CA school district sued over abstinence-only sex ed (apartment, landlord)

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by rebel12

But sex is not a forbidden fruit in America! Everybody has sex, even gays are free to have sex their way.
What forbidden fruit are you talking about? Lol

Please. No reason to be silly. (Or are you actually being serious? ) Sex IS sold as THE forbidden fruit available now in YOUR neighborhood IF you are bold enough and free enough to be one of the "rebels" ... People love the thought of themselves as "rebels", don't they? You know: the ones who break the rules and beat the odds and overcome the consequences. Sneaky sex, kinky sex, wild sex, group sex ... sexy looks, sexy fashion, sexy talk, sexy texts, sexy news, sexy sexy sexy ...

If it wasn't religiously, morally "forbidden", sex wouldn't be any of those titillating excitements ... it would just be -- well, pretty basic copulation mostly. No tickets or flash required.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by rebel12

Excellent point! I would add however that these are the parents not teachers who have to bear consequences of kids sexual (and any other) behavior. These are parents who have to watch their kids dreams and hopes dissapear and often have to support them financially when teenage mom give birth to children. Schools maybe bent on providing technical sex-education but will not help when it comes to raising kids of our kids. That's why parents should have the ultimate say over what, how and when their kids are being taught with respect to sexual education.

It is the consequences that definitely need to be taught. This includes disease, pregnancy, the potential physical and emotional damage from an abortion, the self worth feelings that can negatively be impacted, the view others can have of you and a whole lot more. It isn't just fun and games, though many want it presented that way.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by TrueTimbers

Because thinking about sex during nude public activities is not natural, attending nude gatherings with the intention of sex is perverted... Do you not know any nudists?

I suggest you study up on the philosophy of the nudist... It is about freedom, once you understand it you will agree... It is very "un-sexy".

Matter of fact I suggest we require nudism.. This will put an end to all this selling of sex in America right quick.. Those teens will look at each other in the class room naked and go eeeewwww gross....

Hello... we go through great pains as a society to have our cloths make us look sexy.. Please do get to know a some nudists, you will understand what Highnlight means by his statement then...

I ain't going nude. I hate being laughed at.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Since there were no organized cultures until roughly 10,000 years ago at their very earliest inceptions -- the Natufians, and the concurrent advent of the neolithic era -- and homo sapiens existed strictly in small bands further sub-divided into family units spread over fairly large ranges, there was no real "system" of morality or religion to be shared. Most of that crap came with the establishment of permanent settlements, and the shared burdens of management of crops and livestock and water -- resources. That's when civilizations began to develop and expand. Leadership was required. Egalitarianism slipped away. Shamans took over and superstitions were spread and shared and used to control. Power over others became the goal of the few. That's your origins of religion and morality.

Supposition not fact supported by any genuine historical evidence. You try to use "paleolithic" as a club defined as you wish. There is NO verifiable evidence of what their life was actually like. It is explained in detail based on ..... zero facts and a whole lot of hope/belief that it fits the "reality" one wants.

Doesn't relate to today? Well, that's kinda the missing link here in this very discussion, ain't it though? What we are reading here, posted by some, is the perpetuation of ancient superstitions and fears into our modern times. Sex wasn't bad or "evil" for millions of years ... then, all at once it took on a new persona ... and the crap hole just gets fuller and fuller. What changed? The way the universe breathes? Uh no. Just the way humans have refined their fears into mythologies.

Again supposition on your part. Where is the documented evidence that these early humans did not view sex outside of a committed relationship, as "bad"? Where is the evidence that for millions of years it was not "bad"?

All this sh*t about pornography and "creatively" bizarre sexual fetishes and behaviors exists because of the artificially manufactured illusion of "morality" -- founded in the fear-based messaging of a small group of basically anomalous sociopathic individuals driven to control others.

Now what to do? Now that we have all this population to control and manage? Now that we are so modern and enlightened? Well, la-de-da. Let's ignore biology some more and teach just the fear and superstition part ... teaching abstinence that way based on "moral reasoning" has been working so well for the past 5,000 years since civilizations really got rolling with the religious techniques. Or not.

That is your attempt to jump on your favorite hobby horse, religion. I have not mentioned religion at all, just the biological issues of youth and the emotional issues. They do not require religion to understand.

First step is to recognize the nature of nature.
Second step is to share that. Demystify.

You mean like the myths of paleolithic man you keep going on and on about?

Deal with the issue that in SCHOOL, teaching about sex biologically may well be necessary, but extreme cautions, with solid reasoning on the facts, should also be emphasized. Consenting adults can do as they wish and deal with any consequences good or bad. Juveniles are not yet ready for that and need to be taught ALL that is involved.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Supposition not fact supported by any genuine historical evidence. You try to use "paleolithic" as a club defined as you wish. There is NO verifiable evidence of what their life was actually like. It is explained in detail based on ..... zero facts and a whole lot of hope/belief that it fits the "reality" one wants.



Again supposition on your part. Where is the documented evidence that these early humans did not view sex outside of a committed relationship, as "bad"? Where is the evidence that for millions of years it was not "bad"?



That is your attempt to jump on your favorite hobby horse, religion. I have not mentioned religion at all, just the biological issues of youth and the emotional issues. They do not require religion to understand.



You mean like the myths of paleolithic man you keep going on and on about?

Deal with the issue that in SCHOOL, teaching about sex biologically may well be necessary, but extreme cautions, with solid reasoning on the facts, should also be emphasized. Consenting adults can do as they wish and deal with any consequences good or bad. Juveniles are not yet ready for that and need to be taught ALL that is involved.

Your responses demonstrate a lack of education in anthropology, science, and history.

I do not watch television. But I am aware of the popularity of "forensic" shows ... I believe one is / was called "CSI"? Way back there was one called "Quincy". Etc. Do you understand why they were so popular? Do you understand how science reconstructs things to solve mysteries? Do you believe the forensic sciences are really that good as they are dramatized?

Real life "forensics" are amazing.

There were no commonly shared morals / standards / mythologies in the Paleolithic. Common sense and the slightest grasp of natural history will tell you why.

[rebel12]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

There were no commonly shared morals / standards / mythologies in the Paleolithic. Common sense and the slightest grasp of natural history will tell you why.

And how are even Paleolithic morals relevant today given so dramatically different density of population and social structure of society today???

Its absurd proposing that we go back in time and adopt customs from absolutely different reality and time. Are you also proposing that we abolish money because the concept was not around in Paleolithic era? Lol

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by rebel12

And how are even Paleolithic morals relevant today given so dramatically different density of population and social structure of society today???

Its absurd proposing that we go back in time and adopt customs from absolutely different reality and time. Are you also proposing that we abolish money because the concept was not around in Paleolithic era? Lol

I find your laughter (lol's) amusing ... since I never suggested what you are laughing at.

Paleolithic "morals" aren't relevant today, for the same reason they weren't relevant in the Paleolithic era: they didn't exist.
That was the point of bringing up the references to the era. Get it yet?
A few thousand years of moral mythologies created out of fear and desire to control others --
ummm, compared to hundreds of thousands of years of - well, no "hang-ups".

As for abolishing money? Good idea.

[rebel12]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

I find your laughter (lol's) amusing ... since I never suggested what you are laughing at.

Paleolithic "morals" aren't relevant today, for the same reason they weren't relevant in the Paleolithic era: they didn't exist.
That was the point of bringing up the references to the era. Get it yet?
A few thousand years of moral mythologies created out of fear and desire to control others --
ummm, compared to hundreds of thousands of years of - well, no "hang-ups".

As for abolishing money? Good idea.

Thats ok ,I find all of your posts utterly amusing, Suggesting that we discard thousands of years of civilizational development and adopt social standards from an era with dramatically different density of population and social structure. Wow. LoL.

Are you suggesting we adopt Paleolithic standards of personal hygene as well? Can we keep metal tools? The wheel?


Are you one of these guys:
"Even the cave men can do it" ROTFL.

/FAIL

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Your responses demonstrate a lack of education in anthropology, science, and history.

I do not watch television. But I am aware of the popularity of "forensic" shows ... I believe one is / was called "CSI"? Way back there was one called "Quincy". Etc. Do you understand why they were so popular? Do you understand how science reconstructs things to solve mysteries? Do you believe the forensic sciences are really that good as they are dramatized?

Real life "forensics" are amazing.

There were no commonly shared morals / standards / mythologies in the Paleolithic. Common sense and the slightest grasp of natural history will tell you why.

Basically a non answer.

However your last point shows what I am talking about and shows you have no real idea of what life was like then.

"Common sense and the slightest grasp of natural history will tell you why."

There is NO record just assumptions.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by rebel12

And how are even Paleolithic morals relevant today given so dramatically different density of population and social structure of society today???

Its absurd proposing that we go back in time and adopt customs from absolutely different reality and time. Are you also proposing that we abolish money because the concept was not around in Paleolithic era? Lol

Note Null has no idea what morals existed then just assumptions to fit his position. There is NO record so all is assumption/opinion.

Once historical records begin we have ......... morals in evidence. maybe writing made the difference?

Nah, so what made the change and if NULL responds please present proof not opinion.