step in the right direction!.....what do you think? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-20-2001, 08:35 AM   #16
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:30 AM
My problem with sex education is that it's hard not to teach it without some overwhelming prejudice or bias. It needs to be taught objectively.

My problem is kind of what rougerum stated as a positive of sex education: "It should basically be a class that is going to scare the shit out of kids..." I don't think that such tactics are either mentally healthy or effective. It is like D.A.R.E., a program that has many good intentions to prevent kids from doing drugs, but it just ends up as a way to expose kids to their existence. In fact, it was programs like that that I learned that drugs existed! However, in a usual teenage rebellion, one often gets cynical of what they are taught and will do the exact opposite.

I think that sex education should be approached in a wholly objective manner, allowing kids to understand what is all involved. Perhaps it should no longer be 'sex education,' but, rather, 'Health' class. Scare tactics will only drive them to what they are told not to do; but face it. Most of you remember the way you found out about sex, and I really doubt it was from school. I think we have to remember that kids are just younger versions of ourselves, and they'll figure it all out one way or another.

Melon

------------------
«Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.» - Hui-neng (638-713)
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 09:48 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon:
I do love it when people define what is 'natural' to me. While God did predefine a structure for the animal kingdom--i.e., that does include humans--he, in His infinite wisdom, gave us the power to transcend banal nature. In fact, that seems to be the overall theme of Christianity for the last two millennia; but, then when convenient, we are then told to be limited to our anatomy. So you want to play the "nature game"? Then we should be bisexual. Anthropology has determined that, in studying cultures that have no cultural taboos on sexuality (unlike Western Christian culture that has thousands of taboos), man is bisexual by nature. It is their belief that exclusive sexuality on both ends is a cultural construct. It is disappointing that man limits what God designed.
Melon
Melon, your arrogance never ceases to amaze me. In your great wisdom, you assume that someone is what you call a "troll", so it's okay to threaten that person.
In response to your points, I'll start with the "bi-sexual" bit first. Stop wandering. I was not discussing "taboos" or anything other than pure anatomy. Man is designed anatomically for woman, and vice versa. The female reproductive system can only produce babies with the help of a male, not a female. That alone should tell you that it is natural for a man and a woman to be parents but not 2 women or 2 men.
Also, your statement about Christianity and "nature" does not fit into this conversation AT ALL. People are given a new nature when they become Christians, but that doesn't have anything to do with anatomy. That has to do with the spirit. Not once are Christians told to "fight their nature" in the sense you are talking about. Christians are told to resist temptation for heterosexual sex until they are married, not forever. You remember that God created sex, right?
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 01:13 PM   #18
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 149
Local Time: 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem:
I just want to observe 2 things. It didnt sound as though melon is against sex education in its proper age group. He did make a general statement, but it seemed more directed at the way it is currently taught. I wont go on further as each country has different sex education curriculum. But sex is an issue for teenagers onward, not 5-6 year olds who are only interested in tonka trucks and painting.
Also, I dont think anyone was arguing that science and nature aren't able to allow same sex folks to produce children. It is however possible for same sex couples to be parents. How good they will be remains with the individual couples discretion and abilities as parents in general.

All in all though, it is probably better to instill in children that the family unit can consist of any number of people and genders. Children wont realise they are different until some cruel peer points out that they are different. And when that happens, the parents must be there to handle that obstacle. Same sex parents will be aware that the issue will eventually arise, and therefore plan for that. I believe it is a primamry role for the parents, and a supporting one for teachers.

I think the point of them "teaching" or reading about it in class is to eliminate the idea that they are different, or that they should be made fun of. I think it's not only pointed at the students with same sex parents, but it is for the students who would be otherwise making fun of those other children. To creat some sort normal aspect to same sex relationships to eliminate the thinking that the other students in the class are "freaks" for having same sex parents.

Also in reply to what seems to be the general thought, they aren't teaching the kids about sex. They are simply reading them CHILDRENS BOOKS with a story where a child has to same sex parents, it ISN'T the main focus of the book.
__________________
BLOCK is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 01:20 PM   #19
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 149
Local Time: 12:30 PM
The ignorance in this forum sometimes makes me cry, I didn't start a discussion on the "naturalness" or "correctness" of same sex relationships. Or if this "god" you speak of made us to choose or not to choose, same sex "relations", as they are, happen in the "wild" just as they happen in human life. Many animals have sex with anouther animal of hte same sex, it happens.

also, AGAIN, they arn't teaching the children about how the sex works, or any think like that. They are just reading them stories in which a child has same sex parents, it is NOT(from my understanding) the main focus of the book.
__________________
BLOCK is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 02:20 PM   #20
The Fly
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: LA
Posts: 82
Local Time: 12:30 PM
What i was talking about would be nothing like dare and would not be aimed at kids that young, it would be in high school and at kids that already know enough about sex and are familiar with it. High School kids know about it, you need to get on their level and take cold hard true facts with them about it. I took dare and that was pussy footing around everything drugs were about. I do think this needs to be kind of brainwashing, even though a word like that may sound bad it is necessary. Because if people get pregnant and end up having a hard time in life I gurantee you that would be much more mentally unhealthy to them than any class ever dreamed of.

~rougerum
__________________
Henry Rollins is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 04:16 PM   #21
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 149
Local Time: 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Gee whiz! Did you ask "what do you think" or did you not? Answer: you asked "what do you think"! And some people told you that they dopn't agree with you. And now you say "well, I didn't ask if you think two male or two female parents is natural." But, my opinion on whether this kind of class should be tought is based on the morality of it all. I think that it is not right for a child to be raised by 2 men as opposed to a man and a woman, and that is why I do not think this kind of teaching should be done. How can you ask me "what do you think", but then say "you can't base your opinion on ceratin criteria"?

[/B]

sorry about that, i just got carried away with myself. I just didn't want this to turn into anouther discussion about "the horror of homosexuality" thats all.
__________________
BLOCK is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 06:04 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BLOCK:

sorry about that, i just got carried away with myself. I just didn't want this to turn into anouther discussion about "the horror of homosexuality" thats all.
That's alright. Everyone knows I think homosexuality is wrong. But I also don't usually bring it up, either. But in the case, it is not the morality of homsexuality that is at issue here, it is the morality of 2 male parents or 2 female parents that is an issue for me. And the reason I brought up all the anatomy stuff was because I was upset with Melon for jumping on Halpick, who seems like a nice enough guy.

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-20-2001, 07:45 PM   #23
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 149
Local Time: 12:30 PM
no worries. (i don't care much for melon either)


So, from what i can see there is a general thinking that this new action being taken by teachers is a bad thing. But "they" have already voted for it, so i guess only time will tell if it really does work out.

and just to recap they wanted it to make children with same sex parents feel comfortable at school and give the other children reference so that they don't fear/hate what they don't understand.
__________________
BLOCK is offline  
Old 08-21-2001, 03:39 AM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BLOCK:
The ignorance in this forum sometimes makes me cry, I didn't start a discussion on the "naturalness" or "correctness" of same sex relationships. Or if this "god" you speak of made us to choose or not to choose, same sex "relations", as they are, happen in the "wild" just as they happen in human life. Many animals have sex with anouther animal of hte same sex, it happens.

also, AGAIN, they arn't teaching the children about how the sex works, or any think like that. They are just reading them stories in which a child has same sex parents, it is NOT(from my understanding) the main focus of the book.
Gee whiz! Did you ask "what do you think" or did you not? Answer: you asked "what do you think"! And some people told you that they dopn't agree with you. And now you say "well, I didn't ask if you think two male or two female parents is natural." But, my opinion on whether this kind of class should be tought is based on the morality of it all. I think that it is not right for a child to be raised by 2 men as opposed to a man and a woman, and that is why I do not think this kind of teaching should be done. How can you ask me "what do you think", but then say "you can't base your opinion on ceratin criteria"?

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-21-2001, 08:21 AM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Melon, your arrogance never ceases to amaze me. In your great wisdom, you assume that someone is what you call a "troll", so it's okay to threaten that person.
And what, dare I say, does a 'threat' mean on the internet? It's hollow. It's going to go nowhere. Period.

The fact that I think he's a 'troll' has nothing to do with what he wrote in that passage, but a culmination of the fact that he's a horrible archetype of what people think of farmers, which I find to be incredibly insulting, as I come from a farmer's family. No, we're not a bunch of naive hicks who don't know what the world is outside of our small town.

Quote:
In response to your points, I'll start with the "bi-sexual" bit first. Stop wandering. I was not discussing "taboos" or anything other than pure anatomy. Man is designed anatomically for woman, and vice versa. The female reproductive system can only produce babies with the help of a male, not a female. That alone should tell you that it is natural for a man and a woman to be parents but not 2 women or 2 men.
Well, I do appreciate your opinion, but I respectfully disagree; but, for argument's sake, let's say it is unnatural. It's no different than an infertile heterosexual couple raising adopted children. This is surely not as nature intended, but this is seen as more than acceptable in society.

Quote:
Also, your statement about Christianity and "nature" does not fit into this conversation AT ALL. People are given a new nature when they become Christians, but that doesn't have anything to do with anatomy. That has to do with the spirit. Not once are Christians told to "fight their nature" in the sense you are talking about. Christians are told to resist temptation for heterosexual sex until they are married, not forever. You remember that God created sex, right?
I'm talking about historical Christianity mostly. St. Paul and later ideological successors believed it was up to man to transcend and go beyond our physical nature. Yet, when it came to human desires, people were told to suppress or stick to what is 'natural'--i.e., physical anatomical design. While modern Christianity doesn't go nearly as far as it's predecessors, the cultural subconscious is obviously influenced by them, including what many people claim is 'natural.'

But I see I'm 'arrogant' now. I do love it when people call me names.

Milk of kindness to all,
Melon

------------------
«Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.» - Hui-neng (638-713)
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-21-2001, 09:33 AM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon:
But I see I'm 'arrogant' now. I do love it when people call me names.
You're not "arrogant now", Melon, you've been called that many times. Sometimes you just fit that label, man. And it's not as if you're somehow "above" calling people names. I've seen even the Great and Mighty Melon stoop to that level. Remember Quick Vick? Also, do you remember the things you've called us fundamental Christians?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-21-2001, 09:52 AM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:30 AM
I do not claim to be perfect. Nor do I claim to be 'great and mighty.' Any such claims are not endorsed by the entity behind the persona, 'melon.'

QuickVick is a separate story. Names were called only after his persistent attempts to agitate me. Remember point #1: I do not claim to be perfect.

And what I've called fundamentalist Christians is only a fraction of the hurtful stuff they've labelled to me directly and indirectly. I do apologize to you, 80s, but I have no sympathy for the devil.

Melon

------------------
«Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.» - Hui-neng (638-713)
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-21-2001, 09:54 AM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon:
I do apologize to you, 80s.
Then I apologize to you, Melon.

__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright Ā© Interference.com