Tennessee law designed to curb teaching of"Gateway Sexual Activity"

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Palindrome**

biccat wrote:
Palindrome wrote:I think you missed the part where I said that the teaching needs to be free of all bias.

How do you decide what is bias?

By teaching just the facts and nothing more. Bias can never be wholly elimianted from any human endevour of course but it is still fairly simple to create a factual and 'neutral' lesson on most topics.

**master of ordinance**

Damn, sounds like my mum has become a member of the American goverment.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
You poor b

ds

**Frazzled**

biccat wrote:
sebster wrote:I love your assumption that parents will be properly informed on the issues surrounding sex, and capable of explaining these issues in the same comprehensive manner as a teacher following curriculum laid out by leading sexual health experts.

Are there any other areas where you think parents are chronically uninformed and should defer child-rearing to the proper experts?

Obviously parents don't know enough about nutrition, so they should have a nutrition coach explain how to properly feed their children.

Parents also don't know everything about fashion, and kids could get embarassed if they show up wearing the wrong clothes. So we should have fashion coordinators to teach kids what to wear.

Religion? Heck no! At the very least, experts in theology should explain each religious belief and let kids decide for themselves.

Politics? As upcoming voters, childhood education on political issues is especially important. So lets make sure they know, from experienced politicians, what is going on.

These are just a few areas where parents are ill informed on the issues, and generally incapable of explaining these issues in the same comprehensive manner as a teacher following curriculum laid out by leading experts. Just hand over your kids to the government when they're born and you can have them back when they're 18. Because they obviously won't be ready for a job, and will probably live with you for another 10 years.

It takes a government mandated village to raise a family.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Palindrome wrote:Now you are just trolling Biccat, either that or deliberatly being obtuse.

To be honest I wish that some of those subjects were properly taught in schools, nutrition and politics would be good places to start

We could hopefully cut down on the numbers of ignorant fat people..

How about teaching little Timmy math and language skills better than your average third worlder first?

**Palindrome**

Frazzled wrote:
How about teaching little Timmy math and language skills better than your average third worlder first?

Well if you improve your education system in one area there are likely to be bleedthrough effects.

**biccat**

Palindrome wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
How about teaching little Timmy math and language skills better than your average third worlder first?

Well if you improve your education system in one area there are likely to be bleedthrough effects.

So teaching kids how to feth one another suddenly makes them better at math?

I'm not sure I understand how that works.

**Frazzled**

Palindrome wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
How about teaching little Timmy math and language skills better than your average third worlder first?

Well if you improve your education system in one area there are likely to be bleedthrough effects.

No, there's absolutely no evidence of that. Indeed, employing the aforementioned math skills I learened more gooder in dat der edumacation, its that there is a defined amount of learning hours in a day, school year, and academic life. Take time away from the classics for other classes, and you take time away from those classes.

Besides I'd rather they learn economics, hard sciences, civics including studying the Greats like Locke and Marx, and the proper care and feeding of your wiener dog if we have surplus hours in abundance.

**Palindrome**

Frazzled wrote:
Palindrome wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
How about teaching little Timmy math and language skills better than your average third worlder first?

Well if you improve your education system in one area there are likely to be bleedthrough effects.

No, there's absolutely no evidence of that. Indeed, employing the aforementioned math skills I learened more gooder in dat der edumacation, its that there is a defined amount of learning hours in a day, school year, and academic life. Take time away from the classics for other classes, and you take time away from those classes.

Besides I'd rather they learn economics, hard sciences, civics including studying the Greats like Locke and Marx, and the proper care and feeding of your wiener dog if we have surplus hours in abundance.

Is there any evidence to the contrary? It won't be hard to find the time in the school day for things such as nutrition and sex education classes. Afterall these things are already taught to varying degrees and to be honest there isn't a huge amount of information that needs to be imparted. Being taught maths all day, every day won't help you much if you get pregnant at 16 or if you weigh 30 stone.

**Kilkrazy**

I think it would be awesome if children were taught about stuff by their parents instead of people qualified to teach the stuff.

Obviously this will greatly increase the burden on parents so basically, what we will do is to send the children to schools, where each subject will be taught by a teacher who knows nothing about it.

For example, French will be taught by the Physics teacher. The French teacher will teach Chemistry, and so on.

**Frazzled**

I see you ignored the basic law of mat right off the bat. Excellent.

Not being taught math is an excellent way to end up pregnant at 16 too.

**Squigsquasher**

MrMoustaffa wrote:
Squigsquasher wrote:Why am I not surprised? Damned social conservatives and their silly book! Ugh.

Next time on American Idiocy today: Arizona bans condoms and Alabama legalizes lynching! Also, Kentucky makes it a legal requirement that schools must teach that the atomic bombs were dropped by Al-Quaeda!

Hey, I know Kentucky may not sound like the smartest state ever, but we at least have some semblance of sexual education (not calling you out, just using your quote because it's relevant ). We get shown how to put a condom on, what various sexual diseases look like, how to avoid them, what to use and what NOT to use as a homemade lubricant (one of the funniest/depressing things I've ever seen. Apparently kids have been using peanut butter these days...) They even explained what condoms were right for you and how to tell what sizes were in the box based on the name.

That said, it did almost nothing to lower our teen pregnancy rate. The problem is it's completely voluntary, and parents can forbid their children from going to it with a certain slip. Given the high amount of conservative Christian parents that live out in this area, and you lose a good chunk of students before it even starts. Ironically, these are usually the more "innocent" kids that don't know as much, and REALLY need to see this stuff. Most of the students that go have either already done it or will never get laid anyways, so they rarely learn much.

In my graduating class of 48, we had 2 pregnant girls, and one who had already given birth and was a mom. Sad part was I knew one of the girls, and she was smart, a great student, and had a great career ahead of her. Would better sex ed have stopped it? Maybe, but the fact that even though kentucky's TRYING and nothing is happening, doesn't give me much help for our Tennessee neighbors...

Ha, I was just using Kentucky as a random example. Never been to the UNAHTED STAYTES OF AHMEHRICUH so I wouldn't really know. All I know is that the further south you go, the more conservative and unsane it gets.

**PhantomViper**

biccat wrote:
So teaching kids how to feth one another suddenly makes them better at math?

I'm not sure I understand how that works.

You don't need to teach kids how to feth with each other, they learn how to do that pretty well on their own.

What you do need is to teach them how not to hurt themselves or their lives while doing it...

**Palindrome**

Frazzled wrote:I see you ignored the basic law of mat right off the bat. Excellent.

Not being taught math is an excellent way to end up pregnant at 16 too.

Only if you know what to count. Its also a really unreliable method.

What is the law of mat?

**Frazzled**

Its either:
*Bad spelling for math, or
*The First of the Ten Commandments according to Mattyrm.

**Palindrome**

Whats the basic law of math then?

**Frazzled**

Palindrome wrote:Whats the basic law of math then?

2+2 = 4

Unless you're an attorney, then its whatever number you want it to be.

**PhantomViper**

biccat wrote:
sebster wrote:I love your assumption that parents will be properly informed on the issues surrounding sex, and capable of explaining these issues in the same comprehensive manner as a teacher following curriculum laid out by leading sexual health experts.

Are there any other areas where you think parents are chronically uninformed and should defer child-rearing to the proper experts?

Obviously parents don't know enough about nutrition, so they should have a nutrition coach explain how to properly feed their children.

Parents also don't know everything about fashion, and kids could get embarassed if they show up wearing the wrong clothes. So we should have fashion coordinators to teach kids what to wear.

Religion? Heck no! At the very least, experts in theology should explain each religious belief and let kids decide for themselves.

Politics? As upcoming voters, childhood education on political issues is especially important. So lets make sure they know, from experienced politicians, what is going on.

These are just a few areas where parents are ill informed on the issues, and generally incapable of explaining these issues in the same comprehensive manner as a teacher following curriculum laid out by leading experts. Just hand over your kids to the government when they're born and you can have them back when they're 18. Because they obviously won't be ready for a job, and will probably live with you for another 10 years.

Actually, when me and the missus got pregnant with our spawn of satan we took a parenting course given by professionals that teached us about proper baby and pregnancy nutrition, new-born care and hygiene and lots of other stuff that are more or less important in taking care of a baby. Could we have managed without it? Sure, lots of people do around the world, but what is the problem in trying to learn to do it the "better" way?

You seem to have a pretty heavy bias against education Biccat, any particular reason for this?

**Frazzled**

I think he's again government mandated "education" and more importantly government educators with their own agendas and biases. Thats my two cents anyway.

Me myself? Our district has sex ed. I didn't care. The kids already had way more information from us before that.
I'll note judging by the mouth breather next to us and across the street the ed didn't take...

**biccat**

PhantomViper wrote:Actually, when me and the missus got pregnant with our spawn of satan we took a parenting course given by professionals that teached us about proper baby and pregnancy nutrition, new-born care and hygiene and lots of other stuff that are more or less important in taking care of a baby. Could we have managed without it? Sure, lots of people do around the world, but what is the problem in trying to learn to do it the "better" way?

I don't see a problem with that.

If you disagreed that the way they were teaching you was better, would you still have attended?

Do you think you should have been required to attend that class, regardless of whether you thought the teaching was better?

PhantomViper wrote:You seem to have a pretty heavy bias against education Biccat, any particular reason for this?

I have a bias against tyranny.

I really have no problem teaching kids math, science, reading and writing. Beyond that, schools should just stay out of the issue.

**Kilkrazy**

The issue here is not that people are unable to opt in or out of sex ed classes, but that sex ed is being banned because of fear of PANTY EXPLOSION.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:The issue here is not that people are unable to opt in or out of sex ed classes, but that sex ed is being banned because of fear of PANTY EXPLOSION.

Now thats the kind of post I like to see!

**hotsauceman1**

I agree, In the interest of public health. The Govt should teach things in liu of parents. Like Nutrition and fitness

**Melissia**

Biccat, sex ed is extremely clinical and matter-of-fact in how it is done; it's not "teaching how fun it is to have sex", it's saying "This is how you put a condom on. These are some horrifying examples of STDs and how you can get them. This is what birth looks like."

Hell, sex ed for my class convinced more people to NOT have sex than the abstinence only garbage did. Plenty of girls watched that birth video and realized "oh damn I do NOT want to go through THAT!"

**dogma**

biccat wrote:
Obviously parents don't know enough about nutrition, so they should have a nutrition coach explain how to properly feed their children.

We teach, and have taught, nutrition for years in health class.

biccat wrote:
Parents also don't know everything about fashion, and kids could get embarassed if they show up wearing the wrong clothes. So we should have fashion coordinators to teach kids what to wear.

We teach this indirectly by way of dress standards. Almost every school in the country, public or private, features at least some form of dress code.

biccat wrote:
Religion? Heck no! At the very least, experts in theology should explain each religious belief and let kids decide for themselves.

Religious belief isn't generally considered to be important to the well-being of children, or people in general. Sexual health, by comparison, is quite important.

biccat wrote:
Politics? As upcoming voters, childhood education on political issues is especially important. So lets make sure they know, from experienced politicians, what is going on.

We've taught politics, in the form of history and civics, for decades. Though, arguably, all education that isn't math or a science (and apparently even sometimes in the latter case) is essentially political, right down to the selection of literature consumed in English courses.

biccat wrote:
These are just a few areas where parents are ill informed on the issues, and generally incapable of explaining these issues in the same comprehensive manner as a teacher following curriculum laid out by leading experts.

Indeed, you failed to mention things like mathematics, English, biology, Spanish, physics, economics, and so on.

biccat wrote:
I have a bias against tyranny.

And a general misunderstanding of what tyranny is.

**biccat**

Melissia wrote:Biccat, sex ed is extremely clinical and matter-of-fact in how it is done; it's not "teaching how fun it is to have sex", it's saying "This is how you put a condom on. These are some horrifying examples of STDs and how you can get them. This is what birth looks like."

From the article (I used to wonder if people ever read these):

Fowler said the new law was authored in part because of incidents in which teachers were instructing about alternate sexual practices as ways to have gratification without risking pregnancy.

He said one such incident involved a Nashville high school teacher who was encouraging girls to give boys oral sex in order to get a condom on them.

Fowler also pointed to a Planned Parenthood-organized program at a school in Knoxville, where students were directed to a web site "that actually lists as possible methods of birth control things like oral sex and anal sex play that I think most Tennesseans would find inappropriate."

Sounds very "clinical and matter-of-fact" to me.

**Frazzled**

hotsauceman1 wrote:I agree, In the interest of public health. The Govt should teach things in liu of parents. Like Nutrition and fitness

Well, thinking back on the horror show that was "health" and my public school PE classes, that kind of just blew your argument right out of the water.
In martial arts I learned fitness (and how to burn out your knees but thats a fun side effect). In college I learned fitness.
In public school PE I learned how to jump someone between the lockers and the gym when they weren't expecting it, how to make an entire class sit on the bleachers for a semester so the basketball team could get extra practice in, and how to destroy younger kids in "touch" football. I leanred that every PE coach should be fired and their money used for something more productive, like basket weaving.

**Melissia**

So you're saying one example of teacher misconduct means every one who teaches sex ed must be doing the same thing?

I guess we should be getting rid of religious education because it's obviously staffed by a bunch of pederasts who just want to fondle young boys.

**Frazzled**

Melissia wrote:So you're saying one example of teacher misconduct means every one who teaches sex ed must be doing the same thing?

I guess we should be getting rid of religious education because it's obviously staffed by a bunch of pederasts who just want to fondle young boys.

Religious education is voluntary. Things mandated by the government usually aren't.

**Melissia**

Frazzled wrote:Religious education is voluntary.

It is also prevented by the constitution from being mandatory. My point was that there's always going to be some miscreants, and their existence doesn't prove the entire program is flawed.

**Frazzled**

Melissia wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Religious education is voluntary.
It is also prevented by the constitution from being mandatory. My point was that there's always going to be some miscreants, and their existence doesn't prove the entire program is flawed.

This is true, if it was an instance and not policy.

If it was policy then that would have been a damn sight more interesting class, and I probably wouldn't have slept through it nearly as much as I did.

**dogma**

biccat wrote:
Sounds very "clinical and matter-of-fact" to me.

Certainly does. One can achieve sexual gratification without the risk of pregnancy, though the attendant risk of STDs obviously remains, that's a simple matter of fact. Mentioning that sexual pleasure exists, and can be obtained in ways that extend beyond intercourse doesn't instantly contravene any sort of "clinical and matter-of-fact" demeanor.