[Al Tarket]

sex education is important however it does not matter anyhow, in todays standards women are young more pretty and the men dont want to loose the moment that could change in an instant especially in a relationship. i do not see why young people make a big fuss about the whole issue for, and the older people should know better then to get in the way of a natural urge that can not be ignored no matter how many rules you have.

it would be very dumb of sarah palin to suppress the media, if what they say is true about the American press that they are persistent, rude and uncompromising, they will persist in making sure they get their voice heard, despite sarah palin being very annoyed. however that mccain fellow should keep an eye on her, if she is what i expect her to be. a mad woman on the loose with power to kill the united states Christianity religion off who have their respect within the sex department without a problem.

[General Battuta]

sex education is important however it does not matter anyhow, in todays standards women are young more pretty and the men dont want to loose the moment that could change in an instant especially in a relationship. i do not see why young people make a big fuss about the whole issue for, and the older people should know better then to get in the way of a natural urge that can not be ignored no matter how many rules you have.

Sex education is tremendously important. It prevents teen pregnancies and helps control the spread of STIs like AIDS.

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure young women are just as horny as young men.

[BengalTiger]

The way I see it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards#Extramarital_affair

Mr Edwards, who was caught by the media having an affair not too long ago, tried to deny everything. When the media found that his other chick had a baby just after the affair, he denied that it was his. He even offered to take a DNA test, but his g/f responded that she would not be party to a DNA test "now or in the future.", so they're hiding something. Either the fact he's daddy, or the fact she was sleeping with 2 or more people in late 2007.

Now let's look at Mrs's Palin's case- she's anti abortion, and it turns out she'll face problems, rather than deny them and hope they might go away. She never tried to deny that her daughter is pregnant, she never made her do a quiet abortion. The guy who's marrying her is confirming he's the father by the wedding (perhaps he did it to make this a guarantee he'll be related to a wealthy family, who knows). Also the young future parents will raise the child, and take the responsibility for doing it.

The way I see it, Palin didn't have much of a choice, a lot of teenagers have kids, whether wanted or not. It's the way you take life's challenges that matters here and Palin wins against Edwards.

[Mars]

They recently discovered (can't be bothered to find the BBC article, but it was there last month) that the rate of AIDS in the United States is around 50% higher than previously thought. A pregnancy can completely ruin the prospects of your average teen...

And sex ed isn't important?

[karajorma]

Now let's look at Mrs's Palin's case- she's anti abortion, and it turns out she'll face problems, rather than deny them and hope they might go away. She never tried to deny that her daughter is pregnant, she never made her do a quiet abortion. The guy who's marrying her is confirming he's the father by the wedding (perhaps he did it to make this a guarantee he'll be related to a wealthy family, who knows). Also the young future parents will raise the child, and take the responsibility for doing it.

The way I see it, Palin didn't have much of a choice, a lot of teenagers have kids, whether wanted or not. It's the way you take life's challenges that matters here and Palin wins against Edwards.

Pity she's not running against Edwards then.

Seriously though, why should any American trust someone who believes that abstinence is a great preventative of teenage pregnancy when this is contradicted by not only all the scientific literature on the subject but her own personal experience?

[Mongoose]

I'd trust her in that, if her kid had just listened, she never would have wound up in that situation in the first place. Not her mom's fault that she fell asleep during that particular class.

[Al Tarket]

They recently discovered (can't be bothered to find the BBC article, but it was there last month) that the rate of AIDS in the United States is around 50% higher than previously thought. A pregnancy can completely ruin the prospects of your average teen...

And sex ed isn't important?

no, its not because we are born with that genetic info into our dna, which means being tought it in school is just a supplementary to what you have found out yourself when you reach teenage years before you get taught it in schools, you know it and i know it. Its happens when we become attracted to the opposite sex that our gentials have a mind of their own as a man checking out a woman. im not sure how it goes for woman, however thats all the proof thats needed, the rest tends to itself in due course through flirting and friendships etc.

50% more aids so how is this possible? could we be looking at another africa?

[karajorma]

Sex-ed is there to correct a whole bunch of misconceptions that spring up from exactly the kind of "picking it up" approach you are advocating. If you leave it to "picking it up" you end up with a whole generation believing you can't get pregnant if you **** on the girls period or if she goes on top or if she jumps up and down after sex.

Or did you believe sex ed was about teaching people how to ****? Cause I know that a lot of people think that Americans are stupid but I'd never met anyone who thought they were that stupid.

[BloodEagle]

Seriously though, why should any American trust someone who believes that [teaching] abstinence is a great preventative of teenage pregnancy when this is contradicted by not only all the scientific literature on the subject but her own personal experience?

Fixed, for great justice.

[karajorma]

Fair point.

[WMCoolmon]

Now let's look at Mrs's Palin's case- she's anti abortion, and it turns out she'll face problems, rather than deny them and hope they might go away. She never tried to deny that her daughter is pregnant, she never made her do a quiet abortion. The guy who's marrying her is confirming he's the father by the wedding (perhaps he did it to make this a guarantee he'll be related to a wealthy family, who knows). Also the young future parents will raise the child, and take the responsibility for doing it.

It's hard to deny that someone is pregnant. These things tend to show, on most women anyway.

As for the guy "confirming it" - he's doing no such thing. Unless they've done a DNA test, he has no way of knowing if it was him or somebody else she was sleeping with. Men do not, insofar as I know, have any kind of 100% detector on whether a baby is theirs or not while it's still inside another person.

Finally, of course the guy's marrying her. Her mother is the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, and he probably knew the girl for a long time before now. Her daughter's obviously well off and he's going to have a lot of opportunities to do things that nobody else does over the course of the election. Even if he couldn't stand her, he'd have a good enough reason to marry her. That, and, running away from your commitments when they get (inter)national attention is not going to go over well with the girls.

[Mongoose]

Sex-ed is there to correct a whole bunch of misconceptions that spring up from exactly the kind of "picking it up" approach you are advocating. If you leave it to "picking it up" you end up with a whole generation believing you can't get pregnant if you **** on the girls period or if she goes on top or if she jumps up and down after sex.

Or did you believe sex ed was about teaching people how to ****? Cause I know that a lot of people think that Americans are stupid but I'd never met anyone who thought they were that stupid.

In grade school, we thought that sex ed was all about getting the slightly creepy guy who came in to teach it to us to say "butt ****" out loud.

And I never said that I thought using a completely strict abstinence-only, never-mention-birth-control approach was a particularly wise move.  But I also believe that the other extreme I've seen practiced, i.e. throwing out free condoms and lube like candy without ever delving into the emotional ramifications of sex, is equally unwise.  (Seriously, my best friend in college had to personally refuse practicing putting a condom on a banana back in middle school.)  It kind of becomes a sticky issue (ha) for me personally, since I'm against artificial birth control from a moral standpoint, but I'm also well-aware that you're not going to be able to magically stop teens from having sex just by wishing so.  I do, however, believe that kids are capable of being a lot more responsible than many would give them credit for, and I feel like the automatic assumption that they're going to be screwing like rabbits is a rather insulting one.  I don't really have an answer for what the proper way to go about teaching sex ed is, since the only personal experience I have to go on is based on a few generally hands-off sessions back in Catholic middle-school.  It's really much ado about the most primal of acts.

Then again, maybe what they should really be telling kids is, "Sex can wait...masturbate!"

[Nuke]

or at least invent a semi-decent blowjob machine

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiD1X8baE9Q

god damn she p3wn5

the problem with the whole sex ed thing is it fails to recognize an important fact. the youth of america have not always been absolute ****ing whores. i blame pop culture. they need to stop selling sex to kids. its the new camel joe. teens are so encouraged by our society to ****. you got barely dressed pop stars, singing in a way that sounds like a ****ing orgasm, and barely waring a thing, and dancing in a way that would be expected in a strip club, not in a music group targeted at 12 year olds. its just ****ing sick. rap music does the same thing for teen drug use, rudeness, and general criminal behavior. thats where the problem lies, not in any form of sex ed which i think is up to the parents, not the government. and i sure as hell dont want to pay for it.

[redsniper]

... this coming from the hardcore "I want to burn churches and hope the world nukes itself" Alaskan (soon to be Phoenician) metalhead troll?

Also: agree.

[Bobboau]

I the "I hope one day all religion is discarded as the useless anchor on humanity that it is" Libertarian Atheist, concur with my mass destructive friend.

[karajorma]

And I never said that I thought using a completely strict abstinence-only, never-mention-birth-control approach was a particularly wise move.  But I also believe that the other extreme I've seen practiced, i.e. throwing out free condoms and lube like candy without ever delving into the emotional ramifications of sex, is equally unwise. 

If you're seeing that then you're still seeing bad sex ed. Good sex ed should be pushing abstinence. It shouldn't be pushing abstinence ONLY.

Let me put it this way. In Palin's case you have an 18 year old and a 17 year old getting married. She still has 20 years left on her biological clock. Do you seriously think that having her leave school and get married with no idea how to prevent herself from having a child every year beyond not ****ing is a good idea?

Sex ed isn't just about stopping teenage pregnancies (although that is a part of it). It's supposed to last you the rest of your life. This foolish preoccupation on children having sex is resulting in a generation of people in their 20s and 30s who even when married still don't have much of a clue where babies come from. Yes once you've had your first unplanned child you might look up that information but surely it's smarter to not get to that stage in the first place. Even the Catholic Church is pro-birth control as long as the Rhythm Method is the version used. Some abstinence only sex ed classes don't even teach that.

Yes there are people who will get off their butts and find out the information themselves but they are usually the ones who need sex ed the least! The ones who need it end up with six children not through choice but cause they don't seem to be able to figure out how to stop it happening.

I do, however, believe that kids are capable of being a lot more responsible than many would give them credit for, and I feel like the automatic assumption that they're going to be screwing like rabbits is a rather insulting one.

I tend to agree actually. Not all kids will be. But unless you segregate the ****ers and non-****ers (which all the social problems that's going to cause) the only sensible approach is to teach everyone in the hope of the message sinking in for those who will listen and will actually take something away from it.

Besides as I said before sex ed isn't just about teenage sex (or shouldn't be at least).

Then again, maybe what they should really be telling kids is, "Sex can wait...masturbate!"

Like this?

[Androgeos Exeunt]

Wouldn't too much masturbation damage reproductive organs?

[Mongoose]

Yeah, that'll do nicely.

And no, I don't really think that her situation is a good one at all, although I do respect both of them for taking on the responsibility of raising the kid.  There is something staggering to me about couples that can't afford to raise even one child pumping out five or six, considering that "sperm meets egg" was something we were taught back in grade school.  The point about sex ed being good for a lifetime (or at least until she hits menopause) is a good one, too.  I suppose what would make the most sense to me, and trying to keep at least some of my personal beliefs out of it, would be the sort of program that pushes hard against sex until both parties understand all of the potential consequences of the act and doesn't ignore the fact that ways to counteract pregnancy exist.  (I honestly wasn't even thinking of the rhythm method as a form of birth control when I made that first post, since I'm so used to hearing the term applied only to rubbers and drugs. )  You're always going to have idiots managing to knock each other up, but hopefully you're able to minimize it as much as possible.

Edit: Not if you don't ignore the "holy crap my skin is chafing time to stop" signals your body sends you.

[karajorma]

Wouldn't too much masturbation damage reproductive organs?

And here is an example of the danger of a lack of sex ed.


It won't make you go blind or give you hairy palms, either you know.

[BloodEagle]

Completely unrelated note: Nike should make condoms.