02-05-2014, 06:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Frank
Rob, my point is,,,if McDermott is correct, and i stress correct, in his assertions in the article referenced in the op, I'm of the opinion money of the sort, $800,000 for 1700 students, could be better spent by the doe...
I believe this pilot program for 1,700 students was included in an $800,000 grant, not that it accounted for the whole expenditure.
quote:
with the prevalence and ease of access (by anyone) of porn on the net, i ask you, how much more is there to learn on the subject?
I hope that was a joke, and if so it was a poor one. 11-13 year olds are very sexual, so parents like this guy just have their head in the sand to think otherwise. 12 year old girls are getting pregnant, kids are doing BJs and anal sex and straight sex in the backs of school buses, so the need for education is definitely there, and you can't learn about contraception and STDs from watching porn.
And to skip right over the next objection, many studies have shown that explicit sex ed courses like this, easy access to contraceptives, and even HPV vaccination do not increase the rate of sexual activity, they merely reduce pregnancies and disease.