Let me fuck you guys up with some truth

Firstly, Birth Control is already free if you're on welfare. Making it free for everyone wouldn't reduce the number of people on welfare.

Second, Birth Control isn't expensive. You can get generic Ortho-Cyclen for 12 bucks or less for a one month supply. (Those damn evil drug companies are charging 12 Junior Bacon Cheeseburgers!!!!)

Third, Depo-Provera needs to be used much more often in the welfare community. Its a once every 3 month shot that prevents pregnancy. If you want welfare, you get the shot.... Can't "forget" to take the pill this way.

Writerbuckeye;542110 wrote:Okay...then who's going to raise them, you? The government? Foster care is already a fucked up mess full of abuse and neglect -- and you want to make it BIGGER?

Yeah that sounds like a great idea.

guess i shoulda put up the sarcasm alert

Yes you should have. Especially you.

Writerbuckeye;542293 wrote:Yes you should have. Especially you.

why especially me?

He was either joking about you being a ratard or calling you a ratard.

I Wear Pants;542599 wrote:He was either joking about you being a ratard or calling you a ratard.

have you seen my baseball?

I'll need this explained. I'm either too stupid to get it or haven't seen the film/book/etc to get the reference.

I Wear Pants;542936 wrote:I'll need this explained. I'm either too stupid to get it or haven't seen the film/book/etc to get the reference.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=have+you+seen+my+baseball%3F

Ah.

Most generic birth control is under the generic $10 plans. Wal*Mart, Meijer, Target, etc... All have cheap birth control.

Like I said, some even include them free. Same with Prenatal vitamins.

People who aren't insured or are low on income, only have to let their doctor/pharmacist know, and they WILL work with them. We have SEVERAL generics that are on our discount/free programs. Antibiotics, birth control, pain medication, etc... You just have to ask around.

See, I didn't know that and I bet a lot of people don't either.

PSA campaign?

That's an area that I think could use some overhaul. Sex ed. It simply isn't taught very well.

I agree with that. That's one thing I wish would be really taught in depth across the country, but the religious will never allow it.

I Wear Pants;543315 wrote:See, I didn't know that and I bet a lot of people don't either.

PSA campaign?

That's an area that I think could use some overhaul. Sex ed. It simply isn't taught very well.

tk421;543324 wrote:I agree with that. That's one thing I wish would be really taught in depth across the country, but the religious will never allow it.

Well, maybe because most people think that a more graphich, in-detail sexual education belongs at home. Personally, that's how I prefer it. Are there kids that won't get that at home? Sure. But that doesn't mean that the schools should bear that level of privacy over the responsibilities of the parent, regardless.
Not to mention that the level of resources and multi media, that kids are able to find out way more than ever before. Unless you're Amish or a cult member, you've got access.

How do you prefer it that way when you know that it is ineffective?

It isn't some kids that won't get the proper sex ed at home, it's most kids.

Because parenting belongs at home, not the school. There's really nothing else to say.
If you think that kids aren't getting the proper sex-ed at home, that's a parenting issue, not a school issue.

Look, we've already handed over way too many responsibilities to our schools. Daycare providers, after school babysitters, dieticians, scapegoats - and now we want to up the ante by saying they need to teach our kids better about sex?

I'm not convinced that school will ever do a better job at parenting then parents. Convince me (?)

CenterBHSFan;543458 wrote:I'm not convinced that school will ever do a better job at parenting then parents. Convince me (?)

I couldn't agree more. Parents are responsible for how their kids act. Schools are responsible for their education.

7:40 A.M. kids step foot in Piketon High School and at 3 P.M. they leave, they do this for 180 days. Thats 7 hours and 20 min, so if my math is correct that is 1314 hours they are in school. So during that 180 days, there is 16 hours and 40 minutes on parents time, plus the 185 days not in school for a grand total of 7428 hours under parents watch. 7400+ hours versus 1300+ hours, come on. This doesnt count the 5 or 6 years before they start school. Who has more influence in a childs life? You got it, the parents and friends these kids hang around with.

For those of you advocating teaching more sex ed in schools, are you the same ones screaming about how teachers nowadays are lazy and unions protect their jobs or they would be out on the street? Which is it people, teach academics, or everything else?

When has ANYTHING that the government provided been free???

Follow up, when has ANYTHING that the government tried to fix worked as laid out (and I mean remotely close)?

There could be a case for the latter, but I seriously doubt there is for the former.

redstreak: Two sides to that... A) there is an element of health involvedso it COULD possibly fall under the "Health" realm. However, you can GUARANTEE anything the school teaches will be trumped by my example and my teaching. I think we give too much power to schools when is comes to educating our children.

A) Education starts in the home. IMHO.
B) Schools exist to help ME educate my child(ren). IMHO.

Cruiser, I agree. Both my wife and I teach and our 3 kids are just starting school. School isnt a dumping ground, where a parent sends a kid to learn everything about everything. I enforce my childs learning at home, he gets off the bus and the first thing I say is where is your homework folder and we start.

My fathers favorite saying, "School is a tool. Use it and take care of it and it will last you a lifetime."

redstreak one: I don't know, but with that response, we agree 100% on at least one thing. And it is one thing I am passionate about.

Keep up the great work, RS-1. I have two of my own and do a similar routine.

CenterBHSFan;543458 wrote:Because parenting belongs at home, not the school. There's really nothing else to say.
If you think that kids aren't getting the proper sex-ed at home, that's a parenting issue, not a school issue.

Look, we've already handed over way too many responsibilities to our schools. Daycare providers, after school babysitters, dieticians, scapegoats - and now we want to up the ante by saying they need to teach our kids better about sex?

I'm not convinced that school will ever do a better job at parenting then parents. Convince me (?)

Sex ed isn't parenting, it's education.

I'm not advocating necessarily for more sex education, just effective sex education. You'd be surprised how many schools and teachers still focus on abstinence. That doesn't work.

Just because the word education is after something doesnt mean it only applies to school. Who taught your children to read? Didnt or dont you pick up a book and read to them before they started school? Didnt you teach them the alphabet and the sounds each letter makes? Theres driver ed, did or dont you reinforce the rules of the road at home? Who rode with them during their permit training time? My problem is that some want the schools and teachers to be responsible for educating about life.

Once again, parents are the main providers of most of what a kid learns. I am an adult, I can and will teach my children about life.

The problem is a small amount of the population doesnt see it that way and are abusing the priviledges set up to help those in need.

redstreak, I'm guessing Pants doesn't having kids (am I right pants?) so doesn't know from experience the PoV that we're talking about?
..........................

Pants, abstinence should always be included and focused on in the context of sex-ed. It's the first step of being sexually responsible.

Period.

It isn't a realistic approach. Obviously it should be said that abstinance guarantees that you won't get pregnant or get an STD but focusing on it like it's a possible solution is being naive and reckless. Abstinence should be talked about but the majority of the discussion should be methods to prevent sexually transmitted diseases. Condoms, etc. Then they should also touch on how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. This should not be as big of a focus as the preventative measures towards STDs obviously.

Acting like focusing on abstinence is anything but ineffective is a lie.

On the STD kick, needle exchange services should be allowed to receive federal funds.

You are correct in that I don't have kids Center.

I know you wont believe this, but in my neck of the woods and other places a very small percentage of people see kids as a paycheck. Kids having kids so that they can get paid. Its a freaking scary thing, but they grew up with this mentality. Mom, aunt, grandma, great grandma whoever they are living with, for that matter encourage and support this type of thinking. You start cleaning up this side of it, and watch the other side the number of children being born decrease. Once again, I dont disagree that these types of options should be availabel, like the school counselor or nurse giving out information on where to go to get educated on this, but the school isnt the place.

What scares the heck out of me is the shrinking generation gap between parts of our society. My wife had a parent teacher meeting this year with a great grandma who was raising the child who was 10. Great grandma was only in her late 50's. Your talking 3 generations seperating them with only 40 some years.