I can't stand all of this Harry Potter hype, sorry if I blow off some steam?
Anyway...
What logic does Barak Obama see in sex ed to kinder gardeners? I don't even think that they will soak it all in!
Another government funded program via the Democrats? Wonderful. What else is new?
2007-07-20 14:54:05 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ya see these answers ? People have been fooled into believing that it's quite alright under the guise of 'learning for predatory reasons' . This is exactly how abortion became legal . Most everyone was against it until they said it would be for the 'safety' of the mother . Then loads of people were fooled and relented .
Check the stats for yourself folks , very , very few if any abortions are on record for saving the life of the mother !!!!
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmmm !!!
2007-07-20 15:05:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
Personally, I don't see the sense in it either. I do agree about one thing, any kid smart enough or cognitive enough to ask, should be told the truth in the kind of language they might be able to grasp. Sex education is something that should take place at home with parents. We seem to think when a kid goes to school today it's the school's responsibility to raise them, it's not, it's their job to teach them, not be a surrogate parent. Stop complaining about the democrats and social programs. It's better than the republican version of social programs, bomb them, destroy their homes, occupy their country and then throw money at them to show them how much we care about them while we spread democracy with the business end of a gun. It's a bargain, only costs several hundred billion dollars, four years plus and it has shown no positive results. Great plan.
2007-07-20 15:05:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
from Fox Noise (ANA MARIE COX, TIME.COM)
HART: You tell your children, if there is ever an adult who says to you, "Let's just keep this a secret from mom and dad," that adult is trouble. I don't care if he's a next-door neighbor. I don't care if he's a doctor.
COLMES: That's right, and that's called sex education. What's wrong with that? That's sex education.
HART: But the point is, Alan, you know what? The point is, there's not a child molester in the history of the world that hasn't wanted to keep it a secret from the child's parent. That covers a multitude of sins, but it also keeps mom and dad in the loop.
BETSY HART, "IT TAKES A PARENT" AUTHOR
1. make the education voluntary.
2. Have an option for parents to be present during the lecture.
2007-07-20 15:13:45 · answer #3 · answered by gary L 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Don't you love the Democrats who have posted their answers here as "we're just trying to teach them how to avoid sexual predators," and yada yada yada.....what?...you think the parents can't do that? Isn't that the parent's job, to teach their children safety? And if it is a safety class, why not call it that? A "sex ed" class, to me, means that you're going to teach the kids about "sex", but hey, what do I know right? I'm just a republican.
2007-07-20 16:55:47 · answer #4 · answered by K.K. 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is not sex ed like people keep claiming. It is educating our precious young children on improper touching and how to keep themselves safe from strangers. With society the way it is today I do not see why any logical person would not want their children to be educated on this matter. I understand people will say that is a parents job but the sad fact is not all parents will do this. Are you willing to let children suffer such an atrocity because you are uncomfortable with this very watered down version of sex ed.
2007-07-20 14:58:53 · answer #5 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Just another crazy liberal idea to further erode the authority of parents over their children and corrupt our youth. He's not a wise man. Such a proposal would only come from one who thinks a parent is not fit to teach his own children about sexual matters. It should be summarily rejected by the American people.
And though some have argued to the contrary, it would not stop one child predator to inform a 5-year-old about "good touch, bad touch". If parents choose to do that, fine. It is not the schools job. NO WAY!
2007-07-20 15:08:44 · answer #6 · answered by fruitypebbles 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Sex ed for kindergarten is letting the children watch an egg hatch so they can see the beginning of life
They are not teaching sex as you are implying.
The comment from Obama has been misquoted and taken out of context (A usual republican trick).
2007-07-20 15:03:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
He meant (stated this later) that we need to teach kids that age about "good touches" and "bad touches". And in this day and age, when the largest group of victims of sexual abuse starts at age 5, we need to empower children to take ownership of their bodies, and stop the bs of "respect and do everything adults tell you to".
My daughter is 2, but you damn bet you when she hits the age where she can understand, she WILL know what a "good touch" is, and what a "bad touch" is, and that she has every right to say "No" to someone if they are touching her and she doesn't like it.
THAT is what he meant. So all of this is another "over reaction" complements of the boys and girls on the right.
2007-07-20 15:07:00 · answer #8 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm sorry but five year olds should not be taught about the birds and the bees and STD's. Ridiculous. It's going to take the innocence out of our children. These anti-conservatives are nuts! Of course it's government funded, that's all they believe in! This is why my kids are going to be going to private school so they are actually taught values, and morals instead of learning about their reproductive organs and how to get on welfare when they are in kindergarten.
2007-07-20 15:13:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I don't care if they're kinder or not, gardeners should not be getting govt funded sex ed!
Really, get a grip, will you?
2007-07-20 15:01:53 · answer #10 · answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋