bbauska wrote:But then we started into what teachings I would teach.

To me it is a basic issue of not picking one morality over another. I don't want to inflict my morality on your kids any more than I should allow you to inflict your morality upon mine. The above does not have ANY morality, does it?

Don't we want our kids to be exposed to many different viewpoints? For example, my kids learn about evolution in the regular schools, and then the creation story in Hebrew School. I'm more inclined to ask them questions to get them to think, but I also offer my opinions when they ask and are ready to handle them. (I recall my at the time 11 year old asking questions about the meaning of a billboard on AIDS.) I also teach them that grown-up don't always agree, and even mom and dad don't always see things the same way (e.g. they may vote for different presidential candidates or have different views of the worthwhileness of computer games).

Ray Jay,
We do want our children exposed to many different viewpoints. Personally, I do not want the morality taught in schools. I want to be the one to decide what viewpoints my children are exposed to. I was in Key West for two and a half years. Let me tell you, there are different viewpoints to be exposed to there.

My point is: When it comes to morality, it is not the place of the PUBLIC school system to teach morality. If there is an amoral position, that is fine. If there is a moral position, then ALL positions must be taught. I am sure that there is not a call for the Judeo-Christian, or Islamic view to be taught concerning sex education. Therefore, we do not need to have ANY moral viewpoint, including the lack of moral viewpoint.

Clinical and factual...

BB,

I hear what you are saying and as an actual parent of pre-teens I sympathise. There are so many cultural influences out there and it is very tough to control values. But they see all sorts of stuff on TV and on the computer, and hear about all sorts of stuff from their friends. We are all damaged by excessive media driving our desire to buy things and over-emphasizing money in our lives. The images of beauty and "thin is in" are perhaps even more destructive, especially for our daughter. But it is extremely difficult to fight the culture (the good and the bad).

I think where we differ is that at a certain point, you have to accept your child's wisdom to understand right from wrong. You've managed to determine that the Key West lifestyle is not for you, and I suspect that your kids will ultimately come to the same view.

I also think that you have to reconcile to the fact that teenagers are genetically programmed to challenge their parents' wisdom. If we are too rigid I think there is real risk that the child will overly rebel. The world and people are not just clinical and factual. There's much of us that is reptilian in our thinking. My best friend in junior high school had incredibly strict parents. We all tried pot, and mostly stopped there. But he went on to all sorts of weird stuff. Just an anecdote, but one I take with me.

Anyhow, I totally respect your right to raise your children however you see fit, and I'm sure it must be extremely frustrating for the schools to teach stuff that you don't want them to learn. But if we don't teach them the richness and complexity of life our messages will be ignored. For example, if you tell them that abstinence is the way to go and never mention that sex is pleasurable, their take away will be "well of course dad recommends abstinence; he doesn't understand how good sex can be". The statement: "sex can be very pleasurable" is factual, by the way, not moral.

I think that you misinterpret what I am saying.

We DO say that sex is pleasurable, and is most fulfilling in the realm of a marriage. To not have it in that realm opens a great many possible difficulties such as:
Unwanted pregnancy
STDs
among other issues that involve self worth, loss of virginity, etc.

Thank you for your words RJ

Thinking as a liberal for a moment (it hurts my brain)...
OK, I am a Liberal, I think government should step in and make life better and correct all our wrongs. Clearly unwanted teenage pregnancy is bad for us all, STD's are wrong for us all, loss of self worth just feels like I should support efforts to reduce this horrible situation, so as a Liberal, government must step in and fix what is obviously wrong!?

It seems to me Liberals should support the removal of sex education and back abstinence (but of course not in any religious context, that would not be a liberal position), supporting anything else is simply crazy talk!

You're making the erroneous assumption that teaching abstinence actually works Tom. All the available evidence would seem to suggest that this is not true, so why would anybody looking for a government solution want to go with that ?

Although actually, I guess you could argue that a sex education policy that accepts that young people will be young people and doesn't try to change human nature is actually something of a right wing theory. Conservatism is all about working with the grain of human behaviour is it not ? I'm surprised all you conservatives are so down on the idea...

My question is the following: Is it the responsibility of the school system to teach morality either way?

Teach abstinence, provide birth control (call it vitamins), problem solved.

Tom, congratulations on your straw man. Must have taken you ages. Whole seconds, perhaps.

Neal Anderth wrote:Teach abstinence, provide birth control (call it vitamins), problem solved.

Because nothing is more healthy for society than systematically lying to the people by those in authority. Such as drugging them.

Besides, which kids are gonna take vitamins?

I think you've had enough biology to answer that question.

bbauska wrote:I think that you misinterpret what I am saying.

We DO say that sex is pleasurable, and is most fulfilling in the realm of a marriage. To not have it in that realm opens a great many possible difficulties such as:
Unwanted pregnancy
STDs

While I understand what you are saying, even so, the restriction of sex to within marriage does not preclude either unwanted pregnancies or STDs.

among other issues that involve self worth, loss of virginity, etc.

Not sure what you mean here. What are you saying about virginity here - and how much is about judgement of others rather than your own sense of self worth.

To be honest, to add the 'in the realm of a marriage' thing is to add a moral dimension. It can be just as 'fulfilling' in a non-married but still loving and committed relationship. If anything, the problem with emphasising marriage is that it leads young couples to get married in haste and that will tend to lead to more problem marriages and break-ups later on.

That is MY personal opinion and what WE teach as homeschoolers.

I have made my position about public school teachings quite clear, and the added moral stance I take at home does not apply to the public realm.

And my response is my opinion. Although the idea that it's only extra-marital sex that risks STDs or unwanted pregnancies is one you may want to review in the light of the facts, which are that unwanted pregnancies within marriage are very common (going by abortion statistics), and that STDs are not always exclusive to sex (and, of course, while one partner may be true, the other may not be and you may not find out until it is too late).

Even if I believed for one second that my kid was going to abstain until marriage and only ever take one partner, I'd not want to give them any false confidence about it.

Do I need to bring the statistics from familyfacts.org that you have downplayed as not realistic in today's world? OK, I will.

http://www.familyfacts.org/charts/237/women-most-likely-to-get-abortions-are-poor-never-married-have-some-college

I do not believe all marriages are abortion and STD free, but the numbers show marrieds have less abortions.

http://www.familyfacts.org/charts/232/the-vast-majority-of-abortions-are-performed-on-unmarried-women

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2005/06/adolescent-virginity-pledges-condom-use-and-sexually-transmitted-diseases-among-young-adults

http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/topics0301.pdf

Page 3 of the last link shows a 3 times greater risk of STD among unmarrieds.