PDA

View Full Version : a law passed in california - SB71



DavidP
11-19-2003, 02:24 AM
Have you all heard of this law? What do you think of it?

I just read this article, tell me what your thoughts are on the article:



The most vocal advocates of sex education are teaming up with the nationís largest teachersí union to urge Congress to take away the control of childrenís sex education from parents. The Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) and the National Education Association (NEA) hosted a press conference in Washington today to once again advocate for explicit sex education.

SIECUS publishes guidelines for sex education that call for children ages 5 through 8 to be taught about self touch and arousal, ages 9 through 12 to be taught different ways to seek sexual pleasure other than intercourse, and ages 16 through 18 to be taught about exotic fantasies enhanced by pornographic literature. The Health Information Network of the NEA has signed their support for these guidelines.

"SIECUS and the NEA say they want parents to be involved, but looking at the facts, it just does not ring true," said Leslee Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse. The Abstinence Clearinghouse is an international nonprofit organization that promotes abstinence education and parents as the primary sex educators of their children.

"The NEA and SIECUS were both supportive of a SB71 in California, which was signed last week. That bill took authority away from parents and gave teachers the power to talk explicitly about sex to children of all ages. Parents do not support the messages that SIECUS and the NEA want to force on to their kids," said Unruh, referring to a Zogby survey comparing sex and abstinence education, released in February. When read direct quotes from the SIECUS "Guidelines on Comprehensive Sex Education," the Zogby survey found disapproval rates for the guidelines, with some statements garnering disapproval rates of more than seven in ten parents. The same study showed overwhelming approval (4.5 to 1) for the concepts taught in abstinence education.

"For SIECUS and the NEA to attempt to push parents into giving messages to children that the parents are clearly not supportive of is unconscionable," said Unruh. "Parents do need to talk with their children, but not about SIECUS-style sex. They need to demonstrate love and healthy relationships so that their children can mature into adults that can sustain healthy, lifelong marriages."

"The parent is the advocate of their child," explained Judy Gilliam, a 30-year veteran educator and assistant principal in Fort Wright, Kentucky. "I think we should teach respect for each other and respect for our bodies. I feel it is a parentís right to be the primary educator of their child. They have the right to say what should and should not be taught, especially in sex education. The parent knows the child better than any teacher."

The Abstinence Clearinghouse is the largest nonprofit organization dealing with abstinence education and advocacy. The Abstinence Clearinghouse assists educators, medical professionals, parents and youth serving organizations to effectively educate adolescents and unmarried adults on the communication skills, relationship information and factual knowledge necessary to make a commitment to abstain from sexual activity outside of marriage. More information is available at www.abstinence.net.


Obviously that article is from the "anti" side, and not the "pro" side. There are "pro" side articles out there too, it's just this is the first one I read.

Yoshi
11-19-2003, 02:46 AM
Republican State Assembly (http://republican.assembly.ca.gov/News/Archived/NewsLetter307.htm)

Civil Liberty Union of S. CA. (http://ga1.org/campaign/sexedreform/explanation)

SB 71 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0051-0100/sb_71_bill_20030902_amended_asm.html)

It can guarantee kids proper sexual education. However, it also removes the rights for parents' freedom to teach their kids.

Xei
11-19-2003, 03:28 AM
I completely disagree with such disgusting education. It is absolutely sick to indorse the idea to children to fondle themselves. I think that our world is evolving in a negative manner. Instead of humanity becoming more rational their thought process seems to have error. Instead of making progress it seems that 'Penis enlargment pills' are made. Instead of educating our children with useful information we'll show them how to jerk off. Instead of spending money on useful things, we'll spend it on homosexual parades. The next thing children will be told is that sex between them is encouraged at a young age. The next thing that your little girl will come home excited to tell you what she learnt in kindergarten is how to arouse herself. The next thing that we will see is mis-guided sex-crazed youth of the country making even more careless decisions about what to teach society. It can only get worse from here.

*ClownPimp*
11-19-2003, 05:32 AM
It is absolutely sick to indorse the idea to children to fondle themselves.

No where in that article or the ones that wrath posted suggested that anyone would endorse the idea that children should fondle themselves. But the fact is, children that age do "fondle themselves" so I dont think there is anything sick or disgusting about teaching kids a little about what it is they are already doing anyways.


The next thing that we will see is mis-guided sex-crazed youth of the country making even more careless decisions about what to teach society

Education is the only way to prevent youth from being misguided and making careless decisions. As far as sex-crazed goes, I dont think there is much anyone can do about that :p

edit: w00t my 500th post!

edit2:


SIECUS publishes guidelines for sex education that call for children ages 5 through 8 to be taught about self touch and arousal, ages 9 through 12 to be taught different ways to seek sexual pleasure other than intercourse, and ages 16 through 18 to be taught about exotic fantasies enhanced by pornographic literature. The Health Information Network of the NEA has signed their support for these guidelines.

Somehow I think this paragraph is misleading. No where on the ACLU link did they talk about "exotic fantasies enhanced by pornographic literature". I think the details about how the sex-ed will be given should be questioned, but I think what they are trying to accomplish is a good idea.

DavidP
11-19-2003, 10:14 AM
Those guidlines are given on SIECUS' published guidlines for sex education, which can be found on there website.

Ages 5-8 can be found on pages 29-30
Ages 9-12 page 31
Ages 16-18 page 32

Govtcheez
11-19-2003, 10:22 AM
Mr. Huxley will be pleased

*ClownPimp*
11-19-2003, 04:08 PM
After reading most of the guidlines my initial suspicion was correct. That article is misleading. Taking everything in context I think the guidlines are a good idea. Futhermore the SIECUS isnt aimed to take away control from the parents and local school districts (as far as i can tell). In fact, they leave the actual implementation of the guidlines and the timing and manner in which the topics are introduced and discussed up to local school districts.

DavidP
11-19-2003, 06:38 PM
Level 1: middle childhood, ages 5 through 8; early elementary school.

...

Masturbation (page 30)

Level 1:

- Touching and rubbing one's own genitals to feel good is called masturbation.
- Some boys and girls masturbate and others do not.
- Masturbation should be done in a private place.



I did not take that out of context. That is word for word.

So...you want your 5-8 year old kids learning about masturbation? Go ahead, be my guest.

*ClownPimp*
11-19-2003, 06:41 PM
let me ask you something, what would be the harm in them learning the technical term for something most of them do or will do in the near future?

-KEN-
11-19-2003, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by DavidP
I did not take that out of context. That is word for word.

So...you want your 5-8 year old kids learning about masturbation? Go ahead, be my guest.

"Oh noes!!! Don't tell them about masturabation!!!! It's only a hop, skip, jump, and slippery slope away before they'll all be killing eachother!"

Out culture has an unhealthy fixation on sex. It's nothing dirty, but people would sure have you believe that it is. Teaching kids openly about sex and their sexuality seems like a good thing to me no matter how you slice it.

Govtcheez
11-19-2003, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by -KEN-
"Oh noes!!! Don't tell them about masturabation!!!! It's only a hop, skip, jump, and slippery slope away before they'll all be killing eachother!"
The slippery slope for anything sex related ends at bestiality and pedophilia, stupid.

-KEN-
11-19-2003, 07:15 PM
Damn, I knew that :(

Xei
11-19-2003, 08:25 PM
Children should be educated about sex, I can agree. But this is most certainly not the method that should be used. There is an age where learning about sex is appropriate, and an age where it is not. Age 5 is certainly not when they should be discussing sex. It is similar to the idea of teaching a 5 year-old calculus, they wont understand. The same idea applies to sex. Little children learn visually, so how will they learn about sex at age 5? At age 5 children should be learning life-skills like reading, writing, and simple communicational skills - not how to effectively bring themselves pleasure by masturbating. If I am ever a parent I would never allow my children into such a classroom, it would be barbaric to allow such nonsense.

Here is a question: Would they learn how to masturbate as a class? Or would someone show them privately?

Either are sick, disgusting, and perverted.

*ClownPimp*
11-19-2003, 08:34 PM
masturbation at that young an age has nothing to do with sex. So just because the topic of masturbation would be talked about, doesnt mean that they would be talking about sex.

The fact is that kids that age do touch themselves in that manner and therefore I dont see how it could be considered sick or disgusting to teach them the technical name for it and that it shouldnt be done in public.

Xei
11-19-2003, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by *ClownPimp*
masturbation at that young an age has nothing to do with sex. So just because the topic of masturbation would be talked about, doesnt mean that they would be talking about sex.

The fact is that kids that age do touch themselves in that manner and therefore I dont see how it could be considered sick or disgusting to teach them the technical name for it and that it shouldnt be done in public.

I do not believe that children have a habbit of masturbating in public. However, if what you are suggesting is true, then the schools' rules on the walls would be something like this:

-Treat others how you would like to be treated.
-No name-calling
-No swearing
-No running in the halls
-No talking out of turn
-No budging
-No masturbating
-No stealing
-No fighting

Hmm... does one rule seem to stand out more than the others? Probably because it is out of place and completely unnecessary.

So how exactly would the classroom talk about masturbation? Perhaps the discussion between the teacher and students would go something like this:

Teacher: "Now lets talk about masturbation"
Child: "Whats that?"
Teacher: "It's when a boy or a girl fondles their vaginas' or penis' to bring themselves pleasure"
Child: "Whats that?"
Teacher: "Here, let me bring you some pictures to help you understand."

Seriously, the idea is completely irrational.

*ClownPimp*
11-19-2003, 10:43 PM
I do not believe that children have a habbit of masturbating in public.
Im not saying they do. I just mentioned it because it was in the guidlines as one of the subjects to teach.


So how exactly would the classroom talk about masturbation?
Thats a good question, and I dont have the answer to that. The topic is certainly very delicate and should be handled with the utmost care. Im sure there are people who study how to talk about issues such as this to young children and im sure they will be able to come up with some sort of appropriate way of educating them.

UnregdRegd
11-20-2003, 12:05 AM
Reading the text of the bill itself, I saw absolutely nothing even suggesting that five year olds would be taught what is mentioned in the excerpt quoted from Abstinence.net. In fact, the bill recommends a curriculum that encourages parental discussion and even advises abstinence alone as the best method to avoid pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It also gives parents the right to opt their children out of such a class if they prefer.

A sensible sexual education curriculum can help prevent unwanted pregnancies and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. If children, especially as they pass through adolescence, find out on their own and through peers, they will pick up myths and misconceptions; and so, if they do end up having sex, they will be completely unprepared.

Sebastiani
11-20-2003, 12:18 AM
>> Im sure there are people who study how to talk about issues >> such as this to young children and im sure they will be able to >> come up with some sort of appropriate way of educating them.

Give me a break.

Sex education? For children?!

Let parents educate their children according to their own beliefs.

That program is nothing less that state-sponsored perversion.

I hope someone puts a stop to it somehow. :(

Jeremy G
11-20-2003, 12:57 AM
On the topic of Sex education:

I use to have very elicit sexual fantacies. But since I took sex ed my freshman year of high school, even in my dreams, when I'm about to have sex with a woman im all "Do you have your tested clean of std's card?" (a card you get when you get tested for aids, says your clean and stuff" and then I wear a condom........ :(

BMJ
11-20-2003, 02:33 AM
Originally posted by Sebastiani
Sex education? For children?! Wont somebody please think of the children!?!?

Yoshi
11-20-2003, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by BMJ
Wont somebody please think of the children!?!?

Why think about those little lemmings when they don't know a thing about what they are being taught? ;)

-KEN-
11-20-2003, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by Sebastiani
Let parents educate their children according to their own beliefs.

Hooray! What excellent reasoning!

"Little Jimmy, why did you not wear a condom and give your girlfriend AIDS?"
"Momma and Dad sai' that thu' condom is the devil's work!!!"

Sebastiani
11-20-2003, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by -KEN-
Hooray! What excellent reasoning!

"Little Jimmy, why did you not wear a condom and give your girlfriend AIDS?"
"Momma and Dad sai' that thu' condom is the devil's work!!!"


Muslims teach their children to be Muslim. Atheists teach their's to be atheist. Being a parent is about passing on your own personal values. What those values are is their business, not that of the state. After all, the state would be doing nothing more than passing on *it's* values.

Of course, if parents *want* the state to teach their children about sex, let them. But by all means it should be a choice, not a policy.

-KEN-
11-20-2003, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Sebastiani
Muslims teach their children to be Muslim. Atheists teach their's to be atheist. Being a parent is about passing on your own personal values. What those values are is their business, not that of the state. After all, the state would be doing nothing more than passing on *it's* values.

Of course, if parents *want* the state to teach their children about sex, let them. But by all means it should be a choice, not a policy.

Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I misread. I just assumed this was an opt-in/opt-out type of thing.

the Wookie
11-20-2003, 06:04 PM
i dont think it should be taught in schools at that age. i think at the high school time, lessons about safe sex, stds and abstinience is ok.

once you show someone how to do it (like impressionable youth), and you tell them "ok you can't do it in public" or "keep it to yourself", theres always people who are going to wonder why. school rules include "no cursing", but how many of you still curse? sure masturbation isnt that "easy", but still.

i dont think you should teach things like that. if they really want to, let them figure it out for themselves. i agree with the person said theyre better off learning things like reading, writing, math and those subject. we're far behind the world in those subjects; we're definitely not behind in sex (education)

and aside from that, where does it stop? first you teach them how to, then what? distribute toys to them in school to use? porn mags for those who need "extra help"?

same contraversy with the distribution of condoms in highschools.

if they want to find out, let the resources be available. but let them make the first move. teaching about abstinience in HS is ok, thats a good thing. but things they see on tv tend to influence more than what they are told to do in school. "do as i say, not as i do". well on tv and everything (look at mtv for example), theyre practically promoting sex and promiscuity, but in school theyre being told not to..who do you think they'll listen to? itll just open up that door alot sooner than it should be opened.

personally, i think its leading towards degration of our society. instead of spending time and money on things that better the society, we're spending it on how to teach our kids to sex themselves. it seems as though everything is turning into sex and money. instead of teaching them how to masturbate, why not teach them something with some higher moral and social value?

SinAmerica
11-23-2003, 05:35 AM
Take away control of anything from the people and i'll call you a dirty communist (A.K.A. a Democrat)

This is inheriently wrong, not becuase of the content, but becuase the parents do not have a choice.

nvoigt
11-23-2003, 08:32 AM
Being a parent is about passing on your own personal values. What those values are is their business, not that of the state. After all, the state would be doing nothing more than passing on *it's* values.


No, absolutely not. Children aren't their parent's property. They should be taught to not harm themselves or others. If parents don't agree on this for whatever reason, it should be forced. Some values, like the safety of all citizens are above personal interests like religion.

I think 5 is a bit early for sex ed though... Highschool is fine, I haven't heard of pregnant grade schoolers yet
;)

frenchfry164
11-23-2003, 09:23 AM
Hooray! What excellent reasoning!

"Little Jimmy, why did you not wear a condom and give your girlfriend AIDS?"
"Momma and Dad sai' that thu' condom is the devil's work!!!"

Muslims teach their children to be Muslim. Atheists teach their's to be atheist. Being a parent is about passing on your own personal values. What those values are is their business, not that of the state. After all, the state would be doing nothing more than passing on *it's* values

So you're saying you want women to suffer AIDS and pregnancy and crap, because the dude's parents don't believe in condoms?

5 is way too young to teach sex ed. I think the masturbation thing shouldn't be taught until they are in like 6th grade or something, and should not be taught as in how to do it, but be taught where to do it and not to. Most kids by that age know how to do it anyway.

It's a good idea, just needs to be modified a little bit. The majority of the stuff should be taught at high school, and if the "ages 16 through 18 to be taught about exotic fantasies enhanced by pornographic literature." is taken out completely. School already has enough bogus crap in it that pertains nothing to the career choice and lifestyle of the students, but adding this is complete bullcrap and doesn't need to be there.