Sex Education

[FOFEBA]

I was listening to a conversation between two professors of medicine (urology) at NYU and a pediatrician from Austin, TX who has just written a sex education book for kids.

The pediatrician made the following points:

1. Texas has “abstinence only” and “abstinence plus” sex education in schools, yet the best data show that 30% of 9th graders and 70% of 12th graders are having sex.
2. 25% of all people over the age of 12 in the US are infected with genital herpes. This is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to STD’s which have a very high prevalence in kids, who are often unaware that they are infected or afraid to seek medical care.
3. Kids who attend religious schools tend to lag behind kids in public schools in the sexual experimentation up until 8th grade. After 8th grade, the two populations are nearly identical.

I know what the Catholic position is on sex and masturbation. I am wondering what people on this forum think of accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?

I knew that kids are having a lot of sex, but I did not realize how widespread STD’s are. The number would indicate that the moral education at home is no match for the availability of sex combine with the teenage hormone levels.

My opinion is that while we should be educating our kids morally, we should also be providing them with complete information on sex, sexuality, and the health issues.

 

[puzzleannie]

the statistics as far as they go are backed up by other research I have seen, but I have never seen any research that proves abstinence only education increases (or decreases for that matter) sexual activity among the group that actually receives it. I have also never seen any evidence to that effect about explicit sex ed. All the statistics are general, but never target the actual group that received the program or follows them throughout their teen years into adulthood. The biggest cohort of pregnant teens in our county is 8th grade, showing whatever programs are used in either public schools or church groups is too late if it comes in high school. What goes under-reported and according to my experts is the biggest problem that so far is not being addressed is that over 50% of the fathers of these children are over 21, and a shocking percentage are relatives. A mentality that puts the responsibility totally on the child, and presumes educating the child on either how to have “safe sex” (an oxymoron imo) or urges them to remain pure until marriage is therefore flawed. The abuse element is so seldom addressed in any discussion I read of this topic. It is also ignored btw in the safe environment-safe touching programs in place in most Catholic dioceses.

 

[Totterman]

Bless you,my readers. Statistic seems to be what so many hide behind,truth is that we have only for a very short time have making statistic,but I agree that sex-releted infections must be moore usual now when sex is "everywhery and for eweryone. I am born 1960 and grew up in the free and wery sexual decade and I had sexual experiences (I wos not catholic then,but honestly I don’t think that would have made me act different,but I found out pretty fast that it is’nt “good” whitout love.) and looking back at those years I see that we could have been better of whit moore education,not meaning that “now you know what you can do” but knowing the danger,and of course the sin in sex outside a marriege. I can also say that I would have been much moore happy whitout my pre-marriage sexual experienses. (Sorry for my bad english but I am from Finland and have learn english by my self from TV and books) I would like to see happy teenagers whit no pressure to "do it"but that is dream. But as charity begins at home,so do education,meaning that we should not count much on what the school teach about sex and what migth follow,we parents are in the frontline,and we must act so that WE teach what is rigth. If we would,and this is a dream-world once again,do so,there would be nothing to do statisic for. In the end,what counts,is US,the parents,and sex education do not belong in schools at all. Blessings,Totterman

 

[kimbaichan]

Abstinence only education in a school is a dumb idea, they should teach comprehensive sex ed and the parents should give their kids moral education at home.

 

[gardenswithkids]

… I am wondering what people on this forum think of accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?..
My opinion is that while we should be educating our kids morally, we should also be providing them with complete information on sex, sexuality, and the health issues.

I agree that we should be educating ***our *kids. As in our own kids. My husband and I will educate our kids; you educate your own kids.

“Accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?” Whatever do you mean by that phrase? Children do not all mature at the same rate. Different people need different information at different ages. Telling a child TMI too soon robs a child of their innocence. Failing to tell them enough, can also lead to problems since sex involves matters of life and death. Every person is a unique individual, and I don’t like taking a “cookie cutter” approach to any type of education, including sexual education.

Unfortunately, what passes as “age appropriate” and “comprehensive” sex education is typically is *neither *age appropriate *nor *comprehensive. More typically, those buzzwords describe sex ed with extensive indoctrination about contraception (and other sexual practices that violate Catholic moral teaching) given to other people’s children at the young ages. If we fail to understand the purpose and meaning behind sexuality, we cannot pass on accurate information to our children.

I believe that sexual education should be* truly* comprehensive and designed to meet the needs of the individual. Since you are old enough to ask, I think you are old enough to know the truth. To add to your own “comprehensive” sexual education, I suggest you read and study and pray about Vatican documents like Humanae Vitae ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P6HUMANA.HTM and Casti Connubi. ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P11CASTI.HTM

 

[FOFEBA]

I agree that we should be educating ***our *kids. As in our own kids. My husband and I will educate our kids; you educate your own kids.

“Accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?” Whatever do you mean by that phrase? Children do not all mature at the same rate. Different people need different information at different ages. Telling a child TMI too soon robs a child of their innocence. Failing to tell them enough, can also lead to problems since sex involves matters of life and death. Every person is a unique individual, and I don’t like taking a “cookie cutter” approach to any type of education, including sexual education.

Unfortunately, what passes as “age appropriate” and “comprehensive” sex education is typically is *neither *age appropriate *nor *comprehensive. More typically, those buzzwords describe sex ed with extensive indoctrination about contraception (and other sexual practices that violate Catholic moral teaching) given to other people’s children at the young ages. If we fail to understand the purpose and meaning behind sexuality, we cannot pass on accurate information to our children.

I believe that sexual education should be* truly* comprehensive and designed to meet the needs of the individual. Since you are old enough to ask, I think you are old enough to know the truth. To add to your own “comprehensive” sexual education, I suggest you read and study and pray about Vatican documents like Humanae Vitae ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P6HUMANA.HTM and Casti Connubi. ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P11CASTI.HTM

I agree that children mature at different rates, however we can make some generalizations about what kids are exposed to, and what their social milieu is based on their age and grade level.

Comprehensive sex education, in my opinion, would consist of a non-ideological course explaining the principles of procreation, including specifics about anatomy and sexual acts, the differences and diversity in sexual orientation which are part of the human and animal spectrum, and the types and dangers posed by STD’s, and the best means to prevent the transmission or STD’s, and the various methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Also as a part of this, I would expect the ramifications of pregnancy to be taught, as well as the fact that the only truly safe behavior is abstinence.

If taught in the public schools, I would expect such a course to be fact based, and not to be biased for or against any particular religious perspective.

 

[FOFEBA]

With respect to rates of maturation, the pediatrician pointed out one of the problems these days. There is a scale which is used to gauge a child’s level of sexual maturity which is based on physical characteristics. According to her, to many kids are shaving their private areas that this presents a challenge sometimes to medical professional who want to make this assessment.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I agree that children mature at different rates, however we can make some generalizations about what kids are exposed to, and what their social milieu is based on their age and grade level.

Comprehensive sex education, in my opinion, would consist of a non-ideological course explaining the principles of procreation, including specifics about anatomy and sexual acts, the differences and diversity in sexual orientation which are part of the human and animal spectrum, and the types and dangers posed by STD’s, and the best means to prevent the transmission or STD’s, and the various methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Also as a part of this, I would expect the ramifications of pregnancy to be taught, as well as the fact that the only truly safe behavior is abstinence.

If taught in the public schools, I would expect such a course to be fact based, and not to be biased for or against any particular religious perspective.

The problem is that you seem to feel that any kind of religious perspective is somehow going to be ‘anti-factual’ or else ‘extra factual’, while the public schools supposedly get ‘fact-only’.

But religion or the ‘religious perspective’ (and I’m not just talking about Catholic Christians or even nonCatholic Christians) is not limited to an hour in church on Sunday. One’s religion permeates every degree of one’s life.

Therefore, one is limiting and depriving others of an essential component of life by attempting to ‘remove’ a ‘religious perspective’.

Obviously as a Catholic Christian I hold that Christianity is true. Certainly Muslims and Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and other nonChristian peoples believe that their religious perspective is either ‘equally’ true or possesses enough truth to make it important in life and a true ‘moral compass’ which one uses to measure everything else in life.

That some today have rejected an authentic religious moral compass into either some vague ‘spiritual’ feelings or a total rejection of any kind of ‘god’ is sad. . .but why should we deny truth to those like this who actually need it the most?

Can you imagine if St. Paul was writing to his fellow Christians in today’s climate?

"My dear brothers (and sisters) in Christ (or whatever you deem, if you choose to deem belief in anything). . .

You know that I preach Christ crucified. . .(which of course is simply my own personal opinion and nothing that I expect YOU to accept since your own personal perception of what you feel is true is certainly just as valid as my own perception as there are many paths to Christ–or Allah–or YHWH–or indeed to Nirvana or whatever one feels is one’s ultimate ‘end’) and I urge you (though naturally you are perfectly free to do or not do whatever you choose as your conscience is absolutely paramount and you are the only person who knows what is best and necessary for YOU) to follow Christ (or Allah, YHWH, or indeed just to live like a ‘good person’ and be assured that all will be well). . .

ACK. Yet THIS is what Christian teaching (in the name of 'diversity, understanding, and ‘tolerance’) has become --and even THIS is now ‘too much’ and needs to be ‘swept away’ from real ‘fact-based’ teaching?

As though religion can’t be fact? Can’t be used in conjunction WITH fact?

About 10 years or so ago the schools were very heavily into ‘diversity’ with the idea of ‘inclusion’. We didn’t ‘just’ teach the history of Christianity (which, no matter whether one is Christian or not, most certainly is inextricably wound up in all aspects of western civilization and its teachings for the last 2000 years). . .we ‘also’ taught the history of all other religious views.

At least that way people got a ‘full’ education.

Now it seems that some are trying to sweep away any kind of religious reference–Christian or non–as ‘not necessary’, as if they existed ‘independently’ of anything else, from science to history to literature --and that ‘education’ involves a rigorous rejection of any ‘religious experience’ or even REFERENCE and that so-called facts must be stripped of any frame of reference TO religion. It’s crazy.

It’s like trying to talk of water but not ever using the word ‘oxygen’ in teaching about water. Oxygen is a vital part of water . . .you can’t really understand what water unless you know of oxygen. . .but even if you use the facts that hydrogen is a necessary component of water (a perfectly true and FACTUAL statement), if you don’t say anything about oxygen and its part in the role of water, you aren’t giving FULL TEACHING.

 

[edwest2]

I was listening to a conversation between two professors of medicine (urology) at NYU and a pediatrician from Austin, TX who has just written a sex education book for kids.

The pediatrician made the following points:

1. Texas has “abstinence only” and “abstinence plus” sex education in schools, yet the best data show that 30% of 9th graders and 70% of 12th graders are having sex.
2. 25% of all people over the age of 12 in the US are infected with genital herpes. This is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to STD’s which have a very high prevalence in kids, who are often unaware that they are infected or afraid to seek medical care.
3. Kids who attend religious schools tend to lag behind kids in public schools in the sexual experimentation up until 8th grade. After 8th grade, the two populations are nearly identical.

I know what the Catholic position is on sex and masturbation. I am wondering what people on this forum think of accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?

I knew that kids are having a lot of sex, but I did not realize how widespread STD’s are. The number would indicate that the moral education at home is no match for the availability of sex combine with the teenage hormone levels.

My opinion is that while we should be educating our kids morally, we should also be providing them with complete information on sex, sexuality, and the health issues.

Opinions are not useful. Real Church teaching is useful.

About STDs. In 1960, there were only two, syphilis and gonorrhea. Today, there are about 25.

leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/epid-std.html

Teaching abstinence works better than sex education.

catholicexchange.com/2010/02/13/127027/

However, the media in general, and internet opinion culture, would have you believe otherwise.

What falls under “Women’s Health” includes contraception and abortion. This is wrong. The natural purpose of sexual intercourse is reproduction, not preventing reproduction. Abortion is in no way a health procedure, speaking generally.

The “availability of sex” implies it is somehow easier today than in the past. This is simply not true. Those who want to stay away from sexual activity can do so. What is offering young people too much wrong encouragement is blatant, immodest and incorrect depictions of human relationships in movies and on TV.

Hormones have nothing to do with anything. Everybody’s mom and dad were teenagers and they know exactly what that’s like. A breakdown of social norms and families, lead to unintended pregnancies, especially among poor, young blacks.

I recall the propaganda that was presented in the 1970s. Mom and dad were presented as prudes or were depicted as ‘too embarrassed’ to talk to their kids about sex. An elaborate mythology was created about the ‘birds and the bees’ by those who wanted to present explicit sex education in schools.

In 1973, when my Catholic high school was required to have a class on sex education, many inappropriate subjects were brought up. Masturbation was one. This is a function of an individual where pregnancy never occurs. Since that time, kids were taught explicitly about the proper way to put on a condom, using various props. This was unnecessary. I liken it to putting a 15 year old into a fighter jet and asking him to fly it without any previous experience. The condom is a bit simpler and a lot more obvious in regards to function. Yet sex education is given the more elaborate treatmet.

Sex education in schools is generally a waste of time in its current form. A less explicit, and simpler set of guidelines should be adopted. Questions should be answered, but that’s it. Parents should get the same information their kids are getting at school to ensure everybody is on the same page.

Finally, what should be abandoned is the founding myth of the Sexual Revolution: You can’t control yourself! Nobody can control themselves! Your kids can’t control themselves!!! Give everybody condoms and pills!!!

Who decides when you have sex? The Church? The State? You?

If you answered you, then that is the correct answer. It need not be more complicated than that.

God bless,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

I agree that children mature at different rates, however we can make some generalizations about what kids are exposed to, and what their social milieu is based on their age and grade level.

Comprehensive sex education, in my opinion, would consist of a non-ideological course explaining the principles of procreation, including specifics about anatomy and sexual acts, the differences and diversity in sexual orientation which are part of the human and animal spectrum, and the types and dangers posed by STD’s, and the best means to prevent the transmission or STD’s, and the various methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Also as a part of this, I would expect the ramifications of pregnancy to be taught, as well as the fact that the only truly safe behavior is abstinence.

If taught in the public schools, I would expect such a course to be fact based, and not to be biased for or against any particular religious perspective.

Whoa. Back up a minute. “diversity in sexual orientation” is in no way “sex education.” This would fall under propaganda.

God bless,
Ed

 

[gardenswithkids]

I agree that children mature at different rates, however we can make some generalizations about what kids are exposed to, and what their social milieu is based on their age and grade level.

Comprehensive sex education, in my opinion, would consist of a non-ideological course explaining the principles of procreation, including specifics about anatomy and sexual acts, the differences and diversity in sexual orientation which are part of the human and animal spectrum, and the types and dangers posed by STD’s, and the best means to prevent the transmission or STD’s, and the various methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Also as a part of this, I would expect the ramifications of pregnancy to be taught, as well as the fact that the only truly safe behavior is abstinence.

If taught in the public schools, I would expect such a course to be fact based, and not to be biased for or against any particular religious perspective.

Well you go right ahead and teach that to your own children. Don’t try teaching that to my children or anyone else’s children in public schools.

Some of the information you want discussed in public schools under the guise of “comprehensive sexual education” should be banned under sexual harrassment laws.

 

[twoangels]

I was listening to a conversation between two professors of medicine (urology) at NYU and a pediatrician from Austin, TX who has just written a sex education book for kids.

The pediatrician made the following points:

1. Texas has “abstinence only” and “abstinence plus” sex education in schools, yet the best data show that 30% of 9th graders and 70% of 12th graders are having sex.
2. 25% of all people over the age of 12 in the US are infected with genital herpes. This is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to STD’s which have a very high prevalence in kids, who are often unaware that they are infected or afraid to seek medical care.
3. Kids who attend religious schools tend to lag behind kids in public schools in the sexual experimentation up until 8th grade. After 8th grade, the two populations are nearly identical.

I know what the Catholic position is on sex and masturbation. I am wondering what people on this forum think of accurate and comprehensive age appropriate sex education?

I knew that kids are having a lot of sex, but I did not realize how widespread STD’s are. The number would indicate that the moral education at home is no match for the availability of sex combine with the teenage hormone levels.

My opinion is that while we should be educating our kids morally, we should also be providing them with complete information on sex, sexuality, and the health issues.

I think its the job of the parents and that parents need to give accurate age appropriate information without making their kids ashamed of their sexuality or fearful of sex in general.

I think highschool is too late for moral formation. It begins at a very young age and overall the child’s sexual knowledge should comfortably grow along with their knowledge of sexual morality.

I consider it the school’s job to teach human biology with a unit in reproduction.

 

[andyandely1997]

Well you go right ahead and teach that to your own children. Don’t try teaching that to my children or anyone else’s children in public schools.

Some of the information you want discussed in public schools under the guise of “comprehensive sexual education” should be banned under sexual harrassment laws.

Right on! So-called “comprehensive sexual education” is nothing but an agenda from the Left to break down traditional morals & family values. And they have succeeded pretty well over the past 40-50 years. The NEA is more about their liberal agenda these days than the education of kids. Christian parents need to stand up for their kids & the teachings of Christ. No one can convince me, Christ would be in favor of “comprehensive sexual education.” All of these statistics, what do we expect, when we teach our kids to have sex, only make sure it is safe. Please, give me a break. And then we try to reason away why kids are so sexually permissive these days. All we have to do is look at the culture of adults, within our society, when it comes to sex. Adults, not wanting to feel any guilt or responsibility, from their own sexual promiscuity, are now pushing this false, and more importantly damaging, propaganda on to kids.

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. – Matthew 18:6

 

[st_lucy]

With respect to rates of maturation, the pediatrician pointed out one of the problems these days. There is a scale which is used to gauge a child’s level of sexual maturity which is based on physical characteristics. According to her, to many kids are shaving their private areas that this presents a challenge sometimes to medical professional who want to make this assessment.

I guess I just don’t understand this post. What does shaving have to do with maturation and guaging and sex? :shrug:

 

[illmatic]

I’m glad that if a kid makes a mistake when they are a kid, they have the information that can prevent it ruining the rest of their lives through sex education at school.

 

[jawgee]

I’m glad that if a kid makes a mistake when they are a kid, they have the information that can prevent it ruining the rest of their lives through sex education at school.

What, like a baby??

 

[st_lucy]

I’m glad that if a kid makes a mistake when they are a kid, they have the information that can prevent it ruining the rest of their lives through sex education at school.

What a sad way to look at life. I do hope my children do not see life as this. Condomes and pills to don’t prevent pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. All that sex education at school does is give our children a false sense of security to do what is wrong without getting caught.

 

[illmatic]

What a sad way to look at life. I do hope my children do not see life as this. Condomes and pills to don’t prevent pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. All that sex education at school does is give our children a false sense of security to do what is wrong without getting caught.

I know for a fact that I, at say 16, was nowhere close to as emotionally and spiritually mature and well centred as I am now four years on (still have a way to go though, sure!). Were I to have had sex then for whatever reason and contracted, worst case, HIV from it, it would affect the older, more mature me of today who has a completely different approach to faith and morality than the 16 year old me did. I realise it sounds a bit like I’m saying ‘I am a different person, so I am not responsible for past transgressions’ but that is not what I mean! All I mean is that surely the loving approach to someone of 16 who is misguided is to keep them out of harm’s way as much as possible, even if they are doing something wrong, so that if one day they are able to get on the right page, they won’t have a life-threatening disease as a result of making a mistake. Its the gut feeling I get anyway.

Are you deliberate in insinuating that teen pregnancy and stds are ways of ‘getting caught’? If so, could you clarify what you mean please?

 

[gardenswithkids]

Right on! So-called “comprehensive sexual education” is nothing but an agenda from the Left to break down traditional morals & family values. And they have succeeded pretty well over the past 40-50 years. The NEA is more about their liberal agenda these days than the education of kids. Christian parents need to stand up for their kids & the teachings of Christ. No one can convince me, Christ would be in favor of “comprehensive sexual education.” All of these statistics, what do we expect, when we teach our kids to have sex, only make sure it is safe. Please, give me a break. And then we try to reason away why kids are so sexually permissive these days. All we have to do is look at the culture of adults, within our society, when it comes to sex. Adults, not wanting to feel any guilt or responsibility, from their own sexual promiscuity, are now pushing this false, and more importantly damaging, propaganda on to kids.

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. – Matthew 18:6

Thanks.

Sometimes I really am amazed that people are willing to sit back and let teachers discuss intimate sexual details with minors. I repeat that what’s discussed in some sex ed classes likely violates sexual harrassment laws! Besides breaking sexual harrassment laws, it breaks down a barrier of modesty to force children to listen to discussions of sexuality in such great detail.

Sex ed may be done by some with the motive of helping students, (rather than with the specific intent to break down social barriers and modesty or sexually harrass minors) but some people forget that many bad ideas come from good motives. As the saying goes, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

 

[JanetF]

When my daughter was 7-8 she starting asking basic questions which I answered with basic answers. As she grows older she gets age appropriate answers to her questions. She knows that she can come to me for the best answers that reflect the teachings of the church. She may get the basics in school, but she gets the moral teaching at home. If I disagree with anything she learns at school, I tell her so, and I teach her why I disagree. She seems to be a level headed kid, so my fingers are crossed and my prayers are constant.