Zar

I don't know if "Christianity" believes anything at all as a group in any universal way. People who call themselves "Christians" believe almost anything under the sun.

But there are always plenty of vocal Christians around to fight sex education and promote the use of condoms, and to be close-mouthed about the subject in general. That's who we're talking about. If you or your acquaintences don't define yourself that way, then fine, but don't go around denying that people who call themselves Christians are the anti-sex-education elite.

Maybe Christians who don't identify with the extreme right should stop being so sheepish and say something once in a while instead of riding the coattails of liberally minded people all the time and letting them take all the arrows.

[ December 03, 2001: Message edited by: Zar ]</p>

lpetrich

I find their cowardice perplexing also. Do they expect to be spared by some "Christian Taliban"?

lpetrich

Puttz:
Christianity does not reject teaching sex education. Infact most of us want more.

LP:
Which would not be apparent from what many Fundies seem to want.

Puttz:
Like instead of telling people the simple mechanics of it, which most of them already know.

LP:
How is that supposed to be so?

Puttz:
Why not explain the emotional aspect,

LP:
Such as how evil and dangerous many Fundies seem to believe it is? Be specific.

Puttz:
and other aspects that the liberal education wants to ignore.

LP:
Like what?

Puttz:
If anyone wants to discuss this with me further email me, because I do not have time to follow this discussion,

LP:
You had enough time to come across this bulletin board.

Puttz:
but I did want to clear the air about what many Christians believe.

LP:
Puttz, why are you so cowardly?

calvaryson

Our public schools should mind the business of teaching our kids the basics and stay out of topics of morality. It is not the task of our public schools to socialize but to educate.

calvaryson

They are still public schools and i am part of the public. i should be allowed to determine what, where and when this is discussed with my children. Public schools should stay out of the business of morality and socialization.

Monkeybot

But they should not stay out of the realm of biology. Children should be informed of the FACTS -- such as the fact that unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy and STDs. Or the fact that "pulling out" early does not prevent pregancy. Or the fact that you can get pregnant your first time.

There are numerous misconceptions that schools need to correct.

If the child`s parents want to dissuade him otherwise they are free to do so.

SingleDad

calvaryson

You say this like it's a fact, and not merely your personal opinion.

This is a little better. Indeed you are part of the public, and your opinion does carry weight. However this is a democracy, so you're prone to being outvoted.

Also, being a parent, I am acutely aware that one's children are not one's own, rather it is the children who own the parents. The obligation and the "ownership" is entirely one way.

More importantly, in a modern society, we are answerable to our neighbors and our society at large about how we socialize, moralize and educate our children. The question is not whether we are answerable, but rather to what degree. This claim, read as a deontic moral constraint, is simply fallacious according to prevailing standards.

Still and all, the point of separation you yourself seem to imply as correct is shared by most of society and implemented by the schools. It is indeed the mission of schools, generally, to educate about sex and not moralize. The school presents the facts and leaves moral judgements about sexuality to the parents.

I strongly suspect that your real objection is not that the schools are educating and not moralizing, rather I suspect that your complaint is that they are not moralizing according to your preferences.

Modern society imposes a moral duty on parents: To educate their children according to modern scientific standards. To fail to do so is immoral both from a perspective of social responsibility and from a perspective of preparing one's children for responsible participation when they become adults.

I also believe that parents--especially in a free democratic society--have a moral duty raise one's children to be mentally free; I consider it a moral evil to raise one's children to be ideological slaves.

[ December 14, 2001: Message edited by: SingleDad ]</p>

Ales

I found this also very amusing. I have been masturbating since I was four years old or about this age, I was "proud" of my "invention", I remember, that when I was six, I had a feeling of a fear about this, because nobody told me, it is harmless. I had these ideas: Eating sweet things makes pleasure, but I knew sweet things caused tooth decay, so I inferred that masturbation, which made also pleasure, could bring about some harm. I don't remember the precise prevalence of children, who start masturbating at early age, I think it is roughly 30%. My worries were unsubstantiated, therefore I think some sort of sex education should also apply to this age, but religious obscurantists usually find "taintless childhood" and "immoral sex" incompatible. I also find interesting, that I masturbated every day and often more than once, so the claim, that "the main purpose of human sexuality is reproduction" seems untrue to me, because the "semen verrum" did not appear for nearly ten years of this sexual activity of mine.

dk

I find it absurd to challenge the main function of sexuality. I assure you whatever other purpose human sexuality meets, its secondary to reproduction. In fact all other physical human interaction is ancillary to reproduction.

99Percent

dk: I find it absurd to challenge the main function of sexuality. I assure you whatever other purpose human sexuality meets, its secondary to reproduction. In fact all other physical human interaction is ancillary to reproduction.

Yeah, normally in any other species, sex is for reproduction only. But it is strikingly obvious that sex has acquired a much larger dimension for human beings, otherwise we will reproduce each time we have an orgasm, as it is the norm in the animal kingdom.

Our existencialism is a hard nugget to swallow due to our higher consciousness as humans. The abundant pleasure that we enjoy with sex gives our lives an added significance. I find it highly suspect that religions, specially Catholicism, want to make us feel guilty of this pleasure.

The pleasure we derive from sex is an indicator of our individual success - our right of living, whether we actually reproduce or not. Have you ever notice how you are hornier when you are successful in your own eyes or in the eyes of others? To dismiss sex as just a reproductive function is to deny the human quality in yourself and is ultimately a sign of low self esteem.