US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #8 - Page 32 - 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 09-10-2008, 12:01 AM   #466
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,287
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
I have a son in Kindergarten and another in 1st grade. There is NO sex Education, IMO, as defined in the paragraph listed that is age appropriate for either of my boys. HIV? Alcohol? Drug Use? I know is says, "age appropriate" but I think that this is something that should have been very specific in the ages where this is to be taught and it should be a hell of a lot older that a 5 year old child in Kindergarten.
You don't get it. The phrase "age appropriate" is up to interpretation, and you are interpreting it in the way that allows you be against it. "Age appropriate" will mean something different when dealing with kindergardeners than it will when dealing with third graders than when dealing with sixth graders than when dealing with freshman than with dealing with seniors. I thought this was self-explanatory. No one is saying show condoms to kindergardeners. It's already been said that the only likely 'sex-ed' thing to be taught to kindergardeners is simple protective measures so that if someone tries to molest them they can scream for help. That's it. And, in all likelihood, you know it.
__________________

__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:02 AM   #467
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
No pupil shall be required to take or participate in any class or course in comprehensive sex education if the pupil's his parent or guardian submits written objection thereto, and refusal to take or participate in such course or program shall not be reason for suspension or expulsion of such pupil.
I am NOT missing or ignoring any point.

Your wrong and wrong. First you insisted that you disagree with the bill because it had no age appropriate provision. I show you that it did. Then you say that there is no age appropriate sex ed for kindergarteners and I show you that your kid wouldn't be taught that if you basically signed a form.

So please tell me where I'm uninformed?

I honestly don't even know why I bother.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:02 AM   #468
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Lila64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,710
Local Time: 07:46 PM
my head hurts


anitram
__________________
Lila64 is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:03 AM   #469
War Child
 
TheEdge U2JT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In a house filled with boys, guitars, pets and a lot of love!
Posts: 947
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
Only because these points come up in the statute doesn't mean each one of the points is meant to be taught in every single year.
When one of the points isn't "age appropriate", it doesn't get taught.
Come on, what ever happened to common sense? Write legislation with how is supposed to be implemented. There is no reason for it to be that vague and no for there to be a range of K-12 for sex ed.
__________________
TheEdge U2JT is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:03 AM   #470
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
IT SAYS AGE APPROPRIATE RIGHT THERE IN THE PROVISION.

This is seriously maddening.

I give up.

Section 27-9.2(a)

Obama did not even let it go to a vote

he gave up, too.
Quote:
7/1/2003 Senate Senate Floor Amendment No. 1 Tabled Pursuant to Rule 5-4(a)

It really is a bad idea, to let different people
use their judgment on what is age appropriate with sexual behavior and 5 year olds



Obama = bad judgment ?




Is McCain as wrong as everyone thinks on this issue?

Are the Obama people spinning themselves into the ground?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:04 AM   #471
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
There is no reason for it to be that vague and no for there to be a range of K-12 for sex ed.
This legislation is not vague.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:06 AM   #472
War Child
 
TheEdge U2JT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In a house filled with boys, guitars, pets and a lot of love!
Posts: 947
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
You don't get it. The phrase "age appropriate" is up to interpretation, and you are interpreting it in the way that allows you be against it. "Age appropriate" will mean something different when dealing with kindergardeners than it will when dealing with third graders than when dealing with sixth graders than when dealing with freshman than with dealing with seniors. I thought this was self-explanatory. No one is saying show condoms to kindergardeners. It's already been said that the only likely 'sex-ed' thing to be taught to kindergardeners is simple protective measures so that if someone tries to molest them they can scream for help. That's it. And, in all likelihood, you know it.
Thanks, you are making my point. "age appropriate" is open to anyones interpretation. Thats why I feel things like this should be more specific.

There was nothing in that section about "protective measures so that if someone tries to molest them they can scream for help." I also dont see that as "Sex Ed" either.
__________________
TheEdge U2JT is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:08 AM   #473
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
There was nothing in that section about "protective measures so that if someone tries to molest them they can scream for help." I also dont see that as "Sex Ed" either.
No, generally when you write legislation you don't stick apples and oranges into the same section.

Henceforth, that was present in the other section which I laid out for you.

Again, I don't know why I bother.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:10 AM   #474
War Child
 
TheEdge U2JT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In a house filled with boys, guitars, pets and a lot of love!
Posts: 947
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
This legislation is not vague.
"age appropriate" is vague. I guarantee if we took a survey of the people in this forum as to the time it is "age appropriate" to teach Sex Ed or about contraception, there will be several different ages given.

That's because it is VAGUE. If the government is going to dictate policy like this it needs to be specific.
__________________
TheEdge U2JT is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:11 AM   #475
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Again if Obama stands by the legislation

why did it get tabled (killed) in the Ill State Senate?

and not even come up for a vote?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:11 AM   #476
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,287
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
Thanks, you are making my point. "age appropriate" is open to anyones interpretation. Thats why I feel things like this should be more specific.

There was nothing in that section about "protective measures so that if someone tries to molest them they can scream for help." I also dont see that as "Sex Ed" either.
You're the one asking about common sense. It would be interpreted by school boards, people who run school districts. Do you honestly think that any school board in America is going to give the ok to show kindergardeners condoms and diagrams of sexual organs and all that? Do you? Of course you don't because the first school board to do so would be the subject of outrage and maybe even legal action brought about by angry parents.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:11 AM   #477
War Child
 
TheEdge U2JT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In a house filled with boys, guitars, pets and a lot of love!
Posts: 947
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
No, generally when you write legislation you don't stick apples and oranges into the same section.

Henceforth, that was present in the other section which I laid out for you.

Again, I don't know why I bother.

So you cannot have different age ranges for the different section and material that is being covered?
__________________
TheEdge U2JT is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:11 AM   #478
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 08:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
You're missing or just ignoring the point. It was either poorly written or poorly thought out...or, most likely, both.
I think you're missing the point. The reason for the vagueness is that every community is different. Some communities in this country have higher rates of sexual abuse than others, the exposure is different as well for age groups, some communities are exposed earlier than others...

There was a case recently where sexual abuse occured within a small community of several young children. The school had to come in and teach the children to speak out if this happen to you, this is inappropriate, etc... Well guess what, in this highly letigious society some folks got upset. I bet some wish they had something like this now...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:13 AM   #479
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
You're the one asking about common sense. It would be interpreted by school boards, people who run school districts. Do you honestly think that any school board in America is going to give the ok to show kindergardeners condoms and diagrams of sexual organs and all that? Do you? Of course you don't because the first school board to do so would be the subject of outrage and maybe even legal action brought about by angry parents.

Why push it down to 5 year olds??


why not at least 5th or 6th grade ?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-10-2008, 12:14 AM   #480
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 09:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT View Post
So you cannot have different age ranges for the different section and material that is being covered?
Including set age ranges would likely expose the legislation to possible constitutional issues (arbitrariness).
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now  
 

Tags
mccain, obama, politics

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 09:46 PM.


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