Hawaii lawmaker renews fight to end or revise controversial sex ed program

[blacken700]

hahaha so true

did you tell him you were a judo champ to try to impress him,nevermind 333386 already knows this 

[StreetSoldier4U]

did you tell him you were a judo champ to try to impress him,nevermind 333386 already knows this 

You have a really hard time staying on topic.  You can't even answer a question.

[RRKore]

This doesn't prove the parents wanted it in the first place.   Mods he also didn't provide a link

Oh, my fault.   

Here's the link: http://cig.salk.edu/extra_html/sex_and_school.html

[StreetSoldier4U]

Oh, my fault.   

Here's the link: http://cig.salk.edu/extra_html/sex_and_school.html

So you're blacken?

[RRKore]

This is the lynch pin of liberal thinking, government knows best.

Dammit!  I thought you were more wrong about this:

Spelling
Linchpin vs. lynchpin

Linchpin is the usual spelling of the noun referring to (1) a central cohesive element, or (2) a locking pin inserted in the end of a shaft to prevent a wheel from slipping off. The word derives from the Middle English linspin, which in turn derives from Old English elements. Although lynchpin is a somewhat common variant, its first syllable’s association with the unrelated verb lynch perhaps counts against it.

Oh, and don't let me forget this, lol: http://grammarist.com/spelling/linchpin-lynchpin/

[RRKore]

Yes, some kids as young as 13 are sexually active.  No, I don't see any of them pushing strollers. 

One hundred percent of the girls having sex under the age of 16 are incapable of consenting to sex. 

I understand about the legally being able to consent thing.  I'm just wondering, consent or not, if there's a pregnancy rate at which people normally against school sex-ed would be for it in the hopes that knowledge about contraception (almost wrote "conception" - which would have maybe fit, too, lol) would help curtail pregnancy.  Cuz getting young folks to simply abstain is not likely to work, I don't think. 

Fighting basic biological instincts is likely to be a losing battle for many unless you used some kind of hormonal treatment. Or kept 'em in cages, maybe.

[RRKore]

Looks like someone doesn't know the difference between your and you're.  Again,  you can't back up your claims.

Awwww, don't they say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?  lol

[RRKore]

He's just a retired Marine, with an MBA, member of the State House of Representatives, married to the same woman for 25 years.  

Pretty idiotic thing to say.

Strictly speaking, none of that means he isn't a gay pedophile. 

Still, it's idiotic to say, I admit.

Picture DOES look creepy, though.

[RRKore]

So you're blacken?

Racist post. 

Just wait until Ron hears about this.

[StreetSoldier4U]

Racist post. 

Just wait until Ron hears about this.

You've all but admitted it.  So you go around making idiotic statements and created a gimmick to back you up.  You are mental

[dario73]

You've all but admitted it.  So you go around making idiotic statements and created a gimmick to back you up.  You are mental

Months ago I called him the board's retard.

I am correct.

[blacken700]

Months ago I called him the board's retard.

I am correct.

darioIQ73  mr fake Christian,and the board bigot  

I am correct.

[RRKore]

Months ago I called him the board's retard.

I am correct.

Dude, you call a lot of people names. 

It doesn't mean a whole lot about anyone but you.

[Dos Equis]

I understand about the legally being able to consent thing.  I'm just wondering, consent or not, if there's a pregnancy rate at which people normally against school sex-ed would be for it in the hopes that knowledge about contraception (almost wrote "conception" - which would have maybe fit, too, lol) would help curtail pregnancy.  Cuz getting young folks to simply abstain is not likely to work, I don't think. 

Fighting basic biological instincts is likely to be a losing battle for many unless you used some kind of hormonal treatment. Or kept 'em in cages, maybe.

The only thing we should be teaching kids from 11-13 (your window) regarding whether or not to engage in sexual activity is to abstain.  They need to learn the nuts (so to speak) and bolts of sex, etc., but no 11 year old kid needs to learn how to use a condom or be told that a butt hole is actually a genital, etc. 

[Dos Equis]

Strictly speaking, none of that means he isn't a gay pedophile. 

Still, it's idiotic to say, I admit.

Picture DOES look creepy, though.

No it doesn't.   

[RRKore]

The only thing we should be teaching kids from 11-13 (your window) regarding whether or not to engage in sexual activity is to abstain.  They need to learn the nuts (so to speak) and bolts of sex, etc., but no 11 year old kid needs to learn how to use a condom or be told that a butt hole is actually a genital, etc. 

Before the bursting-at-the-seams-with-porn internet became so popular, I'd have probably agreed with you about trying to tell kids to abstain.  Now, I'm not so sure...   

Good parents will be trying to use some kind of parental blocking apps or other restrictions for their computers at home but I'm sure lots aren't. 

Also, I'd bet that ways to get around that kind of thing are passed around from horny boy to horny boy with a quickness.  In my day, many 10 - 12 year olds had stashes of Playboy and Hustler mags --  which are practically puritanical compared with a lot of internet porn today.

I'm not sure how prevalent young teen pregnancy is, but among today's youth, education for 7th-graders (who are 12 and 13 years old, typically) about correct condom use seems like it'd be a beneficial thing for almost everyone.

[Dos Equis]

Before the bursting-at-the-seams-with-porn internet became so popular, I'd have probably agreed with you about trying to tell kids to abstain.  Now, I'm not so sure...   

Good parents will be trying to use some kind of parental blocking apps or other restrictions for their computers at home but I'm sure lots aren't. 

Also, I'd bet that ways to get around that kind of thing are passed around from horny boy to horny boy with a quickness.  In my day, many 10 - 12 year olds had stashes of Playboy and Hustler mags --  which are practically puritanical compared with a lot of internet porn today.

I'm not sure how prevalent young teen pregnancy is, but among today's youth, education for 7th-graders (who are 12 and 13 years old, typically) about correct condom use seems like it'd be a beneficial thing for almost everyone.

I agree porn is everyone.  That doesn't change the fact that 11 and 12 year old kids should not be having sex.  It's irresponsible to teach those kids how to have sex, including homosexual sex.  And teaching kids that young how to use condoms, etc.--in addition to sending a mixed message--will not do squat to keep them from being sexually active. 

[blacken700]

Abstinence only    LOL

[Dos Equis]

A Whole Lot Of Pono Madness
Posted on February 19, 2014
by Larry Price

After state Rep. Bob Mc-Dermott released his report critical of Pono Choice, a proposed state Department of Education sex-education program, I thought the public discussion of sex education was over.

Then I received a bulletin from UH-Manoa’s Health Promotion Office that it would be hosting its annual Valentine’s Day Condom Fair, which includes games and prizes.

I couldn’t believe it. Educational activities include a condom race and games like “Pin the Condom on Jack.” How creative, eh? Of course, I went to school in the ’60s, so it’s not surprising that I’m surprised. The most exciting thing we had at UH back then was the Ka Palapala beauty contest at Hemenway Hall. No one mentioned the relation of sex to beauty.

I guess it just goes to show how things have changed over the years, like talking openly about the pros and cons of oral and anal sex. I guess it’s acceptable, if it’s all designed to educate students about healthy sexual relationships.

It all seems strange to me because most quality institutions of higher learning are more interested in research or medical discoveries to ease suffering in the world.

Additionally, Valentine’s Day is usually thought of as celebrating love. It’s not something achieved in one day and takes a lot of thought over a prolonged period of time.

I just can’t imagine UH having a condom fair. It doesn’t appear to fit with the university’s mission. Furthermore, I can’t imagine the UH Regents discussing the topic publicly. It’s a tough topic to discuss, and when you read about how difficult it is to find a UH president, it makes you wonder if they know what kind of pono is happening on campus.

http://www.midweek.com/whole-lot-pono-madness/

[RRKore]

I agree porn is everyone.  That doesn't change the fact that 11 and 12 year old kids should not be having sex.  It's irresponsible to teach those kids how to have sex, including homosexual sex.  And teaching kids that young how to use condoms, etc.--in addition to sending a mixed message--will not do squat to keep them from being sexually active. 

So the debate seems to really hinge upon two questions:
- Does a lack of education about certain sex practices including proper condom use do anything significant to keep kids from being sexually active?
- Which is more important?: To try to discourage sexual activity or to try to address issues (with serious, measurable societal costs) like the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy?

I remember my middle-school years well.  I didn't give a flip about what anyone said about whether they thought it was OK to have sex as an 11-year old, I was intent on going as far as possible with the girls I liked.  

Sexually suggestive imagery was everywhere in our society when I was young and is even more ubiquitous now so what kids learn about sex as part of their school curriculum barely matters as a way of discouraging sexual activity, if you ask me.  Sex education centered around condom use (and maybe child support issues, haha) seems like it would be successful as a way to control diseases and teen pregnancy, though.

If you want to discourage sexual activity among kids, teaching girls about how to deal with male arguments like "If you love me, you'll let me" would be probably be more effective for that, lol.

[blacken700]

 

[Dos Equis]

So the debate seems to really hinge upon two questions:
- Does a lack of education about certain sex practices including proper condom use do anything significant to keep kids from being sexually active?
- Which is more important?: To try to discourage sexual activity or to try to address issues (with serious, measurable societal costs) like the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy?

I remember my middle-school years well.  I didn't give a flip about what anyone said about whether they thought it was OK to have sex as an 11-year old, I was intent on going as far as possible with the girls I liked.  

Sexually suggestive imagery was everywhere in our society when I was young and is even more ubiquitous now so what kids learn about sex as part of their school curriculum barely matters as a way of discouraging sexual activity, if you ask me.  Sex education centered around condom use (and maybe child support issues, haha) seems like it would be successful as a way to control diseases and teen pregnancy, though.

If you want to discourage sexual activity among kids, teaching girls about how to deal with male arguments like "If you love me, you'll let me" would be probably be more effective for that, lol.

Those might be your questions, but I see it differently:  should we do anything to promote or encourage kids to have sex at the ages of 11 and 12?  I think the answer is clearly no.  Many of them have not reached puberty.  The ones who have are in no way, shape, or form ready to be parents.  One hundred percent of them cannot consent to sex, so any sexual activity they engage in involves a crime of some sort. 

We cannot prevent kids from being promiscuous.  A lot of them are going to do whatever they want.  But in terms of public policy, we should only be doing things that promote healthy and legal activity for kids. 

[blacken700]

Those might be your questions, but I see it differently:  should we do anything to promote or encourage kids to have sex at the ages of 11 and 12?  I think the answer is clearly no.  Many of them have not reached puberty.  The ones who have are in no way, shape, or form ready to be parents.  One hundred percent of them cannot consent to sex, so any sexual activity they engage in involves a crime of some sort. 

We cannot prevent kids from being promiscuous.  A lot of them are going to do whatever they want.  But in terms of public policy, we should only be doing things that promote healthy and legal activity for kids. 

so I guess by your standards we just hide the precautions, great idea

[Dos Equis]

so I guess by your standards we just hide the precautions, great idea

Not teaching an 11 year old kid how to be a butt pirate isn't hiding precautions.  Nothing is hidden in the information age. 

[blacken700]

so I guess the only thing that is taught in that class is anal sex