Bush: No Sex Anytime

[A_Wanderer]

Well now that I have your attention

According to online reports, the Bush administration in January issued regulations redefining "abstinence" in federal educational programs to mean avoidance of sex at any age whatsoever except within the framework of conventional heterosexual marriage. Loads of tax dollars will now be spent in American classrooms to enforce the message that gays and unmarried heterosexuals, no matter how ripe in age, should never have sex at all, no matter how monogamous. To quote the regs:

Abstinence curricula must have a clear definition of sexual abstinence which must be consistent with the following: "Abstinence means voluntarily choosing not to engage in sexual activity until marriage. Sexual activity refers to any type of genital contact or sexual stimulation between two persons including, but not limited to, sexual intercourse."

[And later:] Throughout the entire curriculum, the term 'marriage' must be defined as "only a legal union between one man and one woman as a husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." (Consistent with Federal law)

source

I think that this admin may have a lot in common with the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

 

[STING2]

Well now that I have your attention

source

I think that this admin may have a lot in common with the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement [/QUOTE]

Actually the birth rate among those that stick to that formula in the United States is higher than any other group.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Would you rather they were advocating premarital sex and encouraging kids to do it?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Yes.

 

[anitram]

I would rather they thought about their own sex lives (ew!) than to obsess about ours constantly.

 

[blueyedpoet]

I wonder what Bush's sex life is like? *shudders*

 

[BVS]

Would you rather they were advocating premarital sex and encouraging kids to do it?

What kind of logic is that? Really?

You just turn everything around? There's only black and white?

 

[deep]

I think the whole premise of this thread is bogus


The source and links are just blogs.


I did some googling and could not find official Government docs to support the claims (they may exist)

I did find
THIS

from the Department of Health and Human Services site

 

[susanp6]

I don't even want to think about that blueyedpoet !!!

 

[deep]

am I defending the Adminisration? jeez

again

from the site

here


there is reasonable? information

at Adolescents/Teens/Youth

at Teen Sexual Health (MEDLINEplus)

regarding Homosexuality.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

What kind of logic is that? Really?

You just turn everything around? There's only black and white?

Things are either good or bad. Right or wrong.

 

[deep]

Things are either good or bad. Right or wrong.

wrong

 

[Utoo]

wrong

 

[melon]

Things are either good or bad. Right or wrong.

Dualistic nonsense.

Melon

 

[blueyedpoet]

Things are either good or bad. Right or wrong.

I believe this is called a false dichotomy.

 

[deep]

I was brought up in an environment with that belief system
Now, I think it is just lazy thinking

I find that many if not most Conservatives, Religious fundamentalists of all stripes, employ this device.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Dualistic nonsense.

Melon

Fine. Things are wrong or not wrong. I don't see how you can disagree with that.

 

[VintagePunk]

Fine. Things are wrong or not wrong. I don't see how you can disagree with that.

In life, not all is black and white, there are many shades of grey. My observation has always been that thinking in dichotomies is either a function of youth, or due to strong conservatism/religious fundamentalism.

 

[chiso]

NO sex at any time?

Sounds alright.



[No, wait... it's NOT alright. ]

 

[indra]

Things are either good or bad. Right or wrong.

Wow. Life must be so very easy for you then.

But boring as all fuck.

 

[indra]

Fine. Things are wrong or not wrong. I don't see how you can disagree with that.

That's because you lack the imagination to see that others may see and think differently. That's very sad for you.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

You're kidding, right?

How come something be in between "wrong" and "not wrong"?

 

[melon]

How come something be in between "wrong" and "not wrong"?

You define something as "right" and "wrong" on the basis of how it benefits you. An action can be right for you or your society, while, at the same time, occur at the expense of someone else or another society. As such, an action can be simultaneously believed to be "right" by one side and "wrong" by another.

That's why I hate dualistic arguments.

Melon

 

[VintagePunk]

You're kidding, right?

How come something be in between "wrong" and "not wrong"?

No. If all you've ever faced in your life are situations where there are clear cut answers, and clear right or wrongs, then you're either not thinking about things too deeply, or you're very fortunate. I suspect age and life experience might change your viewpoint in this regard.

 

[yolland]

I split off the Iran posts and merged them with the other Iran thread. If that's the topic you're wanting to pursue, please do so here.

 

[nbcrusader]

I would rather they thought about their own sex lives (ew!) than to obsess about ours constantly.

The government is interested in all aspects of our lives - as our individual actions have consequences to the society at large.

We wear seat belts for the health benefits and lower medical cost burden on society. How fast we drive, what we eat, where we smoke, etc., etc.

Given the similar health impacts (personal and societal) that can result from sexual conduct, it is not unreasonable to discourage such activity.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the one

 

[blueyedpoet]

The government is interested in all aspects of our lives - as our individual actions have consequences to the society at large.

We wear seat belts for the health benefits and lower medical cost burden on society. How fast we drive, what we eat, where we smoke, etc., etc.

Given the similar health impacts (personal and societal) that can result from sexual conduct, it is not unreasonable to discourage such activity.

It is not unreasonable to discourage behavior that is destructive. Safe sex is hardly destructive.
If the educational community properly instructed students about sex - ie. how to practice safe sex, the emotional and physical effects etc - our society would benefit greatly. Our society is sexually dysfunctional. Sex is still far too taboo. So, on the one hand you have people who are afraid and embarrassed to talk about sex, and on the other hand, you have people who rebel against those who are embarrassed. The latter can engage in some destructive behaviors, as can the former.
By not engaging our youth in productive conversation, we are doing our society a great disservice.
C.S. Lewis once wrote that an alien would believe our society is very off in our attitude towards sex. He gave an excellent example. Say, for instance, that a culture engages in food strip shows. Cover up the burger...ooh, show a little meat....ooh, show a little bun....ooh, show a little lettuce etc. We would think that something was very off with their food drive. Likewise, something is very off in regards to our sexual drive.

 

[deep]

We wear seat belts for the health benefits and lower medical cost burden on society. How fast we drive, what we eat, where we smoke, etc., etc.

Given the similar health impacts (personal and societal) that can result from sexual conduct, it is not unreasonable to discourage such activity.

The Government does not advocate abstinence from driving.

It says if you are going to drive
- do it as safely as possible.


There are some that believe the internal combustion engine
is a sin against humanity and the God's green earth.

And they may choose to abstain from driving. God bless them and God Bless America.

 

[deep]

Say, for instance, that a culture engages in food strip shows. Cover up the burger...ooh, show a little meat....ooh, show a little bun....ooh, show a little lettuce etc.

wow, I need a cigarette.