Bush's Sex Scandal

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
drhark said:


Are 18 year olds brainless jelly fish without Big Brother telling them what to do?

At age 18 would you know long division if you weren't taught it in school, would you know how to read, would you know U.S. History, would you know how to check yourself for cancer, or even know how to drive?

No. And why? Because we need education.

You don't automatically turn 18 and everything you need to know about sex pops into your head.

I wasn't awared education was Big Brother.:|
 
A_Wanderer said:
Only if they don't have a proper education.

So we've come full circle and the next question would be what is a proper education and who decides this.

Sigh...........
 
Proper education is one that prepares them for their future and for life.

And part of life is sex. Be it in high school, at age 18, or when they get married.

But even married couples who have waited still need to know about "safe sex" for not all couples want kids the first year of marriage.
 
drhark said:
Where is there proof that the present system works?

""it is not a school's role to explicitly forbid sex.""

You can't teach a kid right from wrong in a public school? Unless you don't think teenage sex is wrong. Can someone please make a case that teenage sex is good? Children need to be told right from wrong. We don't all agree on what's right and wrong, but the vast majority of Americans would agree teen sex is wrong and not desirable for a healthy society. When they're 18 they can do whatever the hell they want.

""""you sound like a George Bush "conservative" -- there are no morals the government can't instill, no religiously oriented program the government can't fund."""""

Did I mention religion anywhere? This is a typical attack. Typecast someone as religious, then attack them while ignoring the argument.

""""Sounds like that's working really well.""""

We're dealing with sex. Nothing works very well. And single case studies are not proof of anything.

""""""i have never had sex without a condom. not once."""""
I hope that isn't a permanent situation, to not ever experience the real thing

""""Causing teens and preteens to feel guility and ashamed of sex is not how we should be educating our children.""""

They should feel ashamed just as the child who gets caught with their hand in the cookie jar should feel ashamed. I'm sorry if shame and guilt were manipulated incorrectly and abusively by your parents in your childhood but that's how we learned right from wrong.

I'd also like to ask a question. Apart from unwanted pregnancy or disease, what consequences, if any, do you all feel are possible harmful side effects to teenage sex?

My parents were open about sex education and never made me feel ashamed for wanting to know about sex. Also, they never used guilt as a means to teach right from wrong. Alas! I never got pregnet as a teen and nor did I get VD.
Also, It does not appear anyone here seems to be stating they agree with teen sex. We just feel they need to be educated about sex.
 
Last edited:
drhark said:
Where is there proof that the present system works?

""it is not a school's role to explicitly forbid sex.""

You can't teach a kid right from wrong in a public school? Unless you don't think teenage sex is wrong. Can someone please make a case that teenage sex is good?


come to think about it, this is a perfect example of wishful Conservative thinking. you asked for someone to present an argument which no one -- except for perhaps a realy horny teenager -- would argue for. it's as if you need to think that liberals want a world filled with non-stop, consequence-free, underage, non-parental consented fucking. sorry. no liberal thinks that. in fact, both liberals and conservative want the same thing: happy, healthy teenagers who aren't parents and are STD-free. the difference is in how one goes about achieving this. you'd like to use guilt and shame and "no means no" and "don't have sex because it is wrong." whereas a liberal would rather use statistics, information, and reason. this seems to me indicative of a different world view between liberals and conservatives, one that has actually been written about. conservatives see black and white; liberals see grey. conservatives have no problem aligning themselves in response to what is agreed upon to be a certain, inflexible standard that creates reality. liberals tend to question everything, spinning themselves into relativism and becoming obsessed with things like "process."
 
Back
Top Bottom