legislating morality

[z0wb13]

Sex ed in middle school is about reproduction, anatomy, and STDs - that’s it.

i see an obvious compromise between our two positions: schools could offer to teach everything, and anything that parents don’t want their children to learn they can opt out of.

is that reasonable? because would i want my children to be taught everything about sex there is to know, but i wouldn’t feel qualified to teach some topics myself. i would rather have an expert teach a class on human sexuality than myself.

 

[Mumbles140]

i see an obvious compromise between our two positions: schools could offer to teach everything, and anything that parents don’t want their children to learn they can opt out of.

is that reasonable? because would i want my children to be taught everything about sex there is to know, but i wouldn’t feel qualified to teach some topics myself. i would rather have an expert teach a class on human sexuality than myself.

See, I don’t see that as a compromise because the message about ‘safe’ sex (although let’s call it ‘less risky’ based on the numbers above) and other ‘specific’ issues should be answered outside of public school. It is responsible to teach all children about sex, reproduction, and the health risks involved, and they do include an ‘opt-out’ for parents who don’t want their children learning even that much. However, to teach them in a series of 30 minute classes about contraception, where to get it, and how to use it, while avoiding information like the real accuracy rates (not generalizations like ‘mostly effective’) is irresponsible. Let them go to a doctor, counselor, or someone trained in these areas, who can fully explain the risks involved, and that way they get the whole picture.

And it isn’t a class on ‘human sexuality’. You are proposing birth control education to middle schoolers, and only opting to present the functionality.

 

[z0wb13]

"See, I don’t see that as a compromise because the message about ‘safe’ sex (although let’s call it ‘less risky’ based on the numbers above) and other ‘specific’ issues should be answered outside of public school. "

wrong. it’s taken a long time to respond, because you bogged me down in details;p

you don’t get to decide that my children have to be dumber than they otherwise would be just because you have some “belief” in an invisible being.

i have strong religious “beliefs” as well. i believe in things that i can’t explain, or prove with math and numbers. but i don’t demand that your kids have their classes dumbed down. and i don’t have to give any examples, because i pay attention. if i knew that my kid was going to be taught how to masturbate at school on tuesday, i would take the kid to work with me that day. or maybe not! maybe i would “let some middle-aged man” talk to my sons or daughters about masturbating, because it is TOTALLY NORMAL!!!

everyone masturbates. i’m not going to go through the bother of directing you towards a scientific study that proves this, unequivocally, because you just might come back with the sin of onan, while slurping down lobster. from what i can tell, you don’t read any of it anyway.

but let’s go back to condoms. no no no no no. with your 98% failure rate. let’s instead use some lateral thinking. if you have any experience with condoms at all, you know that they are nearly indestructible. they are medical grade. every single condom that leaves the condom factory is mechanically tested. this is not meant to imply computer love;p in fact, every condom that leaves the factory is over-inflated with air and checked for defects.

i’ve taken the time, myself, to test the strength of condoms. and i’m not being kinky or funny, so don’t take down this post. i mean that after reading your posts, and thinking “maybe condoms do break,” i’ve actually tested how resilient normal, off-the-shelf condoms are. so here are a few condom facts that i can personally attest to:

condoms do not dry out and blow away like dust. that only happens in cartoons.

condoms are impervious to heat damage. it’s kind of the point. i found some in my glove box that easily went through two florida summers. there are days in the summer when the inside of a car reaches 140 degrees. i’m pretty sure that a human at 140 degrees would be dead.

condoms, when filled with water and tied off, should only be thrown at a person if you intend to hurt them.

in a survival situation, un-lubricated condoms may be used to protect matches or other vital items from submersion in water.

drug smugglers (mules) routinely use condoms to transport drugs inside people’s stomaches. they remain impervious for many hours in an acidic environment.

condoms CAN be damaged if they are carried around in a wallet for any length of time. credit cards, and even the wallets themselves, will eventually wear down due to being constantly sat on.

if you ever want to sneak booze onto an airplane, or pee into a pre-employment drug test, you can use a condom;p

condoms are NOT routinely sabotaged by religious fanatics.

And it isn’t a class on ‘human sexuality’. You are proposing birth control education to middle schoolers, and only opting to present the functionality.

also wrong. i think comprehensive sex education should be comprehensive. functionality is a part of the whole.

 

[z0wb13]

The problem is without God, there is no morality. There’s anarchy and a return trip a barbaric state.

so as a taoist, am i inherently immoral? does this explain my love of bar-be-que ;p

 

[pinay]

everyone masturbates.

I know for a fact this is not true.

I don’t masturbate. So that’s at least one person that makes the term “everyone” false.

 

[bz5]

i understand that there are probably as many opinions on abortion as there are people on this forum. that said, why should any one religion’s opinion on the subject be forced onto people that aren’t of that faith?

so abortion is a sin in the catholic church, but why should hindus or muslims have to accept that? some do or don’t anyway, but there doesn’t seem to be any general consensus in those religions. most muslims allow it until the fourth month, and many, but not all, hindus ban it outright.

so my question isn’t on whether or not abortion is a sin. rather, i want to know is if it is ever alright to force one person’s beliefs on another person, and why or under what circumstances.

What would you have us legislate based upon? Legislators’ personal financial interests? Celebrities’ causes of the day? Pure power plays? They do a lot of that already - how well does it turn out?

 

[z0wb13]

What would you have us legislate based upon? Legislators’ personal financial interests? Celebrities’ causes of the day? Pure power plays? They do a lot of that already - how well does it turn out?

morality guides legislation. that seems self-evident.

it doesn’t seem to work the other way. the war on drugs has be a resounding failure, much like prohibition. did you know that prescription drugs cause more deaths per year than car accidents?

 

[Tony888]

there is no proof that any of this is true. not that wikipedia is the best source, it’s just the easiest: Abortion does not impair subsequent pregnancies, nor does it increase the risk of future premature births, infertility, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage.

if you want to dispel any other misconceptions you have about abortion, you could look here.

the facts are that around 70,000 women are killed worldwide by unsafe abortions in the developing world, a mortality rate of 367 per 100,000 procedures. that’s compared to 0.2–1.2 deaths per 100,000 procedures in countries where it is legal and safe, making it a safer medical procedure than actually giving birth.

i don’t see how these numbers don’t concern the “pro-life” position at all. instead, you just throw around colorful language, call me [indirectly] a merchant of death, or inaccurately describe abortion as a genocide. it’s all very emotionally charged, but it ignores the facts, and those are that if abortion was made illegal in the US, then more women would die from unsafe procedures.

answer these simple questions:
would outlawing abortions reduce unwanted pregnancies, and how?
would reducing access to reproductive health care (by, say, defunding planned parenthood) affect the health of babies, and how?
what do you mean by “abstinence-only”? show me a lesson plan.

Isn’t the real issue whether and when abortion is considered to be the taking of a human life?
Whether abortions have a low mortality rate or not for the mother is incidental to this fundamental question.
The rate of unwanted pregnancies is also secondary
I see contraception as a seperate issue, be it the pill, condoms, or abstinence

 

[ExplosiveOxygen]

i understand that there are probably as many opinions on abortion as there are people on this forum. that said, why should any one religion’s opinion on the subject be forced onto people that aren’t of that faith?

so abortion is a sin in the catholic church, but why should hindus or muslims have to accept that? some do or don’t anyway, but there doesn’t seem to be any general consensus in those religions. most muslims allow it until the fourth month, and many, but not all, hindus ban it outright.

so my question isn’t on whether or not abortion is a sin. rather, i want to know is if it is ever alright to force one person’s beliefs on another person, and why or under what circumstances.

If abortion is a sin then is also allowing the poor education of children a sin? It is abuse of the minds to stick young boys for hours at a time into desks. It is abuse of the mind to keep those more perceptive back due to age, and those who are less perceptive to be ridiculed by such terms as learning disability. Different words won’t change the facts.

 

[ExplosiveOxygen]

If abortion is a sin then is also allowing the poor education of children a sin? It is abuse of the minds to stick young boys for hours at a time into desks. It is abuse of the mind to keep those more perceptive back due to age, and those who are less perceptive to be ridiculed by such terms as learning disability. Different words won’t change the facts.

You can’t stop people from having sex. So you have to have a full program to give all the opportunities to any child if you want every child to be born. Otherwise you create generational poverty.

 

[Tony888]

If abortion is a sin then is also allowing the poor education of children a sin? It is abuse of the minds to stick young boys for hours at a time into desks. It is abuse of the mind to keep those more perceptive back due to age, and those who are less perceptive to be ridiculed by such terms as learning disability. Different words won’t change the facts.

Don’t you think we already address your questions with our penal code and other laws/regulations? Child abuse is defined for the courts, as well as the state’s legal obligation to provide education for children with learning disabilities.

We just have people that disagree on whether abortion should be considered first degree murder or not

 

[ExplosiveOxygen]

Don’t you think we already address your questions with our penal code and other laws/regulations? Child abuse is defined for the courts, as well as the state’s legal obligation to provide education for children with learning disabilities.

We just have people that disagree on whether abortion should be considered first degree murder or not

If you make abortion illegal.
You only allow people to do self abortions.
They can drink themselves into a stupor.
Starve themselves.
Use more violent means…

The children need to be fed. Education is a lifelong process. The state only gives partial help several years into a child’s life. If a mother is unfit and unwilling to foster a child to the full potential, she causes lifelong damage to the child. The solutions include allowing contraceptives and abortions, or providing full and complete guidance to the child. Somewhere in there are privacy rights and the fact that you don’t own the body of others. Does the Jesus in the bible say to love or to destroy? Bringing a life into this world and giving every opportunity of suffering from an unwilling mother is destruction.

The state provides not education to children but factory worker indoctrination. Usa school system is an example of complete failure. To trust in the possibility that it can be fixed with more money is to be blind.

The term learning disabilities is an insult. We all have different brains and different ways of learning. We have technology at our disposal. Online learning and then tests for proof of learning are so much more efficient than classroom style.

 

[Tony888]

Clearly you see the life of the mother weighted significantly more than the life of the child.
However, It’s dishonest of you to try justify abortion based on the cost of raising the child.

• There are ample couples looking to adopt
• You skirt the real issue - when is it considered murder

If you make abortion illegal.
You only allow people to do self abortions.
They can drink themselves into a stupor.
Starve themselves.
Use more violent means…

The children need to be fed. Education is a lifelong process. The state only gives partial help several years into a child’s life. If a mother is unfit and unwilling to foster a child to the full potential, she causes lifelong damage to the child. The solutions include allowing contraceptives and abortions, or providing full and complete guidance to the child. Somewhere in there are privacy rights and the fact that you don’t own the body of others. Does the Jesus in the bible say to love or to destroy? Bringing a life into this world and giving every opportunity of suffering from an unwilling mother is destruction.

The state provides not education to children but factory worker indoctrination. Usa school system is an example of complete failure. To trust in the possibility that it can be fixed with more money is to be blind.

The term learning disabilities is an insult. We all have different brains and different ways of learning. We have technology at our disposal. Online learning and then tests for proof of learning are so much more efficient than classroom style.

 

[ExplosiveOxygen]

Clearly you see the life of the mother weighted significantly more than the life of the child.
However, It’s dishonest of you to try justify abortion based on the cost of raising the child.

• There are ample couples looking to adopt
• You skirt the real issue - when is it considered murder

I imply no conclusions. The system of support for the child is not there. When it comes to pass that each child has the means to gain full potential I will accept your position.

Many points were made, please reflect and show that you love the world and not the system.

 

[bz5]

If abortion is a sin then is also allowing the poor education of children a sin? It is abuse of the minds to stick young boys for hours at a time into desks. It is abuse of the mind to keep those more perceptive back due to age, and those who are less perceptive to be ridiculed by such terms as learning disability. Different words won’t change the facts.

Abortion is wrong because it takes a human life. How can that be comparable to a boring education? That’s a separate issue. If it’s okay to kill someone because he won’t be well-educated, that principle applies equally to the first-grader. (And I agree with you about poor educational standards in govt. schools - it’s one reason I homeschool my very bright and active sons)

 

[ExplosiveOxygen]

Abortion is wrong because it takes a human life. How can that be comparable to a boring education? That’s a separate issue. If it’s okay to kill someone because he won’t be well-educated, that principle applies equally to the first-grader. (And I agree with you about poor educational standards in govt. schools - it’s one reason I homeschool my very bright and active sons)

I mean that reinforcing the part without fixing the whole leaves nothing but broken pieces. If we allow the suffering of the life we saved are we not causing suffering?

If a person is dying very slowly and they ask you to kill them because they can not even do that themselves, are you a sinner for doing so?

 

[z0wb13]

If abortion is a sin then is also allowing the poor education of children a sin?

here you compare apples to oranges.

It is abuse of the minds to stick young boys for hours at a time into desks. It is abuse of the mind to keep those more perceptive back due to age, and those who are less perceptive to be ridiculed by such terms as learning disability. Different words won’t change the facts.

i don’t follow. i did and do very well for myself, stuck behind a desk for hours at a time. i like having a desk.

 

[z0wb13]

Abortion is wrong because it takes a human life.

says you. my eyes and brains and religious beliefs don’t see it the same as you. i believe that your life begins when you take your first breath. when i look at a fertilized egg at the moment of conception, i don’t see a person, or a baby, or even much potential for either. i just don’t see it.

that’s what my intractable religious belief is.

 

[Mumbles140]

**1)**you don’t get to decide that my children have to be dumber…

2)…about masturbating, because it is TOTALLY NORMAL!!!

**3)**everyone masturbates…

**4)**but let’s go back to condoms…

5) i think comprehensive sex education should be comprehensive. functionality is a part of the whole.

1. Since when is it the role of the public school system to teach kids everything? Why are you excusing parents/guardians from being the primary teachers about life? Schools should educate and allow for social interaction, not replace the role of parents.
2. Because most people lie when nervous does not make lying normal. Look at utility - genitalia were created for reproduction, and pleasure is secondary to that act. Self-gratification is not the ‘intended use’, which means it is not ‘normal’ in a ‘use’ sense.
3. This point by itself is meaningless. If your point is that ‘everyone does it, so it should be taught’, then I argue that everyone cusses. Should we teach swear words in the classroom?
4. Congratulations that your own anecdotal evidence has provided you with such interesting stories. However, let’s talk real facts. Condoms are tested for safety, and yet they have failure rates because they can tear during the act, they can fall off during the act, they can be improperly used (user error), or can be damaged during transport (i.e. wallet).

Let’s compare condoms to cars. Both, when used properly, can still lead to unintended consequences (I refuse to use the term ‘accident’ for ‘unintended pregnancy’). So, we need to stress the importance of responsible use and safety when using them. Most states require 2-3 years of practice and/or limited responsibility before giving you full rights for a car. At least for me, we had ‘classroom’ driver’s ed in the school, which meant we learned the laws of the road, what road signs meant, and how to respond in certain situations. However, actual driving practice ‘behind the wheel’ was organized through an outside company. Even then, it is the parents’ responsibility to train the child to drive, and most states require that parents’ sign off that the kid has driven a set amount of hours with adult supervision.

So let’s look at results - car accident could result in monetary damages, personal inury, or even death. Unintended pregnancies creates a human being, which is a lot of money to care for and can be risky for the teenage girl, or death (abortion). So if a car takes several years of constant practice, with the majority of oversight coming outside the school, why would we allow our school less than 8 hours (assuming 2 weeks of 45 minute classes, which is what my sex ed always was) to try and teach ‘responsible use of birth control’ to teenagers?

1. Then why do sex ed programs that teach about contraceptives ban teachers from talking about failure rates? If we are being comprehensive, why isn’t abstinence also taught as a responsible, viable option for high schoolers? It seems that in an 8 hour window, anatomy, process, and disease/health risks take the majority of the time, so why not let the parents, religious institutions, or medical professionals handle these other matters? Isn’t that one of the major functions of free clinics? Teach/provide birth control? Why not utilize those if that is what you or your child want? Why must you make the schools do it?

 

[Tenofovir]

so my question isn’t on whether or not abortion is a sin. rather, i want to know is if it is ever alright to force one person’s beliefs on another person, and why or under what circumstances.

All or nearly all legislation is about legislating morality.