Friday, April 9, 2010

The symptonmatic problem of sex ed.

I was reading over a DA's threat, I don't remember where but I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find, of how anyone teaching contraptives in Sex Ed will be charge with contributing to the deliquency of a minor. Though to a great deal of degree agree with the man, this kind of far right lunacy doesn't do much addressing the issue of who should be responsible for sex education in this country. This a most polorizing issue as it was the final straw, as I'll get into later, that got my ex wife, who was as liberal as they come, she still liberal today but more to the right than she used to be.

The claim by the abstince only group is that sex ed encourages teens to be sexually active while the other side claims pregency and STD's increase when children aren't taught about sexuality and prevention of both pregancy and STD's. Both side have a good degree of validity in their point. Contary to what the left says, sex ed does encourage sexual activity. The thing is children aren't just getting educated in school alone. I had 14 year olds, still today as I substitute teach, that know more about sex to make a brothel worker in Nevada to blush with ignorance and these are 14 and 15 year olds. They view sex ed as the state endorsement that they have a right to their sexuality. Contrary to the right claim, it's their sex ed knowledge that does keep the rates down, about 50% in many areas. There's a bigger picture that missed by both side and why this minister that's also the DA of the district isn't going to win himself any points in the mortal world as well as the spirital world as well.

The real issue isn't education or who's better fit. We can argue til Armageddon comes about it, it won't change people's mind one way or the other. The real issue is what get children to become sexually active at such a tender age to begin with? In my humble opinion, it's our decadent culture and our moral decline. Think the left will despise me for that statement. Well, take a look at the culture we live in.

First, the ads. One thing for sure in our culture, we have given up parenting to letting the media babysit our children. So is it a shock they pick up on the messages protrayed. Just watch the Disney Channel to see how far we've fallen. There, children are modern, in the know, flirty, while parent's are rigid, stupid, archaic, and just inferior. I wonder what these children will grow up to be if all adults are mentally diminished? They have children with rights of adults an no parent has no right to authority over them. They're viewed as being able to handle such responsibilities even better if parents and adults allow them to be free. This includes their maturity and sexuality. Try going 10 minutes without some perverse message (libertian to leftist out there) with reference to freedom without responsibilities. With the exception of buzz driving is drunk driving, they're all actions without consequences. Oh, that and that vaccination for that cervix virus.

When they get older, nobody wants to admit it, but they view, quite often, adult movies. No, not that kind, though I bet it does get through. I mean the R rated features. Hollywood these last few years have taken the perverse to extreme measure. Like the Nicole Kidman movie Birth where she's insinuating having sex with a 10 year old (though she thinks he's the reencarnation of her dead husband). The worse one, Sex in the City. This is now syndicated so we have a series with now two movies of woman being a bunch of unpaid whores and viewed as liberating. I'll never forget the scene that did for me and I left where you have a guy sacrifices and nature for two years to have one of the sluts overcome cancers. What was his reward. She loves herself more. What does that mean? Ladies today wonder why men have no loyalty or respect for them or why we're acting like dogs? Well, when you treat us like dog, we act like it. All in the name of sexual liberation. Well, it goes both ways and young boys and girls know it. Since there's no honor or respect in the relationship, much less the act, all that matters is the here and now. All that matters is the instant gratification.

Often the left, especially women and girls, say they're going to do it anyways and to asking to wait or saving themselves is unrealistic. There I have to agree with them. When we live in a morally bankrupt culture were everything is relative and there's no vice or valor anymore, yea we all tend to descend to the lowest common denominator. When there are no standards, no respect, either for other or ourselves, when self control is viewed as something unnatural, is it a surprise that we have no shame. After all, as a sub now, my main challenge it seems is to keep the children from fondling each other and I don't mean that figuratively. The last assignment I did, one of the "boys" threaten me with a civil rights lawsuit if I did anything to stop him from his right of "affection". I sent him out anyways, but do I worry. Not at the moment. A school district isn't going to advertise their schools are brothels yet. But as we descent more towards anything goes as long as it feel good, I wonder for how much longer. So long as we let our children have freedoms and responsibilities of adult without any real consequences. As this debate is really about who's responsible for the consequences, as long as we continue to have anything goes in our culture sexually, then yea, sex ed is going to continue to encourage children to have sexual relations. As well as they're going to need to be educated to reduce the consequences of pregnancy and STD's. Because it will be unrealistic to give a green light on the subject culturally and not have a vast number to take the offer.

No comments: