Sex Education
I wrote this to a local TV station who had people arguing about which kind of sex education to teach in our schools. I did agree more with the abstinence side -- especially when the abstinence advocate asked the other to define abstinence, and she said "it's a choice some people make," refusing further clarification -- but my view is a bit different.
=====================
I wish your program had devoted some time to the notion that public school is not the place to teach *anything* about personal sexual activity, be it abstinence or not. It's not the information I have a problem with, it's the source.
Anyone who isn't family will not teach my children about sex, period. That's my job. And my children will surely know a lot more about sex, in a comprehensive and healthy way, than children who learn about it via a combination of MTV and the public schools.
Yes, many parents won't be such good teachers. I personally don't see this as a problem for the schools to take on, but if they must, then the class should be optional, and not the default option.
Further, so much time and money and energy is spent on deciding which type of sexual information to give to impressionable teenagers, instead of addressing the fact that -- compared to 30 years ago -- today's high school graduates are, overall, pretty ignorant. They don't know the difference between Andrew Johnson and Andrew Jackson, and couldn't even begin to tell you what a gerund is.
But some people decided that sex is more important than being well-educated. Perhaps if the children were more well-educated, they would be smart enough to figure things out on their own a bit better? Teach them history, teach them to figure out why things happened, why people did what they did, and what other choices they could have made. Pretty soon you'll get kids who are actually thinking for themselves.
But we can't have that, because government schools are designed to create programmed citizens who will do what is best for society. That's why there's so much emphasis on rates of sexual activity, pregnancies, and diseases. But I am raising intelligent, creative, confident, and capable individuals. Statistics are irrelevant to the parent; what matters is the individual. I am far less concerned with statistics than I am about my own individuals, including the psychological impact of strangers giving them intimate information about sex.
I am no anti-government wacko (believe it, or not). But in the case of public schools, there can be no denying that they are not designed with the best interests of the individual children in mind, but with society in mind. And that's not good enough for my children, and the current debate about which form of sex education to teach is a perfect example of why.
=====================
I wish your program had devoted some time to the notion that public school is not the place to teach *anything* about personal sexual activity, be it abstinence or not. It's not the information I have a problem with, it's the source.
Anyone who isn't family will not teach my children about sex, period. That's my job. And my children will surely know a lot more about sex, in a comprehensive and healthy way, than children who learn about it via a combination of MTV and the public schools.
Yes, many parents won't be such good teachers. I personally don't see this as a problem for the schools to take on, but if they must, then the class should be optional, and not the default option.
Further, so much time and money and energy is spent on deciding which type of sexual information to give to impressionable teenagers, instead of addressing the fact that -- compared to 30 years ago -- today's high school graduates are, overall, pretty ignorant. They don't know the difference between Andrew Johnson and Andrew Jackson, and couldn't even begin to tell you what a gerund is.
But some people decided that sex is more important than being well-educated. Perhaps if the children were more well-educated, they would be smart enough to figure things out on their own a bit better? Teach them history, teach them to figure out why things happened, why people did what they did, and what other choices they could have made. Pretty soon you'll get kids who are actually thinking for themselves.
But we can't have that, because government schools are designed to create programmed citizens who will do what is best for society. That's why there's so much emphasis on rates of sexual activity, pregnancies, and diseases. But I am raising intelligent, creative, confident, and capable individuals. Statistics are irrelevant to the parent; what matters is the individual. I am far less concerned with statistics than I am about my own individuals, including the psychological impact of strangers giving them intimate information about sex.
I am no anti-government wacko (believe it, or not). But in the case of public schools, there can be no denying that they are not designed with the best interests of the individual children in mind, but with society in mind. And that's not good enough for my children, and the current debate about which form of sex education to teach is a perfect example of why.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment