Archive for the ‘Sex Education’ Category

Your tax dollars are used to prohibit discussion about legalizing prostitution

Monday, September 13th, 2010

In 2003, Congress passed the $15 billion U.S. Global AIDS Act to distribute U.S. federal aid to organizations fighting AIDS.  But, in order to get the funds, an organization mush sign an Anti-Prostitution Pledge which included the following clauses:

  1. “No funds [...] may be used to promote or advocate the legalization or practice of prostitution or sex trafficking.”
  2. “No funds [...] may be used to provide assistance to any group or organization that does not have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.”

    Cool, huh?  So, this is the government saying that it will withhold funding for AIDS treatment and prevention, essentially holding people in need of medical services hostage, unless the organizations agree to explicitly adopt specific political point of view even if that point of view undermines their efforts to mitigate the spread of AIDS.

    Manhattan’s Museum of Sex

    Monday, April 26th, 2010

    If I had known of this museum, I would have visited it on my last vist to New York.

    To avoid censorship, the museum takes no federal or state money; it relies solely on admission fees and donations.

    Smart move.

    Sex education nonsense in Wisconsin

    Thursday, April 8th, 2010

    According to a story on cnn.com, teachers in Juneau County Wisconsin are being warned that if they teach kids the sex education curriculum specified by law, they could find themselves facing charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

    Because the law requires teachers to instruct children not only about contraceptives but about how to use them, Juneau County District Attorney Scott Southworth said, schools are forced to encourage students to “engage in sexual behavior, whether as a victim or an offender.”

    And since minors can’t legally have sex in Wisconsin, teachers would essentially be endorsing the behavior and could be held liable, Southworth said in the letter.

    Yeah, Scott.  Better that the kids should find out about safe sex from their doctor when he’s treating them for some STD or from their OB/GYN after they get pregnant.  This reminds me of Texas conservatives objecting to HPV vaccine because it could eliminate the cervical cancer that they consider to be a handy deterrent to teen sex.  Next we’ll be telling teens they can’t use seat belts because it encourages reckless driving.

    The law doesn’t force any schools to teach the sex education classes, but it sets out strict guidelines on what should be taught in the schools that choose to do so. The law passed narrowly in the legislature and was the topic of a fierce battle between Republicans and Democrats: No Republicans voted for it, and it was signed by a Democratic governor.

    Has anyone else noticed how the two political parties seem to be so completely absorbed with fighting each other that common sense is completely lost?  If one party came up with a way to cure cancer, the other party would oppose it simply because it wasn’t their cure.

    Rep. Kelda Helen Roys, a Democrat, told the Wisconsin State Journal that she believes there’s no problem with the law.

    She said Southworth, a Republican, is a “zealot” who wrote the letter to try to scare people out of teaching the sexual education classes.

    Well, you know, all serious crime has probably been eliminated in Wisconsin, so prosecutors have nothing else to do but target teachers.

    “The teacher could be charged with the crime even if the child does not actually engage in the criminal behavior [of having sex as a minor],” Southworth wrote.

    If democrats really wanted to do something positive with their legislative majority on Wisconsin, they’d grow a set of balls and scrap the law that turns kids into criminals for having sex.

    Commentary on attitudes about sex right on target

    Monday, March 1st, 2010

    The Santa Maria Times published an excellent editorial pointing out society’s irrational attitudes toward the sex:

    Warning: This may be X-rated

    The only point I take issue with is the comparison of Janet Jackson’s half time escapade, which resulted in major media coverage, with violent video games which are readily available and even marketed to children.  Advocates of censorship almost always base their arguments on the idea that children suffer lasting (if not permanent) damage from exposure to certain types of material, most notably sex and violence.  It is certainly true that the crusade against sex is far more active and receives far more attention and support than the campaign against violence.

    But the reason I hesitate to make such a comparison is that, instead of arguing against censorship of sex, it comes across to many people as an argument (or excuse) for censorship of violence.   The fact is that, for every claim that a child’s behavior can be traced to porn or video games, there are a gazillion examples of kids who were exposed to the same material and weren’t affected.  A far more plausible explanation is that the kid had a propensity for certain kinds of behavior and and his interest in certain types of content stems from the same internal predisposition.

    Finally, I would like to make clear that the First Amendment doesn’t have an exception that allows material to be censored because it could adversely affect people’s thinking.

    Crackdown on girls who sell sex for fancy clothes

    Saturday, February 27th, 2010

    According to  scottsman.com:

    POLISH police have launched a campaign warning high-school girls of the dangers of prostitution, amid fears growing numbers of them are selling their bodies for clothes and electronic gadgets.

    So, are they trying to say they should be asking for more?  Or that you should only have sex for love (ie: free)?

    “We do not want to teach children how to easily earn money, but to show them that prostitution is linked to drug addiction, alcoholism and trafficking in human beings,” said Sergeant Adrianna Mazur, of Katowice police.

    Yeah, nothing pisses off the anti-prostitution crusaders more than people who contradict their claims that prostitution is always slavery and exploitation.  Telling teenagers that exchanging sex for status will lead to doom and misery is a bit like telling teen pot smokers that marijuana will destroy their lives.  Even teens know bullshit when they hear it.

    A recent survey of 15-year-old girls found 67 per cent had a friend or peer who had engaged in prostitution, and only half of those surveyed thought it was something wrong.

    The ant-sex crusaders will probably take that as a cry for help and want to send them to some kind of reeducation program.

    One has to wonder if the sole mission of the anti-sex busy bodies is simply to heap public shame and scorn on those who don’t strictly conform to their own outmoded attitudes.  It’s as if society is telling young people that having sex at an early age will make their lives miserable and then, to prove it, they do everything that can to make sure their lives do, in fact, become miserable.

    Mississippi Gives Up on Abstinence-Only Sex Ed.

    Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

    According to the original article:

    Mississippi has one of the highest teenage birth rates in the nation, and its only sex education option in public schools is an abstinence-only curriculum that doesn’t give information about contraception.

    Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis envisioned the state legislatures as “laboratories of democracy”.   Maybe we should thank Mississippi for proving how stupid abstinence-only sex ed is, saving the rest or the country from such idiocy.

    A bill that passed the state House on an 84-35 vote Tuesday would give school districts the option of offering an “abstinence-plus” curriculum that would still encourage students to refrain from sex but would also give them information about birth control pills, condoms or other contraception.

    No info about abortion will be permitted, though.

    Then there’s this little tidbit…

    The House defeated a proposal by Democratic Rep. Gregory Holloway of Hazlehurst, who wanted to offer a $2,000 a year university scholarship to any student who graduates from high school without either getting pregnant or getting someone pregnant.

    …which reminds me of the scene in The Messenger where The Church requires that Joan of Arc (Milla Jovovich) undergo a grand ceremonial examination to prove she is a virgin.

    Boobies BAD!

    Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

    Kids at a Santa Clara middle school are being told they can’t wear a bracelet promoting breast cancer awareness because it is “demeaning” and distracting. The bracelets say I heart Boobies on one side and Keep A Breast on the other.

    I can understand the part about it being distracting, but I think the problem lies less with the bracelets and more with the way children are indoctrinated with the idea that certain body parts are off limits thereby infusing sexuality with mystery, not only heightening their interest, but forcing the kids to explore it on their own, unsupervised (which can be distracting).

    So much for all that abstenance education…

    Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

    According to the Guttmacher Institute:

    The significant drop in teen pregnancy rates in the 1990s was overwhelmingly the result of more and better use of contraceptives among sexually active teens. However, this decline started to stall out in the early 2000s, at the same time that sex education programs aimed exclusively at promoting abstinence—and prohibited by law from discussing the benefits of contraception—became increasingly widespread and teens’ use of contraceptives declined.

    You mean telling teens not to do something isn’t an effective deterrent?  I’m stunned.

    In the UK they start compulsory sex education at age seven.  At age eleven, they teach about contraception.