After Morning Pills In Schools *

At 10/3/2012 10:40:55 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
No.

At 10/3/2012 11:18:56 AM, inferno wrote:

At 10/3/2012 10:40:55 AM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
No.

Do you disagree.

At 10/3/2012 10:38:57 AM, inferno wrote:
You heard the news about this serious matter I am sure.
But really you guys. Should elementary kids(pre-teens) be given after morning pills or condoms while in school in order to prevent pregnancy. Its your call. What do you have to say about this issue.

At 10/3/2012 3:08:01 PM, innomen wrote:

At 10/3/2012 10:38:57 AM, inferno wrote:
You heard the news about this serious matter I am sure.
But really you guys. Should elementary kids(pre-teens) be given after morning pills or condoms while in school in order to prevent pregnancy. Its your call. What do you have to say about this issue.

Pretty awful actually.

How about killing a baby that survives abortion?

At 10/3/2012 4:04:59 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Regardless of the age of the kid I am against it. Schools should not be that involved in their lives and are essentially taking away the responsibilities of the parent.

At 10/3/2012 4:09:49 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:04:59 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Regardless of the age of the kid I am against it. Schools should not be that involved in their lives and are essentially taking away the responsibilities of the parent.

Does this extend to every other subject which you for some reason think should be exclusive to parents?

What's with people and being so up tight?

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:09:49 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:04:59 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Regardless of the age of the kid I am against it. Schools should not be that involved in their lives and are essentially taking away the responsibilities of the parent.

Does this extend to every other subject which you for some reason think should be exclusive to parents?

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:09:49 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:04:59 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Regardless of the age of the kid I am against it. Schools should not be that involved in their lives and are essentially taking away the responsibilities of the parent.

Does this extend to every other subject which you for some reason think should be exclusive to parents?

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

At 10/3/2012 4:00:44 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Elementary school? I didn't hear that. It would seem unnecessary though. First, what third grader is getting down and second, what third grader is developed enough to get pregnant?

If we're talking middle and high school though, it seems fine. Better than abortion isn't it? I hear some people frown upon that sort of thing.

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

At 10/3/2012 9:06:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Morning after pills are one thing. Those are pills for the morning that comes after an unusual occurrence.

After morning pills? Like, pop one after every morning? Wtf?

At 10/4/2012 10:41:51 AM, inferno wrote:

At 10/3/2012 9:06:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Morning after pills are one thing. Those are pills for the morning that comes after an unusual occurrence.

After morning pills? Like, pop one after every morning? Wtf?

Are you in favor of sexual activity taking place with pre teens in private.

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

At 10/5/2012 2:57:24 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

How does distributing condoms impose sexual morality on someone?

How does distributing condoms "interfere with the parenting process"?

At 10/5/2012 2:57:24 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

How does distributing condoms impose sexual morality on someone?

How does distributing condoms "interfere with the parenting process"?

At 10/5/2012 3:08:26 AM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:

At 10/5/2012 2:57:24 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

How does distributing condoms impose sexual morality on someone?

How does distributing condoms "interfere with the parenting process"?

The major issue most people have with the two of these is the moral issue. Whether it be against religious belief, increase sexual activity, or just they don't like it. Parents shouldn't be allowed to force their morals on children.

At 10/5/2012 4:20:49 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/5/2012 2:57:24 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

How does distributing condoms impose sexual morality on someone?

Because contraceptives is a moral issue for many Christian denomination. When you give them to kids, it condones the use of contraceptives and the like. It parents want their kids to have condoms. they can easily buy the condoms for them.

How does distributing condoms "interfere with the parenting process"?

Mainly for the reasons I posted above. Schools do not have the right to raise kids in place of the school.

Like Social said earlier. Much of my problems with these can be solved by privatization and giving parents a choice in where they send their kids.

At 10/4/2012 10:04:11 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

At 10/4/2012 10:41:51 AM, inferno wrote:

At 10/3/2012 9:06:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Morning after pills are one thing. Those are pills for the morning that comes after an unusual occurrence.

After morning pills? Like, pop one after every morning? Wtf?

Are you in favor of sexual activity taking place with pre teens in private.

If the pre-teens are, sure. If they'd prefer it be in public, that's fine too. Why?

At 10/5/2012 5:44:32 AM, royalpaladin wrote:

At 10/5/2012 4:20:49 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/5/2012 2:57:24 AM, BlackVoid wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:41:00 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:35:16 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:16:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 5:07:13 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:52:29 PM, socialpinko wrote:

At 10/3/2012 4:45:31 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:

Mostly. Is there any reason you think the school has the right to do this?

It's not a matter of right, it's a matter of why someone objects. Prima facie there's no problem, so the onus is on the person bringing an objection to it. I've never seen a good reason to put this area of life in some special sacred shelf above everything else. What's the difference between that and giving out life preservers?

Because many people find the issue of birth control to be a moral issue. And thus the question is do schools have a right to interfere in the parenting process to that extent?

If some Amish family is uncomfortable by the idea of a school offering birth control, they can go to a school that doesn't. This is the problem with having a public school system. Someone's gonna feel uncomfortable. Stop socializing something as personal as education and privatize that shiz.

Compete agreement. I was just about to get to that.

However, if they are going to force the educational system, I would prefer that they would not force their sexual morality on kids.

How does distributing condoms impose sexual morality on someone?

Because contraceptives is a moral issue for many Christian denomination. When you give them to kids, it condones the use of contraceptives and the like. It parents want their kids to have condoms. they can easily buy the condoms for them.

This is like arguing that if someone has a religious belief that prohibits him from eating beef (i.e. if he is a Hindu), the school ought not distribute beef in the cafeteria because he could potentially purchase it. Making contraceptives available does not violate the rights of parents; the students are free to take them, and they do not have to take them if they have moral prohibitions against doing so.

How does distributing condoms "interfere with the parenting process"?

Mainly for the reasons I posted above. Schools do not have the right to raise kids in place of the school.

Schools exist both to provide children with moral and academic educations.

Are you opposed to the sexual morality that is imposed on students in health class? Some pagan religions promote extramarital and premarital sex. Do you think that teaching students to be sexually "moral" in classrooms is destructive to the parenting process for these children? Should those programs be abolished, or ought we do something more sensible and permit the children to opt out?

Like Social said earlier. Much of my problems with these can be solved by privatization and giving parents a choice in where they send their kids.

Parents already have this choice. Private schools already exist, and parents are free to send their children to these schools at any time. I know because I transferred to a private high school in 10th grade the day before school began.

At 10/5/2012 10:38:39 AM, inferno wrote:

At 10/4/2012 10:04:11 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

At 10/4/2012 10:41:51 AM, inferno wrote:

At 10/3/2012 9:06:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Morning after pills are one thing. Those are pills for the morning that comes after an unusual occurrence.

After morning pills? Like, pop one after every morning? Wtf?

Are you in favor of sexual activity taking place with pre teens in private.

If the pre-teens are, sure. If they'd prefer it be in public, that's fine too. Why?

Because they are not at a stage where they are mature enough to deal with the psychological and physical implications of sexual activity.

Morality does have its place