Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I fail to see how teaching facts is ever a threat to anyone or trumping parental rights. If a school your child goes to has a program you will hear about it and they give you an opt out, but it's really more of a sign that you should be talking to your own kids about this stuff first and not putting it off or trying to keep them ignorant because you prefer them not to know about things for whatever reason. If you want to teach them then do it, there is no danger.
Again, what is so bad about having an opt-in policy like most sane schools? Why do parental rights take a backseat and the state's moral authority trumps the parents? Are you also aware that also may violate a parents' 1st Amendment rigthts, especially if the state is interfering with their constitutionally protected religious beliefs?
But if they are under the age of 18 then it is the parent who is responsible, not the state. A 12 year old who has a baby cannot apply for welfare/food stamps. And a grandparent cannot apply for welfare because their kid had a kid.
Actually yes they can apply for any of those programs once they have a child.
So as the schools take more responsibility to teach the kids about sex and provide contraceptives and at younger ages, could the parents have legal grounds to blame the school for their kid's pregnancy then ?
(a) Opt in should be the way to go.
(b) Why are parents continuing to relinquish their responsibilities to public schools? Sad.
(c) Can I 'opt out' as a taxpayer to funding these free condoms?
That's what I was about to say. This goes back to again, bailing out someone for their mistakes of not practicing self-control. Lucid is basically saying forget parental rights, the state is supreme.
No i'm not, but thanks for putting words in my mouth .
(a) Opt in should be the way to go.
(b) Why are parents continuing to relinquish their responsibilities to public schools? Sad.
(c) Can I 'opt out' as a taxpayer to funding these free condoms?
A) An inconvenience is never opted into.
B) Are they? Stop making things up.
C) Yes. Stop being a tax payer.
It's never been brought up in court but it most likely would win. Very few districts do this anyway so the point is moot. And parental rights do have limits believe it or not.
Parental rights only have limits if you allow them. Believe me, I have seen parents fight hard for the sake of their kids, and if done right, will succeed.
Parental rights only have limits if you allow them. Believe me, I have seen parents fight hard for the sake of their kids, and if done right, will succeed.
Better to learn self-control so that you dont need taxpayer funded benefits later on, or get STDs. What a radical concept
Liberals don't think for themselves, remember.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
