STDs still on the rise, report says

Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn't say go without the education, I'm saying that if you don't think your children are getting the information that they need then you should be taking the initiative to provide that to them yourself.

How early do you think children should be introduced to this material?
 
disappointed said:
I didn't say go without the education, I'm saying that if you don't think your children are getting the information that they need then you should be taking the initiative to provide that to them yourself.

How early do you think children should be introduced to this material?
Click to expand...

What material? Sex ed should be developmentally appropriate.

Again, what about the parent that does not, or cannot, for what ever reason, provide accurrate information to their child regarding topics such as STDs, protection, teen aged pregnancy? Should those children be put at risk?
 
BradB08 said:
Do you consider children born out of wedlock to be "bastard children"? I have known people who expressed an opinion similar to yours and they consider children out of wedlock to be bastard children.
Click to expand...

And when it comes to Bristol Palin's son--they come to her defense. :roll:
 
What parent can't get to a public library and check out a book for free?

I don't know, sex can be a very destructive force, not only physically in the form of STD's, but it can definitely damage someone emotionally. Now I admit that I have made my mistakes, but I hope that I can teach my son not to do the same thing.

This is just a very sensitive subject. I understand that if children do have sex you want them to not catch an STD, but you're effectively telling them it's ok to go out and have sex at an early age if you're teaching them how to do it. It's not that much different than saying, "Don't do heroin, but if you do, make sure to do it the right way so you don't kill yourself."
 
disappointed said:
What parent can't get to a public library and check out a book for free?
I don't know, sex can be a very destructive force, not only physically in the form of STD's, but it can definitely damage someone emotionally. Now I admit that I have made my mistakes, but I hope that I can teach my son not to do the same thing.

This is just a very sensitive subject. I understand that if children do have sex you want them to not catch an STD, but you're effectively telling them it's ok to go out and have sex at an early age if you're teaching them how to do it. It's not that much different than saying, "Don't do heroin, but if you do, make sure to do it the right way so you don't kill yourself."
Click to expand...

Those that don't have libraries in their towns.
 
disappointed said:
What parent can't get to a public library and check out a book for free?

I don't know, sex can be a very destructive force, not only physically in the form of STD's, but it can definitely damage someone emotionally. Now I admit that I have made my mistakes, but I hope that I can teach my son not to do the same thing.

This is just a very sensitive subject. I understand that if children do have sex you want them to not catch an STD, but you're effectively telling them it's ok to go out and have sex at an early age if you're teaching them how to do it. It's not that much different than saying, "Don't do heroin, but if you do, make sure to do it the right way so you don't kill yourself."
Click to expand...

That is completely absurd. Children that are exposed to abstinence only education are having sex at the same age and the same rate as children who receive comprehensive education. The only difference is the ones that receive abstinence only are more likely not to use protection.

Since when do teens need permission to have sex? Did you ask your parent for permission? The fact is, they are going to have sex, they have always had sex, and they will continue to have sex. Teach them what they need to know so that it doesn't ruin their life or cause them to contract a disease that can take their life.

Sex education doesn't teach children how to have sex. It teaches them reality. And how to protect themselves from pregnancy and STD when reality hits.
 
There's always a good answer, as long as it's not that you just take responsibility for your life.
 
I didn't have the greatest parents, so I didn't really ask them anything. I had sex ed in school, but I still had unprotected sex. Luckily I didn't get an STD or get any girls pregnant. Not something that I'm proud of, but my parents were a terrible example for me.
 
disappointed said:
There's always a good answer, as long as it's not that you just take responsibility for your life.
Click to expand...

Protecting yourself is taking responsibility. Making sure that your kids have accurrate information, through whatever source is taking responsibility. Simply telling kids, "Don't have sex." is irresponsible. Not recognizing that all kids are at risk without the proper information is irresponsible. Believing that if you don't talk about it, they won't experiment is irresponsible. Believing that you can protect your child from making the same mistakes you made simply by telling them not to do it is irresponsible.

The whole idea behind comprehensive sex ed is that kids are taught to be responsible for their lives. Give them comprehensive ed, and the chances that they will also become responsible for another life before they are mature enough and responsible enough to handle it is reduced.
 
BradB08 said:
Don't you think that this statement is a little ignorant?

I do.

Without sex, we wouldn't be here.

And nature doesn't care if you have sex before marriage. Marriage is an outdated religious institution that doesn't adhere to any laws of nature.
Click to expand...

and not many people believe in traditional marriage anyway. open relationship thing, you know? :cool2:
 
disappointed said:
I didn't have the greatest parents, so I didn't really ask them anything. I had sex ed in school, but I still had unprotected sex. Luckily I didn't get an STD or get any girls pregnant. Not something that I'm proud of, but my parents were a terrible example for me.
Click to expand...

And many parents are bad examples for many children. That is why it is necessary that they get accurrate information from other sources. So tell me...do you consider yourself capable of providing your child with information regarding say HIV that is scientifically accurrate? Or what about gonnorhea, or syphillis, as these are both on the rise, and have many medical consequences that the general public is not aware of.

Evidently, not many parents are, or we would not be seeing the greatest increase in the incidence of the diseases being diagnosed in 15-24 year olds.
 
jillio said:
That is completely absurd. Children that are exposed to abstinence only education are having sex at the same age and the same rate as children who receive comprehensive education. The only difference is the ones that receive abstinence only are more likely not to use protection.

Since when do teens need permission to have sex? Did you ask your parent for permission? The fact is, they are going to have sex, they have always had sex, and they will continue to have sex. Teach them what they need to know so that it doesn't ruin their life or cause them to contract a disease that can take their life.

Sex education doesn't teach children how to have sex. It teaches them reality. And how to protect themselves from pregnancy and STD when reality hits.
Click to expand...

exactly.

besides, as has been proven time and time again, the more you tell a teenager not to do something, the higher the likelihood that they will.
 
Hear Again said:
exactly.

besides, as has been proven time and time again, the more you tell a teenager not to do something, the higher the likelihood that they will.
Click to expand...

Yep, the nature of the beast. That is why it is necessary to provide them with information that will allow them to protect themselves. "just Say No" is naivete in action. It didn't work with drugs and alcohol, and it doesn't work with sex.
 
disappointed said:
What parent can't get to a public library and check out a book for free?

I don't know, sex can be a very destructive force, not only physically in the form of STD's, but it can definitely damage someone emotionally. Now I admit that I have made my mistakes, but I hope that I can teach my son not to do the same thing.

This is just a very sensitive subject. I understand that if children do have sex you want them to not catch an STD, but you're effectively telling them it's ok to go out and have sex at an early age if you're teaching them how to do it. It's not that much different than saying, "Don't do heroin, but if you do, make sure to do it the right way so you don't kill yourself."
Click to expand...

that's easy for you to say and speculate. What about the facts that in old time, the sex was considered as taboo. You failed to take into account that not all parents are well-informed about it. You also failed to take into account that handful of parents were married young... meaning they may not know enough about it. Just because they are parents doesn't mean they know it all.

It is best left for professional to properly educate students about STD, sex, etc.
 
disappointed said:
I didn't have the greatest parents, so I didn't really ask them anything. I had sex ed in school, but I still had unprotected sex. Luckily I didn't get an STD or get any girls pregnant. Not something that I'm proud of, but my parents were a terrible example for me.
Click to expand...

See!?

Some parents don't take the responsibility to educate their children about sex.

So our community as a whole needs to help educated children and adults about sex education.

Not all will learn and still have unprotected sex But at least some will.
 
I never said I would "simply tell them not to do it."

And yes I feel totally capable giving my children scientifically accurate information on all diseases, not just STD's. I am a physician.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top