Free Birth Control for 11-Year Olds
-
Irrespective who invented marriage, it is not for everybody. And where Chancellors of the Exchequer gave tax benefits to those who are married, it is no longer a religious view, it is more like a financial solution. And as you know, today, UK Government treat married and co-habiting (as if married) with equality in almost all respects, notwithstanding the promises of the Conservatives to give greater tax breaks to married persons.
My point is that a lot of people who think they're not married because they're not state-married are in fact just as married as those whom the state recognises. State legal marriage may not be for everybody due to tax, inheritance etc law but trust me if you're together you're married. Time for dinner.:)
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Unfortunately, half a century of cultural erosion is a difficult thing to undue.
Education is the solution providing that there are competent teachers to teach the subject AND willingness of children to both listen and learn. However, if education is the answer, then there also needs political clout with the willingness to spend sufficient money to see it through.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Education is the solution providing that there are competent teachers to teach the subject AND willingness of children to both listen and learn. However, if education is the answer, then there also needs political clout with the willingness to spend sufficient money to see it through.
Education isn't the answer. In fact, it appears to have absolutely no affect. Legislation here in the US mandated abstinence programs (in lieu of safe-sex education) in some pilot areas. The net result was absolutely no difference. And yet teen sex and out-of-wedlock birth rates continue to climb. The reasons run much deeper than what a classroom can fix.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Education is the solution providing that there are competent teachers to teach the subject AND willingness of children to both listen and learn. However, if education is the answer, then there also needs political clout with the willingness to spend sufficient money to see it through.
Education isn't the answer. In fact, it appears to have absolutely no affect. Legislation here in the US mandated abstinence programs (in lieu of safe-sex education) in some pilot areas. The net result was absolutely no difference. And yet teen sex and out-of-wedlock birth rates continue to climb. The reasons run much deeper than what a classroom can fix.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
What if he parents are religious fanatics, she gets strep throat and wants to take an anti-biotic for it? She can't make the decision to at least talk to a doctor about it?
Hey! I finally found a picture of myself!
leckey wrote:
What if he parents are religious fanatics, she gets strep throat and wants to take an anti-biotic for it?
what does religion, or lack of, have to do with making your child take antibiotics ?
leckey wrote:
She can't make the decision to at least talk to a doctor about it?
sure she can, but thats not birth control. im not against birth control or free advice / medicine for minors. i just think the parents should be notified if their 11 year old daughter is asking for it. like i said in an above post, physical maturity is not the same as emotional maturity. just because an 11 year old girl is physically mature, does not mean that she is emotionally mature enough to have a sexual relationship, and providing free birth control without parental notification is only encouraging the behavior. i started having sex at a young age, and im sure there are plenty of people here who did the same. if they dont have a few horror stories personally, they know someone who does. sex is a natural thing in life, and scientifically you are in you prime" from ~14 - ~26 for females and ~16 - 35 for males, but in todays society, there aren't very many people in the lower bounds who are emotionally mature enough to do deal with physical relationships...
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
Well, if education is not the answer and statutory programs have no effect, then frankly, the answer becomes elusive.
Currently there is no federal funding for comprehensive sex ed but according to the Surgeon General, comprehensive sex education is empirically proven to be a highly effective approach. 'In 2000, the Surgeon General reported that providing young people with contraception information decreases the likelihood of teen pregnancy or an STI infection while not expediting the initiation of sexual intercourse, increasing the frequency of sexual contact, or increasing the number of sexual partners.'
-
Currently there is no federal funding for comprehensive sex ed but according to the Surgeon General, comprehensive sex education is empirically proven to be a highly effective approach. 'In 2000, the Surgeon General reported that providing young people with contraception information decreases the likelihood of teen pregnancy or an STI infection while not expediting the initiation of sexual intercourse, increasing the frequency of sexual contact, or increasing the number of sexual partners.'
oilFactotum wrote:
Currently there is no federal funding for comprehensive sex ed but according to the Surgeon General, comprehensive sex education is empirically proven to be a highly effective approach. 'In 2000, the Surgeon General reported that providing young people with contraception information decreases the likelihood of teen pregnancy or an STI infection while not expediting the initiation of sexual intercourse, increasing the frequency of sexual contact, or increasing the number of sexual partners.'
And yet the abstinence programs initiated the next year and followed for the subsequent 5 showed no discernable difference in results. In other words, sex education (despite Clinton's surgeon general's wishes) has no immediate effect on teenagers' behavior. Of course, the overall acceptance of promiscuity by our culture in general certainly does.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
leckey wrote:
What if he parents are religious fanatics, she gets strep throat and wants to take an anti-biotic for it?
what does religion, or lack of, have to do with making your child take antibiotics ?
leckey wrote:
She can't make the decision to at least talk to a doctor about it?
sure she can, but thats not birth control. im not against birth control or free advice / medicine for minors. i just think the parents should be notified if their 11 year old daughter is asking for it. like i said in an above post, physical maturity is not the same as emotional maturity. just because an 11 year old girl is physically mature, does not mean that she is emotionally mature enough to have a sexual relationship, and providing free birth control without parental notification is only encouraging the behavior. i started having sex at a young age, and im sure there are plenty of people here who did the same. if they dont have a few horror stories personally, they know someone who does. sex is a natural thing in life, and scientifically you are in you prime" from ~14 - ~26 for females and ~16 - 35 for males, but in todays society, there aren't very many people in the lower bounds who are emotionally mature enough to do deal with physical relationships...
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
VonHagNDaz wrote:
i started having sex at a young age, and im sure there are plenty of people here who did the same
You do realize where you're posting this right? ;P
------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.. but it ROCKS absolutely, too.
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
i started having sex at a young age, and im sure there are plenty of people here who did the same
You do realize where you're posting this right? ;P
------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.. but it ROCKS absolutely, too.
haha, im an open book though, you ask and ill tell
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Currently there is no federal funding for comprehensive sex ed but according to the Surgeon General, comprehensive sex education is empirically proven to be a highly effective approach. 'In 2000, the Surgeon General reported that providing young people with contraception information decreases the likelihood of teen pregnancy or an STI infection while not expediting the initiation of sexual intercourse, increasing the frequency of sexual contact, or increasing the number of sexual partners.'
And yet the abstinence programs initiated the next year and followed for the subsequent 5 showed no discernable difference in results. In other words, sex education (despite Clinton's surgeon general's wishes) has no immediate effect on teenagers' behavior. Of course, the overall acceptance of promiscuity by our culture in general certainly does.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
In other words, sex education...
No. In other words abstinence only sex education has no effect. Comprehensive sex education does work.
-
haha, im an open book though, you ask and ill tell
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
I didn't mean that you felt like sharing. I meant that you assumed most of us had sex at a young age:) After all, we are all computer nerds right? ;P
------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.. but it ROCKS absolutely, too.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
In other words, sex education...
No. In other words abstinence only sex education has no effect. Comprehensive sex education does work.
oilFactotum wrote:
No. In other words abstinence only sex education has no effect. Comprehensive sex education does work.
No, the study showed that abstinence education had the exact same affect as telling 11-year olds how to get it on (i.e. no net effect). So that begs the question...Why are you so eager to teach 11-year olds how to get it on when it has no beneficial effect? Are you some sort of pervert?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
oilFactotum wrote:
No. In other words abstinence only sex education has no effect. Comprehensive sex education does work.
No, the study showed that abstinence education had the exact same affect as telling 11-year olds how to get it on (i.e. no net effect). So that begs the question...Why are you so eager to teach 11-year olds how to get it on when it has no beneficial effect? Are you some sort of pervert?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
the study showed that abstinence education had the exact same affect
That is simply false. The only studies I have seen compare abstinence only sex education with no sex education and in those studies there is no difference.
-
I didn't mean that you felt like sharing. I meant that you assumed most of us had sex at a young age:) After all, we are all computer nerds right? ;P
------------------------------------- Do not do what has already been done. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.. but it ROCKS absolutely, too.
Doctor Nick wrote:
After all, we are all computer nerds right?
thats no excuse, im talking about a bit younger age in the previous post, but we had Computer Engineering nights at different bars across downtown when i was in college. if you didnt have a social life, we drug you out and did everything we could to give you opportunities to have one. also, its fun watching a computer geek try to talk about 802.11 standards in conversation with a girl they just met. :laugh:
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
Red Stateler wrote:
the study showed that abstinence education had the exact same affect
That is simply false. The only studies I have seen compare abstinence only sex education with no sex education and in those studies there is no difference.
oilFactotum wrote:
That is simply false. The only studies I have seen compare abstinence only sex education with no sex education and in those studies there is no difference.
Your ignorance (which is amazingly vast) does not denote falsity. The study[^] in question compared "sex education" vs. "abstinence education" and there was no discernable difference between the two. Essentially sex education, regardless of its type, does not have any effect on either the frequency or "safety" of teenage sex. So that begs the question...Why do you want to teach 11-year olds how to get it on? Are you some sort of pervert?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
oilFactotum wrote:
That is simply false. The only studies I have seen compare abstinence only sex education with no sex education and in those studies there is no difference.
Your ignorance (which is amazingly vast) does not denote falsity. The study[^] in question compared "sex education" vs. "abstinence education" and there was no discernable difference between the two. Essentially sex education, regardless of its type, does not have any effect on either the frequency or "safety" of teenage sex. So that begs the question...Why do you want to teach 11-year olds how to get it on? Are you some sort of pervert?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
i want to see numbers that show statistics regarding stds among student who underwent the differnt educations, or was that included in this study. i think thats one of the most important statistic that should have been weighed...
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
oilFactotum wrote:
That is simply false. The only studies I have seen compare abstinence only sex education with no sex education and in those studies there is no difference.
Your ignorance (which is amazingly vast) does not denote falsity. The study[^] in question compared "sex education" vs. "abstinence education" and there was no discernable difference between the two. Essentially sex education, regardless of its type, does not have any effect on either the frequency or "safety" of teenage sex. So that begs the question...Why do you want to teach 11-year olds how to get it on? Are you some sort of pervert?
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
compared "sex education" vs. "abstinence education"
I am constantly amazed at you ability to shamelessly make completely unsupported claims. Family life services is not comprehensive sex education. Your statement is false. Read the title to the article: "Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs".
-
i want to see numbers that show statistics regarding stds among student who underwent the differnt educations, or was that included in this study. i think thats one of the most important statistic that should have been weighed...
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
VonHagNDaz wrote:
i want to see numbers that show statistics regarding stds among student who underwent the differnt educations, or was that included in this study. i think thats one of the most important statistic that should have been weighed...
Considering the fact that they used condoms and had sex at the same rate, I would imagine that their STD rates were similar.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
Red Stateler wrote:
compared "sex education" vs. "abstinence education"
I am constantly amazed at you ability to shamelessly make completely unsupported claims. Family life services is not comprehensive sex education. Your statement is false. Read the title to the article: "Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs".
oilFactotum wrote:
I am constantly amazed at you ability to shamelessly make completely unsupported claims. Family life services is not comprehensive sex education. Your statement is false. Read the title to the article: "Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs".
Where did I say otherwise, captain super-duper-genius? The study indicated that abstinence and promscuity education had the same net result. Read above a few posts and I said that education cannot deter sexual promiscuity and that it is a purely cultural issue (that arose out of nearly half a century of the left-wing agenda). So now, here we are, giving birth control to 11-year old kids because leftists are too dumb to realize that it was exactly that mentality that ultimately led them to have to do so in the first place. But hey...I guess it works for pervs who enjoy the idea of 11-year olds having sex.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
-
i want to see numbers that show statistics regarding stds among student who underwent the differnt educations, or was that included in this study. i think thats one of the most important statistic that should have been weighed...
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
Bear in mind that the study does not compare comprehensive sex education and abstinence only sex education.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
I am constantly amazed at you ability to shamelessly make completely unsupported claims. Family life services is not comprehensive sex education. Your statement is false. Read the title to the article: "Study Casts Doubt on Abstinence-Only Programs".
Where did I say otherwise, captain super-duper-genius? The study indicated that abstinence and promscuity education had the same net result. Read above a few posts and I said that education cannot deter sexual promiscuity and that it is a purely cultural issue (that arose out of nearly half a century of the left-wing agenda). So now, here we are, giving birth control to 11-year old kids because leftists are too dumb to realize that it was exactly that mentality that ultimately led them to have to do so in the first place. But hey...I guess it works for pervs who enjoy the idea of 11-year olds having sex.
Anybody rape your wife yet? -IAmChrisMcCall
Red Stateler wrote:
The study indicated that abstinence and promscuity[sic] education had the same net result.
And again that is false. The study made no comparison between comprehensive sex education and abstinence only sex education.
Red Stateler wrote:
I said that education cannot deter sexual promiscuity and that it is a purely cultural issue
That is false and you have provided nothing to support your claim.