I went to four different public high schools on two different coasts, and none of them taught sex ed at that time.
Then I guess your schools failed to provide you with a complete science curriculum, which included a health class.
Did your school teach you abstinence only, or sex ed without abstinence, or a combination?
I've already answered that. My school taught biological fact. Morality was left to the parents, as it should be.
Since your school taught sex ed, are you saying that schools in the past decade quit teaching sex ed?
Nope, that isn't what I am saying at all. I'm saying they have stopped providing comprehensive education in favor of morally based abstinence only.
Morality doesn't mean each person should do whatever he or she wants. Morality is a standard equally applied to everyone.
Nope. Morality is subjective. You cannot, as much as you would like to, decide morality for another.
Legality sometimes includes morality but not necessarily. Some laws permit immoral activities.
Nope. Laws prevent illegal activities. Whether or not it is amoral is a personal judgement.
Want? I want people to live moral lives voluntarily. But I know that isn't going to happen any time soon. In fact, things will get a lot worse before they get better.
No, you want people to live by your moral standards. Just because they don't doesn't mean that they are amoral. It just means that you are passing judgement on them based on your own standards you set for yourself.
What do you want?
I want people to have the skills and the knowledge necessary to make those decisions for themselves. I want that one small faction not decide what is moral for all, but only for themselves.
But you said that kids don't get the right kind of sex ed, so how do you have proof that it reduces STDs and pregnancy???
I have proof that abstinence only does not reduce the amount of sexual activity of teens. It only reduces the likelihood that they will use protection. When compared to kids that receive comprehensive sex ed, the only significant difference was the abstinence only kids did not use protection. They still had sex as teens, they still had as many partners. Kids that are sexually active and likely not to use protection are also more likely to become pregnant or contract and spread an STD.
How do you know parents aren't also teaching facts? Do you think teachers have exclusive rights to the "facts?" Parents can teach their children facts and morality.
Someone ain't teachin' the facts. Look around. See the rise in STDs and teen pregnancies? Parents can only teach what they know. Many parents are as ill informed regarding the facts of STDs as their children are.
That goes both ways.
How so exactly? If one is denied the facts, one should still be able to make a decision utilizing information unavailable to them? Only if they are a prophet.
No. There is one trustworthy source but I'm not allowed to discuss it at AD.
