Sex Indoctrination

arbilad · Head Chef

Sex Indoctrination

Pt314 · Senior Member

I don't want it funded by Congress anyway. I thought this was something that local school districts decided. The high school I attended here in Utah was heavily abstinence based.

arbilad · Head Chef

PT, I absolutely agree with you that the federal government is not the level to decide those things at.

Fregramis · Senior Member

arbilad wrote:

PT, I absolutely agree with you that the federal government is not the level to decide those things at.

Well, we turned the education of our children over to the Federal Govt. so they can pretty much decide whatever they want.

It's time to abolish the Department of Education.

-- Edited by Fregramis at 12:31, 2007-05-30

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Fortunately, all good parents homeschool. Some choose to send their children to school for instruction in core subjects. I am of the opinion that consistent gospel instruction and close, open relationships between parents and children can counteract the world's effects.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I half-jokingly referred to building one's immune system rather than living to avoid all known carcinogens on another thread. My own philosophy applies here as well. We cannot avoid all non-Truth. We should teach our children at home how to answer these questions and why we feel the Gospel has all the answers we need in life. I'm not saying "jump right in" but I wonder how successful children become as adults who have been raised in the stall, so to speak.

(Just thinking out loud here - I have no one's example in mind and don't even know who homeschools here.

)

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

I agree coco. There are PLENTY of people who raise good, valiant children while sending them to the evil public schools, even in godforsaken places like California. I've seen it happen. Recently.

What's sad about government injecting sex ed into schools, is that there are so many children who don't get decent parenting at home. There are no values being taught to counter the "information" that is given out in the schools. That's the real tragedy here, imo.

arbilad · Head Chef

So incredibly much depends on the kid in question. Yes, I have seen kids in my ward do excellently in public school. But for my son, public school is just not an option at this time (except for certain non-academic stuff; for instance, we're considering signing him up for school basketball). He did not do well academically or socially when he was in public school, nor would he if we put him in public school right now. Even though we supported him and helped him in public school, he was failing. So, homeschool was right for us, because now he is succeeding.
And Coco, studies actually show that homeschoolers are generally very well adjusted as adults. HSR posted some statistics on the other forum that, if I have a moment, I'll look up and link to here. But generally socialization is not a problem for homeschool kids. Learning at home doesn't mean that they only associate with their family. Our son, for instance, has visited museums, dairy farms, etc as field trips, and has regular extracurricular activities.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I think there are homeschoolers that are well-adjusted and some that are...well,... a leetle bit on the weird side. But who cares? They're usually weird because the whole family's weird, homeschooled or not.

Be that as it may, I was more focusing on the approach one takes to dealing with evil in the world in general, not so much if a homeschooler can grow up and associate/communicate with people and not stick out like a sore thumb. Do we, as a people or as a family, tend to avoid evil? Do we turn tail, hide and run from it? "There's evil in that public school, so we're not having any part of it." I just think this approach can only go so far.

Again, I'm not advocating throwing our kids to the wolves. When I lived in a different location I was considering homeschooling. My answer for my oldest, was that it was not in his best interest as far as his purpose and mission in life was concerned. Luckily, before he started kindergarten, we had moved to a much better public school situation and my previous concerns resolved themselves.

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

If what happened at the highschool in Boulder happened in my kids school, I would yank them out. So far it has not. I'll stay in the public schools as long as I see there is a value in the education they provide. I did take my daughter out of the sex ed class. She read the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet earlier this year and we talk about it often when we see what the world is doing. We also gave her the gospel centered version of the birds and the bees. This is a better way of doing it. I think that public schools can offer some good core education and if you are involved with your child's school you can steer their educational experience around most of the garbage but it does take some effort. I may have to homeschool someday and am open to the option if ever my child is forced into indoctrination of this sort.

I hate to think of other kids getting this sort of thing who do not have a good base to teach the right way at home but there is not much we can do for them if the majority chooses to elect folks who have this agenda. These children will suffer incredibly from the choices that these allegedly responsible adults encourage. It's sad. Many of these kids are already coming from broken homes and problem childhoods. A school abstinance program will not help a child coming from a multigenerational dysfuntional family situation.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I sure hope science has developed a cure for teenage rebellion and the tendency to identify with self-destructive lifestyles by the time my son turns 18...

--Ray

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Depending on science will get you nowhere.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Note to Ray: teenage rebellion is usually over by 18. Try 14-15.

IMO, the cure for teenage rebellion and self destructive lifestyles is found in the first eight years of a child's life. Be a good parent, and his chances of turning out okay are much better.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Yeah, and if he rebels, you know you were a sucky parent.

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

bokbadok wrote:
Note to Ray: teenage rebellion is usually over by 18. Try 14-15.

That's been hubby's and my experience too... fortunately we're on the last of cycle of teens that start over 40 teens and nearly 10 years ago... WHEW! Sometimes I thought it would NEVER end... Son2 and his friends are all 17 now and pretty good kids, but 14, 15 & 16 IMO... you can have 'em...!!! 17 is STILL tough at times, but at least for us, there are fewer "episiodes"...

Personally, I have a very long nap scheduled for the day Son2 writes me that letter from his first "away from home" experience (usually for all teens this happens during the first year away at school, or while on their missions...) It's the one that says... "Mom/Dad I am so sorry... you were right, I didn't know it all..." wink

Fregramis · Senior Member

My children are homeschooled. My oldest boy was asking the right questions, so he learned about the birds and the bees a month before his baptism. I have a weekly "PPI" of sorts with each child, where they can ask any question and this is the ideal time to deal with issues like sex education. And it is a totally relaxed and comfortable scenario. My parents did not tell me about it until I was nine and I had already heard the nasty "humping" jokes and stories at school. So nasty were the stories that I knew my good LDS parents did not participate in that activity. Imagine my confusion...

It's not what is taught in the school that worries me as much as what sewage other kids bring from their homes.

nitasmile · Senior Member

bokbadok wrote:

Fortunately, all good parents homeschool. Some choose to send their children to school for instruction in core subjects.

Bok- please help clarify that I am correctly thinking you are saying what I think you are saying:

you are saying even if a child goes to public school all day that their parents still "home school" in the sense of teaching other things in the home environment, ie teaching sex ed to kids or whatever other good values, etc? If this is what you are saying, I agree- parents are always teaching, they have that huge responsibility at all times.

Euphrasie · Senior Bucketkeeper

That's how I understood it.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Yes Nita, that's what I'm saying. All good parents "homeschool" their children in religion, values, morality, ethics, manners, and all the other skills and habits they need to grow up to be righteous, contributing adults in society.

That said, just because I send my kids to school doesn't mean that learning doesn't stop when kids leave the campus.

If not homeschooling, what is it called when my son asks me how, if brown eyes are dominant, a boy in his class can have blue eyes when both his parents have brown eyes, and I draw a little diagram on the white board while explaining dominant and recessive traits, the Punnet square, and the concept of heterozygotes?

My kids read and observe, they ask questions, and if I don't know the answer, we look it up. I may not homeschool full time, but I definitely do homeschool.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Parents like abstinence-only programs because they take comfort in the false notion that it will exclude their child from the stats: 48% of boys and 45% of girls in grades 9-12 are sexually active. Source

Nobody debates the fact that abstinence is the most effective way to stop unplanned teen pregnancies and STDs. The realities, however, are that abstinence-only programs don't work (despite parents' demand for those programs,) and that almost half of high-school kids are gonna have sex (despite parents' insistence that it won't be their kid.)

Now before ya'll go ballistic, read the research here .

A summary of the research:

There is no scientific evidence that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, those that censor information about contraception, are effective.

On the other hand, research continues to show that comprehensive sex education, which teaches both abstinence and contraception, is most effective for young people. Youth who receive this kind of education are more likely to initiate sexual activity later in life and use protection correctly and consistently when they do become sexually active. Evaluations of comprehensive sex ed programs show that these programs delay the onset of sexual activity, reduce the frequency of sexual activity, reduce the number of sexual partners, and increase condom and contraceptive use. Importantly, the evidence shows that these programs do not encourage teens to become sexually active. In short, responsible sex ed programs work!

If congress is going to mandate sex ed in school, I'm supportive of curricula based on sound scientific inquiry rather than curricula based on parents' continuing denial of reality.

-- Edited by Roper at 22:41, 2007-05-31

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

I am really just so glad that my kids do not pay much attention to statistics...

arbilad · Head Chef

For those with strong stomaches, this is the transcript of the panel where they suggested kids have sex and do drugs.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Roper: Do you detect any attempts in this education to advocate sexually deviant lifestyles or behaviors? Is there discussion of masturbation? Did you expose your own children to these programs? How did you discuss these matters with them, and do you see any dangers in such normalization being taken further? What do such programs teach about pornography, procreation, abortion and parental involvement?

There is something carnal and appealing in the notion that some may have that they are promoting what they call "the free expression of sexuality" and the free exchange of such behaviors... Young nubile fleshy... Titillating... whatever the case, it's a mainstream of Hollywood entertainment. The more normalized this behavior it becomes, the less likely caution will be exercised in the part of the least cautious ranks of our population (namely our youth).

--Ray

-- Edited by rayb at 13:05, 2007-06-01

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Arbi, is it okay if I use the word absurd to describe the contents of that transcript and the things the "panel" said? Or would disturbingly ludicrous be more appropriate?

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

The incident in Boulder is indeed deplorable. But that one incident cannot be used as a baseline from which to judge all effective sex ed programs.

If the government is going to mandate sex ed in schools, and use my tax dollars to pay for it, then I want the most effective programs possible--ones that have been scientifically proven to reduce unplanned teen pregnancy and the risks of STDs. Admittedly, that's a public health perspective.

From a moral perspective, I don't think the government should be mandating sex ed in the first place. That's the responsibility of parents. I teach my children absolute abstinence before marriage and absolute fidelity after marriage.

Organist · Senior Member

I read the transcript (long). I am for open and frank information about sex and drugs, but this was just disturbing. In order to combat religious influence they brought up absurd points to try and make it look too rediculous to give credence. The information was designed to get kids who were wondering about sex (which is natural) to go and do it and to not worry about the consequences (they made jokes about STDs). This panel was composed of Satan's imps. (If any of you have read the priesthood/RS's 10th lesson from Spencer W. Kimball you might understand this reference).

But, instead of anger, I am filled with sorrow. This reminds me of Moses 7:26 "And he beheld Satan; and he had a great chain in his hand, and it veiled the whole face of the earth with darkness; and he looked up and laughed, and his angels rejoiced."

The more I see the ills in the world, the more I realize that sharing the gospel with others is the only sure medicine. The more I realize this, the more I realize how poor I am at sharing the gospel, and when I do try, I typically fail. But, so did Noah, so I'm in good company.

Perhaps I should make a simple goal of sharing one thing about the gospel every day with someone else.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Roper, do you also teach your kids about the various birth control options and their failure rates?

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Roper: You didn't answer my questions. Do you subject your kids to the world's idea of mandatory sex-ed?

Obviously if you answer no, the question then follows, if it's not good enough for your children, why is it good enough for your neighbor's?

--Ray

arbilad · Head Chef

I thought I had posted it here before, or seen it posted, but maybe it wasn't posted. There's an article in Meridian about how studies that show that abstinence education doesn't work are flawed, and that comprehensive sex education programs really are very pro premarital sex.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

rayb wrote:

Roper: You didn't answer my questions. Do you subject your kids to the world's idea of mandatory sex-ed?

Obviously if you answer no, the question then follows, if it's not good enough for your children, why is it good enough for your neighbor's?

--Ray

I support the school's curriculum for sex ed, and my children attend the classes when the subject is discussed. As parents, Sister Roper and I give them the Gospel perspective before, and provide clarification after.

bokbadok wrote:

Roper, do you also teach your kids about the various birth control options and their failure rates?

I teach my children that before marriage, abstinence is the only method of birth control approved by the Lord.

Look, friends, sex ed in public school is a treatment for the symptoms of a pervasive disease--our society's obsession with all things sexual. So instead of attacking the schools' sex ed programs, maybe we should employ our time and talents in sharing the cure for the disease--the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.

To me, criticizing sex ed in schools makes about as much sense as criticizing the companies who make insulin and the doctors who prescribe it, instead of working on cure for diabetes.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Good point.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Yet if some evil drug company BrandX that made insulin were telling kids "Eat and drink all you like of this sugary food, and afterwards just take more of BrandX Insulin!" you might want to consider a little constructive criticism.

--Ray

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I guess I look at it like I can't possibly have any meaningful influence on the BrandX corporation. I CAN have meaningful influence on my own children. And I also think it's good if they can learn to "see through" the rhetoric rather than just have it removed from their experience.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Roper, I wasn't challenging you. To clarify, my kids attend the school sex-ed classes too, and we approach it much the same way you do.

I was just curious if you (or anyone else) have discussed birth control with your kids... it came up in a family discussion recently, in the context of the spacing between the kids in our family, and I've been thinking about the issue since then.

I tend to be quite open about the topics of sexuality with our kids, and I think it's been a good thing. I haven't yet decided if a discussion of birth control methods is ground that should be tread with my kids. If they're going to learn about condoms in school, I would rather they hear it from me first, just like everything else. And yet I wonder if abstinence can be effectively taught alongside a discussion of birth control?

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

rayb wrote:

Yet if some evil drug company BrandX that made insulin were telling kids "Eat and drink all you like of this sugary food, and afterwards just take more of BrandX Insulin!" you might want to consider a little constructive criticism.

--Ray

But that's not what sex ed programs do. At least not in Texas. Here are some of the state standards in health education for middle and high school students:

Students will

... explain the consequences of sexual activity and the benefits of abstinence
... summarize the facts related to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection and sexually transmitted diseases
... discuss the legal implications regarding sexual activity as it relates to minor persons
... analyze the importance of abstinence from sexual activity as the preferred choice of behavior in relationship to all sexual activity for unmarried persons of school age
... discuss abstinence from sexual activity as the only method that is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and the sexual transmission of HIV or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, and the emotional trauma associated with adolescent sexual activity
... examine the legal and ethical ramifications of unacceptable behaviors such as harassment, acquaintance rape, and sexual abuse
... explain the relationship between alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and other substances used by adolescents and the role these substances play in unsafe situations such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)/Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD), unplanned pregnancies, and motor vehicle accidents
... analyze the relationship between the use of refusal skills and the avoidance of unsafe situations such as sexual abstinence
... analyze the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of barrier protection and other contraceptive methods including the prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs), keeping in mind the effectiveness of remaining abstinent until marriage

In Texas, these are the state standards that curriculum and instruction must adhere to. As a parent, educator, and advocate for children, I wholly support them. Our oldest two children received education according to these standards, along with the Gospel perspective we teach in our home.

Maybe there are some states with much more liberal standards that actually "entice" children into having premarital sex. I don't draw that conclusion from the sex ed programs with which I'm familiar.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

That's an interesting question, bok. My 10 yo girl's been with me in the drivethrough of the pharmacy before, picking up the Pill. Haven't thought much about a discussion with kids. I almost feel like I would come across like, "Don't have sex. But if you do, use this!" weirdface

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

bokbadok wrote:

Roper, I wasn't challenging you. To clarify, my kids attend the school sex-ed classes too, and we approach it much the same way you do.

I was just curious if you (or anyone else) have discussed birth control with your kids... it came up in a family discussion recently, in the context of the spacing between the kids in our family, and I've been thinking about the issue since then.

I tend to be quite open about the topics of sexuality with our kids, and I think it's been a good thing. I haven't yet decided if a discussion of birth control methods is ground that should be tread with my kids. If they're going to learn about condoms in school, I would rather they hear it from me first, just like everything else. And yet I wonder if abstinence can be effectively taught alongside a discussion of birth control?

Bok, sorry if I came across as defensive.

I'm torn on discussing contraception with our kids, for the exact reasons you mention. So far, we have open discussions with our older boys whenever they have questions about sex, but the subject of contraception has never been addressed. I suppose if they ever asked about it, we would discuss it.

For now, I guess I'm okay with with the expectation that abstinence is the standard, and that they can make decisions about contraception in the future with their spouses.

Coco, fwiw, my wife learned about the pill when she was 12--it was prescribed to help regulate her menstrual cycle. At that age, her parents didn't emphasize the contraceptive aspects of it, just that it was a form of medicine to help her body's natural cycle.

-- Edited by Roper at 19:35, 2007-06-05