Saturday, February 10, 2007

Chew on this

Why religious institutions should not be responsible for sex education.

2 comments:

Gregg "I Say Things About Things" Parker said...

It could have been worse. They could have used the technique that some parents use when they catch their kids smoking. You know, when they force them to smoke a whole carton? I certainly wouldn't put it past them. I just can't understand why any religious-based organization would be allowed to instruct kids on sex. I mean, no matter what they say about how their goal is to stop the spread of disease, what they really want is to stop people having sex altogether because they consider it immoral, and everyone knows that. Imagine, if you will, an organization given a government contract to instruct children on how to remain safe from gun violence. How quickly would the NRA go nuts if the organization's mantra were "the only way to be safe is to not own guns?" They would never have it, insisting that what should be done is to teach proper safety and responsible ownership of guns. I would think, then, that anyone who holds this position on firearms would have to hold the same position on something like reproductive organs. I would, of course, think wrong. That's what I get for expecting consistent logic.

Ellen said...

"It was fine for me, because my best friend and me did it first," said Julia Bellefleur, 15, a Damascus High School sophomore who participated in the exercise. "But it was kind of gross for everyone else. I was just glad I did it first."


So the lesson Julia learned from this exercise was that it’s “fine” to have sex, as long as you’re one of the first to do it---and with your best friend, no less? Hmmm…it seems as though the lesson backfired a bit…