Let’s look at your profound contributions to this thread, shall we?
They’re not going to keep your child’s curriculum a secret just so they can laugh at you, Frank.

For the love of all that is holy, either deal with what people have been saying to you or shut up.

Now,was there a point you were trying to make?

BTW, what I was referring to was having children in a school system.

I’m not saying you have to have children to have an opinion, or even the right opinion, but it’s harder for me to be so casual about letting my children be educated on such a complicated and sensitive subject, when they seem to have botched the job of teaching far simpler stuff.

If your school district didn’t do it, then they should have. But that aside, not having sex ed in school is stupid for the reasons I discussed above.

This is a very simple concept: teach abstinence and contraception. It’s not complicated. It saves lives, heartache and pain.

A. Teenagers DO drive.
B. As for the other two, my answer is no. However, I don’t trust most adults with a loaded gun, so that point’s kinda moot.

“Tell kids they shouldn’t be banging each other like bunnies?”
Nooooooooooooooooooo…!!

Once again, the conservatives fail to understand the agruement. Liberals aren’t against the “absinance” part of abstinance-only education. They’re against the “only” part. So riddle me this, Batman, why do you so venomously oppose teaching about contraception in school?

My point, as you well know, is that I, who have children, would want to know exactly when they are having sex education.

Since I have never been sent such a slip, either my school district doesn’t bother with them, or they have offered that education without my permission.

Your experience with the sex education of children is abstract — mine is real.

So before you embarrass yourselves further, move on to one of the Iraq – oriented threads, where ignorance and foolish run rampant on the left.

And why would they? They already have pleanty of other perfectly legitimate reasons to laugh at him.

I just wouldn’t want it forced on my child without my knowing about it, anymore than you would want your child to learn that Intelligent Design is a viable alternative to the Theory of Evolution without your knowing about it.

One side is talking about fairy tales, we’re talking about the real world.

That means “at risk”.

And Zython — that’s your real name, right? — no one is presuming that children OR teenagers are “stupid by default”.

The labels “children” and “teenager” (or “adolescent”) were purposely designed to distinguish them from adults by virtue of their immaturity, not their lack of intelligence.

Would you give a teenager a loaded gun, let them drink alcohol, or drive a car?

“Tell kids they shouldn’t be banging each other like bunnies?”
Nooooooooooooooooooo…!!

Your obsession with sex is showing, gentlemen (all of you, Oliver included), and it is ugly.

Where’d you get the 25 lower cap from? I know some senior citizens with the maturity of a child.

The point is that, with reference to preparedness for sex, no 16 year is prepared, and is likely to be harmed in some way.

Why do conservatives believe that children and teenagers are stupid by default? Are they THAT afraid of youth?

But if you’re so concerned about their preparedness, maybe it would be good to, y’know, prepare them, instead of trying to feed them a lot of scary stories and keeping the condoms locked away.

An emotionally immature 16 year-old having sex will suffer all the same consequences as an emotionally immature 33 year-old having sex.
That’s just silly. An emotionally immature 16 year old (who is, by definition, younger than 16 emotionally) is obviously at greater risk than an emotionally immature 33 year old (who could be emotionally anywhere from 25 to 32).

The point is that, with reference to preparedness for sex, no 16 year is prepared, and is likely to be harmed in some way.