Writerbuckeye;739711 wrote:The Chicago Way at work, right Mr. President?
Cruiser_96....right there my friend
Writerbuckeye;739711 wrote:The Chicago Way at work, right Mr. President?
O-Trap;741276 wrote:I'm neither here nor there when it concerns sex education.
#1. I am actually supportive of introducing kids to it as a concept when they're that young, much in the same way we do alcohol. Teaching kids to wait until they are older to engage in sex for the purpose of their safety and well-being isn't really much different from teaching kids to wait until they're older before consuming alcohol (legality of it notwithstanding). There are boys and girls beginning to engage in it at very early ages (a girl at the local youth center just learned she was pregnant about a month ago -- she's 11 and just finishing 4th grade).
#2. I do agree that sexual education, from the standpoint of being taught by the schools, should indeed be exclusively biological and scientific. Teach the physiology of it, and teach what contraceptives are available (and what is NOT safe as a contraceptive), and what they do. I would STRONGLY emphasize the FACT that no contraceptive is 100% effective, and I would also emphasize that it IS possible to get pregnant in any coital position and at any point in the woman's cycle. Those are all factual, and should be taught.
Teaching the ethics and emotional element of sex, however, is the responsibility of the parent, and should not be within the scope of what the school has the authority to teach.
I Wear Pants;741589 wrote:"Especially when that's about to be taught to Elementary schoolers. Parents should have the option to opt out, and say "No thanks, I'll decide when and where Jimmy learns about sex". "
Why? It just isn't practical and would cause problems if parents were able to do that. What is the teacher supposed to do, make the kid sit out in the hall while the subject is being taught? And then do you think that kid isn't going to talk to his friends that were in the class or feel weird that he has to be separated from the rest of class?
I don't understand why our country is so afraid of sex and so unafraid of violence.
O-Trap;741927 wrote:Honestly, I have no qualms with the schools teaching the biology of it without parental consent. What makes that element of it so different from any other study in biology?
That's why I suggest that the emotional, social, and responsibility issues are not touched. Those are the responsibility of the parent.jhay78;742043 wrote:That would be the social and emotional consequences of handling the issue prematurely or irresponsibly. The topics of classification, astronomy, earth science, etc., don't carry the same "baggage".
You're welcome to homeschool your child (and should always be).QuakerOats;742124 wrote:The twisted mind of the liberal elite establishment is nearing us to the point of no return.
Liberty is at stake.
Change we can believe in ........
Con_Alma;742133 wrote:I hope that every parent is homeschooling their child and then using the formalized education system to augment that education.
I think everyone on here can agree with the statement, "It's the parent's responsibility to educate their children."Con_Alma;742047 wrote:We rely to much on formalized education to educate our children.
It's my responsibility to educate my children. I use the education system to augment my efforts not to be the effort itself. The timing is important to be aware of if a school system teaches sex education so that it can be intermingled with the efforts We are making at home with the children.
Public school system: Good at educating kids (most schools).OSH;742504 wrote:I think everyone on here can agree with the statement, "It's the parent's responsibility to educate their children."
The reason why we get into all these other discussions of sex education, school food, and other "hot topics" is because there are SO many kids out there who do not get the "parental education." The public school system is stuck between a rock and a hard place with their education topics. With those kids that do not have the "parental education," who is educating them? Who is responsible for them? I believe, the public school system is picking up where so many parents have failed. Do I blame the public schools for that? Absolutely not, it's noble. The problems then come when the public schools step on the toes of those who are "parental educators." They don't want their kids learning these "hot topics" at school because they can do it at home and they can do it better.
The public school system isn't a babysitting service -- but it has become that. The public school system isn't a parenting service -- but it has become that. The public school system is require to educate the youth of America -- their education has shifted because there are so many that have failed in educating at home.
OSH;742504 wrote:I think everyone on here can agree with the statement, "It's the parent's responsibility to educate their children."
The reason why we get into all these other discussions of sex education, school food, and other "hot topics" is because there are SO many kids out there who do not get the "parental education." The public school system is stuck between a rock and a hard place with their education topics. With those kids that do not have the "parental education," who is educating them? Who is responsible for them? I believe, the public school system is picking up where so many parents have failed. Do I blame the public schools for that? Absolutely not, it's noble. The problems then come when the public schools step on the toes of those who are "parental educators." They don't want their kids learning these "hot topics" at school because they can do it at home and they can do it better.
The public school system isn't a babysitting service -- but it has become that. The public school system isn't a parenting service -- but it has become that. The public school system is require to educate the youth of America -- their education has shifted because there are so many that have failed in educating at home.
jhay78;742602 wrote:All great points. I can't fault the public school system entirely for filling in the gaps where parents have been negligent. My complaint is when school take advantage of those gaps, override the good parents, and use the school system to go beyond actually educating children. Not only that, but statistically speaking, they haven't performed well in the "educating" department either.
OSH;742629 wrote:I completely understand the bolded statement. Not to excuse the schools [again], but administrators do not look at how many "parental educated" students are there, they just are looking at what they can do for those NCLB and troubled kids. It happens to be that those students who have "parent educators" are the ones that are punished from where the schools are filling the "parental education" voids (I hope that makes sense). It would be nice if some students were able to opt out of certain educational efforts from the district.
Now for the underlined statement...I do not agree. The American public school system has its faults and failures -- I have my issues with it as well. But, there are very few countries that provide the education that we provide in the United States. If the American public school system wasn't educating well, why do we see many people traveling to the US for an education? We are one of the only countries that provide an education for all people groups, socioeconomic classes, and whoever else decides they want to learn. Could we do it more efficiently? Maybe. Could we use a bit of educational reform? Probably. But there are very few countries that provide an education that we do. Could we get better in educating? Only if we wanted to neglect other children of an education.
Again, I have my issues with the way that we operate our public school system, but providing an education to EVERYONE is something that is necessary. Schools need reformed. They could operate a little more efficiently.
I Wear Pants;742559 wrote:Public school system: Good at educating kids (most schools).
Public school system: Bad at instilling qualities like morals, work ethic, respect, etc.
At least that's how I see it.