The Instigator
CarlaJMena
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ConformistDave
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Should kids learn about sexual education in elementary school?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
ConformistDave
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/18/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,581 times Debate No: 23676
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

CarlaJMena

Pro

I do think kids should learn about sexual intercourse in all ages. This is because teaching about the human body is nothing to laugh about. Some kids may find it silly, but its really a problem today. Aids, HIV, rapes. They have to learn about this stuff so they can avoid it and have a better future. Kids today are having sex and getting pregnant. Who's fault is it? The parents because they are not teaching these kids about the consequences of the actions.
ConformistDave

Con

I want to thank CarlaJMena for posing this topic for debate. I will do my best to try and refute his position honestly, and hopefully change a mind or two whilst doing so. I will try to discuss each point he has made individually, and am open for criticism of opinions. That being said, the show must go on.
The very first point he has made about kids learning about sexual intercourse at all ages is simply ridiculous. My opponent appears to equate inappropriate mannerisms, with not taking the human body very seriously. Nothing could be further from the truth. Elementary school children do not understand discussions on puberty, because the average age of first menstruation is around the age of 12 for girls.
Mind you, we are discussing children that are between the ages of 5 to 11. Boys generally mature slower than girls sexually, and having them participate in discussion on adolescent targeted problems is asinine. My opponent appears to want to punish the norm for the exception, and seems to be taking this matter with an emotional approach. Precocious Puberty is the exception, and other means should be taken to address the exception. With some of the zany statements my opponent has made, I'm afraid he may next try to advocate including information about sexually transmitted diseases in coloring books as well.
Debate Round No. 1
CarlaJMena

Pro

Children do not fully understand the discussions on puberty because no one has ever taught them that. Many girls the ages of 8 - 16 get their periods, and they might have a heart attack! (Not literally) . Next day, what do you know? Shes asking her mom what had just happened to her and has no idea of what has been going on with her body. That is why it is important for kids to be approached these things. Believe it or not some baby boys also have erection, and they had no idea of what was happening to them. 5 may be an age a little early, but 6-13 im fine with. Today, kids are exposed to so much information about sex and relationships on TV and the Internet that by the time they approach puberty, they may be familiar with some advanced ideas. And yet, talking about the issues of puberty remains an important job for parents because not all of a child's information comes from reliable sources. So why not teach them about these things a more proper way?
ConformistDave

Con

My opponent has continuously used deviations in contrast with normal distributions, and quite frankly has ignored statistical data with regards to this argument. The argument will have to be adjusted to pander towards the emotional need of my opponent. My opponent has brought up the fact that baby boys have erections, but has failed to disclose the fact that fetuses can have erections as well. I'm not understanding why my opponent has a knee jerk reaction towards children having erections, or menstruating without being properly informed.
There is nothing wrong with either of these things, and my opponent seems to think that the child will somehow be permanently scarred for life when these things happen. My opponent fails to realize that none of these events are going to impact a child in any sort of negative way, and quite frankly can not show any statistical evidence that it would or wouldn't. My opponent has also brought up the fact that television and internet make it easier for children nowadays to prime themselves for sexual promiscuity, and this contradicts the original statement of "kids should learn about sexual intercourse in all ages."
Debate Round No. 2
CarlaJMena

Pro

My opponent seems to have ignored my last sentence. Stating that kids should learn these things in a more proper way than how the TV is displaying it. It is possible a child will somehow be traumatized for life. And if my opponent knew, periods can cause anxiety problems. And yes, these events can impact children in negative ways. My opponent does not realize that children get bullied from these things. Since they dont have much information about this topic.
ConformistDave

Con

The reason that the last sentence was ignored, is because it completely contradicts your original statement. Your original statement had nothing to do with how children would learn about sexual intercourse, but to just simply teach it to them regardless of the methods involved. Your original statement simply blamed the parents, and by de facto this juxtaposition would try to do everything in its power to alleviate parents of power. It is possible that a child will be traumatized for life by playing kickball, or from eating apples with the class.
Anything has the ability to cause children anxiety problems, and to also make them bullied. If a child is tall it may be bullied, if a child cries it may be bullied, if a child talks funny it may be bullied. Children will bully others over anything. My opponent has accused me of having little knowledge on the subject matter, but has failed to provide statistics, or psychological studies pertaining to the subject.
I wish to thank my opponent for instigating this debate, and I hope you all have enjoyed it.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by anachronist 4 years ago
anachronist
I would vote pro but stupid site won't confirm me. Teen pregnancies and stds are caused by lack of sex ed.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by twocupcakes 4 years ago
twocupcakes
CarlaJMenaConformistDaveTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Tough to say who won. The argument was short and not many points were developed. Also "Elementary" is a broad range. It was never clearly agreed upon or defined.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
CarlaJMenaConformistDaveTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had many logical falacies and self contradictions. Con proved that elementary school is too early.