Yes, sexually active kids in middle school are the result of sexualizing them through sex education. This goes to show that sex education is a success. It works just as the sexologists of Planned Parenthood planned it would when they devised the programs that are implemented throughout public schools. Dole out the birth control drugs, condoms, and provide abortion, if it gets that far, and voila, Planned Parenthood is in the BIG MONEY, $$$$$ and lots of it.

Planned Parenthood isn't completely about abortion. The mission statement of Planned Parenthood is to destroy as many lives as possible, through encouraging sex by removing the visible consequences.

Do you have evidence that kids weren't sexually active in middle school prior to the implementation of sex education programs? One stat in Maine is that sexual activity among middle schoolers has dropped 10% in the last ten years -- seems to be that education is actually working.

WTF? Are you serious? You really need to do some research before you spout completely vile information. You may not agree with Planned Parenthood, but that doesn't negate that they do good work for those women who need medical services and can't always afford them. Planned Parenthood isn't just birth control and abortions, it also provides reduced rates for annual GYN exams which leads to early detection of various types of cancer.

First, you've got to do something about those double negatives in the same sentence!   


ANd to the point...of course it would. Why? Becasue they are in a natural state of latency. You've got two little ones. Look up latency period and study it. We mustn't violate their natural latency period....their time of innocence. This is a gift from God in His creation.

They are physically, mentally and emotionally asleep for any kind of sexual activity. It is awakened naturally and normally when puberty starts which usually begins with girls before boys. I think on average, puberty hits girls 3 years before boys.

From the beginning at an early age, parents should teach modesty. For example, little girls shouldn't be allowed to sit with their legs up showing their underclothing.

After puperty sets in, chastity is taught.

We encourage youth sex and kill babies, but that's okay, because we also offer cut rate GYN exams! Research doesn't change the first two facts. Do you know all the good stuff that cigarette companies do? Doesn't make them less of a death factory.

Your opinion doesn't make it fact. PP provides birth control and abortions -- your spin on it is just that -- spin. Show me where PP encourages underage sex (and providing birth control is not the same as encouragement). And as far as I know, no one can prove when "life" begins and that is why this debate continues. Please do not pretend that your opinion is the only one that matters or pass it off as fact.

Removing deterents = encouraging.

Since no one can prove when "life" begins, then why aren't we erring on the side of caution, instead of erring on the side of convenience?

Really? and where was that stat when King Middle School approved birth control for 11, 12 and 13 year old girls? If educating for sex is working as you claim then why is there the clamour for MORE birth control and GREATER availability to young middle school kids?

Doesn't make sense to me.

There is no doubt whatsoever that educating for sex is actually working...and as a result---children are sexualized and many, way too many of them are acting out sexually as a result.

Lula, do you realize that infants boys get NBRs (no-reason-boners) and children of both sexes learn early that rubbing their genitals creates a pleasurable sensation?

I think an honest, age-appropriate approach to sex education is a good way to go. I think sexual repression is as bad as full on sexualization.

Children don't need to be overwhelmed with information, but their questions and experiences should be addressed in a way that respects their intelligence and provides context and moral instruction in accordance with the values of the family.

Example: A small child who has not yet grasped the concept of privacy who is touching him or herself could be distracted with a different activity. An older child is instructed that exploring his or her body is fine but it is a private activity and should be done in solitude.

I mean, do you tell a 7 year old that a stork is responsible for mom's pregnancy? Of course not. When my boys were younger they learned that a woman has a "birth canal" that is designed for delivering babies (there are some great children's books available on pregnancy). Now that they are older we have added to their understanding of the equation by answering their questions honestly (no need to go above and beyond or give them way more info than they need to satisfy their curiosity).

Both my boys are very modest and neither are as of yet showing any sort of age-inappropriate sexual interest (girls still have cooties, LOL, except for me because I'm a grown up and sister because she's a baby, haha).

I guess the proof is in the pudding and my children are still young yet, but I don't think making sex shameful is a very useful tactic.

Lula, are you of the opinion that sex is merely for pro-creation? Do you think masturbation is wrong?

Do you have an sources to back that up? Mine is from the Maine Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Opinions aren't facts, folks.

SHADESOFGREY POSTS:

When does a human life become a human life? When does life (no italics) begin? This is the truth we seek and it is a truth that exists for physical human life certainly has a beginning and an end.

SHADESOFGREY POSTS:

Opinion and viewpoint only have jurisdiction in subjective areas. Becasue the question of when life begins has an answer, a truth, opinions have no bearing or influence what that truth is...yet, people erroneously act if it does.

So, let's as best we can separate truth from opinion. We hear some say that life begins at conception, or life begins at three months, or life begins at birth.

On the question of when life begins we can arrive at truth through science and reason. This is from the New Oxford Review Nov. 2002. First, we know from scientific fact that upon the creation of a single cell zygote, an entire cascade of events is set in motion. At conception, the zygote, by its inherent genetic program begins a maturation process that will lead it through every stage of its life, from the embryonic stage to birth to childhood to adulthood.

That is to say, every child, adolescent, and adult today, was at one point a single cell zygote. Firthermore, at the point the zygote is formed, is is endowed with a complete set of 46 chromosomes, the same number that adult humans have, 23 coming from the egg and 23 from the sperm. This chromosome combination is unique from that of its mother or father.

Whatever form a human life takes, be it a zygote, a morula, blastula, late stage embryo, neonate, infant, child, or adult, the issue is still one of life, NOT size or stage.

Science and reason suggest, therefore, that at the point of conception, a distinct and human being has been created.

And eugenics. And you still have not provided any source for the following quoted statement. Just a friendly reminder.

Actually, I linked to the study about 40 comments ago, go back and look.

TexasWahine Posts:

As a mother of 4, 2 of each, I am familiar with what you are describing as NBRs. I asked our pediatrician about it and was told this is a perfectly normal part of nature. As to your second point, it's also the same part of nature and we adults should make nothing big of it. They are still in their latency period and innocent.


When you said this I was reminded of a news story I read last week about a school in Oslo, Norway. Here is the first paragraph of the news story. "An Oslo pre-school teacher, backed by child psychologists, has suggested that kindergarten children be encouraged to “express” their sexuality through “sex-play” and games, including dancing naked and masturbating, in pre-school and day-care centres."

What we have here is pure adult evil going on..sex abuse disguised as sex education.





I agree. Parents know their child best and can instill the type of morality that they want their children to have. Teaching sexuality is formation, not loading up with information as public schools do.

I'm 100% opposed to classroom sex mis-education. I think it's tantamount to sex abuse.



Our sexuality is a gift from God. Properly ordered it brings much happiness. Sex is only shameful when it is misused.



I'm of the opinion that sex should only be in marriage of the man and woman and always open to life. Period. So, yes to your second question.

Wow, that would result is some really uptight people...you need release somewhere.

~Zoo

Actually, that had nothing to do with your claim. I read it. Do you have another?

If you really think the link has "nothing" to do with my claim, you might want to try reading it again...

For example it states: "Significantly, the abortion rate for 2003 was roughly equal in developed and developing regions—26 and 29, respectively—despite abortion being largely illegal in developing regions."

Also: "Africa, Asia and Latin America had the highest regional abortion rates, even though abortion is generally legally restricted and often unsafe in those regions."

In case you missed it, that says that abortion rates are higher where it is ILLEGAL. More than 20 million abortions each year happen in places where it is not legal to do so. Thus, making abortion illegal does not reduce the number of women having an abortion.

I also provided the example of Nicaragua for you. You can disagree with the stats that I'm providing, but please stop acting like I'm not providing them.

Lula posts:

ShadesofGrey posts:



Sources? How about from the horse's mouth? My evidence starts with Maine State Law. In 2002, Maine enacted its sex-education law which they call, "Comprehensive Family Life Education." The first part of the law defines "sex education in Kindergarten through 12th grade that medically accurate...that includes education on family planning and STDs,...that promotes responsible sexual behavior and addresses abstinence and the use of contraception.

The 2nd part states the Education Commissioner shall provide effective sex education to all Maine students by "contracting with local family planning programs, including the Family Planning Association of Maine. Three years ago, the Education Commissioner, fulfilled her mandate by providing SIECUS**2004 Sexuality Education. SIECUS is a spawn of Planned Parenthood.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the SIECUS curriculum educates for sex and not if, but when the students beome sexually active, it's designed to prepare them for sexual activity by using contraceptive drugs and condoms.

Note that the Maine education law reads sex education that promotes responsible sexual education and the use of contraception. Fast forward to October, 2007 and the King Middle School and see if sex education isn't doing just what it is expected to do...sexualize our youth and move from promoting responsible use of contraception to actually doling contraception to 11, 12 and 13 year olds.

In 2006, even though there was a clamour from some parents, the school officials from the town of Westbrook, Maine voted to teach the eighth graders about using birth control. I am somewhat familiar with the story as a friend emailed me the info along with some newspaper clippings. The schools officials justified it claiming it was in response to a rising teen pregnancy rate. Sure enough, they produced a chart from the Maine Dept. of Health and Human Services, Maine center for disease control Office of Data, Research and Vital Statistics that showed in the towns of Westbrook and South Portland, pregnancy was up 14% and 5% respectively.

I'll give you that teen pregnancy on the whole has gone down, but ever since schools gave kids the red light to go by educating for sex and doling out contraception and condoms, fornication in Maine is way up, in fact, chlamydia which in some cases causes cervical cancer and sterilization, is the highest.





I've done plenty of research on Planned Parenthood. What has said about Planned Parenthood is not vile, but the truth. It's Planned Parenthood deeds that are vile and wrong. Very vile and very wrong.

does the vatican keep records of conceptions, zygotehood, etc. or only live/still deliveries? does any government do differently? when wills are probated in favor of all living descendants are zygotes, blastulae, etc. issued an equal share of the estate? are pregnant women who travel internationally required to present visas and passports for themselves and their unborn children? does any insurer issue policies covering zygotes, morulae or any other prenatal entity?

Lula posts:

KINGBEE POSTS:

We are hearing more and more news stories of people killing pregnant women and taking their baby taken from the womb. You bet when these go to trial, the baby is going to be acknowledged as a baby. Laci Peterson and baby Conner come to mind...it was double murder was it not?

Even young children know a pregnant women is carrying a baby.



I have every reason to believe that---if I am dying and writing my will and my daughter is pregnant, then I can designate a portion of my estate to the babe in the womb-----and that would be honored in law.



No, but pregnant women are sure treated specially when it comes to X-rays, etc. aren't they? Why is that, Kingbee?



Look in your medicine cabinet and read the back of just about everything in there for the directions of use. Warning: If pregnant or breast feeding, ask a health professional before use.
Gee, seems like everyone involved in producing the tylenol or cold medicine, etc. take great notice of the baby in the womb, whether he's at his zygote, morulae, or prenatal stage....and rightly so, he's a precious gift of Almighty God.

The sooner we all get back to our senses and stop ignoring what every little child knows and recognize the life and humanity of the child in the womb, the better off we'll be.

In the US alone, there have been over 50 million abortions since 1973. World wide it's estimated there are over 50 million abortions annually.


In the case of abortion, the issue in question is life, the most sacred of our unalienable rights. The risk of erring on the wrong side of life is on the line is the most horrific gamble a government can understake, becasue it means risking the death of the very people it is empowered to protect.

Abortion is exactly the same as giving the death penalty to a person who has not been proven guilty. The unborn, becasue they are unseen and unheard, have been wrongfully denied the 'equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Even for those who insist that proof beyond a reasonable doubt as to when life does or does not begin doesn't exist should 'err of the safe side' with no spurious definitions of "person" standing in the way.

The principle here is to avoid killing even one innocent human life. By maintaining the policy of abortion on demand, we 'err on the side of extreme risk'. Is this the description of civil society? Any reasonable person would have to say no.

Policies protecting human life in the womb, would be to 'err of the safe side', and would be completely in sync with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and its core principle of defending the inalienable right to life.

when did the church jump into bed with freud? is it an in for a penny, in for a pound thing or do yall cherrypick (heh) stuff when it supports your pov. i don't know how coked up he was when he proposed his latency theory but i'm guessin somewhere between to the gills and borderline delusional.

it's only during the last 4-5 years that my memory has eased down from painfully acute and become easier to live with. thus stipulated, i still remember a great deal more of my childhood than i'd prefer. i wouldn't presume to dispute your personal experience, but i can't recall an age or phase when most of the kids around me--friends, enemies and everyone else sharing the orbit--and by most i mean at least 7 outta 10, could have been described as being closer than a 4-day drive to that state of 'physically mentally and emotionally' sexually unaware or uninterested you're tryin to sell us.

i attended catholic schools in the umc suburbs in which all those kids and i were raised during some of those norman rockwell golden years reagan misremembered so fondly. as 5-yr-olds, we played doctor & house. later on it was show n tell. followed by a seemingly endless litany of dirty jokes (if sufficiently motivated i could very easily rattle off the top 20 punchlines for each grade from 3 to 8--punchlines only to spare listeners outrageously ridiculous premises on which they pivoted) and hours upon hours of speculation about all things sexual.

the only sex education we received was in 8th grade on the day when our female clssmates were ushered off to some undisclosed location for a special showing of film provided by the feminine products industry ('you're a young lady now' was the title--or so i was informed later that day). our home room nun, a raging psychotic known as sister irene, produced a small booklet from her locked desk drawer, put on her game face, insisted everyone take seats at the front of the room and admonished us in advance that what she was about to impart was a very serious matter of great importance and no silliness would be tolerated. just before she began to read she looked up and saw me sitting directly in front of her as always cuz i was not permitted to choose a desk.

for several days prior to this one she'd been reading the entire class a few chapters per day from a fascinating volume entitled 'st maria gorretti--virgin & martyr'. according to this account the future saint had an uncle named luigi, i couldnt resist the impulse to sketch out my vision of uncle luigi as a learning aid for my classmates who were duly impressed. spurred on by success, i brought the character closer to life while we had lunch by giving him a voice and a amusing italian accent.

somehow this whole thing got outta hand and, unbidden not to mention without prior approval or authorization, the next day 'uncle luigi' began providing quips and asides as his niece's tale progressed. shortly thereafter sister irene suspended the narrative and demanded a meeting with me during which we agreed uncle luigi was a disruptive influence and would never-a darken-a da doorway to da class-a-room ever again.

all of which explains why the good sister felt it necessary to inform me personally and by name even that this was some serious stuff and it would be best for both of us if i made a real effort to remain silent from that second forward. it became moot a moment later when, appropo of nothing, i was summarily ordered to remove myself to the cloakroom which was separated from the main classroom by a wall.

thus it was i was the only member of that class free to roll around on the floor with tears in my eyes as sister irene solemnly informed us we had a sac between our legs the contents of which were similar to two large beans. i wasn't able to catch the rest after i buried my entire head into someone's heavy coat

the next year i entered 9th grade at another catholic school which also had its own elementary school in an adjacent building. over the next three years i saw for myself a phenomenon to which i was made privy the very first day of class--at least 4 but no more than 6 of the 20-25 8th grade girls were knocked up each year by the beginning of may.

it occurs to me that freud's latency theory may be complete nonsense but a devastatingly effective tool when utilized by molestor priests.



public schools had no connection whatsoever with the two girls from my elementary school who didn't graduate from high school because they killed themselves after they realized they were pregant.

Nothing in the link or your response in #100 addresses your claim. The link compares different societies (which do not have a common starting point or basis) to say what? A lot perhaps, but nothing to prove or even validate your claim.

Now, if you want to take a society where abortion WAS illegal, and then was legal and show me those stats, then we can begin a discussion. However, saying that Africa is comparable to Europe (when the dynamics as well as the reasons are more varied than similar), then we can debate that point if you would like. I dont think, outside of Margaret Sanger, you are going to find many to support that hypothesis.

So again I ask, where are the facts to back up your claim?

Sorry I missed the last few days. I pretty ill.

Quick comment about PP:

PP is not the problem. Blowing up Planned Parenthood will not fix any of these issues. Even though I am against abortion I see Planned Parenthood fulfilling a need (a capitalist venture). They are dealing with again the 'result' just as with giving middle schoolers birth control. I get very irritated at the anti-abortionist protesters at PP because they want to address the result not the cause.

Planned Parenthood is a not-for-profit organization that lobbies for the right to kill babies. I think that's a problem, even if it's not THE problem.

I'm not goign to blow up PP, though. I saw one once, I didn't blow it up.