Comments on: Rethinking Sex In the Classroom?

By: chinathesaint

chinathesaint — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:41:48 +0000

In our country there are a lot of girls who get pregnant at a younger (and younger and younger…) age. I think the media and technology are somewhat responsible for this (sex is promoted in the ads, tv, movies and is easily accessed through the internet even by kids), so as our culture that made us always consider morality and being conservative. I mean girls (even boys) here would be very shy to buy contraceptives for fear of being discovered that she’s already having sex, thinking that she’ll be laughed at or be talked about, risking the fact that she might get pregnant or she might get a disease. But you can’t blame the girls because PMS is a big issue here esp. to the old fashioned people. In spite of this, the young still keep on doing “it” and get unwanted pregnancy, making our population bigger and our poverty rate worse. I think sex education will help the youth understand better their responsibilities and the consequences of having sex. The only problem is if it will ever be implemented in our ever conservative and ever religious country.

copyoracle.com

By: baby invitations

baby invitations — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:47:13 +0000

Does sex education program works? It seems like sex among teenagers are quite common nowadays and not a single sex education could really stop them.

By: Free Reminder

Free Reminder — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:28:14 +0000

Half of all teens in the United States are sexually active. There is clear evidence that comprehensive sex education prevents pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. But the Bush administration and its conservative allies are pushing critical facts about sex and its consequences out of the classroom, in favor of incomplete — but more politically palatable — sex education programs.

By: keyz

keyz — Sun, 17 May 2009 13:39:18 +0000

I’m not a censoring proponent, and in fact, was an English major who had to read most of what you mentioned, plus much much more. The notion of having kids read literature of previous generations is to teach them the progression of human history and the struggles of each previous generation or civilization. Unless we know our history, we are doomed to repeat the previous failures. Additionally, whilst authors such as Twain and Steinbeck did use the “n” word, they were often commenting about social strife. Twain was NOT a racist, but was very much pro-abolition and women’s rights. What he wrote reflected the society of his day and was often sarcastic. He also paid for two black men’s college education (one to Yale law school and another to become a minister but I forget where). Studying literature is very much an in-depth study of history. Do not ever censor anything simply because of a word inside of the book, you must study the time and the author was well as his writings. Indeed, there are writings that are deeply offensive. However, we cannot sacrifice the freedom of the press or the idea that we teach through literature by providing a select few with the ability to censor or restrict how and what we learn!

By: The Mother

The Mother — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 14:34:06 +0000

THe problem with censoring books from another age, for content objectionable to this age,is that that rules out just about all available literature from more than ten years ago.

Let’s face it. Women and minorities WERE viewed differently in the old days.

As a Jewish family, we can’t even read Shakespeare without pause.

And yet, I refuse to censor my kids’ reading. We can teach them proper values, and simply deal with poor role models from OLD BOOKS by reminding them that things were just different then.