NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.local6.com/news/15773787/detail.html

Apparently the patently false scare tactics and lacking information that comes with current "omg sex is scary!" abstinence education classes (often taught by people who have probably have no teaching credentials) has convinced a large number of gullible halfwits in Florida that a number of really idiotic things are true. Like drinking bleach will prevent HIV. I guess that's true - you can't get HIV if you are dead. In hopes of invoking the spirit of Quantum Leap and putting right what once went wrong, Florida is putting a bill through their Congress to force abstinence education classes to teach more realistic sex education - including things about contraception (ooh, scary).

Drinking a capful of bleach (which is between 1.5 and 3% chlorine) wouldn't kill you. Worst case you get a mild chemical burn all the way down. I think.

Not sure how it'd react with stomach acid though. The resultant salts might be poisonous.

Drinking a capful of bleach (which is between 1.5 and 3% chlorine) wouldn't kill you. Worst case you get a mild chemical burn all the way down. I think.

Not sure how it'd react with stomach acid though. The resultant salts might be poisonous.

Might not kill you but it is still a bloody silly thing to do....

What's this "contraception" you speak of? Is that the one where praying to Jesus makes your woman immune to your seed? Or is it where the vile animal skin kills babies?

I love religion.

Drinking a capful of bleach (which is between 1.5 and 3% chlorine) wouldn't kill you. Worst case you get a mild chemical burn all the way down. I think.

Not sure how it'd react with stomach acid though. The resultant salts might be poisonous.

Well, if you drink much more than that, you'll dissolve your esophagus. I'd imagine eating would become quite the chore after that.

ZOMG! Comprehensive sex ed?

What's next?!?!?!?!

Florida teens also believe that smoking marijuana will prevent a person from getting pregnant
Nah, that's just what they tell the cops when they're caught.

Well, if you drink much more than that, you'll dissolve your esophagus. I'd imagine eating would become quite the chore after that.

Bleach isn't even close to that corrosive. Even chlorine up to 15-20% isn't powerful enough to eat through skin without prolonged exposure. Does make it fizz though. White foam bubbling up on your exposed skin. Starts to tingle pretty quick.

Wow. In the absence of fact, rumors spread. Nutty. :p

Heheheh the best bit about that was this:

'Teaching abstinance will still be required...'

How does one go about teaching abstinance?

Okay kids you don't do it like this...:D

I remember my 10th grade health class. The teacher said "According to the state of Florida, I'm supposed to teach you about abstinence. But that's a total pile of crap, so I'm going to show you this condom now..."

I remember my 10th grade health class. The teacher said "According to the state of Florida, I'm supposed to teach you about abstinence. But that's a total pile of crap, so I'm going to show you this condom now..."

I like your teacher...

He probably has been fired though... :(

http://www.local6.com/news/15773787/detail.html

Apparently the patently false scare tactics and lacking information that comes with current "omg sex is scary!" abstinence education classes (often taught by people who have probably have no teaching credentials) has convinced a large number of gullible halfwits in Florida that a number of really idiotic things are true. Like drinking bleach will prevent HIV. .

Nice misprepresentation of the article there. This bizarre factoid was not presented in a class, it is merely something some teens believe.

Your cause-effect linkage of teen stupidity to an abstinence education class isn't backed up by the article anywhere.

If a kid goes to an abstinence class and somehow comes out believing that bleach prevents HIV, just IMAGINE what kind of totally assinine, moronic things that kid will get out of a sex ed class.

Some kids are idiots. That's the bottom line. In the words of the great Bill Cosby, children are brain damaged. And yes, in our Darwinian system, if we keep this up long enough, sooner or later genes creating an instinctive dislike for the smell of bleach will spread through the Human genome, so no more kids will drink bleach, and the homes and clothing of the future will be filthy.

On the other hand... one of the nations with the LOWEST proportion of adults with aids is Norway. Norwegians eat lutefisk, which is essentially fish prepared with lye, an ingredient in bleach. Given that AIDS rates are highest in nations with NO lutefisk consumption, I can see how the connection could be made.

Bleach isn't even close to that corrosive. Even chlorine up to 15-20% isn't powerful enough to eat through skin without prolonged exposure. Does make it fizz though. White foam bubbling up on your exposed skin. Starts to tingle pretty quick.

Sorry, it was battery acid I was thinking of. Too many ways dumb people try to commit suicide.

It takes a bunch of teens drinking bleach to convince the state that they've got this whole "sexual education" think the wrong way 'round...

Wow.

Friggin' dark ages stuff there.

Nice misprepresentation of the article there. This bizarre factoid was not presented in a class, it is merely something some teens believe.

Your cause-effect linkage of teen stupidity to an abstinence education class isn't backed up by the article anywhere.

If a kid goes to an abstinence class and somehow comes out believing that bleach prevents HIV, just IMAGINE what kind of totally assinine, moronic things that kid will get out of a sex ed class.

The actual facts?

If a student is never taught the facts about sex, all they have are rumors.

The actual facts?

If a student is never taught the facts about sex, all they have are rumors.

Shhh! You're going to offend the fundies :D

Nice misprepresentation of the article there. This bizarre factoid was not presented in a class, it is merely something some teens believe.

Your cause-effect linkage of teen stupidity to an abstinence education class isn't backed up by the article anywhere.

It's backed up by common sense. A while ago, people believed the earth was flat. A while ago, people believed that dragons existed beyond the horizon. A while ago, people believed that this flat earth surrounded by dragons existed in the center of reality.

Now they don't. Why not? Because now they know the truth.

If they were never taught the truth, all they'd have is speculation.

Bleach is dangerous and will scar the lining of the throat and esophogus all the way down. :(

Sadly kids are dumbasses and other kids think it is funny to tell them stupid things to do. Some kids in our class told a guy in our class to piss in a coke and drink it and it would prevent pregnancy. He did and it didn't. :rolleyes:

The actual facts?

If a student is never taught the facts about sex, all they have are rumors.

I am curious in this day and age what student doesn't have access to a computer or television?

Frankly a parent that isn't explaining this stuff to their kids is guilty of abuse in my opinion. Keeping kids stupid is a dangerous thing.

/steps off soapbox

I am curious in this day and age what student doesn't have access to a computer or television?

You can find these sorts of rumors on the web, believe me.

And what television programs provide comprehensive sex ed?

Frankly a parent that isn't explaining this stuff to their kids is guilty of abuse in my opinion. Keeping kids stupid is a dangerous thing.

Oh, I agree. Negligence more than abuse, perhaps, but definitely bad parenting.

But the types of parents who push for abstinence-only education unfortunately aren't going to teach real sex ed it in the home either.

You can find these sorts of rumors on the web, believe me.

And what television programs provide comprehensive sex ed?



Oh, I agree. Negligence more than abuse, perhaps, but definitely bad parenting.

But the types of parents who push for abstinence-only education unfortunately aren't going to teach real sex ed it in the home either.

True about the tv shows and I guess it can be safely assumed that if a parent is stupid enough not to teach their children about their bodies and sex then they certainly aren't going to let them watch tv that shows any such things either. :rolleyes:

Yet such parents sure know how to breed. :(

Frankly a parent that isn't explaining this stuff to their kids is guilty of abuse in my opinion. Keeping kids stupid is a dangerous thing.

/steps off soapbox

I don't think the parents are responsible for teaching their children sex ed and biology any more than it is their responsibility to teach them math or chemistry or english literature.

Teaching is what schools are for.

I don't think the parents are responsible for teaching their children sex ed and biology any more than it is their responsibility to teach them math or chemistry or english literature.

Teaching is what schools are for.

Agreed. But you have to admit, at least in this day and age, certain topics may be considered "private", and are most appropriate in a parent/child discussion.

Plus, a kid can't potentially mess up their life with an unintended pregnancy if they don't know pi to the 10th place.

I think parents should get more involved.

I don't think the parents are responsible for teaching their children sex ed and biology any more than it is their responsibility to teach them math or chemistry or english literature.

Teaching is what schools are for.

I don't agree, teachers are there to enhance an education but it begins at home. I taught my kids the alphabet, their numbers and how to read and write before they went to school. I also taught them how to use scissors and crayons too. And surprise surprise the biology of their bodies and sex ed.

Nice misprepresentation of the article there. This bizarre factoid was not presented in a class, it is merely something some teens believe.
Probably because of improperly taught scare tactics in abstinence ed class.

Your cause-effect linkage of teen stupidity to an abstinence education class isn't backed up by the article anywhere.
Nothing besides the fact the entire article implies it. Did you read the article? The fact students are drinking bleach to prevent HIV, or thinking Mountain Dew and marijuana can prevent pregnancy is causing the state's congress to put through legislation with more thorough sexual education in a place where the article states that abstinence education is mandated. Apparently you are the only one who doesn't understand the correlation there.

Kids Drink Bleech

Kids dies

The Gene Pool gets a bit cleaner.

*nods*

Why are we trying to keep the idiots from killing themselves off?

Plus, a kid can't potentially mess up their life with an unintended pregnancy if they don't know pi to the 10th place.

They can't??? Oh shoot!

How on Earth do people come up with these sorts of things? I mean, I didn't get much in the way of real sex ed until my senior year of high school, but I never cooked up, nor believed, any of these retarded sorts of beliefs. I knew that condoms and pills were good methods (not that I had sex during high school) and that it was pretty straightforward.

On the other hand...

Perhaps it would be better, a little chlorine for the gene pool, so to say, to allow these sorts of retardatious myths to spread.

Kids Drink Bleech

Kids dies

The Gene Pool gets a bit cleaner.

*nods*

Why are we trying to keep the idiots from killing themselves off?
You've left out a few key bits to that:

Kid is smart enough to realize that she/he wants to use contraception, because he/she is aware that there are STDs and that STDs are bad.

Kid has no factual information on contraception or STD prevention (thanks to bumble-fuck religious nutters running the educational system), but has it on good authority from friends that drinking bleach works.

Kid drinks bleach in a misguided attempt at "safe sex."

Kid dies.

Meanwhile, kids who don't bother to even think about safe sex continue to fuck, spread STDs, and make babies.

Thus, the kids who are at least smart enough to know that they want to use contraception die from poisoning, while the kids who can't be bothered to worry about contraception go on to breed another generation of children who will grow up and not use contraception, and so on and so forth.

Heheheh the best bit about that was this:

'Teaching abstinance will still be required...'

How does one go about teaching abstinance?

Okay kids you don't do it like this...:D

When I was in school, the official position was that they taught abstinence, but they also taught alternatives as well, as if to cover all the bases. The official story was: "Abstinence is best, but there are other things you can do, and here are the risks." My MS health teacher still has her job.

On the other hand, the local NHL team had representatives come to my wife's HS, and they told that class the same thing, more or less. THey are officially disinvited to that school.

Did I mention that my wife went to Catholic schools and had numerous pregnant classmates, and I went to a suburban public school, and I had maybe one pregnant classmate?

I don't think the parents are responsible for teaching their children sex ed and biology any more than it is their responsibility to teach them math or chemistry or english literature.

Teaching is what schools are for.

How on Earth could you ever believe that?

Parents are a vital link in the development of a person's knowledge about the world, they are able to provide uniquely suited information for the child, and they are able to help them understand that which is most important.

Hell, my school system had constant parent-teacher interactions, and always sought to get parents involved in their children's education, and it certainly did not hurt, given that my school system was one of the top 100 in the United States.

Parents can foster an environment of constant learning and lifelong education in a way that an institutionalized school cannot. As far as sexual education is concerned, parents can provide the everyday example a child needs, and teaching them, in a one on one fashion, about things like their anatomy and sexual development can be done far more effectively than in a classroom setting, where half the class is snickering to begin with.

Teaching is for schools and parents to work together in carrying out.

Heheheh the best bit about that was this:

'Teaching abstinance will still be required...'

How does one go about teaching abstinance?

Okay kids you don't do it like this...:D
Pretty much. It goes something like this:

So, kids, abstaining from sex means that you don't have sex. Since most of you have been not having sex for your entire lifetimes, you already know how to not have sex. Just keep not having sex the way you've been doing.

Hmm. It looks like we've got some time left. I guess this would be a great time for me to tell you about how your private parts are so shameful that we must never discuss them or their workings, your sinful urges are so wrong that you deserve to die of AIDS if you ever give in to those urges, and if you have premarital sex you will be a used up piece of chewing gum and nobody will ever love you.

Perhaps it would be better, a little chlorine for the gene pool, so to say, to allow these sorts of retardatious myths to spread.

I like the myths i've heard in clinics, etc around Dundee. Notably :

- You can't get pregnant if you do it standing up
- You can't get pregnant if she's on her period
- You can't get pregnant if you squirt cola into your vagina after sex

How many of these are more widespread I have no idea

How on Earth could you ever believe that?

Do we require the parents to teach a child algebra? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child shakespeare? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child chemistry? No, the schools do that.

The job of the school is to provide a well rounded education essential to being productive members of society. That's why we have schools. Understanding human reproduction is one of those things that is necessary to know to be productive members of society. We should not allow the school system to shirk its responsibility of teaching comprehensive sex ed by saying "that's the parents job" any more than we would allow it to avoid teaching math, or science, or english by saying "that's the parents job."

Now is it of course better when parents are involved? Absolutly. Should parents take an active role in their childs' education, in all areas? Definitly. I absolutly believe parents should take active roles in their childrens' education. I do not believe in allowing schools to avoid their responsibility to provide comprehensive sexual education by some magical absolution of responsibility by saying "it's the parents job".

I wouldn't support schools saying "it's the parents job to teach sex ed" as an excuse to not teach sex ed any more than I would support schools using the same line to eliminate math, science, english, or any other subjects. The job of providing education is the job of the schools, and this nonsensical bullshit about how providing sex ed is the responsibility of the parents is just that, bullshit.

The job of the school is to provide comprehensive education on all critical subjects, that absolutly includes sex ed.

Do we require the parents to teach a child algebra? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child shakespeare? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child chemistry? No, the schools do that.

The job of the school is to provide a well rounded education essential to being productive members of society. That's why we have schools. Understanding human reproduction is one of those things that is necessary to know to be productive members of society. We should not allow the school system to shirk its responsibility of teaching comprehensive sex ed by saying "that's the parents job" any more than we would allow it to avoid teaching math, or science, or english by saying "that's the parents job."

Now is it of course better when parents are involved? Absolutly. Should parents take an active role in their childs' education, in all areas? Definitly. I absolutly believe parents should take active roles in their childrens' education. I do not believe in allowing schools to avoid their responsibility to provide comprehensive sexual education by some magical absolution of responsibility by saying "it's the parents job".

I wouldn't support schools saying "it's the parents job to teach sex ed" as an excuse to not teach sex ed any more than I would support schools using the same line to eliminate math, science, english, or any other subjects. The job of providing education is the job of the schools, and this nonsensical bullshit about how providing sex ed is the responsibility of the parents is just that, bullshit.

The job of the school is to provide comprehensive education on all critical subjects, that absolutly includes sex ed.

Interesting. You appeared (to me and I think I am not alone) to be attacking parents for teaching when you addressed my post that stated I felt it was irresponsible of parents to NOT teach their children about sex.

Do we all agree it takes both parents and the education system to teach children?

Do we all agree it takes both parents and the education system to teach children?

Absolutly. Parents SHOULD be involved with the school, definitly. But they should not replace the school

Absolutly. Parents SHOULD be involved with the school, definitly. But they should not replace the school

So we should outlaw homeschooling?

Parents are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their children get educated. Most aren't really qualified to provide that education alone, so they send children to an organization that is - a school. It is the school's responsibility to provide a proper education, and they cannot shirk that responsibility by assuming "the parents should do that." However, the ultimate responsibility lies with the parents, so they cannot responsibly assume that the school is doing its job and fail to supplement shoddy education.

So we should outlaw homeschooling?


Yes. But this is my personal opinion.

So we should outlaw homeschooling?

An entire different animal. That's the parent willfully choosing to do so, not the school/legislature pawning off responsibility from the school to the parent.

It is the school's responsibility to provide a proper education, and they cannot shirk that responsibility by assuming "the parents should do that."

This.

so they cannot responsibly assume that the school is doing its job and fail to supplement shoddy education.

What's that say for our society if parents can not reasonably assume the schools will do their job? I would think in a prosperous, wealthy nation, that should be one of the FIRST things that would be reasonably safe to assume.

Nice misprepresentation of the article there. This bizarre factoid was not presented in a class, it is merely something some teens believe.

Your cause-effect linkage of teen stupidity to an abstinence education class isn't backed up by the article anywhere.

If a kid goes to an abstinence class and somehow comes out believing that bleach prevents HIV, just IMAGINE what kind of totally assinine, moronic things that kid will get out of a sex ed class.

Some kids are idiots. That's the bottom line. In the words of the great Bill Cosby, children are brain damaged. And yes, in our Darwinian system, if we keep this up long enough, sooner or later genes creating an instinctive dislike for the smell of bleach will spread through the Human genome, so no more kids will drink bleach, and the homes and clothing of the future will be filthy.

On the other hand... one of the nations with the LOWEST proportion of adults with aids is Norway. Norwegians eat lutefisk, which is essentially fish prepared with lye, an ingredient in bleach. Given that AIDS rates are highest in nations with NO lutefisk consumption, I can see how the connection could be made.

Not so much. In the absence of the fact about sex, rumors can take seed and grow, as these in Flroida have. Abstinance-only "sex ed" is responsible for making that soil fertile for the seeds of stupidity to grow.

You've left out a few key bits to that:

Kid is smart enough to realize that she/he wants to use contraception, because he/she is aware that there are STDs and that STDs are bad.

Kid has no factual information on contraception or STD prevention (thanks to bumble-fuck religious nutters running the educational system), but has it on good authority from friends that drinking bleach works.

Kid drinks bleach in a misguided attempt at "safe sex."

Kid dies.

Meanwhile, kids who don't bother to even think about safe sex continue to fuck, spread STDs, and make babies.

Thus, the kids who are at least smart enough to know that they want to use contraception die from poisoning, while the kids who can't be bothered to worry about contraception go on to breed another generation of children who will grow up and not use contraception, and so on and so forth.

[/thread]

Do we require the parents to teach a child algebra? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child shakespeare? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child chemistry? No, the schools do that.

The job of the school is to provide a well rounded education essential to being productive members of society. That's why we have schools. Understanding human reproduction is one of those things that is necessary to know to be productive members of society. We should not allow the school system to shirk its responsibility of teaching comprehensive sex ed by saying "that's the parents job" any more than we would allow it to avoid teaching math, or science, or english by saying "that's the parents job."

Now is it of course better when parents are involved? Absolutly. Should parents take an active role in their childs' education, in all areas? Definitly. I absolutly believe parents should take active roles in their childrens' education. I do not believe in allowing schools to avoid their responsibility to provide comprehensive sexual education by some magical absolution of responsibility by saying "it's the parents job".

I wouldn't support schools saying "it's the parents job to teach sex ed" as an excuse to not teach sex ed any more than I would support schools using the same line to eliminate math, science, english, or any other subjects. The job of providing education is the job of the schools, and this nonsensical bullshit about how providing sex ed is the responsibility of the parents is just that, bullshit.

The job of the school is to provide comprehensive education on all critical subjects, that absolutly includes sex ed.
Very well put.

Ideally, all parents would teach their kids the basics about sex, just like all parents would teach their kids the ABC. All parents would be involved in their kids' education when it came to sex and reproduction, just like all parents would be involved in the rest of their kids' education.

But we don't live in "ideally." In reality, a lot of parents are unwilling or unable to provide their kids with the education they require.

An entire different animal. That's the parent willfully choosing to do so, not the school/legislature pawning off responsibility from the school to the parent

But it demonstrates that the ultimate responsibility lies with the parent. A parent can choose not to utilize a school, but cannot choose not to seek some sort of education for their child.

What's that say for our society if parents can not reasonably assume the schools will do their job? I would think in a prosperous, wealthy nation, that should be one of the FIRST things that would be reasonably safe to assume.

Reasonable and responsible are not necessarily the same things. Parents should be able to reasonably assume that the school they send their children to is doing a good job, because the school should be doing so.

They cannot, however, responsibly do so. It is the responsibility of the parent to make sure that the school is doing its job.

An entire different animal. That's the parent willfully choosing to do so, not the school/legislature pawning off responsibility from the school to the parent.



This.



What's that say for our society if parents can not reasonably assume the schools will do their job? I would think in a prosperous, wealthy nation, that should be one of the FIRST things that would be reasonably safe to assume.

You would think and we would hope anyway.:rolleyes:

I found much misinformation being taught to my children in public schools. It is one reason we always discussed their lessons. If I didn't agree with what was being taught we had a lesson at home and a lesson in how to jump a teachers hoop knowing it was bogus. A skill that is needed in college without question. ;)

I will give you an example: 7th grade classroom and the teacher is required to address evolution. Not a problem, it is a chapter in their text books. They cover dinosaurs, the geologic periods and in the end he tells the class that fossils are actually planted in the ground by scientists trying to disprove religion.

9th grade classroom and an agriculture teacher tells his class that President Clinton is guaranteeing their parents will be out of work by the year end. (I was waiting to take that class as a sub and heard that one myself.)

So to assume that the public education system is actually top notch at their task is making a huge and dangerous assumption.

Do we require the parents to teach a child algebra? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child shakespeare? No, the schools do that.

Do we require the parents to teach a child chemistry? No, the schools do that.

The job of the school is to provide a well rounded education essential to being productive members of society. That's why we have schools. Understanding human reproduction is one of those things that is necessary to know to be productive members of society. We should not allow the school system to shirk its responsibility of teaching comprehensive sex ed by saying "that's the parents job" any more than we would allow it to avoid teaching math, or science, or english by saying "that's the parents job."

Now is it of course better when parents are involved? Absolutly. Should parents take an active role in their childs' education, in all areas? Definitly. I absolutly believe parents should take active roles in their childrens' education. I do not believe in allowing schools to avoid their responsibility to provide comprehensive sexual education by some magical absolution of responsibility by saying "it's the parents job".

I wouldn't support schools saying "it's the parents job to teach sex ed" as an excuse to not teach sex ed any more than I would support schools using the same line to eliminate math, science, english, or any other subjects. The job of providing education is the job of the schools, and this nonsensical bullshit about how providing sex ed is the responsibility of the parents is just that, bullshit.

The job of the school is to provide comprehensive education on all critical subjects, that absolutly includes sex ed.

That's certainly quite a different take from what I got from your original post, in which it appeared that you were criticizing parents who taught their children about sexual education. After all, your exact quote was...

I don't think the parents are responsible for teaching their children sex ed and biology any more than it is their responsibility to teach them math or chemistry or english literature.

Teaching is what schools are for.

I took away from that a belief that parents don't have a responsibility to teach their children about sex ed and biology, a point of view that I fully and completely disagree with. I feel parents who do not do so are damn near negligent, and rank in the wide world of awful parenting behaviors.

In my view it is the responsibility of the parents and the schools to teach sex ed, and neither can legitimately foist the blame for failure on the other party.

Your later post, in which you agree with my position that education should be a joint effort between all parties involved, though is far more sensible.

Very well put.

Ideally, all parents would teach their kids the basics about sex, just like all parents would teach their kids the ABC. All parents would be involved in their kids' education when it came to sex and reproduction, just like all parents would be involved in the rest of their kids' education.

But we don't live in "ideally." In reality, a lot of parents are unwilling or unable to provide their kids with the education they require.

Ideally, all human beings would be responsible. But the fact that this isn't true doesn't absolve anyone of their responsibilities.

The fact that schools have certain responsibilities in teaching children does not absolve the parents of their own responsibilities in ensuring that their children are receiving an adequate education.

In my view it is the responsibility of the parents and the schools to teach sex ed, and neither can legitimately foist the blame for failure on the other party.

^This^

Ideally, all human beings would be responsible. But the fact that this isn't true doesn't absolve anyone of their responsibilities.

The fact that schools have certain responsibilities in teaching children does not absolve the parents of their own responsibilities in ensuring that their children are receiving an adequate education.

Hear hear.