[geeks] Re: Small schools.& elections

[David Cantrell]

[taken to geeks]

"Joshua D. Boyd" <jdboyd at cs.millersville.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, C Sorensen wrote:
> > If your daughter gets pregnant by the football 
> > captain you blame the school for poor sex 
> > education. 
> 
> In the current state of things, I think poor sex education is a large part
> of the problem.  They should be teaching kids not to have sex, not how to
> have sex.

Expecting teenagers not to fuck is like expecting politicians not to take
bribes.  If you tell 'em not to fuck, you'll just be laughed at and they'll
ignore everything else you say.  Just like if you try moralising at your
elected representative.

A more productive approach would be to educate them in matters like safe
sex, foreplay (certainly when I was a teenager it was just chat ... kiss ...
grope ... bouncy-bouncy), and how utterly horrible the consequences of
unsafe sex can be.

Yes, I know that this would really upset the immoral minority of religious
nutcases.  That's a good reason to not allow local politics into school
administrations :-)

> Of course, aren't parents supposed to influence their kids more than
> schools are?

Don't be silly!  Next you'll be suggesting that people take responsibility
for their own actions!  What an absurd notion.

-- 
David Cantrell | david at cantrell.org.uk | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

      Good advice is always certain to be ignored,
      but that's no reason not to give it            -- Agatha Christie