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.
Can't get pregnant through the digestive or respiratory systems.Can't tell kids
well this way of breathing is entirely normal like you can with saying
homosexual sex is normal. ( whatever your position on that is). I don't need
some activist teacher indoctrinating my kids in sex at school. Not what schools
are for
.
All the more reason to teach it. I still would like to know why you consider reproduction as being "filth". Very curious.
That is because they don't subscribe to aborting 1/2 of the babies. It also is a result of rural communities and not sex education or the lack of the same. Can I also ask what your statement has to do with teaching sex education in kindergarten? That is the subject of this thread or was supposed to be.
BTW, yes, we worry about young kids getting molested, do you think this is new? Were you even alive in the 40s and 50s? Our parents handled our sex education and also taught us about the possibility of things happening to us. We didn't leave it up to the schools. Sex education for 5 and 6 year olds has nothing to do with molestation. I am shocked anyone would even suggest there is a correlation between the two?
Teaching 5 and 6 year olds about good touch/bad touch has everything to do with molestation. There is absolutely no valid reason for a parent not wanting their child to be taught that.
Teaching 5 and 6 year olds about good touch/bad touch has everything to do with molestation. There is absolutely no valid reason for a parent not wanting their child to be taught that.
There is no valid reason that a child hasn't heard that from their parents before entering school.
By 3 a child can be told about touching.
There is no valid reason that a parent shrugs off parenting thinking school will pick up the slack and do it for them. That's parental neglect.
I don't consider reproduction filth. But seeing how my 6 year old was very much involved in naming her baby sister,and going to the pregnancy appointments she had PLENTY of questions for her mother and I. We answered every single one. No schools needed to explain things to her. We did as parents its our job to answer questions from our kids.
I believe this was yours?
Quote:
Exactly. One of the very few benefits of living in the bible belt is this filth
won't fly here.
I can't understand how anyone would not want children to learn about good touch/bad touch. I really question the motives of anyone against that being taught.
Then listen up ... and pay close attention, so that your confusion may be partially cleared up.
The first order of business when protecting such young children as those of kindergarten age is for parents to safeguard them by not allowing unsupervised access to them by adults not fully vetted and trustworthy. This would necessarily include adults in the business of working with children, because the creeps that sexually abuse children gravitate toward occupations that provide such access, including clergy, daycare operators and employees, etc. The parent is the person to teach their children the difference between bad touching and good touching ... not strangers who might actually be a potential threat, be they school personnel, priests, or anyone else, INCLUDING kindergarten personnel.
Secondly, the hard cold fact of the matter is, when it comes to the vanguard of child protection, the state has the WORST RECORD ..... child protective services are the least safe hands to which children may be exposed, as the data suggests that a child is 5 times more likely to suffer abuse, either sexual or physical abuse while in the custody of Child Protective Services, PRECISELY because of the situation I mentioned previously regarding how abusers gravitate toward positions which allow such access to their prey. So do research the deplorable record of state sponsored agencies and child welfare organizations before you make the inexcusable mistake of believing that they are the best qualified to safeguard children, rather than the parents.
And while it is important to recognize that there are sick SOB's out there that are a threat to children, careful monitoring of who has access to your child will always be the far better tactic than instilling fear in the minds of these children WHILE putting the onus on the child to report inappropriate contact, because 1) these abusers of children are practiced in the art of manipulation and securing their silence ... 2) making this sick situation an issue of fear in the minds of these young children is unhealthy. The facts are, innocent and genuine affection in the form of physical contact between children and adults is beneficial to the development and happiness of children. This is scientifically proven, where children in incubation wards developed and matured faster and healthier when held and stroked by medical personnel such that might come from the infant's parents, than the children not provided this physical contact. The same is true of young children who find comfort and joy in such physical connection with trusted adults. Grandma hugging little junior and patting him on the butt should not ring alarm bells in anyone's mind, least of all in the mind of 5 year old Johnny. Instilling this type of fear in children is really a form of abuse itself, and creating this mentality of fear in children's minds where EVERYONE is a potential threat to them is psychologically damaging, affecting their natural, healthy development. This is not so unlike the mentality of constant fear being induced in adults today, as the all powerful protectors of the state suggest there is a terrorist hiding behind every bush, and around every corner, and that the first thing that should come to mind when we see a backpack is fear of an explosive device.
Furthermore, my opinion on these matters are not just philosophical or theoretical, but true in practical application and personal experience. Many years ago I dated a woman with a son of near kindergarten age, around 4. This little boy was such a sweet adorable kid that over time he and I developed a very close bond ... as close as one could come to a biological father son closeness, where he would charge me as I arrived at the door with this beaming smile and a huge hug as if he hadn't seen me in weeks. He so longed for that male/father bond which his real father neglected too often, evidenced by the too numerous to count last minute disruptions of our weekend plans, when "dad" canceled his weekend custody/visitation, with our disappointment paling in comparison to the subsequent disappointment of this sweet kid when told he was once again not going with daddy for the weekend. Then one day as I arrived, and went to give this boy the routine, obligatory hug, he recoiled. So I asked him what was wrong, and he told me that dad had told him not to hug me, that it was inappropriate. Now, to this day, I do not know whether this was based on some fear of inappropriate touching, or whether the father was simply jealous of the close bond his son was developing with another man, but the sadness in this boy's face was impossible to miss. So I just told him that it was OK, and that I didn't want him to disobey his father ... and I gave him a hug, while telling him that he need not hug me back, breaking his father's rule, which eased his discomfort, and generated another big smile. But I'll never forget the way this altered our interactions, and the unnecessary burden put on this boy, because he now consciously stopped jumping on my lap at every opportunity as he had grown accustomed to do, or even the reticence in just holding my hand when the three of us were out together. I felt very sad that he was put in this situation of denying this innocent and healthy affection he had for me, and I for him. This is one of the unintended consequences of the type of fear mongering that underlies this particular matter.
Now, really pay close attention here .... I cannot begin to list the vast number of unintended negative consequences produced by the ever well meaning but ill conceived, hair-brained, idiotic, nonsensical and counterproductive actions of the modern day liberal movement who believe they have discovered new and better ways to do virtually everything! This is PARTICULARLY true when it comes to educating and raising children, if one were to simply look at the results we see today after several decades of the progressive agenda that has dominated education, and how we have tumbled from being number 1 in virtually every measurable metric, to being barely middle of the road, competing now with developing third world countries. The same is true of the emotional and psychological development of children today as compared with children 40 years ago.
Your self proclaimed lack of understanding is exactly that .... you don't understand the error in your own line of reasoning, consequently, you can't understand the opposition to it. Nevertheless, the error in reasoning is there, and you need to work on understanding that, rather than why people disagree with you.
That is because they don't subscribe to aborting 1/2 of the babies. It also is a result of rural communities and not sex education or the lack of the same. Can I also ask what your statement has to do with teaching sex education in kindergarten? That is the subject of this thread or was supposed to be.
BTW, yes, we worry about young kids getting molested, do you think this is new? Were you even alive in the 40s and 50s? Our parents handled our sex education and also taught us about the possibility of things happening to us. We didn't leave it up to the schools. Sex education for 5 and 6 year olds has nothing to do with molestation. I am shocked anyone would even suggest there is a correlation between the two?
There is a difference between teen pregnancy rates, and teen birth rates.
Quote:
Mississippi was ranked 2 out of 51 (50 states + the District of Columbia) on 2011 final teen births rates among females aged 15-19 (with 1 representing the highest rate and 51 representing the lowest rate).RH1 On a similar scale – where 1 is the highest teen pregnancy rate and 51 is the lowest – Mississippi was ranked 2 out of 51 (50 states + the District of Columbia) in pregnancies to females aged 15- 19 in 2008
Now, really pay close attention here .... I cannot begin to list the vast
number of unintended negative consequences produced by the ever well meaning but
ill conceived, hair-brained, idiotic, nonsensical and counterproductive actions
of the modern day liberal movement who believe they have discovered new and
better ways to do virtually everything! This is PARTICULARLY true when it comes to educating and raising children, if one were to simply look at the results we see today after several decades of the progressive agenda that has dominated education, and how we have tumbled from being number 1 in virtually every measurable metric, to being barely middle of the road, competing now with developing third world countries. The same is true of the emotional and
psychological development of children today as compared with children 40 years
ago.
And look at who is head and shoulders AHEAD of you. Progressive countries. Some so progressive, that you would call them socialist. Countries which DO teach sex ed in schools, and have nothing even remotely resembling your Republicans within their borders.
Last edited by weltschmerz; 09-01-2013 at 12:01 PM..
And look who is head and shoulders AHEAD of you. Progressive countries. Some so progressive, that you would call them socialist. Countries which DO teach sex ed in schools, and have nothing even remotely resembling your Republicans within their borders.
Those countries are also the least obsessive about sex in all facets of their society..politically, socially and economically.
That is because they don't subscribe to aborting 1/2 of the babies. It also is a result of rural communities and not sex education or the lack of the same. Can I also ask what your statement has to do with teaching sex education in kindergarten? That is the subject of this thread or was supposed to be.
BTW, yes, we worry about young kids getting molested, do you think this is new? Were you even alive in the 40s and 50s? Our parents handled our sex education and also taught us about the possibility of things happening to us. We didn't leave it up to the schools. Sex education for 5 and 6 year olds has nothing to do with molestation. I am shocked anyone would even suggest there is a correlation between the two?
Teen PREGNANCY rates are through the roof in southern states that teach abstinence. That's different than the birth rate, which factors in abortion, miscarriage, etc. States that teach broader reproductive health have lower PREGNANCY rates than those states which are abstinence only.
The whole purpose of good touch/bad touch is to protect kids from molestation and to teach them personal boundaries and body safety--I'm not sure what you're talking about here. That's part of the kindergarten health curriculum. It's really simple--any body parts covered by your swimsuit are private, and it's "bad touch" for someone to touch you there unless it's to help you, like your parents or the doctor applying medicine or to keep you clean, just like it's "bad touch" to kick someone, or punch someone. "Good touch" is a hug or kiss from your mom, etc. When someone doesn't follow the touching rules, you tell another adult, and you keep telling until someone helps you. Here's a sample instruction outline: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/NR/rdonly...riculum_12.pdf
I'm not SAYING anything. I only provided the numbers the census bureau collected.
I would venture that poverty and immigration status have something to do with these high numbers.
Maybe states need to do what NYC is doing...paying for IUDs for teens.
I do see 14 year olds getting pregnant. I do think it's a huge problem.
And I don't think it's all due to lack of sex education.
I'm usually in the middle schools and last year I was in the high school for several months.
I saw too many pregnant students walking the halls and heard one too many stories about students dropping out after they had their babies. I asked one teacher if that was the norm and she shook her head and said there's more and more each year.
There's more to it then education. They can't get to drugstores and they have no money to buy this stuff and they have such a casual approach to getting pregnant.
There needs to be more than saying "use a condom" by a teacher.
Bah..I've gotten so far off topic here which is learning "penis" at age 5 so I'll stop.
Then what exactly were you trying to say? You deliberately left out the data on other states, with equally high teen pregnancy rates, that don't have high hispanic populations, and compared them to a state that's primarily white. If you look at the common denominators among states with high teen pregnancy rates, it's poverty and a lack of comprehensive reproductive health care education.
Kids are more likely to use contraception the first few times they have sex if they have a clear understanding of the issues around it, and if it's accessible to them. When I was a girl, lots of girls DIDN'T plan for sex or use birth control at first because they were afraid it would make them look promiscuous. They still had sex anyway, and some of them got pregnant. When you take the social issues out of it and treat it as a medical issue, it becomes matter of fact, and people take more responsibility for their own health.
We're off the subject anyway, because it's a long way from teaching kids proper names of body parts and that all life forms reproduce to reproductive health care education in high school.
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.
