Sex Ed. In School..are you For or Against?
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
| Started: | 12/16/2007 | Category: | Education |
| Updated: | 5 years ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 1,282 times | Debate No: | 536 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (12)
|
I am against sex ed in school....kids are going to school to learn about math,science,civics..ect...not about sex...they dont need to be learning something they shouldnt be getting into...drivers ed is for peaple who are ready to drive...the law says that under 18 is a minor and should not be having sex...let sex ed be some collodge class or something after the person is 18..would that be so wrong?..does sex have to be shoved into there face and condom machines distributed in the schools?...that sends the wrong message to the kids that he/she is old enough to have sex...some will say..Oh the more education they get on it..the better off they will be......how is that?....talking about it will just make the kid wanna try it out more...there is a time and place for things....school is not a place to talk and teach about sex....I heard a person say to me one time that if a kids knows about sex..that the kid wont get into sex...thats a pretty lame statement...if a kid was going to have sex he or should would do so..rather or not there was sex ed....and the kid wouldnt need sex ed to teach him something he/she should naturally know as they grow up...dont think that this is only a high school matter...kids in the 3rd grade are bieng taught sex ed!!....come on....there is no reason to talk about or teach about sex to a elementry student..Period!
We require more sex ed now. Our children need to realize what they are getting into. We need to offer them all the insight and tools we have. If we fail our children this very concept of "safer sex" it is a win/win. How can one deny to educate our children, we have a few concepts that may help our children in self respect and love. This is a course we have all been waiting on. If more parents{as I did with my two sons..yrs ago}, informed them, they will utilize what they have learned. That is our job as parents, school boards just to name a few. This is something that MUST BE TAUGHT NOW. If we want a wiser future..education has and will always be thee light. |
![]() |
|
I don't feel it takes a course in school to teach a person how to have safe sex if me or you was around a kid im sure there are better things to talk about then intercourse....kids arent as stupid as some adults put them to be...accualy there wiser nowadays..I never needed sex ed....i knew what sex was and the risk of having it..i didnt need a book to tell me...there learning more at a earlier age...and as for the comment "Lsav" put...(speaking to him)..if 2 14year olds are totally allowed by law to have sex...then I guess you learn something evryday..but teens are not stupid...they dont need to have sex to learn about the risk and varies thing to learn....i just dont feel that it needs shoved in the faces of the boys and girls in school....if peaple go so much in protecting Sex Ed and feel kids should learn about it and have a class on it...dont cover your mouth in shock when the kid talks about it or wants to experience it.
Hey hi, CL you make SEX sound sooo bad. Kids are going to have it with or without your blessings. I feel we should give all KIDS thee chance to lower{yeah lower std's and unwanted births}. It seems so unheard of to hold back any knowledge from our children. If time has taught us any- thing---we need to teach our children. They need that much from us as parents. If they are taught now then can feel the difference between Lust and love {we can only hope on that one}. Please open your mind, just a bit. Thanks and regards to a wiser tomorrow. |
![]() |
|
yes..i know there going to have sex with or without are approval...but you cant take a negative thing and make it positive only cause its popular....drugs are popular too...but they dont need a class in school about drugs!....and if they was to of never started a sex ed class and got peaple started on that...so many peaple wouldnt be led to think it was important to have...a person can know about drugs and the negatives of it...they dont HAVE to have a class to go to in school teaching them its bad and why its bad...they can get that info outside of school..and the same goes for sex.....if parents were parenting..they wouldnt expect the schools to teach and tell there kids evrything.
This is why we can't get our own troops from the mess Bush{one & two} have made. We really need to debate this issue? I'm shocked I have feed back on it. We should take Sex Ed a few steps ahead. Allow these kids to earn a grade{not an option} to babysit or spend time interacting with toddlers{naturally heavily supervised}. I can safely say If I had to DO THAT, my two sons would NEVER have arrived at 18 & 21. This is from a woman{female that never wanted children} so I could have learned a lot here. We as a thinking mind, need to re arrange some peoples ideas on life and knowledge, I'm still blown away it is here on this age old topic. Stop wasting time and get a drug/drinking class in place. Let us give them all the insight and horrific videos they showed the class of 1980 and under. No, it may not stop 50 of them, if we can wake up the "push overs" at least 5 kids, we have parented our schools as well as homes. Regards and please keep those minds open. Miss Ruth A. Marland |
![]() |
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by PreacherFred 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by BadBoi 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by BornDebater 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by LandonWalsh 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by countrylover 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | ![]() | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by charlie139 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by griffinisright 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | ![]() | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 3 | 0 |
Vote Placed by righty10294 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by zuc704 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Vote Placed by sqharawa 5 years ago
| countrylover | ruth421963 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |

















And there's no law against teens under the age of 18 having sex. There's a law against people over 18 having sex with individuals who are not. As far as sleeping with people goes, the restriction is on the rights of people over 18 not under. As far as the law goes if you're under 18 you can legally have sex with any willing partner, though they might not be able to legally have sex with you.
Also, studies have shown that sex ed reduces teen pregnancy and STDs. Whereas abstinence only sex ed does absolutely nothing. It boils down to considerable harm for no reason what so ever, except people want to stick their fingers in their ears and deny the most basic truths known to man: teens have sex. -- Abstinence only sex education is child abuse. Letting kids out in today's culture uninformed and ignorant is abuse. It's unduly harmful for really sketchy reasons. You'd rather believe lies than protect children.
*sigh*
The argument that "what kids don't know about sex won't hurt them" is ridiculous. Abstience may work for some people, but it won't work for everybody. And since we know some kids are going to have sex regardless, don't you think it would be wise to give them information that would prevent an STD or a pregnancy.
Also, my first "sex ed" class in was in 5th grade and it lasted for about a week. It wasn't graphic and teachers weren't giving out condoms to 11 year olds. I don't even know where you heard the condom machines from, I've never seen or heard of anything like that.
reading your previous debates, I find it hypocritical that you are against abortion, but also against providing people with information on how they can avoid finding themselves in a situation that might require an abortion. If you want people to make educated decisions and NOT have to seek an abortion, then you should do your best to provide people with information that would help then avoid having to make such choices. 99% of the population is going to have sex at some point in their life and every single one of those people is required by law to go to school until age 16. The most effective way to ensure these people protect themselves is to give them the resources through mandatory sex education. You say that kids are not "as dumb as people think they are" but then why are there still so many unwanted pregnancies every year? I can say personally that without sex-ed I would have never known about the birth control pill or where to get it because sex is just a taboo topic in my family.
Males produce sperm
Females produce eggs
When the two join the female becomes pregnant.
It really didn't get into the details of how that happened. Even if the courses are being taught in 3rd grade I don't see the problem. The point of the early courses are simply to inform children about the biological processes that are necessary for our species survival.
that can come of {keeping
sex out of thee schools}.
I realize kids are going to
have sex with or without school.
We can utilize school as a tool.
If it means handing out "safer sex"
learn more HERE..hell yeah.
Att eh very least you will have
kids that have become so much wiser.
Kids start becoming sexually active
as young as 12 yrs old. Naturally that
is far too young.
I feel we as a society need to show
the kids "the good, thee bad & thee ugly".
If we choose to fail our children here--
why bother sending them to school. Aside
of "very unsafe sex & drugs--they are lucky
to be learning anything".
We need more sex ed NOW.....Slow these kids down.
This wont do it alone{parents need to interact as I
did yrs ago with my two sons.}.
Keep sex ed in the schools......