Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

In sex education we had a person from a sex health clinic come in and teach us about condoms and "alternitive sex" like oral.

Most people are going to have sex. There should be more campaigns in favor of condoms. Condoms help prevent pregnancies and diseases such as HIV / Hepatitis C

when i was in grade 11, we were forced to write a report on the rise of AIDS /HIV and other STDS

someone mentioned to hand out condoms as a solution, the problem with that is, it might work with some third world country, but the thought in most north american / european teens heads isn't " oh if i don't wear this , i will catch a serious disease"
they are thinking something more akin to " if i wear this thing, it wont be as pleasurable "

during sex ed, the teacher had mentioned to get you and your partner tested BEFORE doing anything sexual , even at the time it sounded totally ridiculous, i do think it would be an idea for a serious relationship , but not for a one night stand type thing

the problem is that drugs or alcohol is usually blocking all common sense when sexual activity is going on between two teens

At 6/25/11 10:48 PM, highschooldude wrote: i n cluded i pic that makes abbdentes less effective in males and lesbians

I hope you get something penicillin can't cure, just to prevent you from further contaminating the gene pool.

At 6/26/11 09:47 AM, Elfer wrote: Football abstinence would be a good program, and it would be cheap too. All you have to do is go to the spot in the high school where the retired jerseys hang, and put up a sign saying "FOOTBALL KILLED THESE STUDENTS. DON'T BE NEXT."

Sure, and you can put the signs right next to the "Don't Drink and Drive" and "Don't Smoke" posters already there.

At 6/27/11 05:11 PM, Mfan wrote: when i was in grade 11, we were forced to write a report on the rise of AIDS /HIV and other STDS

someone mentioned to hand out condoms as a solution, the problem with that is, it might work with some third world country, but the thought in most north american / european teens heads isn't " oh if i don't wear this , i will catch a serious disease"
they are thinking something more akin to " if i wear this thing, it wont be as pleasurable "

during sex ed, the teacher had mentioned to get you and your partner tested BEFORE doing anything sexual , even at the time it sounded totally ridiculous, i do think it would be an idea for a serious relationship , but not for a one night stand type thing

the problem is that drugs or alcohol is usually blocking all common sense when sexual activity is going on between two teens

that's what the problem with some people. they only think of pleasure. they are not thinking of what's the aftereffect. so its really better to teach abstinence and teach kids to know when is the right time.

Just gonna drop in here.

As a lot of things, I agree that abstinence only and scare tactics is thing of the past. But conversely, I still think sex should be treated as a serious subject and dangers of sexuality should be explored, as well as it should be made clear that technically, sex is only reserved for those who want to bear the consequences.
So you don't just say "Here, some condoms. no fuck away as long as you wear them."

I was taught sex ed in high school I believe and from what I remember, it was nothing about abstinence and was about proper condom use and stuff like that. I suggest that this is probably the best thing that we should teach to our kids. We even went over the likelihood of getting pregnant with the percentages. They said that abstinence is the only thing that is 100% guaranteed, but leave that up to the students to decide.

Reminds me, how far is abstinence in education anyway. I doubt there's so many schools that choose to ignore condoms anyway.

"NO ONE" I know practices abstinence. Why should I?

O GOD
who doesnt hate those piss-ass hippies that belive too strongly in that bible crap

Abstinence only sex ed? What is going on in America? Had they turned stupid over the past 25 years because of fundamentalist Christians?

First, Creationism (aka "Intelligent" design), and now this. Puts me off from living there. People are abusing the Bible!

I agree completely. Scare campaigns work when we are taught in elementary school. When kids get older they make poor decisions like having unprotected sex in high school. Teaching Abstinence Only isn't going to keep these older kids from having sex. If they want to explore then let them explore, just don't feed them this horse crap. If kids are smart then they won't have unprotected sex in high school, teachers and campaigns shouldn't treat them like babies and instead treat them like adults and let them make their own decisions whether they are poor ones, or good ones.

Education, that is what is IMO the most important thing that can be done.

The teaching of abstinence is RETARDED .
It is only done because of those stupid fucking religious assholes , still trying to jam their damn beliefs down people throats , & the hell with the problems that creates.
Teach children about how to protect themselves from pregnancy & diseases.
Teach them about every form of birth control & every type of disease & how prevalent it is in society ! Teach them that if you're going to have sex, you need to be careful & you have to be smart about it.
Hell saddle kid's (particularly girls) with young children every day at school for a couple of weeks.
Make them keep up their class load of work & care for a small child through out the whole day, make them come to classes early & keep them after for a couple of hours ! Let them get a feel for how much work taking care of a child is...probably scare more than half of them, away from any type of sex at all.

But education, the truth, these IMO are what should be done for young people.

You so silly - I see absolutely no problem with abstinence, but I can see the frustration with abstinence only, if you're not a Christian. If you want to have programs that are inclusive of everything then you really must screen to see if the person is Christian or not, and refuse Christian educators the right to teach it. If something is a part of their religion then it's unreasonable to force them to teach it otherwise, so just cut the middle man out entirely and it'll make everyone happy. It's a Christian's responsibility to teach their own children about their beliefs and how they are to treat sex, so if they're going to trust the schools to teach their children about it then they shouldn't complain when they teach them contrary to their beliefs.

So in conclusion - have non-Christians teach the subject and the Christian can teach what they want in their own homes. No one's toes are stepped on, and the education you want to have is accepted. Everyone wins.

At 6/27/11 10:23 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 6/25/11 10:48 PM, highschooldude wrote: i n cluded i pic that makes abbdentes less effective in males and lesbians

I hope you get something penicillin can't cure, just to prevent you from further contaminating the gene pool.

We must inform you that eugenics doesn't work, we appologise for the inconvenience.

At 7/4/11 04:23 PM, Gario wrote: So in conclusion - have non-Christians teach the subject and the Christian can teach what they want in their own homes. No one's toes are stepped on, and the education you want to have is accepted. Everyone wins.

By Christian, you mean conservative Christian, I hope. Teachers just have to teach hat's in the curriculum and if they refuse, then they are not good teachers.

You can't exclude teachers just because they are Christian, as there are many Christian teachers that don't have problem with condoms.

Abstinence by its very definition is fucking retarded.

People fuck, okay? They do it all the time and nothing is wrong with that, there are probably a couple thousand people in the world fucking right now. There is probably a couple thousand people in the world fucking at all times.

Gues what is the biggest common denominator with all your ancestors? They got laid.

Sex is part of life, not teaching it is insulting.

At 7/8/11 12:10 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Abstinence by its very definition is fucking retarded.

No it's not. Abstinence is a virtue, and it's a shame that we all don't have the will to achieve it on some level.

People fuck, okay? They do it all the time and nothing is wrong with that, there are probably a couple thousand people in the world fucking right now. There is probably a couple thousand people in the world fucking at all times.

So? People drink all the time. I apretty sure there are a few thousand people doing cocaine right now too. Just because a lot of people do something, doesn't mean it should be encouraged. Face it, we Americans are too loose with our sex. We are free to have it, but we do it so much without a thought to its consequences, both physical and emotional.

Frankly, we should all look up to those who have the self control to turn down sex until they are physically and emotionally ready and responsible.

Gues what is the biggest common denominator with all your ancestors? They got laid.

Yeah, well back then, in the need to out pace the infant mortality rate and the young lifespans, we had to breed like mormon bunnies just to survive as a species. Nowadays with modern medicine, such vulgar practices of unrestricted procreation are more harmful than helpful to our species.

Sex is part of life, not teaching it is insulting.

Self control is part of life. Not teaching that is equally insulting.

At 7/6/11 01:18 PM, RubberTrucky wrote:

At 7/4/11 04:23 PM, Gario wrote: So in conclusion - have non-Christians teach the subject and the Christian can teach what they want in their own homes. No one's toes are stepped on, and the education you want to have is accepted. Everyone wins.

By Christian, you mean conservative Christian, I hope.

Obviously, yes. Some Christians have no problem with it, and others do.

Teachers just have to teach what's in the curriculum and if they refuse, then they are not good teachers.

I could tell you how wrong that type of thinking is in the world of education, but let's keep it relevant to the topic at hand. As you're an atheist I understand you have no context to understand the problem, but asking a Christian (or any religious, really) to teach something that is directly against their beliefs is disastrous for them - there's some serious spiritual consequence to it. Whether or not you believe in an invisible punishment in the afterlife (or whatever) for breaking some belief doesn't factor in, here - if you ignore how someone will respond to that situation then you (or whoever the administrator is) is entirely at fault, since the situation is very easy to avoid. If you want to avoid a situation where something is being taught that you don't want then hire someone who is willing to teach it. It's the easiest road that avoids the problem, so why would you do anything otherwise?

You can't exclude teachers just because they are Christian, as there are many Christian teachers that don't have problem with condoms.

Some Christians don't. Some do. Point taken, though - I admittedly was taking the safe road on this and simply removing anyone who might teach differently from the equation. Perhaps just asking the person if they have problems with condoms/birth control/any prevention measure is enough. If they have a problem with it then don't ask them to teach it. That'll fix the 'abstinence only' problem in sex ed.

If you want to avoid a situation where something is being taught that you don't want then hire someone who is willing to teach it.

Er... I mean if you want to avoid a situation where you want something taught then hire someone who is willing to teach it. Hopefully the day will come where there is an edit function on these forums :/

At 6/27/11 10:23 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 6/25/11 10:48 PM, highschooldude wrote: i n cluded i pic that makes abbdentes less effective in males and lesbians

I hope you get something penicillin can't cure, just to prevent you from further contaminating the gene pool.

lol I'm not sexually active because i can't afford condoms let alone going on dates i had one gf i would have fucked her but i didn't have a rubber in the world (and shed had lots of parners) so i backed out

but yah that gen pool joke was a low blow but you did not know it i have lots of mental illnesses passed on Genetically i've thought of getting snipped because of it but then my balls would be free floating fuck that

i guess i think it's a joke how many of you so strongly want to abstain and think anyone who doesn't is retarded i don't know about you but in Canada we use rubbers most of our population comes from imagination they poster in my jr.high said "5 minuets of please is not worth a life time of pain if you don't abstain use a condom every time" in small print it said atccul time may very this was realistic education we even had actors do a play in grade nine showing things about relationships involving sex at the end they showed how things can go wrong

but i will admit i'm pissed that no girl i know wants to have sex with me i go after hot ones but i know i'm like sub par but there are uglier guys i think it's because that or i'm a smokier and alcoholic (yah i know i'm a real catch lol) but yah hope all you want the chances of me geting anything (like an std) any time soon are like next to none unless i can get the clap from a porn site

At 7/8/11 11:20 PM, highschooldude wrote: but i will admit i'm pissed that no girl i know wants to have sex with me i go after hot ones but i know i'm like sub par but there are uglier guys i think it's because that or i'm a smokier and alcoholic (yah i know i'm a real catch lol) but yah hope all you want the chances of me geting anything (like an std) any time soon are like next to none unless i can get the clap from a porn site

Chicks that have sex in high school are sluts anyway. The fuck wants that sloppy seconds? You might as well have sex with a full compost bin...

At 7/8/11 11:20 PM, highschooldude wrote: lol I'm not sexually active because i can't afford condoms...

They're like 75 cents at most gas stations. That's... no, no one wants to be with a guy that can't spend 75 cents for them. I could find that much in the seat of my car - if that was the only thing that was preventing me from sex then I'd fork out the 75 cents.

Seriously, that's possibly the worst excuse on the planet to not have sex.

At 7/9/11 05:46 PM, Gario wrote: They're like 75 cents at most gas stations.

Fuck gas station's, he's Canadian, remember? Universal Free Healthcare. He ought to be able to walk up to any health department and get 'em by the bagful for FREE, just like you can here in America.

If he's to stupid to know that, maybe it's best that he's not out having sex at all.

LOL proteas just because you have deluded yourself into thinking that celibacy in the reason you don't have sex, doesn't mean that abstinence only programs will have any effect on you know, normal people.

At 7/9/11 10:16 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote: LOL proteas just because you have deluded yourself into thinking that celibacy in the reason you don't have sex, doesn't mean that abstinence only programs will have any effect on you know, normal people.

I know what you guys are trying to do, and I'm not playing your game anymore. Troll me all you want, misinterpret and misrepresent what I say all you want, I'm not going to snap on you.

At 7/9/11 10:23 PM, Proteas wrote: I know what you guys are trying to do, and I'm not playing your game anymore. Troll me all you want, misinterpret and misrepresent what I say all you want, I'm not going to snap on you.

If you read the entire thread, Prot's point is actually quite intelligent. Our ideas are pretty much the same, just the way he comes at the argument makes his idea sound different?

At 7/10/11 06:43 PM, Camarohusky wrote: If you read the entire thread, Prot's point is actually quite intelligent. Our ideas are pretty much the same, just the way he comes at the argument makes his idea sound different?

It's just an illustration of my "elephant in the room" rant, dude. They don't want to debate me at this point, they just want to stir me up and piss me off.

To which I say; don't feed the trolls.

At 7/8/11 12:44 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 7/8/11 12:10 AM, VenomKing666 wrote: Abstinence by its very definition is fucking retarded.

No it's not. Abstinence is a virtue, and it's a shame that we all don't have the will to achieve it on some level.

Says who?
Sorry for being such a pinko commie yuropeen, but put most bluntly: Sex is good. No, I'm not saying that there aren't any associated problems (like STDs, infidelity, unwanted pregnancies and - god forbid - rape), but fundamentally, sex is one of the healthiest activities imaginable, both emotianly and physicaly. The idea that sex is shamefull, bad for you or even immoral - not that I don't understand why someone would come up with such reasoning, but that's for another thread - is, well, pure evil.

At 7/11/11 03:48 PM, Killersepp wrote: sex is one of the healthiest activities imaginable, both emotianly and physicaly.

You know what's healthier than sex? Self control.

The idea that sex is shamefull, bad for you or even immoral - not that I don't understand why someone would come up with such reasoning, but that's for another thread - is, well, pure evil.

Those are some provocative words that you just put into my mouth.