Well, actually without the religious conitations I do teach and tell my stepkids that abstinence is really the only true way to keep from getting STD's or pregnant; however, having said that though I tell them that IF they are going to have sex to do so responsibly. I'd rather that they tell me that they are knocking boots because then I would take them to the GNY (forget Planned Parenthood) and get them on the pill. Mostly though I just want them to be safe and stress that condoms are ALWAYS necessary. The two younger ones biothing took them to get Guardisil, which is something, but won't keep them safe from EVERY possible STD. I presented the Guardisil info to my oldest SD and told her the good and the bad about it and let her make her own decision. She did decide to get innoculated for it.
As for funding, I do really feel that there is a place for teaching it in schools and other places, however, it should not be directly associated with religious reasons to remain abstinent.
Oh...lol. I'd take them to a regular GYN and their scripts for whatever type of birthcontrol they wanted would cost less than Planned Parenthood due to our benefits and perscription plan. I shoulda said that I wouldn't take them to PP but rather a regular doctor.
I had a woman complain to me about the school system's sex ed program the other day. She said, "You know, they start teaching sex ed in fourth grade. Of course, I didn't let my son take the class, but he knows all about it anyway because all of the kids talk about it."
Um, okay, so she'd rather her kid learn about sex from a bunch of fourth graders than from an actual teacher who is certified to teach the subject? What kind of logic is that? I guess people think that if they pretend sex doesn't exist, then their kids will never do it. Funny how plenty of teenagers had sex (and babies) long before sex education was part of a public school curriculum.
I'm all for promoting abstinence. I honestly don't think school aged kids should be having sex. But teenagers do a lot of things they're not supposed to do, and isn't it better to teach them how to protect themselves if they do end up giving in to their instincts?
If anything, I think sex ed should be more comprehensive. Kids need to learn about the emotional consequences, not
( ... )
It would blow your mind some of the ignorant things I've heard from parents in my line of work. I really wish more of them could sit in on the classes I offer.
And I wish more schools that aren't providing comprehensive sex ed would give me a call.
I'm really proud of one of our local elementary schools - they actually have me come in 9 times each year for their 6th graders.
Comments 7
As for funding, I do really feel that there is a place for teaching it in schools and other places, however, it should not be directly associated with religious reasons to remain abstinent.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Um, okay, so she'd rather her kid learn about sex from a bunch of fourth graders than from an actual teacher who is certified to teach the subject? What kind of logic is that? I guess people think that if they pretend sex doesn't exist, then their kids will never do it. Funny how plenty of teenagers had sex (and babies) long before sex education was part of a public school curriculum.
I'm all for promoting abstinence. I honestly don't think school aged kids should be having sex. But teenagers do a lot of things they're not supposed to do, and isn't it better to teach them how to protect themselves if they do end up giving in to their instincts?
If anything, I think sex ed should be more comprehensive. Kids need to learn about the emotional consequences, not ( ... )
Reply
And I wish more schools that aren't providing comprehensive sex ed would give me a call.
I'm really proud of one of our local elementary schools - they actually have me come in 9 times each year for their 6th graders.
Reply
Leave a comment