy or STD's. So best just to say not to do it. If you and that is YOUR CHOICE as a parent. You want to teach your kids safe SEX and how to uses condoms that is your choice, its NOT the schools.

Sinn=Really I dont see you add in anything to this discution so go **** off.

ProBusiness

Now I've heard it all - parent's blaming the SCHOOLS for not teaching THEIR kids about sex and pregnancy.

Parent's - get off the couch, turn off Oprah and The People's Court and TALK to your kids!! It is NOT the government's responsibility to teach your kids about sex, teach your kids how to handle money, or teach your kids what to eat and not eat. If you aren't adult enough to be a parent then DON'T be a parent!!

Pro Business, you are irrational. Do you expect parents to know all about human sexuality, pregnancy, human anatomy and all of the other important aspects of sex education? Do you think parents have the tools to teach that information in a convincing manner? The parents job is to ensure that children are developing into knowledgable and responsible adults but to expect them to have all of the intellectual tools and educational skill to make that happen is absurd. You may as well expect parents to teach world history or chemistry to their children.

Let's have our teachers teach sex ed and leave the abstinence teaching to parents. OK?

Teaching the benefits of abstinence, good moral values accompanied with good examples, controlling your child's whereabouts and with whom he/she is hanging around, adequate curfews and knowing where are they, what they are doing and who are their friends is the best manner to ensure healthy well-raised kids. I was raised this way and am applying the same values to my children. The problem today is that not many parents are involved in the life of their children nowadays.

When I was in high school (1948-1952) the boys I knew did not EXPECT me to have sex with them and did not act as if, somehow, I was being unfair if I did not. Sure, a few tried, but none assumed it was his right. Maybe, the statement made in The Masters and Johnson report decades ago, should be heeded today. MUCH MORE NEEDS TO BE SAID TO THE BOYS THAN TO THE GIRLS.

This comes down to conservatives living in a fantasy world, while the rest of society lives in REALITY.

In their fantasy world, abstinence will work... ignoring the fact that the Catholic church has pushed this message for a thousand years, and it has FAILED. Plus we have conservative leaders claiming it will work, while it FAILS in their own house. On top of all that, when studying the billions that Bush spent in abstinence only education, researchers found that there was ZERO change in teen behavior.

Reality, statistics and facts dictate that abstinence only education does not work. However, conservatives refuse to give up their idealistic fantasy world, despite thousands of years of failure.

So we have to decide whether we live in a religious fantasy world, or if we live in reality.

This is all about religion.....period. Bible thunmpers don't want kids to be on the pill or use a condom.

My mom received abstinance-only education at home (good girls don't do that), and nothing at school back in the 70's. With absolutely no real information, she was left to learn about sex and reproduction from her friends. Apparently, when they told her she couldn't get pregnant her first time, they were wrong. Nine months and a shotgun wedding later, I came along. 2 1/2 years later, my sisters came along because the doctor failed to tell my mom that antibiotics would cancel out the pill.

Once my sisters and I were old enough, we were given information. Once we started dating, we were taken to the doctor to get put on the pill. Parents can teach their children all the morals they'd like, but the children still deserve to be given information on a very important part of their health.

Leatherneck918,

Here is some reality for you.

Texas teaches abstinence only in their sex-ed classes. It has worked wonderfully..... at creating the nations highest teen pregnancy in not just America, but the world.

Abstinence only = Fantasy Land

Condoms = Reality

Please, go buy a clue. You need it.

inmissouri

Very good post! I think you probably have an uphill battle with this issue in your state. Right?

My word, how dare these people sue the school for not doing what state law explicitly requires it to do.

Look no further than the Palin family - you will see how well abstinence-only education works.

I'm not saying this to be political or to slam any single party, only to point out that abstinence-only education failed miserably for one of its biggest proponents.

don- funny thing, I was the only girl in my group of friends who graduated high school without getting pregnant. One friend even made her mom a grandma at the age of 32 (both started having kids at 16). Luckily, at least for them, my kids have two reasonably intelligent parents who will fill in any blanks the schools miss- something Aiken's parents were obviously unable or unwilling to do.

I think they should teach all girls they can not get pregnant through their mouths and it is ok to swallow.

Ash Plissken: Wrong.

HIV/STD Prevention Disclaimer:

This site contains HIV/STD prevention messages that may not be appropriate
for all audiences. HIV is defined as Human Immunodeficiency Virus, AIDS is
defined as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, and STD is defined as sexually
transmitted disease.

1. Are schools required to teach comprehensive sexual health
   education?

   No. Schools are not required to teach sex education.
   Education Code (EC) Section 51931(b) defines comprehensive
   sexual health education as: "Education regarding human development and
   sexuality, including education on pregnancy, family planning, and
   STDs."

   If schools choose to teach comprehensive sexual health education,
   they shall follow specific laws regarding course content and parental
   notification, as described below.

2. Are schools required to teach HIV/AIDS prevention education?

   Yes.
   Since 1992, California public schools have been required to teach HIV/AIDS
   prevention education at least once in middle school and once in high school.
   EC Section 51931(d) defines HIV/AIDS prevention education as:
   “Instruction on the nature of HIV/AIDS, methods of transmission, strategies to
   reduce the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, and social and
   public health issues related to HIV/AIDS.”

I have no idea what my mother was taught regarding sex education. But I can imagine that being a teenager, during the 70s, who attended Catholic school, that she didn't very much. Which is why I came along a month after she turned 16 and my dad was 18. Obviously I appreciate being alive, but I can't help but wonder how my mother's life would have turned out had I not come along. Times were really tough when I was young, and my father was an abusive a$$hole. How they managed to eek out a marriage for almost 18years, I'll never understand. Just how different would her life have been?

Her early pregnancy is a prime reason why my mother took me to a gyn at around 16ish, and made sure I knew how to protect myself. Here I am 34, and I still don't have any kids, but if I did I'd make damn sure they knew what to do to protect themselves and their future.

Inmisouri

You're right to blame the schools for your mom's pregnancies. They should have taught her to read. Even way back in the '70s, there were books containing this information. Since BC pills were new, the antibiotic link might not have been known by doctors then.

Mark Johnson 2007 Wrong:

States ranked by rates of pregnancy among women age 15-19 (pregnancies per thousand):

1. Nevada (113)
2. Arizona (104)
3. Mississippi (103)
4. New Mexico (103)
5. Texas (101)
6. Florida (97)
7. California (96)
8. Georgia (95)
9. North Carolina (95)
10. Arkansas (93)

States ranked by rates of live births among women age 15-19 (births per thousand):

1. Mississippi (71)
2. Texas (69)
3. Arizona (67)
4. Arkansas (66)
5. New Mexico (66)
6. Georgia (63)
7. Louisiana (62)
8. Nevada (61)
9. Alabama (61)
10. Oklahoma (60)

Who is doing all of these studies if the results are statisically insignificant? Is that not a waste of money?

And people, people, people. Condoms or no condoms, abstinence or no abstinence - if the parent/s do not care, the kid is going to do what it wants anyway.

Leatherneck918,

I don't know what site you pulled all of that from, but the law is that if a public school teaches sex education--which this one was doing--then that education is required to be comprehensive and medically accurate. RTFA.

The civil lawsuit is the first of its kind in California since the passage of a 2003 law requiring that sexual health education in public schools be comprehensive and medically accurate, said Phyllida Burlingame, reproductive justice policy director at the ACLU of Northern California.

I.E., Sex education that consists of "just say no" is in violation of the law.

I just thought of something while reading this. If teen pregnancy is much higher than in the past and a long time ago it was taught at home by the parents and their was less teen pregnancy something seems wrong. You would think that with all the information out since the 70's that the number would be less. I do believe knowledge is a powerful thing but we seem to be missing something.

Sex education or not, kids are stupid and are going to get in trouble. When I was a teen, I did a girl every chance I got, and rarely used a condom. It was not like I didn't know about them, it was more like any sexual encounter was random, and I went for it protected or not. Sort of like I felt it was the last chance ever, and if I passed it up you would never get another chance. That was 35 year ago, and I doubt kids today have any more common sense.

@ Leatherneck918

"The Bible's main story concerns a virgin birth.=WRONG what you people fail to get or even understand do to your to ignorant to ****ing understand is that back when the Bible was Written the WORD Virgin meant ONLY THE WOMAN WAS NOT MARRIED... It did not mean as today that the Woman never had sex before. Get a ****ing clue Einstein.

Just like in the finstons song: they say: have a gay old time. Do to the word gay back then meant HAPPY, not today's word of meaning your a flaming F**.

Get it or would you like to apologies that you dont have a ****ing clue of what you're even talking about."

The original Hebrew word "almah" may or may not be used to indicate someone who is a virgin in the modern sense of the word. It is contextual. The issue surrounding the original Hebrew word is still very much in debate.

And yes, I understand that you have stated that you don't care about religion, (and this declaration almost certainly comes about as you back peddle because you know as well as I do that you are full of it). Although, your stated disinterest in religion begs the question; why you would attempt to use a venue that you obviously know nothing about to try to gain credibility? I latched onto this bone because it seems to have been your entire strategy in this argument; from legalities, to statistics, to your apparent disconnect with reality regarding abstinence only sex education, you have been absolutely, and even comically incorrect on every count. Although getting you to take your own admonition to heart and apologize because you haven't got a clue would be a miracle in and of itself.

For those of you who keep stating that it is the parents job to educate their children about sex, I absolutely agree. However, for those of us who are able and willing to do our job in that respect, we can find ourselves in the unfortunate position of directly contradicting a school curriculum that teaches abstinence only. I've been in the "I don't care what your teacher says" predicament a few times, and in a few years when my daughter takes sex ed., I will be there again. I won't shirk my obligations here, but try to understand that it may be more of an uphill battle than you think.

Abstinence is the only method that is NEVER practiced.

.

You are complete and utter moron in life

@ Sinn --- whether or one agrees with Leatherneck or not, name calling is unacceptable. Please go back to your corner and come out when you can engage in civil discourse. Criticizing the comment is one thing, name calling is something else entirely.

*don't-touch* doesn't work when we're talking about teen hormones.

Leatherneck obviously knows nothing about statistics, lol. The Central Limit Theorem says that with a large enough sample size (typically over 30) the data become normally distributed, and so the mean of the sample will approximate the mean of all possible samples from the population. The sample size needed to make a valid statistical inference depends on the difference you are trying to detect between groups and the variability of the measurement, but for almost all studies, a sample size of 1700 would be considered very, very large. The sample size is simply NOT a limiting factor to interpreting those findings.

In any case, if the school is teaching ANY curriculum, it should comply with the requirements under the law. If they are not following the law, then they should be sued. While the parents certainly can have a role in teaching about sexuality, many either don't have the knowledge or are not comfortable teaching their kids about it. Do we expect the parents to teach physics, if the school decides their science curriculum doesn't need to cover this discipline?

Todd Akins is a product of abstinence only education... just look at how well he knows the female body. o.O?

I see Leatherneck was wasting his time trying to make a legitimate statement and trying to get some rational thinking into the conversation, the liberals got it so twisted out of proportion they almost blue Leatherneck through the ceiling,the fact is going back to Leathernecks original post is he is correct. before sex ed came into the schools we did not have a fraction of the problems we have today concerning teen pregnancy, VD or the Gay issues, if you teach a child how to use a condom the first thing that child is going to do is try to use it, and when a school passes them out they are saying go do it, and that is wrong, that is not the schools job. especially when the damn things do have a 20% rate of failure. maybe while they are at it they can tell the girls if you do it make sure you get paid first. and what makes these people think that a parent does not poses the tools to teach their own children, are they referring to the teen mothers that could not remember what the teacher told them about how to use the rubber, you know the one with six kids by six different fathers and two of them were borne with HIV, not one of them knows their father and the mother is on welfare. oh yea sex ed works real good. I especially like the one last year when a school was passing out rubbers with holes poked through them, that's what trust will get you.

Leatherneck et al..... Teaching abstainance only and believing that this will or would prevent pregnancies and prevent the transmittion of sexually transmitted diseases is nonsense.

As it is presumed that we are all adults, thus one will speak plainly...

We are living in a time where it is easier to travel globally and thus diseases have become global too, therefore there are sexually transmitted diseases that are making a comeback and are becoming nigh on impossible to treat these days. It was noted that there was a strain of gonorrhoea in London that did not respond to treatment or was very difficult to treat. Perhaps that was why condoms were being made readily available at the Olympics, where it was ''better to be safe than sorry'' as the saying goes.

It was not a matter of giving a few shots of antibiotic injections in the bum anymore. Syphillis is also on the rise while HIV/AIDs is still rising and have not been contained amoung heterosexuals and there are many people who are infected and do not know it, because they have not been tested and thus are not being treated either. It is on the increase amoung homosexuals too if I am not mistaken.

It was noted some time ago that there were those kids who stated they practiced abstainance and were still found to have sexually transmitted diseases in the mouth, throat and rectum. That is because these kids believed that engaging in oral and rectal sex was not 'having' sex and that they were still virgins because they did not participate in vaginal sexual intercourse.

Under these circumstances how is teaching abstainance alone - instead a comprehensive course in pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention - going to protect these youngsters from all the mis-information etc that they get from peers, media, internet, movies, video games etc? Isn't it better to give these children and other young people all the necessary information that they may need to protect themselves from diseases and from peer pressure?

It may also be difficult for parents to talk with their children about these issues, as there may be a high level of embarassment felt by the parents discussing these topics with their children. Children may not even believe that their parents know anything about the subject and some may not believe that their parents actually engaged or engages in sexual activity in the first place, or if they do it is a ...eeuuu... moment. LOL.

To spare both parties this discomfort and maybe even passing on some mis-information it would probably be best that this sort of health education is addressed/taught in an open and honest manner at school by a health professional. At least in the school setting the childen can feel free to ask questions and get the correct information that they need and or seek in a non-judgemental setting.

Think those teens going off to college are any more knowledgable about pregnancy and sexually disease prevention than when they were in the school system if they were never taught about these things back then? How about teaching them how to protect themselves by not putting themselves in harms way, eg re friendships, attending parties, alcohol poisoning, date rape, drugs, sexting, spring break, viral infections, flus, getting medical and mental help, sharing a dorm room with others and protecting themselves from unwanted camera monitoring, about not imbibing foods and drinks that belongs to others, not using hygeine products that belongs to others like toothbrushes, tooth paste, soap, towels and feminine products etc. conflict resolution especially with some college campuses allowing concealed carry of guns on campus. Children need to know what is expected of them, and they need to be taught good manners and how to interact with others, as well as moral values.

Protecting and preparing children for life take a long time and starts early, from even in kindergarden re touching, not getting into strangers cars etc, keeping eyes on them on playgrounds, or even in the backyard as even young children are being snatched, sexually assaulted and murdered these days. Thus parents need to be parents and stop trying to be their childrens friends, buddies or negative behaviour enablers.

The Good Book states.... 'train up a child in the way he should go, so when he is old he will not depart form it". And the golden rule states... "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" i.e. treat others the way you want to be treated.

Peace....

Ash Plissken: I pulled that off the Department of Education site for California. Look it up> :-)

jrsygrl-6605722-Inmisouri

You're right to blame the schools for your mom's pregnancies. They should have taught her to read. Even way back in the '70s, there were books containing this information. Since BC pills were new, the antibiotic link might not have been known by doctors then.

Just wondering, who would have told her that there were books available with that information? Her teachers? Her parents? Her priest? The librarian? Even if she did feel comfortable asking someone, the only answer would have been 'don't do it until after marriage'.

Teaching children about sex should be a joint effort between parents and schools. In aperfect world, teens would not have sex and if they did, they would be able to openly talk to their parents about sex prior to having it. That being said, this is not a perfect world. I had sex as a teen and so did most of the teens I went to school with. We were given a brief summary of what sex was and types of contraceptives, however, not all of us had parents we could talk to. If my parents would have found condoms or birth control pills in my room, I would have had the crap beaten out of me. Many teens are in the same situation. It is very important to remember that this is not a perfect world. Things don't always work out the way they should. If a child is not able to talk to a parent or adult in their life, who can they turn to? If they have a sex ed teacher who is honest, open, and realistic, hopefully they will be able to talk to them. We don't need more pregnant teens and we don't need more newborn infants abandoned in trash cans.

Teaching children about sex is strictly a parent's task because it is a value-laden subject and schools are not allowed to teach values. I wouldn't want my kids to learn about the most personal subject in an adult's life in a sterile, non-judgmental environment like a public institution. And why are some using the editorial 'we'? Few here speak for anyone but themselves. And fewer here share a value-system adequate to parallel the strictly mechanical and biological segment of sexuality.

DBuck and Leatherneck,

You say that sexual misconduct never occured before it was discussed in school. BS! Think back to the autobiographical flim/book, Angelas Ashes by Frank McCourt. The priest admonishes all the young boys to NOT touch themselves. Cut to the next scene where all the boys are lined up against a stone wall, masturbating furiously. Churches have contributed to the sexual conduct of kids far more than sex education classes. Then there's the priests themselves who are the perverts.

Sex ed in schools has always been optional. I remember getting a permission slip for my mother to sign in order for me to attend it. She could have opted out and I would have had to go to the library for the duration of the class (and looked like a stupid freak) and the other kids would have thought I was wierd. Speaking of my mother, she never had any sex ed and was pregnant at fourteen. She had six more kids and it ruined her life. She never accomplished anything and is now whacked up on prozac. My sister committed suicide because of the horrible relationship she had with my uneducated, messed up mother.

My kids had sex ed. My son is 23 and had a high school sweetheart for five years. No pregnancies. My daughter is 28 and has two BA degrees and a masters. No pregnancies (thank you, Planned Parenthood). Two years out of college and she now runs a company. Big difference between her and my mother.

Churches want unplanned pregnancies. They can prey on the weak like the Mormons did on my mother. They want to swell their numbers so they get more money and power. It is sick and narcissistic. All religions are cults and those who follow them are lost, sick people with identity crisises. If you stupid jerks don't knock it off, we will end up just like China, aborting full term fetuses. That is what they have to do because they are desperate.

It was horrible to grow up in a family with seven children. None of us got the attention we needed. This is also what can happen on a global scale. Our resources are drying up. The oceans are overfished. The crops are dying from drought caused by overpopulation. ANY and all birth control methods should be used and ANYONE, I don't care if you are rich or poor should limit their family size to two, before the government has to do it for you.

YOU are not that great. The world does not need more than two of you. Replace yourself, replace your mate. Be happy with the gender of your child and don't "hold out for a boy". Raising a boy is hell anyway. What's so great about them? Girls are smarter and way less trouble.

Where have you been living? Young kids have been having sex since the beginning of time. It is vitally important to educate them about birth control. Fewer unwanted, neglected babies. Fewer abortions. Whether you like it or not, kids WILL have sex.

...kids are probably going to have sex, but it wasn't always that way.

Actually, yes, it always was.

...he/she is not mentally or emotionally ready at all for that.

This is due to social engineering, not evolutionary biology. Even in the early 20th century it was not uncommon (or unacceptable) for teens as young as 13 to get married and start having children.

But who should be responsible for teaching the birds and the bees to our children? I guess that depends on whether we think ALL children should have medically accurate (up-to-date) information or just the "blue state" children.

Some will, many many won't... Previous generations had far less pre-marital sex than recently, starting in the 50s it began escalating a lot more. I still don't think the answer is arming our pre-teens wilthbirth control pills (which don't guard against disease and make having sex real easy) and rubbers. Most teens can barely brush their teeth in the morning let alone handle the responsibility and consequences of casual sex.

The world is a much different place, social engineering or not, no 14 year old is capable of dealing with the consequences of pre-marital sex.

Don't limit it to 14 year olds Mike - I know plenty of adults that aren't able to deal with the consequences of sex...but what we are talking about with this story is education.

See, people should be taught that abstinence is the only way to be 100% sure, but if you are going to have sex, you need to protect yourself and know as much as you can to keep from getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant and to protect yourself against disease.

It's stupid to bury your head in the sand and say - just don't do it.

The problem is people don't understand what Abstinence Only is. The curriculumn I have seen is very thorough concerning the issues mentioned about, deseases and preventive of both desease and pregnancy.

On-the-other-hand, I find modern Sex Ed fails to fully inform kids about the risks.

We base our current sex ed on what we now know were fraudulent studies. That needs to change.

Previous generations had far less pre-marital sex than recently

If you study history you'll learn that just isn't true.

Previous generations had far less pre-marital sex than recently, starting in the 50s it began escalating a lot more.

I hate to burst your bubble, but in the 17thcentury in the US between 30-40% of brides were pregnant before marriage.

http://maghis.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/4/9.extract

And in 1920 61% of men admitted to sex before marriage. We have seen an increase in premarital sex since the 50s, but not nearly as large as you might imagine.

@

Mike.D34

I'm a bit torn by this, on the one hand kids are probably going to have sex, but it wasn't always that way. It has ALWAYS been that way..

Keep your backward thinking in the south. We like education here.

I think most are you are wrong thinking it has always been this way.

Most people when they engage in what would be considered rebellious, destructive, or immoral behavior rationalize it by claiming everyone does it. When in fact it's a subset of you and your delinquent friends. I saw this with friends and drug use, friends who used cocaine were convinced literally everyone used it, but in fact it was a very small sample of people who did.

So if someone was a tramp in high school they think everyone must be, when in fact it's not true. I'm not saying abstinence only in schools is the way to go, but handing a kid who can't reliably do anything a rubber and crossing your fingers seems like a pretty bad idea, and when you look at the rates of STDs among 15-24 year olds it's pretty clear it's not working (they are by far the highest rate of infected).

Obviously the schools suck from wherever you are News98. I don't think there was a coherent sentence in that load of drivel you posted.

Oh, and we liberals think abstinence is a good thing, but realize some teens will have sex. Those that do should be properly prepared for it.

Mike.D34

I think it is you that would be suprised about how often pre-marital sex occured back then. In fact it was not uncommon in Europe, during the middle ages, to see a couple "going at it" in the back of church during Sunday mass. I think why people have the misconception that everyone was so pure years ago is that it was more shameful for an unwed bride to be pregnant, that they were either married off right away or sent to "live with a relative".

And no one wants to hand these kids a handful of rubbers and cross your fingers. We want to educate these kids on the proper use of birth control, the different types of birth control, and the pros and cons of each type.

Mike.D34,

Maybe the reason rates are so high are because kids are afraid to get birth control because they don't want to be seen and judged by people like yourself negatively. It is so sad that these same people that want to arm every household with guns just in case they are needed for protection are so against arming a sexually impulsive species with the protective tools to prevent disease and unwanted pregnancy. Either teach a comprehensive approach to sex or nothing at all.

With shows on MTV glorifying teen pregnancy, does it really matter what they teach in school? These shows were meant as a warning i'm sure, but all a teenage girl sees is "She is on TV" and "my boyfriend would be better to me than her boyfriend". Teenagers in general think they know everything and adults know nothing. Plus, if adults can do it, why can't they? How many teenagers do you know that have more good adult examples than bad adult examples? Before you answer, think about the TV and the internet and even books in the school library. Until more adults start being good examples, nothing is going to change. "Do as I say, not as I do" is not going to cut it.

DarkShadow - this makes me think of something I was taught - if you are too embarrassed to buy protection, you are not ready to have sex.

darkshadow - i don't think that's the case at all, from my experience kids don't seem to give a @!$%# what their parents think and certainly don't care about being judged by any adult. they have access to free BC, condoms, and nearly all schools have sex ed, yet it's still a pretty serious issue.

you all act like the vast majority of teenagers don't already have access to bc, condoms, and sex-ed, they do, they are simply too stupid and too irresponsible to care.

Its not the mental and emotional parts that get pregnant. 14 is old enough to get married in most of the world. If the parents are such cowards that they cant talk their kids about sex, the poor kids should get long-term birth control so they can grow up before having their own kids.

no mention is made here about BJ's, abortion, demanding to keep the babies and live happily after witgh the fataher and on welfare they can dol it!! Its all good MOM/DAD and we will need grandparents to help us out financially if the rent vouchers, food stamps, IRS additional aid, IRS Credits, car allowance and telephone just aren't enough........If my daughter was careless enough to engage in sexual intercourse and get pregnant I would tell her to go live with the father and if the mother didn't like it she could leave with her daughter

Graylady25,

That is true and I agree that if you can't take the responsibility to get birth control then you do not have the level of responsibility to have sex. Yet why should they care when they see people like Mike.D34 on forums like these calling them stupid and irresponsible. If they are already going to be labeled like that then why should they care to put forth the effort? Abstinence only education just makes them feel like they have to further sneak around to not get caught, which means avoiding the purchase of birth control because someone might see them. Give them access without prejudice and the allow them the benefit of the doubt and teenagers might surprise you. Insult or disrespect them and that it what they will return back.

According to my dad, who was born in 1922, his generation was at least trying to have sex as often as possible!

The schools didn't have your children, YOU DID. It is up to YOU to teach your children responsibility, morality, responsibility and sex education. Schools should be responsible for the other needs in life so your children can learn and prosper. Too many parents today treat the school systems more as baby sitters then learning centers. If you want the schools to teach your children other than the Reading, Writing, Mathematics, Sciences and History then you should not have even considered becoming a parent. Sex education should be from the PARENTS!

Today schools have Day Care centers for teenage mothers from grades 6 thru 12 in our district. Shows like Teen Moms and enough sexual escapades on TV shows to make the oldest Playmate Bunnys look like comedians. Porn everywhere and freely accessible. It is a whole new world because of lazy parenting.

EngEsq

And in 1920 61% of men admitted to sex before marriage. We have seen an increase in premarital sex since the 50s, but not nearly as large as you might imagine.

Then how come, as I stated above, are there day care centers in virtually every school district from grade 6 and up?

@Ginger Holm:

If "Abstinence only" education teaches about prevention, it's not "abstinence only".

Too often kids only know "don't do it", but sometimes they don't even know what's "it", they think you can't get pregnant from the first time, or if you do this/that, rather than knowing from the comprehensive education.

njofaustin, because today a teen who is pregnant stays in school instead of being taken out and sequestered away.

The fact is, today teen pregnancy is the LOWEST it has been since we started keeping records in the US. Those are CDC statistics.

Teaching the benefits of abstinence, good moral values accompanied with good examples, controlling your child's whereabouts and with whom he/she is hanging around, adequate curfews and knowing where are they, what they are doing and who are their friends is the best manner to ensure healthy well-raised kids. I was raised this way and am applying the same values to my children. The problem today is that not many parents are involved in the life of their children nowadays.

EngEsq: Okay, fair is fair, I'll give you that because I just checked the CDC statistics. But CDC went on to say:

The United States has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the fully industrialized world. While the rates have been declining in the last 15 years, it remains a source of concern that

• 34% of teenage girls in the U.S. are becoming pregnant at least once before the age of 20.
• The teen pregnancy in the U.S. rate is ten times that of Japan, four times those of France and Germany, and nearly twice that of Great Britain.

Despite the fact that sexuality and family planning have been divisive political issues in this country, there is a near consensus that a reduction in teen pregnancy rates should be a health priority. When teens get pregnant, the potential harm to the mother, the child, and society at large can be wide-reaching.

Teen mothers tend to function less effectively compared to their non-childbearing peers. Early childbearing further compounds the poverty and low educational attainment that are the precursors of teen pregnancy. Childbearing interferes with important developmental tasks facing adolescents who then have to juggle competing demands of growing up and parenting. Compared to their peers who postpone childbearing, teenage mothers tend to have

• more psychological problems
• lower graduation rates
• less stable employment
• greater reliance on social assistance and welfare
• higher poverty rates
• more marital instability
• and more frequent health problems

Good job mamma's!! There is no way for the teachers or school to know what those kids are doing in their personal lives. I hope this suit is a win.

not financially however, and if this turns out that these woman are requesting $$ I seriously would consider this suit to be just another manipulative move by greedy American citizens who found themselves a little treasure to nab up before someone else....

But I want to belive their motives are not for financial gain but for the safety and security of the hormonal disobedient, mischievous, identity crisis, confused teens in America (and for those teens who just really want sex and have no underlying issues, they are many kids who dont have issues but instinctively need or desire the sex we all humans want).

I think the other point of sex ed, is not jsut for pre-marital sex, people need to know how to prevent pregnancy and other things after they are married too. so it is a lifetime thing. plus, if you are 30 and not married yet, odds are you've had sex, so knowing prevention of risks is crucial, for EVERYONE.

I don't konw about this whole suit, but to me, I think the parents need to know to what level their kids are being taught, and fill in teh blanks, I think that is reasonable. ALthough would be good for everyone in the area to have the same level of education, so I can see their point too.

Mike.D34

I think most are you are wrong thinking it has always been this way.

Most people when they engage in what would be considered rebellious, destructive, or immoral behavior rationalize it by claiming everyone does it.

Mike mike mike, you are speaking for yourself hun, and really that is all you are doing. I have never engaged in activities just because the ppl around me were, none of my friends were having sex and none of my friends were pregnant....but I was at 17. Why? Because nobody gave a crap about me or my future...when my dad threw me against the wall and said to never talk about college again (1994 -yes that recent) I decided that i had no future and that all i was ever gonna be was a bare foot lady with no education past high school....so you see I did have sex ed, but what I didnt have is a way out of the life I was given and told I had to except. The part about my dad, I was at the dinner table and ask who was gonna pay for my college, my dad slammed the table against my brother and threw me into another room where he looked me dead in the eye and said you have no future....so to me its the parents that need the education....but condoms would have used if I had them...hahaha birth control what a joke...i didnt even see my first pill until after he was born. I did have rebelious behavior but not because everyone else was too...no one was just me! Sex ed did nothing to encourage sexul behavior if anything straight after class I was more drawn to girls who were just having their period like me. I had no desire to fondle mens genitals or kiss other girls or anything...just an idea popped in my head and i had no other way out, or at least thats what I thought

Rather than suing, how about these parents teach their children what they want them to know?

njofaustin

I'm fully aware that the US sucks when it comes to teen pregnancy. Of course all the countries that have low teen pregnancy rates also have much more robust and comprehensive sex education.

News98:

So abstinence is "bad" according to the dopes at our horrible public schools?

That's not what anyone is saying. What's "bad" is relying on teenagers' willingness to PRACTICE abstinence.

Laura-313822:

Rather than suing, how about these parents teach their children what they want them to know?

State law requires the school to do it. The school is breaking that law.

If the parents are teaching their own kids about birth control and disease prevention why they hell should they care the school is teaching abstinence? It seems these ladies have too much time on their hands or don't want the job of educationing their kids. Stupid lawsuit and a huge waste of the school resources. I guess next the school should foot the bill for all kids born to high school students because they will have failed in their job. Again, this is stupid. It's called self-responsibility.

First off any of you talking about handing out rubbers and birth control pills what are you talking about? Do you think that is what these parents or the school who teach more comprehensive sex ed are doing? Give me a break. This is about education, plain and simple. Time to grow up and stop giggling every time someone says penis or vagina.

The fact is we need to be teaching kids about this is a professional setting by someone in the know as well as parents need to be parents and talk to their kids about sex as well. Its a two front approach. And for those with the heads in the sand, there is a little thing called the Internet and it provides more access to sexually explicit content than previous generations ever had access to. Not to mention all the other references we see on TV and advertising.

So what do you want? Play dumb and ignorant tell kids just don't have sex, and have them learn about sex from the Internet (non educational sites) and other forms of media(or people) that don't give good factual information or have a formal education setting in place that can properly inform kids about protection, STD's, ect. and still emphasize that abstinence is obviously the only sure option but that if they do have sex here are ways to protect yourselves and other things to be concerned with? Well what is it?

Oh and don't forget this is useful information thruout life and a good number of these kids will be heading of to college soon and be on there own.

So stop with the 1950's thinking and trying to ignore a vital part of our being.

Again, these are our bodies and there is nothing wrong with understanding how they work and how to keep them healthy, which includes proper sex education.

It is time

Education is for knowledge. What the individual does with that knowledge as it is applied to their daily life is something other. If a person wants to be celibate their entire life, that's an individual choice and has nothing to do with sex education as an aspect of one day being a biological adult. This is where Akins showed himself to be a first class idiot, misrepresenting biological information regarding rape and pregnancy, for some crackpot political religious purpose. I hope the people of California aren't showing themselves to be the same class of intellectual nincompoops as Akins constituency. We not only need sex education in schools, we clearly need a broader based curriculum in all the sciences. The politicians should all have a science debate. Sex education is about health more than the kamasutra, and one of the biggest debates in this country is the Health Care debate. Do you really expect that when the debate gets to sexually transmitted disease they're going to cease talking so they don't offend a fundamentalist Christian group, or the Pope? Not likely.

This debate is hilarious. Just a few new things I have learned today:

1. "Just say No." I guess this is a great way to prevent unwanted teen sex just like it was a great way to prevent unwanted teen drug use.
2. "It's a parent's job to educate their kids." I guess there's no reason anymore to send kids to some building called a school for 8 hours per day, 12-13 years straight.
3. "Kid's didn't have sex 'back in the day'" I guess Romeo and Juliet was written about 30 year old lovers and Henry the 8th didn't really marry a 16 year old of "child-bearing-age." Nah, teen sex is a new thing invented by the interwebz and MTV!
4. "Abstinence-only works 100% of the time" I guess someone should have told that to Sarah Palin's daughter?

Another point:

Kids don't stay kids. Keeping them ignorant of how stuff really works as they become adults insures the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies.

Kids are the parent's responsibility. They are to teach them right and wrong and if they want their kids to know about birth control they have every right to do so. Pass out rubbers and birth control pills to your kids.

There is no way this should be the school's problem. What happened to personal responsibility on the parent's part, the kids need to be taught by their parents. Their parents were probably teen parents too and uneducated and not involved. Give me a break. Kids are getting pregnant around the world and it is a FAMILY issue and a FAMILY problem. Stop expecting the government to do EVERYTHING for you, including thinking.

there was not as much teen sex "back in the day" because they were already married.

just say "no" was a terrible drug policy and a terrible policy to prevent teen pregnancies

a broad approach teaching kids the value of abstenance as well as ways to help prevent unwanted pregnancies and dises seems like a logic and proven approach

MmmMmmBeer-Gee I thought they went to school to learn reading, writing, math, social studies, physical education etc etc.

Now they have to take care of your kids sex lives, drug problems, violence. Let us not forget that most of the kids in CA have to learn English before they can even start the rest. Damn Californians.

There is a difference between teaching abstinance as the major part of a healthy, young person's, sexual education, but, it cannot be the only part. Basic knowledge of the biological parts of both sexes is something that should be required and knowledge of birth control's usage is very important. But, the liberal dogma of showing explicit homosexual sex and the complicit "winking" at underage sexual activity needs to be limited! It is a fact that some of the most liberal school districts actually celebrate underage sexual activity and is as ridiculous as a conservative district teaching only abstinance! Knowledge is power, but, it cannot only be as believed by the current liberal intelligensia! There is wisdom in teaching moderation and the safety of abstinence!

It is a fact that some of the most liberal school districts actually celebrate underage sexual activity

Really? Where?

Abstinence only is a failed policy that doesn't give the kids the tools that they need to protect themselves and not get pregnant. It also leads to uneducated adults that cost the system billions of dollars in medical and social costs. Hormones and genetics are very powerful and just telling kids to just say no to sex is laughable ignorant and a failed policy everywhere it has been tried.

What is the problem with sex? It feels good, its a great way to relive stress, and it is very natural, so attempting to repress it for conservative religious reasons leads to numerous psychological problems. It is time to grow up and admit that we are sexual beings.

It can be argued that abstinence only sex education it is a policy based on religion and is a violation of the Establishment Clause's separation of church and state.

My grandparents on my fathers side got married when they were 15, and on my mothers side my grandmother was 15 or 16 and my grandfather was like 21. Both sets stayed together until they died.

Teenagers have always had sex, and if you think different you are only fooling yourself.

And in 1920 61% of men admitted to sex before marriage.

@EngEsq ... actually, you hit the sore point. People who think that there's been a big increase in premarital sexual activity aren't really concerned about the males. They're just concerned that perhaps more females are having sex. Even worse in their eyes, the females are probably enjoying it, too. The double-standard is alive and well in the US.

If the parents are teaching their own kids about birth control and disease prevention why they hell should they care the school is teaching abstinence?

Perhaps they, as taxpayers, are concerned that the schools aren't teaching the kids what they need to know to live in the real world (as opposed to a 1950's June Cleaver world that never existed). I don't have children, but as a taxpayer I think that my opinion matters just as much as a parent's.

To quote Margaret Mead, "This generation is no worse than the past, they just don't pull down the shades." Morality is something that is taught at home not in the schools. Telling a teenager no is like waving a red flag at a bull. Better that they know how to prevent pregnancy then to how to continue their education while raising a child.

MoCowgirl, look at the sex ed classes in California. Some are very explicit and they teach homosexual activity at the same level as hetersexual activity. In some areas in my home state of Colorado, they also teach that homosexual activity has absolutely no societal backlash. This may be true in Fantasyland, but, not is Realville!

Abstinence-only education only works for people who never have sex. Maybe a dozen in 10,000 people?

I have a few friends who teach public high school kids and you wouldn't believe their misconceptions. Just a few off the top of my head:

You can't get pregnant if he pulls out

You can't get pregnant if you do it in the water

You can't get an STD if you shave your pubes (this one was from a college girl)

You can't get pregnant if the girl is on top

So tell me... why shouldn't we be educating on this topic? Sex is temporary but kids are forever. No matter how hard kids try, sometimes hormones overcome willpower. Abstaining is denying human nature. When abstaining fails, better they know what they're doing.

Just look at how badly our politicians are ignorant of basic reproductive biology. I rest my case.

Also, if you look at the demographics, the states that do abstinence-only education (primarly in the south) also have the highest teen pregnancy rates. I think Mississippi was tops when I last looked. Yet these are also the states that don't want any welfare or help for poor women and single mothers. They've made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.

Dan M-1100664

MoCowgirl, look at the sex ed classes in California. Some are very explicit and they teach homosexual activity at the same level as hetersexual activity. In some areas in my home state of Colorado, they also teach that homosexual activity has absolutely no societal backlash. This may be true in Fantasyland, but, not is Realville!

While I suspect this is patently false, let's go with it.

Do gay people not have the right to learn about their sexuality the same way that heterosexuals do? And let's be honest, homosexual relations are only a little different in a few key areas. Oral, anal, erogenous zones, disease prevention... it's important for everyone.

Let me guess: now you're going to tell me that no straight guy likes anal, right?

I'm a bit torn by this, on the one hand kids are probably going to have sex, but it wasn't always that way.

Er, not quite Mike. Let's look at some famous historical examples (and realize that the "commoners" were generally married and/or pregnant much earlier)

Catherine of Aragon, married to King Henry XIII's brother at age 15.

Mary Queen of Scotts, married at age 16.

Queen Mary II, married at age 15.

In ancient Greece, women generally married as young teens. In ancient Rome, the minimum age of marriage was 12.

Call me old fashioned (and I'll probably be called worse than that) but whatever happened to the parents responsibility of educating their children? If the schools have to do the job it shouldn't teach extreme sex - positions, etc. The more you tell kids about certain subjects the more it piques their curiosity to the point where they just have to try it. I think forcing all students to have sex education only encourages them even more to go out and do it. If it must be taught, the stress should be on prevention of STDs and pregnancy and not on the actual sex act itself.

I thought girls could put an Aspirin between their knees and be completely protected... That's what the Teabaggers profess.....

Idiots.

XX.

A condom is only as good as it's operator.

OO

Where do most kids get their information regarding sex and STDs? If you ask one group of Boston teenagers, it’s porn—and they’re trying to change that.

The high school students hail from Boston’s Jamaica Plain neighborhood, one of the highest-risk areas for teen Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) and pregnancies in the city. To attract attention to the surging infection rates, the teens produced a documentary tackling their peers’ views on sex. The video notes that while most teenagers between 15 and 19 are having sex, many of those same teens learn about sex primarily through porn.

http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/is-porn-the-best-sex-ed-teacher/

Watch the teens speak about the importance of sex ed....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lA09isnXTQ

Todd Akins is a product of abstinence only education... just look at how well he knows the female body.

o.O?

How are parents supposed to offer sex education to kids, when the parents themselves are intellectually challenged on the subject? ( And that's being polite.) If you don't have a biology program that can present not just ideas on anatomy and fertility in the child's education, but disease issues, birthing issues, nutrition issues, physical and mental health development and issues... you don't have squat for an education.

Mating doesn't take any education what-so-ever. It's innate to species. But after that child is born you don't want to be dropping it on it's head, feeding it lead paint, scalding it in the bath water, feeding it moldy food and bad water. You have a lot of stupid old people who wish to pretend age is wisdom... so they don't look so stupid themselves, not because there aren't plenty of younger adults well qualified to provide a quality education to their children in the topic of sex ed. Health care costs to get children to the age of adults are high, because of these fantasy concepts of morality issues if people understand sex. If they understand sex, then Mary the Mother of Jesus isn't going to work as a concept and that's the very reason religions don't want educated people.

Another thing to think about... why do so many adult women go on cruises and the like to get pregnant? Why don't these same women get pregnant in their own neighborhoods? Study some genetics when you get finished with your biology classes, and you'll find science can give you insight into all types of questions.

Just in from the Whitehouse: "First Lady Michelle Obama this week is serving as guest editor for iVillage.com, NBC’s “community of online women” that offers sexually explicit material, including graphic sex tips from prostitutes, “20 kinky things you SO can do,” and a list of “naughty” apps for mobile devices. " Starr, P. (August 22, 2012) "Michelle Obama 'Guest Editor' for Website Featuring Sex Tips--Including from Prostitutes" Retrieved Aug. 24, 2012 from: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michelle-obama-guest-editor-website-featuring-sex-tips-including-prostitutes

The more you tell kids about certain subjects the more it piques their curiosity to the point where they just have to try it. I think forcing all students to have sex education only encourages them even more to go out and do it.

You are so right. Until sex education was widespread in our schools, teens were NEVER interested in sex. /end sarcasm

Nature pretty much ensures that teens have an intense interest in sex, regardless of what schools teach.

lilian101

Just in from the Whitehouse: "First Lady Michelle Obama this week is serving as guest editor for iVillage.com, NBC’s “community of online women” that offers sexually explicit material, including graphic sex tips from prostitutes, “20 kinky things you SO can do,” and a list of “naughty” apps for mobile devices. " Starr, P. (August 22, 2012) "Michelle Obama 'Guest Editor' for Website Featuring Sex Tips--Including from Prostitutes" Retrieved Aug. 24, 2012 from: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michelle-obama-guest-editor-website-featuring-sex-tips-including-prostitutes

"The liberal media have repeatedly and deliberately turned a blind eye to the violent, hateful culture of liberalism, particularly their vicious attacks against those who advocate traditional Christian values and conservative principles.”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm gonna bookmark that site for when I need a laugh :D

Actually, by law, it is the school's responsibility to provide accurate, comprehensive sex education. Did you read the article?

A lawsuit by the "teach my kids to screw safely" crowd.

Its only the law cuz parents are cowards with their own kids.

ok, so lets just say for arguments sake, you've instilled in the kids that abstinence is the way to go. I think we can assume that these kids will grow up and get married. Doesn't it make sense that they'll want to plan their families and need some sort of knowledge.

Abstinence only success rates are less than 18%. What about the other 78% of students? Don't they deserve help according to the law that states they must be taught how to take care of themselves?

The Pill + condoms = 100% protection. Girls need to know about this because boys haven't a clue. Look at Akin. He doesn't understand the process of conception and he's a (well, allegedly) grown man.

diana

The average parent has neither the ability nor the knowledge to do an even adequate job of teaching sex education to their children. If they want to give their kids the abstinence message that is their business (and good luck with that!)

Those who believe parents should be teaching sex education should be home schooling their kids. That way they will never have their kids hear any nasty words or have their children exposed to that dirty talk about sex organs and the like.

diana - We have lawmakers who can't even bring themselves to say "vagina" and call it lady parts or - worse - vejayjay. That gives me about zero confidence that all parents are equipped to deal with the topic. It is better to have a neutral party answer questions kids may not want to ask their parents. By your logic all parents should be home schooling anything schools teach. I'm going to just say - completely without proof - that that would not work out too well.

Seems like alot of adults need some serious reproductive education...after Akin's comments about pregnancy from rape, you realize that there are a lot of really clueless people out there.

ALso, after going through soem infertility, and learning WAY more than most people know about getting pregnant at least, I can tell you that even alot of doctors (including OBGYN's) dont' really know. Only fertility doc's could really give you the run down on how babies are actually made (besides the sex part).

peanutGalleryTheater:

Its only the law cuz parents are cowards with their own kids.

Or maybe it's to avoid the risk that the parents will turn out to be ill-informed, and end up giving their children false information.

I guess parents should be parents and teach their kids about Algebra and Social Studies. Heck, why do we even have schools anyway?

Peridot, I do have some issues with what you are saying. First, condoms are not 100% effective, close, but not quite. Second, hormonal pills do have major side effects including blood clots, weight gain, and other major side effects. Third, if a teenager uses only birth control pills it does not protect against STDs. I am afraid that the only truly effective and safe form of birth control is abstinence! I will admit that when I was a teenager I did not practice what I preach now, but, at that time an STD was not, even occassionally, a death sentence! (I know, AIDS is now just a permanent, controlled disease, but, it is still not exactly a case of the clap!)

Abstinence needs to be part of a comprehensive sex ed program, but, not the only part! The problem is that our schools are "winking" at underaged activity and actually promoting homosexual activity. Don't say that I am a right-wing wacko, I refused to let my 13 year old daughter watch a sex ed move which actually showed homosexual activity, not implied, the actual act!!!!! I saw the movie first online and refused for this to occur!

Why are so many parents so embarrassed or ignorant about sex education? It is because they still have not had the proper education themselves. It is correct for the schools be mandated to provide this education beginning at age 10 or 11. That is when these kids start talking about it and "making stuff up." The prohibition of anything simply makes people (kids) want to know more and experimentation will have to do" if there is no good education. BTW, I was born in 1925, and yes, sex was "running amok" even then. But as usual, only pregnant girls were punished for, "getting themselves pregnant."

!

Peridot, just one other thing.... 100% -18% = 82%, not 78% as you quoted in your post. I sure hope that you are not the math teacher at my daughter's junior high school, and, I really hope you aren't the sex ed teacher!

"We will continue our review of the suit in order to better understand the concerns raised by the plaintiffs, but Clovis Unified has fully complied with both the California Education Code and the State’s content standards.”

apparently Clovis Unified has complied with all laws concerning thier sex ed classes and is wondering why these parents have not come to them with thier concerns and gotten an explanation from the district. This is nothing more than people show boating.

Did it ever occur to you that dealing person-to-person with a huge bureaucracy like a school board is futile? Do you really believe that going to see the principal of your kid's school and telling him/her that their sex ed classes suck is really going to change anything? Legal action is the only thing that gets even a bit of their attention.

This is further evidence that "hands-off" parenting has become the norm in our society. Sex education is a very personal matter, and this should be taught at home first and foremost. These women are both in the medical field, which makes them highly qualified to have this talk with THEIR OWN kids. I understand that some parents are as ignorant as their children, but when it's your job (yes, REAL parenting is a JOB ), sometimes you've got do the hard stuff (like research and having awkward conversations). Kids are going to pick up a fraction of the lesson in a classroom setting where everyone is snickering and whispering stupid jokes behind the teacher's back! When parents sit down face-to-face with their children, they get the significance of the message.

Some people may be able to teach their children on their own. The vast majority do not have that ability. That is why we have a public school system. We, as a society, have decided that we want to have our children properly educated. Part of that education is for them to learn the facts about their bodies and what happens when they engage in sexual activities.

It is not abdicating your responsibilities as a parent to require that the educators you pay for actually teach basic science. While the morality of sexual encounters can be taught at home, the consequences, for almost all parents, simply can not.

Just as "just say no" did not work to stop drug and alcohol use, it also does not work for sex.

Someone up there said the average parent is not up to the sex ed job, and the schools will do a better job. Will they do the same job teaching sex as they now do with math, grammar, science and all the rest? Woe betides us if that's the case. Either the nation will die out from failure to replace the dying or else we will populate like rabbits and destroy the land. The schools are not up to the task of teaching much to most.

Your second sentence does not follow from your first one although your first one was merely an unsupported opinion.

Clovis and Fresno are also the anus of California. It's not a place you live if you have a choice. Most are the children of migrant farm workers who could really use some sex ed and birth control.

...

Bob, I agree that abstinence only is not appropriate. I do have issues with many schools teaching homosexuality as being as acceptable as heterosexuality. This causes issues with children just entering and fighting through puberty. The basic biological teachings should be used and the beliefs about sexuality should be left to the parents. I know that some parents are ignorant and not as educated themselves as they should be, but, this is a minority.

Dan So LGBT should feel like they are not normal like their peers? You want them to feel like their sexuality is wrong? The results of thinking like that is dead LGBT students. LGBT students deserve the same education as their straight students. If you don't want your kids exposed to gays, keep them in your house. The rest of us would really appreciate it.

@Bob:What a completely stupid post!(but,you know what opinions are like, don't you?)

Bball LGBTs are as normal to their peers as straights are normal to their peers but LGBTs are not normal to the normal world.

And that kind of bigoted mindset contributes to discrimination against LGBT students. Thanks for confirming that tom. This is exactly why students need comprehensive sexual education to get accurate information and not outdated and ignorant lessons from abstinence only.

Gwen, shouldn't it be the parent's responsibility FIRST! We do have the right to regulate what sexual teachings are given to OUR children. These children are our responsibility and we do not appreciate how some teachers take these children, shake them up like a can of soda, then give them back to the parents and just wait to see what happens when they are opened!

Dan, they aren't teaching random ideas. They are supposed to be teaching factual, scientifically proven information about sex and pregnancy. Not all parents have the initiative, knowledge or interest in teaching their children this stuff. It is unfortunate, but true. If all children had parents who took an interest in their child's education and took the time to have open dicussions with their children, I would agree with you. It is a shame that it is necessary for this stuff to be taught in schools, but many times if they don't get it in school they won't get it at all. That being said...if all parents took an interest in their child's education the state of our education system wouldn't be struggling the way it is.

You base your vote for the President on whether or not a public school outside your district teaches kids to use rubbers or not? Call me crazy but I look at things like the economy and national security. I can teach my own kids to use rubbers if they have sex without having to elect officials to do it.

It is simple religion-bad education-good.

Yes, lets not "go back" to those old days when people were responsible.

Teen pregnancy is lower today than any other time in US history. Today it is at 34.3 births per 1000 and was 61.8 in 1990. It has been on a steady decline since these things were measured. So yeah, lets not go back to days when "responsible" meant more teen pregnancy.

Oh, and kids today are also significantly smarter than just a generation ago:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=will-we-keep-getting-smarter-flynn-effect-says-yes

That's right, because sex ed is being taught in school again. That's the reason teen pregnancy is declining. The idea of keeping children in the dark about their own bodies and about sex ed is counter-productive. It leads to teen pregnancy and abortion. Still, that's what the antiabortionist crowd want. They can't have it that way any longer, though. They're going to have to deal with sex education if they want fewer abortions and that's that.

There was a meeting about this between pro-choice and anti-choice last year and this is how it came out between them. You can have it one way or the other but you can't have it all your way. Too bad for them, because young people have sex drives and 80% of them will act on them. Period.

News98 wishes to return to the "good old days" that never existed.

His head is so deeply buried in the sand that he does not understand that Title 9 was about equal opportunity for women in athletics - not about making anyone "smarter"

He fails to understand that sex predator laws really are effective.

He doesn't even know that "hard-ons" are not a modern invention.

He seems to think that "Playboy" is part of the public school text book collection.

He thinks that Catholic schools have been "taken away" - who knew?

Thanks for the ultra-conservative, old white man perspective, though. It was at least a little bit humorous (though probably not intentionally so).

Parents are doing quite enough damage to their children by cramming silly religious beliefs into their immature brains. What makes you believe they should be teaching their sex education myths as well?

News98:

YOUR THINKING is outdated as a caveman. Eddie the caveman who wants EVERYONE to think about sex all the time.

You misspelled "strawman".

I guess they didn't teach you anything about logical fallacies in your wonderful parochial "education."

Brainwashing children with delusions and self-serving fantasies of life after death have dire consequences.

On the other hand if leaving them in close proximity to predators is what you want then an unwanted pregnancy isn't bad compared to pederasts in priests clothing.

EdBurke, seperation of church and state in the constitution meant only that the government would not have an official religion (At the time of the revolutionary war, the offical church was the Church of England)! This does not mean that liberals have the unbridled right to teach all children their morals. Religion has been a part of this country since its founding and will (hopefully) be an influence for as long as possible. I am not a religious man, but, the liberal dogma of humanism is as much a religion as anything taught during a Catholic mass, or a Budhist ceremony! Just because you don't call it religion doesn't mean that it influences just like Christianity, Budhism, Judiasm, or Islam! The lack of a religiion is a mock version of all of our religions in this country!

Tea Tarded, how is it your responsibility to tell everyone who follows a religious tenet that they are ignorant! How absolutely tolerant that you don't respect others belief if they aren't the same as yours. BTW, I am not a religious man, but, I do not consider all who follow a religion to be an idiot! Although in the case of intolerant, ignorant, bigoted, anti-religious liberal morons I would make an exception!

Sorry if I've made you cry Dan. Go dry your pussy and try again....

BTW, were you a victim of the pederasts? Sure appears that way.

@ teatarded, you are a nasty human being, who put you in charge of anyone else's choices? We were given free will to make our own decisions and you will soon have to learn that you have to allow others to make their own decisions based on what is best for them. It is called mutual respect.

You must just be such a joy to live with (sarcasm in case you couldn't get it) are you this controlling with everyone in your life? I would hate to see how controlling you are with ones you say you love when you are this controlling with people you don't even know!!

Yes there is freedom of speech to say what we want but it doesn't always mean we have to use that right, it is the smart person who knows how to treat others respectfully without nasty, ignorant comments trying to demean them. It actually really just goes to show that you have a huge lack of love in your own life that you have become so bitter and degrading. Try showing some love and perhaps you will get some back and stop being so bitter and nasty to others.

@just me: Amen!

abstinence - that's what I get for trying to post from my phone, and it wouldn't let me edit.

In these days and times, a 14 to 15 year old child starting high school knows a heck of a lot about sex. They know about condoms, free birth control meds. This education comes from the home and the parents. I would not trust an instructer to educate a girl child of mine to learn about sex, period. Their are very many good teachers that out weight the bad ones. I just read an article about a group of young cheerleaders , having a stay over night with their coach? and they played a game that we called strip poker in my day.This was also called "bonding" time. No thanks, I think it is the parents responibility to raise that child, the truth of right and and wrong, morally and physically, Then you pray and hope what you taught them, gets them through this life.

Frankie, it's just wishful thinking. People in general are flawed and not perfect. If you think that most parent will tell their kids how to protect themselves, how to behave with the opposite/same gender, then it's not so. Unfortunately. Basing policies on wishful thinking doesn't work.

Where is it written that abstinence is a "religion" thing? Regardless of what you may think, abstinence is 100% effective. I'm not suggesting it should be the only thing that's taught, but it should be one of the things taught. Everyone seems to adopt the policy that since they will do it anyway (whether sex, drinking, drugs, whatever) we might as well arm them with the education necessary for their success.

Hows that working out for you. Does it strike anyone else that this approach leaves a hint of "we are condoning what you do"? Why can't "we don't condone this behavior and here is why" be an option.

It is a proven fact that School, Job, Marriage, and Kids IN THAT ORDER will give you the best chance at success in life. If any of those are omitted or become out of order, your chances for poverty, lack of opportunity, etc. are multiplied immensely. Why don't they teach that in school?

Seems to me that our real problem is a sex-obsessed society where girls in particular--though guys too--are taught that being sexually desirable is the biggest thing and kids don't have anywhere near enough productive to do to keep them out of trouble, nor do the teens who are most at risk seem to have appropriate support and supervision from their parents/guardians. Popular culture teaches teens to flaunt it and experiment, dress and act provocatively. It endorses sex for fun or recreation or just to blow off some steam. I think decisions about sex, as portrayed in the media, are unhealthy, almost always spur-of-the moment and impulsive and usually in circumstances no good sense or good judgment would condone. I think most teens know that sex can have serious consequences, but that the media deliberately downplays the risks. How often do you hear characters in the movies who've hooked up talking about a condom breaking or STDs or the uneasy feeling of wondering whether you really should have had sex with someone? How often do you hear them talking about sexual history and bugs they could be passing to the other? How often do you hear them talking about promiscuity and the consequences of that? How often do you hear them talking about what would happen if the woman "accidentally" got pregnant and what repercussions that would have? How often do you hear them talking about whether they're ready to be parents and what they'd do if there were an unexpected pregnancy?

A school can never teach a young person the most important things about sex... That it's easy to get swept up in sensations. That breaking up is a lot harder and more wrenching when you've had sex with the person you're breaking up with. That communicating about sex and what you want--or don't want--can be very hard. That men and women can perceive sex and consent to sex very differently. That sex is a serious responsibility that's about more than just you and your partner...that it can bring a third party, a baby, into the picture. (No abortion can change your responsibility to the potential lives you might create.) That contraception is no guarantee and you'd still better be ready to be a parent if you use it. That sex can--and should--create an emotional bond, whether or not anyone involved has any business bonding with the other. (Which is a very good reason to keep sex only between people who are totally committed to each other already and--more than that--stable. Marriage isn't a sinecure for all of this, but it at least provides some protections if people choose unwisely, and people would certainly take sex and the responsibilities that go along with it a lot more seriously if marriage were a prerequisite of having sex.)

So no, I don't think any school--abstinence-only or no--can do anywhere near an adequate job of teaching kids about sex. I think that's the responsibility of their families and, if applicable, their faith communities. I think we should encourage kids to avoid sex outside of marriage and be very careful about who we marry. If we did that, STDs would quickly become a thing of the past and families would be much more stable.

@my2centsworth,

Most sex ed teachers DO teach that abstinence is the only way that NOTHING will happen to them. The rest of the info is helpful too.

High school? I got it in 6th grade.

We had to watch a graphic childbirth video. After that, nobody in their right mind would do anything that might result in pregnancy.

Bill - couldn't agree more. 6th grade had to sit through graphic childbirth video AND a text book discussion of STDs and the facts associated with reproduction. Required the presence of a parent during the lesson. DO you know how embarassing it is for a 11-12 year old to watch that in front of your parents? Wow - it's amazing I ever had kids!

It is, but many don't.

if you would stop doing it, you wouldn't go blind!!

YES! Janelle

Well said. How can people who belive in fairy tales be running government... truly scary.

Sorry Janelle, it isn't just Republican politicians who have treate women like crap. How about Teddy Kennedy and his drowned date. John Edwards and his little on the side ring a bell? How about Bill Clinton and Monica? I really think that both sides have had a really bad record and neither should throw stones!

Where did I say one thing about political parties?

Don't forget John and Robert Kennedy, and Marilyn Monroe, who died under mysterious circumstances, presumably because she knew too much. Kennedy motto, "Use em, then lose em." While the little women at home stand by their men (and the power and money)...Just high paid whores.

@ dan m......where in janelles post did you see the word republican?

And while we are at it, how does sex education for boys and girls have ANYTHING to do with political sex scandals that occurred decades before any of today's schoolchildren were even born? Because two wrongs make a right? Unless you are doing math, where two negative numbers create a positive one, apples and oranges, dudes.

Amazingly, some people have the ability to read between the lines....The mere fact that you singled out the one instance of a Republican politician, to prove your point, out of thousands of Political Gaffes would lead one to believe that you have an Agenda or a Bias...Wouldn't you agree?

Or, it is the most recent instance of "mis-speaking" that applies to the situation at hand?

Aren't we clever this morning! (sarcasm,in case you couldn't "figure it out on your own"!)

It does sound like a myth. God could do that , anything he wants.

WE were founded as a Christian nation. Bring Christianity back to schools.

Can't please everyone so please the majority, not he minority. Leave them

alone. Our beliefs shouldn't bother them. Too much hate, like Rev.(?) Wright's

church of hate, Nomo' attended for20 years.

@Jack Kinch....We were NOT founded as a Christian Nation. Christianity has never been part of our schools, nor does it belong there. The Constitution was written to protect the rights of the minority from the majority. Your beliefs are yours alone and don't belong anywhere near my children.

Lisa is right.

"This country is in no way founded on the Christian religion". -George Washington

Well said. Bring back Segregation, disenfranchise black students. kick women out of our public colleges. All of which have been laws defended with the argument that its the law so it has to be obeyed. So by all means, lets just do what the law tells us no matter how we believe or how just it is.

Please tell us more about how unjust it is to give teens accurate information.

It's a nice thought, but I wouldn't trust some parents to know the difference between a condom and an ice cube tray. If they're going to learn about it, they might as well learn it from a trained professional with accurate information.

Sorry Ash, but have you seen the latest test results in this country? If these same teachers are in the classroom teaching my daughter sex ed I would prefer to say NO!

Ash, I think she knows that...

And Dan, the teachers that teach sex ed are more specialized than the ones teaching basic subjects.

Sorry but the facts are.. comprehensive sex ed works.. check out Japan or many of the Western European countries (Netherlands/Scandinavia) that have low teen pregnancy rates along with comprehensive sex ed.

You must be Dr Knowverylittle. To demonstrate use of a condom, bananas are used. The end of a broom can also be used, or a stick.

This crap works extremely well in every other country: Canada, the UK, Sweden. You lose this argument and by virtue of your ridiculous hyperbole, the next three arguments.

Every once in a while I agree with something Peridot says.

what utter crap.

Like everything you post.

Japan also teaches self-discipline. We make up excuses and drugs for kids who wont listen.

Japan also teaches absolute conformity, has a very high teen suicide rate and gave the world such morally straight ideas like animal porn, bukake, Hentai, etc. So yeah, by all means lets emulate the Japanese.

They also bombed Pearl Harbor, never officially apologized for it, perpetrated the Rape of Nanking, conducted horrible experiments on POWs, and sought out young soldiers to die in a lost cause for the glory of the empire. Of course that was a long time ago, but their public education actually has remained fairly static since then so their children are being taught in the same methods. Absolute conformity and suppression of individual will for greater shared glory.

The list of atrocities committed by Americans and Christians is 1000 times longer and a million times worse.

News98, you're a 14 year old male. Your brain is being flooded by testosterone. Another ten years is required before you'll have a fully developed cerebral cortex and you'll be an adult with worthwhile opinions.

Right now, according to our caveman ancestors, you should be out on the plains chasing antelope. You're barely civilised and scarcely worth communicating with at this stage of your development. All your rage and angst is tedious. You think you're the only person in the universe who has ever felt like that in the history of the planet. You're not unique, you're nothing special, there have been millions of males just like you coming of age in the past. It's difficult because you live in an artificial environment. There's not a lot we can do about that. Try to find a sport you like, that will help...this writing out your anger issues online isn't helpful.

Abstinence only sex ed fails with 72-80% of students. Look up the stats. It's a waste of money.

Candlewycke: You couldn't be more wrong. Japan apologised for Pearl Harbor during President Clinton's presidency. He brought it to their attention that they should do. As far as the Rape of Nanking, they acknowledged they were wrong about that as well. Personally, my friend was in labour and in a POW camp for women overseas. They tied her legs together so that she delivered a dead child. She forgave them that, or did you think she should have carried that anger to her grave?

So your argument is we shouldn't teach sex ed in the US because the Japanese were responsible for atrocities in WWII? I don't get the connection.

Something tells me that news98 thinks that the schools are teaching the kids how to have sex rather than what sex is and what it results in. A well done sex-ed curriculum is neither titillating or giggle-inducing, but can (and does) result in well informed teens.

The Japanese government said they regretted and express deep remorse for Pearl Harbor, but never apologized. Emperor Akihito cancelled a trip to the Arizona war memorial just last year in the fear that Americans would want an apology when he was there. You are more wrong than Candlewycke I'm afraid.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19941122&slug=1943318

I guess it all comes down to what IS sex? I don't think kids today think oral sex is really sex. To them sex is the penis entering the vagina, anything else doesn't count. When I was a kid I remember my best friend's mom, a nurse, sitting us down and telling us that we can get pregnant without losing our virginity! She said heavy petting can lead to it if there is any type of ejaculate from the male. To this day, before the condom goes on I make sure "willy" doesn't get close to the v. lol

News98, some of the things you say make me seriously worry about your grasp of reality. You think public schools teach "have sex continually"?

Really?

I read and laugh at you liberal idiots who rant and rave trying to justify behavior that you know is wrong and irresponsible, but you think if you deny long enough that there are accountability and consequences, it will become so. But I have to say, toad, you make me laugh the loudest with your ridiculous statistics. You make yourself sound like an ignorant little boy trying to get in on an adult conversation. Could you quote some of those millions of studies that have proven God doesn't exist? How about the atrocities committed by Christians that are on a list "1000 times longer and a million times worse"? Could you be more specific? You sound like a fool. But then doesn't the Bible say, "The fool has said in his heart, there is no God."? You and a couple of others on here fit to a tee.

OK Candyled!ck... How can you critisize Japan for the absolute conformity that they theach and then turn around and start criticizing their ideas for not conforming to our moral standards? That's just flat out hypocritical!

Bill, he didn't turn down the trip because he thought we didn't deserve an apology. It was likely because he thought the Americans would still be mad about WWII and he'd never hear the end of it, which isn't wrong for him to do because the time for that is over.

Because it is the LAW for the schools to be teaching proper sex education. Sounds like you don't think too well. Are you a bible thumper?

Suing isn't always for damages. You can also sue someone to make them do/not do something.

This isnt for THEIR kids. This is part of forcing your views on other people who disagree with it. They cant win an argument so they have to have the govt force their views on everybody else. And yes the same applies to other side.

Peanut brain-They aren't "forcing" their views on anyone. If you knew how to read, you would also know that it is the law in California DUH!.

That's a nice thought, but STD's and teen pregnancy are a societal problem, and as we all know there are some irresponsible parents out there. It would be fantastic if all parents were awesome and involved, but unfortunately it's not reality, and if it is for you then I want to live in the world you're living in. Most schools allow parents to take the kids out of the class when they're doing a course on sex ed, and a lot make the parents give permission for the kids to be involved, so there's not a whole lot of suing to be done. Plus it's a LAW in that state that the school isn't following, so the mom's are well within their rights to sue. So if some parent is too crappy to teach their daughter about sex ed and she gets pregnant and then goes on welfare to support the baby, guess what, it magically becomes your problem and my problem. I'd much rather the schools teach kids about sex than have to pay more to support teenage mothers.

You have my applause and respect as well as my admiration! Thank you for being a well taught caring person! The only person responsable for your actions is YOU! No one can be blamed for your stupidity, ignorance and disrespect but YOURSELF! Your parents didnt make you do things you have to know are wrong. No matter how badly you were abused it doesent take away your own responsiability to control your own actions! Not one person on this planet is responsable for your actions but you!

Anon, you are correct, this is a societal problem; but carry this idea a little farther. Unwed mothers are a societal problem when they don't have their own support system and rely on society to survive, should society control how many children a person is allowed to have based on how much support society has to provide? This can go from the octagon mom to welfare recipients, where does the line for society controlling free choice start and stop.

I'm not suggesting an answer, just looking a little farther down the road.

If the parents dont want their kids getting sex ed, they can opt out. CA has been like that since I was a kid there-- the northern part, not the weirdo part. ;)