Meanwhile, the conversation of Sex-Ed makes me think not about what Sarah Palin (not currently running for President) might think about it, but how John McCain (currently running for President) intentionally mischaracterized Obama's plan for "age specific sex education" - y'know... telling kids how to avoid "inappropriate touches" - as "sex education for kindergartners".

Please, John... you know you don't have my vote this time... but if you want my respect, please tell Rove "Thanks but no thanks" to his disgusting tactics.

From what I recall of my 10th grade sex ed classes they pretty much did hide the concept of abstinence.....yeah, they told us about it; they did say it was the best way to avoid pregnancy etc; but they spent all of two minutes(or about 1/20 the time they spent explaining how to buy a condom) on the idea.

Two minutes on abstinence out of a total of 9 weeks of sex ed to me might as well have been hiding the concept; but that's just my 2 cents.

I don't get it. What's more to say about it?

"Abstinence is not having sex until you get married. It's the only guaranteed safe choice. 100% guarantee you will not get pregnant and 100% guarantee you will not catch a disease from having sex. The decision to have sex is an important one not to be taken lightly and will have lifelong consequences no matter how safely you do it."

That's what I remember from my sex ed classes. What else is there? Do you need a textbook to illustrate how not to have sex? A scientific analysis of exactly why not having sex prevents pregnancy? Discussion of clinical trials that measure the likelihood of contracting an STD while not having sex?

As I have understood it and looked into the exact language of the bill in question, here is the exact language from the bill itself that was passed.

Here is the bill itself.

Originally the language was for 6 though 12, but that was crossed out and the bill was passed with the K in stead of the 6.

As I read that, this means that sex ed taught to kindergarteners SHALL include what followed.

scaeagles - please don't insult everyone's intelligence by refuting my post with another partial quotation.

How about this part of the same document:
I stand by my original statement.

Keep reading, it emphasizes age appropriateness:

It also doesn't say that sex ed will be offered in those grades, just requirements if it is.

Joycelyn Elders was a real champion for education, and I think she had some incredibly great ideas.

Unfortunately for her, she could never articulate things quite right. That masturbation thing was really the last straw; after that the White House never really supported her. But you know she did mean that "masturbation as a form of sexual pleasure/release should be taught as a viable alternative to direct-contact activities." Remember that she was in office in the early '90s during Clinton's first term. With Clinton in office we were finally looking at AIDS seriously, and we were trying to figure out a way to teach comprehensive sex education to kids within that context. Her suggestion would've helped prevent of a whole host of fluid-exchange problems, from pregnancy to HIV transmission.

...as it turns out, with Clinton's second term, that first problem kind of took care of itself in an unintended way, when Clinton swore up and down that "that" was *NOT* sex. Kind of sad... there's a whole generation of kids who think that's "not sex." :rolleyes:

I fully admit to not reading the whole bill. I did not have the time to in the context of this discussion and posted a link to the full document. I was not trying to hide anything, nor did I intend to insult anyone's intelligence.

As I have posted here before, it is simply NOT possible with the thoroughness of so many people here to try to mislead by leaving out information.

Leaving out stuff can make someone sound a certain way...

:D

I'm not sure what link started the sex-ed topic but this story is covering an ad McCain's campaign is running.

I am curious why Obama is called Mr. Obama while McCain is called Senator McCain.