If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WYFF)   You know your sex-ed curriculum might be out of date when, out of 490 female students in your high school, 65 of them are pregnant   (wyff4.com) divider line 326
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

21492 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Aug 2006 at 10:09 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



326 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2006-08-15 09:45:42 AM
"If we had math books from 1988, reading books from 1988, as a parent, I would be furious," said Patty Rafailedes, a physical education teacher.

I'm sure there have been amazing advances in the field of high school mathematics, Patty...
 
2006-08-15 09:49:11 AM
I'm sure there have been amazing advances in the field of high school mathematics, Patty...


I picked up on that too. I'm hoping she was referring to the condition of the books, not their content.
 
2006-08-15 09:56:13 AM
I blame it on the cervical cancer vacine. I bet they all got it and now thought it was ok to have sex. The little tramps.
 
2006-08-15 09:56:18 AM
How can today's kids get by on sex ed books from the 80s, obviously ignoring advances by Sanchez, Cleveland, Rudder, and Karl?
 
2006-08-15 09:58:28 AM
McRat: I'm sure there have been amazing advances in the field of high school mathematics, Patty...

binnster: I picked up on that too. I'm hoping she was referring to the condition of the books, not their content.

There have been quite a bit of advances in the cirriculum acctually. Teaching methods are constantly changed and better examples are used. Many of the newer texts also make use of a graphical calculator as a teaching tool. Highschool math reflects a jumping off point towards post secondary math and must reflect the mathmatics at that level as well.
 
2006-08-15 09:59:09 AM
My grandfather swore by the pull-out method. My aunt, three uncles, and father disagree.
 
2006-08-15 10:07:27 AM
binnster: I picked up on that too. I'm hoping she was referring to the condition of the books, not their content.

The content's actually changed a bit, too. Less of the "list of concepts and list of sample problems to solve" and a bit more of "here's how these concepts work, anyways".

So yeah, I'd be pissed off if any school books dated to '88. They ought to be updated every few years anyway, because of wear and tear, if nothing else.
 
2006-08-15 10:08:28 AM
Sex Ed books from the 80's?? Dear Lord, those kids aren't learning anything except:

--hold out for the perfect guy driving a red Porsche 944
--never masturbate in the pool house without locking the door
--never trust fat southern strip club owners
--accept challenges from the best skier on the mountain, since the quirky -- yet hot -- girl can teach you to be an Olympic pro overnight
--always pay your two dollars
--never take your dates to see Otis Day and the Knights at a juke joint
--posing as a male student to facilitate your journalism career can have unexpected romantic side-effects
--the name "Corey" is a career death sentence
 
2006-08-15 10:11:55 AM
ORRRRRRRR, you can say it's working very, very, well.

/No slut left behind.
 
2006-08-15 10:11:59 AM
Out of date is the only thing that will protect our precious teen vaginas, submitter! If we tell these kids that pleasure will cause their eyes to fall out then they'll never get pregnant.
 
2006-08-15 10:12:26 AM
Mr. Coffee Nerves

/winner
 
2006-08-15 10:12:45 AM
Mercy Medical Center had mothers between the ages of 11 and 19.

That's good quality parenting.
 
2006-08-15 10:12:57 AM
Eh, they live in Canton, it's not like there's anything better to do.
 
2006-08-15 10:13:19 AM
It's simple, really. Someone should just tell them to not have sex.
 
2006-08-15 10:14:41 AM
ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!
 
2006-08-15 10:14:46 AM
I'd suggest flying in planes to carpet the lawn of the school with leaflets about abortion.
 
2006-08-15 10:15:28 AM
So what do you call a woman who practices the rhythm method?

Mom!

/Oldie but goodie
//maybe not
 
2006-08-15 10:15:56 AM
According to the Canton Health Department, statistics through July 2005 showed that 104 of the 586 babies born to Canton residents in Aultman Hospital and Mercy Medical Center had mothers between the ages of 11 and 19.

That's almost one-fifth of the children born. And who the hell can even have a baby at eleven?? Too many hormones in the milk
in Ohio.
 
2006-08-15 10:16:39 AM
SilentMattCanuck: ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??

No, having given birth at age 11.

Pregnant, probably, by age 10.
 
2006-08-15 10:17:10 AM
img207.imageshack.us

Magua wants his two dollars.
 
2006-08-15 10:17:20 AM
How do they get these statistics? Are hospitals required to report teen pregnancies to the teenagers' schools?

And for the most part, I agree with Headcheese. Abstinence-based is best even from a scientific perspective, but there also needs to be discussion of the "morning-after pill" due to the sad fact that conceptions by force still occur in our society.
 
2006-08-15 10:17:29 AM
Egoy

There have been quite a bit of advances in the cirriculum acctually. Teaching methods are constantly changed and better examples are used. Many of the newer texts also make use of a graphical calculator as a teaching tool.

Graphical calculator? These kids nowdays dont have to use their brain at all any more! When I was in school the only caclulator we were permitted were the type you pull out. A slide rule!

/ see we had the pull out method back then!
// I wonder if anyone knows what a slide rule is?
/// get off my lawn!
 
2006-08-15 10:17:44 AM

came in to at the same thing the quiet canadian did.

According to the Canton Health Department, statistics through July 2005 showed that 104 of the 586 babies born to Canton residents in Aultman Hospital and Mercy Medical Center had mothers between the ages of 11 and 19.


They had a pregnant 11 year old? I hope someone also got shot in Canton..... several times... starting with his ankles... at 3 inch intervals.
 
2006-08-15 10:17:47 AM
Reading that headline, I could suddenly hear 'Little Britain's' Vicky Pollard character go on one of her rapid-fire defensive tangents, something like...

"Yeah but!No but!Yeah but!No but!It doesn't matter anyways cuz Amber said Trey did it but you can't believe a word she says cuz of of the hair dye, and Trey sez he dint do nuthin' cuz he wunt even in town at the time but that's a lie cuz I talked to Ashlee who talked to Kate and they both totally got done up by Trey, but Gordon sez Trey wuz gay so it don't matter.."
 
2006-08-15 10:17:56 AM
SilentMattCanuck

That's what I said. Everybody gave me those "who takes their daughter to an abortion clinic!?!?!?!?" looks.

I was like "Daughter? No, she's my girlfriend, she's getting some work done. We're gonna have a smiley-face pancake at IHOP afterward."
 
2006-08-15 10:18:57 AM
Egoy: There have been quite a bit of advances in the cirriculum acctually.

Like "New Math" ?

;)
 
2006-08-15 10:19:12 AM
Egoy and muninsfire,

Ok eggheads, she said reading books too, what great advances have been made in the field of reading since 1988?

/:P
 
2006-08-15 10:19:29 AM
portscanner: Graphical calculator? These kids nowdays dont have to use their brain at all any more! When I was in school the only caclulator we were permitted were the type you pull out. A slide rule!


If you think the graphical calculator removes the need for a brain.....nevermind I don't want to get into in this thread.
 
2006-08-15 10:19:49 AM
They had a pregnant 11 year old? I hope someone also got shot in Canton..... several times... starting with his ankles... at 3 inch intervals.

How do you know the dude wasn't 11 or 12 himself?
 
2006-08-15 10:20:17 AM
It must be all that rap music and those 13 year old in push-up bras and eyeshadow.

/from previous article
 
2006-08-15 10:21:02 AM
I grew up in Canton, and let me tell you... Timken High School is a shining example of a welfare program gone horribly wrong. Having babies is a full time paying job there.
 
2006-08-15 10:21:06 AM
Abstinence, like communism, works perfectly...in theory.
 
2006-08-15 10:21:28 AM
I can top that....

The high school where I teach, two health teachers (who both deal with sex ed in their curriculum) were prego when they walked down the aisle plus our "Life Management" teachers are all divorced!
 
2006-08-15 10:21:50 AM
Yaay! Another win for abstinence-only education!
 
2006-08-15 10:22:08 AM
Egoy

Ever been at the DMV? They had to use a calculator to subtract 1971 from 2004.

/ I do long division in my head faster than most people with a calculator
// get your calculator off my lawn!
 
2006-08-15 10:23:12 AM
Gosh, otto. Sounds like there's an awful lot of gossip going on at your school there!
 
2006-08-15 10:23:37 AM
This wouldn't happen if the kids' parents would stop them from matriculating so shamefully.
 
2006-08-15 10:23:48 AM
Before reading the article, I was wondering which red state this was from. Turns out it was Ohio.
 
2006-08-15 10:23:55 AM
NikolaiFarkoff

Bra-VO.
 
2006-08-15 10:23:56 AM
binnster: Ok eggheads, she said reading books too, what great advances have been made in the field of reading since 1988?

About 18 years' worth of new writing.
 
2006-08-15 10:24:00 AM
PunGent

Abstinence, like communism, works perfectly...in theory.

I only know of one person that got pregnant while abstinent.

/ if you fark, you are not abstinent
 
2006-08-15 10:24:17 AM
SlowTimedRapid


Umm...you are a moron.

You said:
"Abstinence-based is best even from a scientific perspective"


That is simply not true. What would be accurate would be to say "not having sex is best from a scientific perspective."
You see, abstinence based education does not stop people from having sex, but it does make them ignorant about how to have sex responsibly. Hence the fact taht 13% of those teenage girls in Ohio are knocked up.
People like you are the brains behind the runaway success of the Catholic anti condom drive in Africa, which with its preaching of abstinence has done wonders to halt the spread of aids.
 
2006-08-15 10:24:27 AM
serpent_sky

Everyone knows that the male is ALWAYS utterly guilty, even if they're just as incapable of making the decision. (I'm thinking of an incident at Brown where both people were drunk (that is not in dispute) and had sex, but the woman successfully got the school to discipline him.)
 
2006-08-15 10:24:53 AM
I would think a male teen living there would have great odds at having sex, so whats the problem?

/just kidding.
 
cv
2006-08-15 10:25:26 AM
They're going about this the wrong way. They need to ban music with sexy lyrics. That's what's causing all the pregnancies.

At least that's what I read on the Intar-web.
 
2006-08-15 10:25:54 AM
bkennedy: I was like "Daughter? No, she's my girlfriend, she's getting some work done. We're gonna have a smiley-face pancake at IHOP afterward."

Smiley-face pancakes are an abortifacient, IIRC.
 
2006-08-15 10:26:03 AM
portscanner: PunGent

Abstinence, like communism, works perfectly...in theory.

I only know of one person that got pregnant while abstinent.

/ if you fark, you are not abstinent


Yeah, umm...it's possible to not have teh sausage go into the biscuit, but still get a bit of gravy nearby, which has actually resulted in another bun in the oven before.
 
2006-08-15 10:26:03 AM
SilentMattCanuck:ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!


Yeppers. Girl I work w/ is 30 and has a 17 year old. On the good side she realizes it was a mistake, and her daughter hasn't made the same one yet.

/loves her kid, but come on who wants a 3 year old @ 15.
 
2006-08-15 10:26:14 AM
My niece (15 y.o.) gets to use calculators in her math class.

She is stupid as hell.

I asked her what 10 times 2 was and she said "5." I am not lying or exaggerating. Then she whined and said she could answer if she had a calculator, and that she can use one in math class anyway.

Not saying using a calculator isn't value-added, but I did fine using my sheer brain-power alone for any math until 11th grade. WTF???

/get off my lawn!
//threadjack, sorry...
 
2006-08-15 10:26:31 AM
bringing the city school district's health curriculum in line with national standards.

Isn't it sad when school boards have to strive to meet the minimum stands?
 
2006-08-15 10:27:43 AM
muninsfire

Coffee, meet keyboard. Keyboard, meet coffee.
 
2006-08-15 10:27:49 AM
binnster

Harry Potter!
 
2006-08-15 10:28:34 AM
65 future criminals, dirtbags, and white trash. Yay.

PRO-Abortion 2006. Shouldn't even be a choice for these women.
 
2006-08-15 10:28:46 AM
img227.imageshack.us

I'd impregnate it!
 
2006-08-15 10:29:30 AM
Yuck Fou!: My niece (15 y.o.) gets to use calculators in her math class.

She is stupid as hell.

I asked her what 10 times 2 was and she said "5." I am not lying or exaggerating. Then she whined and said she could answer if she had a calculator, and that she can use one in math class anyway.


So when she says she's only gone to 2nd base with a boy, what do you suppose she really means?
 
2006-08-15 10:29:59 AM
SilentMattCanuck: ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!



Pregnant at Four
 
2006-08-15 10:30:20 AM
I'm not clear from the article, but it sounds like the previous curriculum emphasized abstinence, and the new curriculum will emphasize abstinence along with safe-sex education that actually works.

Way to go, Christian fundamentalists.
 
2006-08-15 10:30:24 AM
Thinking abstinence is a workable solution amongst teens is denying reality.
 
2006-08-15 10:30:35 AM
ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!

Yeppers. Girl I work w/ is 30 and has a 17 year old. On the good side she realizes it was a mistake, and her daughter hasn't made the same one yet.

/loves her kid, but come on who wants a 3 year old @ 15.


Your math confuses and frightens me. 30-17=13. If she got pregnant at 12, that still wouldn't be 11.

But, yes, my cousin started her period at 9, so technically, she could have gotten pregnant then.
 
2006-08-15 10:31:10 AM
Now we know where Bill Clinton is teaching.
 
2006-08-15 10:31:15 AM
vygramul:
Everyone knows that the male is ALWAYS utterly guilty, even if they're just as incapable of making the decision. (I'm thinking of an incident at Brown where both people were drunk (that is not in dispute) and had sex, but the woman successfully got the school to discipline him.)

Discipline him for what? For his poor choice in warm spot for his dick for the night? I can't stand whiney women like that.

I also hate how men are always pointed at. I mean, because an 11-year-old was knocked up, some guy should have been shot? When there is no other information whatsoever? Maybe the guy was 10, for all we know, and she pushed him for sex. We know nothing more than a really young kid had a kid.

Uninformed male-bashing, in the guise of "protecting" females is out of control.
 
2006-08-15 10:31:23 AM
maybe they all just want babies. is that so wrong?!?!
 
2006-08-15 10:31:30 AM
I'm not too far removed from the public school system (I'm 25), but there seemed to be a lot of calculator-ing going on in the lower level math classes. I was in accelerated math programs all the way through middle and high school (2 years of calculus... good times) and we got to use the graphing calculators... but only in class to see examples of area under the curve, etc. I knew kids in the general curriculum classes who couldn't do anything simple without a calculator. I'm not sure if it's laziness on the part of the teachers or what. I guess it's all part of the need for instant gratification so prevalent in society.

Although, I'll admit. I'd rather the dude at the DMV have a calculator at his disposal than have to sit there while he figures out how to carry the 1.

/has a math degree
//cannot stand people who think math isn't important
 
2006-08-15 10:32:06 AM
portscanner: Ever been at the DMV? They had to use a calculator to subtract 1971 from 2004.

/ I do long division in my head faster than most people with a calculator


*sigh* can you solve differential equations with complex terms in your head? I can, but I don't. I really didn't want to get into this, but I will if you insist. I was top of my class in first year Calculus in university. we are talking a 99 on the final and a final grade of 96% Doing long devision is not what the calculator is used for. In fact you do not need a graphical anything to preform long devision.

Allowing students to see functions and derivatives and integrals as they interact with changes they are making is probably the best tool going. Sure I can sketch functions, but why? I'm not doing math to become some sort of computer I'm doing it to solve a problem.
 
2006-08-15 10:33:33 AM
This isn't flamey enough, and I have to go to work soon. So here:

This is the fault of all the conservatives who think that by not teaching kids about sex, they'll never figure out how it works, and voila, stay virgins until marriage.

I also assume that these people were never teenagers with raging hormones, or else they would know better.
 
2006-08-15 10:34:52 AM
BrotherTheodore

She has a gay boyfriend. Literally. Or at least, a guy we are all convinced is gay and she is infatuated with him so we are certain they will be farking soon, if not already. We believe this because A)He is confused and wants to see if he really is gay; and B)she is weak-minded, obsessed, and will do anything he says.

So 2nd base isn't my fear - it's the home run. We have begged our mother-in-law to get her on BCP's, STAT.
 
2006-08-15 10:35:29 AM
 
2006-08-15 10:36:04 AM
Unless the books are saying that the Baby Jesus pilots a stork and drops the kids off in a basket, the books aren't out of date. It's the fact that none of them nor their parents care. farking leads to babies, that isn't exactly new knowledge. Parents have to spend 20 minutes to explain how this shiat works, it isn't that hard.
 
2006-08-15 10:36:34 AM
Always use condiments when you masticate...

Yuck Fou
What math classes did you take in 9th and 10th?
 
2006-08-15 10:37:47 AM
GavinTheAlmighty: Parents have to spend 20 minutes to explain how this shiat works, it isn't that hard.

Wait, have the parents take responsibility?

You TERRORIST!
 
2006-08-15 10:38:09 AM
I went to a Catholic HS in Ohio, and we were taught "sex ed" in Religion class, senior year. It consisted of the teacher telling us that the pope did not approve of premarital sex, or of any type of contraceptive device. So he ended up telling us about his own wife's rhythm method, and how she would chart her temperature, and then they would have sex when it was the right time of month. One word for that: Eeeeeewwwww. Seriously, in school I learned more about sex in 5th grade at the public elementary than I did in 4 years of HS.

/recovering Catholic
 
2006-08-15 10:39:13 AM
a)Birth control
b)Keep legs closed

Pick one. It isn't that complicated.
 
2006-08-15 10:39:19 AM
I have a friend in the medical field, and he's seen ultrasounds done for girls as young as 8. Because they're pregnant. It's freakin' sad.
 
2006-08-15 10:40:36 AM
I love it! "Christian fundamentalists impregnated my daughter, because everyone knows it's the government's responsibility to keep my daughter from getting pregnant!"
Straw man applauds.
 
2006-08-15 10:40:59 AM
6655321

Still chasing the magic clenis? How sad.
 
2006-08-15 10:42:39 AM
Oops! Sorry!
 
2006-08-15 10:43:00 AM
R.A.Danny: Like "New Math" ?

I regularly use a math that was developed only about 20 years ago. We often refer to it as a "new math", because that's really what it is. There are still mathematicians trying to figure out some aspects of this "new math".

I doubt it would be taught in high school, but it has been an important advancement for many different fields of study in the sciences. It would be of educational interest to teach high school kids some of the precursors that are involved in this "new math", so that when they go to college - where it is being taught - they will understand it better.
 
2006-08-15 10:43:24 AM
Isn't there supposed to be an obligatory Fb.? reference in the headline?

/might not have the farker's handle right
//he was before my time here, but I've seen it used
 
2006-08-15 10:43:37 AM
Some people can't do math; had I been allowed a calculator in high school, I may have learned more.

I'm fine with memorizing facts, reading comprehension, writing, languages, but I am borderline retarded when it comes to math and science. I need a calculator to do the most basic of math, or I will get it wrong. Better to have kids learn some practical theory and the way to get by -- taking their limitations into account -- than acting like everyone can learn on the same level.

A lot of the problem, too, is not dividing classes based on skill level. I should have been in the most basic of math classes, so I could learn on my own level and not hold others back [or get lost] and I should have been in the most advanced English classes, so I would not be bored by those who could not read quickly or well.

/780 verbal on SATs; 320 on math [after 3 tries.]
 
2006-08-15 10:43:52 AM
Math sucks, what has it ever done for me? Only math my bank account works with is subtraction.
 
2006-08-15 10:44:39 AM
Psycho Doughboy

9th - Algebra
10th - Geometry
summer btw 10th and 11th - Algebra II
11th - Math Analysis
12th - Calculus

Why?
 
2006-08-15 10:45:24 AM
muninsfire
Yeah, umm...it's possible to not have teh sausage go into the biscuit, but still get a bit of gravy nearby, which has actually resulted in another bun in the oven before.

This is classic and I will now use it forever.

That being said, and it's been said here by others, abstinence education does not work by itself, people(read kids) will do things that stretch the standards of society and this includes sex.

If we, as a society, give a better 'sex' education that includes abstinence and use of condoms or other birth control methods among other things, our children will at the very least have the tools and knowledge they need to make an informed decision.

I mean I don't want my daughter, who is 13 btw, to have sex until she is in a committed, monogamous relationship but if she does I would at least like her to be safe about it and use a condom. If nothing else other than to prevent disease or pregnancy.

I mean sex feels good, and I enjoy and partake as much as possible, and not being in a relationship at this time it would be stupid of me to come home one night with the news that I got some chick whose name I don't even know pregnant.

More knowledge about sex != automatic whoredom as so many people in this country profess.
 
2006-08-15 10:46:11 AM
So abstinence-only education isn't the answer, eh?

Who knew?
 
2006-08-15 10:46:23 AM
Everybody can do math. It's the teaching method that screws most people up.
 
2006-08-15 10:46:58 AM
Ohio tag needed.
 
2006-08-15 10:49:28 AM
McRat: reading books

as opposed to picture books?
 
2006-08-15 10:51:08 AM
serpent_sky: Some people can't do math; had I been allowed a calculator in high school, I may have learned more.

You weren't allowed a calculator? We weren't allowed a specific kind of calcuator (I think TI-85 and higher) because of their ability to be programmed to perform difficult equations. I understood the logic, meaning that idiots could get a smart kid to program their calculator so they answer questions they didn't really understand. But realistically if you can program the calculator, when is your employer ever going to say I want this done, error free, without the use of technology. Stupid teachers.
 
2006-08-15 10:51:51 AM
Ah, a little googling reveals the handle to be -Fb. My bad.

Man, that abstinence thing is really working out well for them in Canton.
 
2006-08-15 10:52:09 AM
serpent_sky: I'd suggest flying in planes to carpet the lawn of the school with leaflets about abortion.

leaflets with coat hangers attached.

/i'll have the chicken
 
2006-08-15 10:52:15 AM
And who the hell can even have a baby at eleven?

The school where my wife works has second graders who are fully aware of sex and the, er, mechanics involved. Some fourth graders are sexually active. In addition a fourth grader was gang raped by a group of fifth graders.

Get's better, she teaches in a very poor school. The culture is one that condones young girls finding older "men" because the family figures she's found herself a decent provider. The result is that child molestation cases are pretty common.
 
2006-08-15 10:52:32 AM
I blame rap music.
 
2006-08-15 10:53:13 AM
muninsfire

Terrorist?

*BOOM* headbutt!

www.zidanehead.com
 
2006-08-15 10:53:51 AM
 
2006-08-15 10:53:56 AM
I had to sub for a math class during a planning bell once, when their teacher suddenly took ill. She left them multiple-choices problems to review for a Standards of Learning test. One question asked for the square root of 30. The stuedents immediately pulled out their calculators and began whacking away.

I told them to stop and look at the answers. One was five, one six, one between those, and one outside them. The problem was fairly obviously set up to see if they could realize that thirty lies between twenty-five and thirty-six, the squares of five and six. For one knowing one's squares, the problem was soluable at the first blink.

These students had never learned their squares. Their teacher simply had them using the calculator for everything. They'd have saved time on their test, were this a real test, by knowing mathematics instead of leaning how to punch buttons.
 
2006-08-15 10:54:17 AM
SilentMattCanuck: ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!


The youngest recorded pregnancy is something like 7 years old.

And yes, ew.
 
2006-08-15 10:54:20 AM
plong
I went to a Catholic HS in Ohio, and we were taught "sex ed" in Religion class, senior year. It consisted of the teacher telling us that the pope did not approve of premarital sex, or of any type of contraceptive device. So he ended up telling us about his own wife's rhythm method, and how she would chart her temperature, and then they would have sex when it was the right time of month.

I hear you. I also went to Catholic HS in Ohio. As did my brother.

And I've got two nieces and a nephew who'll tell you that the rhythm method doesn't work.
 
2006-08-15 10:54:39 AM
Yuck Fou!: So 2nd base isn't my fear - it's the home run. We have begged our mother-in-law to get her on BCP's, STAT.

Sure, but given her 'trouble' with math, it's possible she has the base numbers mixed up a bit?

"A Home Run! No way is he getting to FIRST! Second base is my limit!"
 
2006-08-15 10:54:45 AM
Gee, you'd think that they were using the Sex Ed guidelines of the Bush administration with numbers like that... no surprise it's a red state...



/Condoms, folks... if you're gonna fark, use condoms...
 
2006-08-15 10:55:24 AM
LaRoach: The school where my wife works has second graders who are fully aware of sex and the, er, mechanics involved. Some fourth graders are sexually active. In addition a fourth grader was gang raped by a group of fifth graders.

Get's better, she teaches in a very poor school. The culture is one that condones young girls finding older "men" because the family figures she's found herself a decent provider. The result is that child molestation cases are pretty common.


......that's one farked up school system, dude.

/I didn't know of anyone who was sexually active until 7th grade.
//Always made me wonder why THAT kid was gettin' it on.
 
2006-08-15 10:55:38 AM
plong:
I also went to Catholic HS in Ohio, and can definitely relate. We were taught only 1) abstinence, and 2) the rhythm method...by a nun. We were also taught fornicating is eeeevvvillll, and that girls who had abortions & didn't repent would go to hell (with their babies going to Limbo). Even more ironic was that the girls who did get pregnant & decided to have/keep their babies were either kicked out of school or treated as lepers by the nuns. The ultimate irony? Girls who magically became "unpregnant" were a-okay with the school admin.

/another recovering Catholic
//likes Taoism a lot better
 
2006-08-15 10:55:50 AM
Must be that good old fashioned turtle syndrome. Roll 'em on their backs and they can't get up.
 
2006-08-15 10:55:51 AM
I was unaware the women of Ohio had sex with men.
i92.photobucket.com
I thought they were all ugly bull-lesbians.
 
2006-08-15 10:55:58 AM
Oh, and portscanner: I see your slide-rule and raise you an abacus. Only we weren't allowed to use them. I was busted for "cheating" for pulling an abacus out during a test in geometry class, since I didn't feel like multiplying numbers out on paper.
 
2006-08-15 10:56:30 AM
The Rev. David Morgan served on a committee that developed the lesson plans. He said the new curriculum moves beyond the "Just Say No" approach.

Why do these fundies try and screw up society for the rest of us???
 
2006-08-15 10:56:41 AM
BrotherTheodore

Ha ha ha. True, true.
 
2006-08-15 10:57:25 AM
StandsWithAFist: /another recovering Catholic
//likes Taoism a lot better


We should start a club or something.
 
2006-08-15 10:59:18 AM
It's a Liberal conspiracy for sure. What we need is an abstinence only policy. It's the only way.
 
2006-08-15 11:00:49 AM
I went to a Catholic highschool and we had to wear uniforms. They had maternity kilts. I shiat you not.
 
2006-08-15 11:01:51 AM
You weren't allowed a calculator?

No, and it was silly, because like I said, I didn't learn much, and use a calculator for even the most simple math now.

I also went to Catholic school, and was taught NOTHING about sex, other than, as others have said, abstinence and the rhythm method. Lucky for me, my boyfriend at the time had an older and wiser cousin, who gave him a box of condoms and told him what to do after we were together for almost a year and decided to go forth into the world of sex.
 
2006-08-15 11:04:26 AM
mesmer242: I have a friend in the medical field, and he's seen ultrasounds done for girls as young as 8. Because they're pregnant. It's freakin' sad.

What's so sad about it? We're talking about a woman reproducing. It's not a funeral.
 
2006-08-15 11:05:16 AM
RyoShin: The youngest recorded pregnancy is something like 7 years old.


Actually it's 4 (see my earlier post)
 
2006-08-15 11:05:46 AM
muninsfire that's one farked up school system, dude.

/I didn't know of anyone who was sexually active until 7th grade.
//Always made me wonder why THAT kid was gettin' it on.


No doubt! Back in "the day" (the eighties, oh god I'm getting old!) if someone was having sex in junior high it was always a huge deal! We couldn't decide if they were the coolest thing out there or a freak of nature.
 
2006-08-15 11:05:53 AM
Because the way my high school is set up you take some extremely hard math classes in 10th grade. We were required to take geometry/algebra in 8th.
 
2006-08-15 11:05:59 AM
What's so hard to remember? Just hold your breath!
 
2006-08-15 11:06:25 AM
5 year old preggers from Peru in 1939.

//She is from Pisco, Peru.
///Pisco is an inexpensive distilled wine (brandy).
////Drank way to much Pisco while living in Chile near border of Peru.
 
2006-08-15 11:06:45 AM
Call me crazy, but I assumed that if I ejaculated inside a girl, she was going to get pregnant. I figured it was the rule, not the exception.

Trojans are your friend. Use them all the time. Don't be a 16 year old daddy. It really screws up your life. In fact, don't become a parent until you are ready to give up sex all together. Because after the kids arrive, your hot "wife" becomes a hot "mommy" and not your hot 'sex-toy' anymore.

Somebody put these hussies on the pill. Forced contriception or sterilization i say.
 
2006-08-15 11:07:20 AM
I find it ironical that their mascot is the Trojan.

http://www.cantontimkentrojans.com/
 
2006-08-15 11:08:11 AM
What kind of idiotic parent lets the schools be the only form of sexual education for their kids? The real issue here is parents not taking responsibility. You can't let an institution raise your kids or trust that they will get everything they need to out of school.

I have already discussed sex with my 10 year old. I knew it was time when she started saying she got a 'tingly' feeling when she saw a certain boy in class.

/ strong advocate of toys before boys.
// they last longer that 30 seconds.
 
2006-08-15 11:09:48 AM
Psycho Dooughboy

Ah, I see. Well I assure you, my niece isn't in an advanced math program, and I am pretty sure she hasn't had Geometry yet and is going into 10th grade. I don't think she is taking Geometry in 10th grade either.
 
2006-08-15 11:09:53 AM
Bludrose: What kind of idiotic parent lets the schools be the only form of sexual education for their kids?

The same kind of parent that's let the school system essentially raise their kid since kindergarten, because either both mommy and daddy have full-time jobs to try to support a family or they just don't care about the kids.
 
2006-08-15 11:12:15 AM
Bludrose

Yeah, it is the parents responsibility, but the case for sex ed in schools is that, like it or not, there are a lot of sucky parents out there, and when they screw up, society has to pay for their mistakes. It's cheaper in the long run to teach junior how to use a condom than it is to pay for the costs associated with his accidental kid. Sex ed is pragmatic. Abstinence-based sex ed, or expecting the parents to take care of it, is based on a rosy idealism that just plain doesn't work.
 
2006-08-15 11:13:26 AM
EVERY SPERM IS SACRED!

/Had to be said.
//Is abstinent.
///Would rather not be. :-(
 
2006-08-15 11:13:46 AM
Does this headline surprise anyone at all? I mean coming from a state that put down their cheese puffs, stopped watching American Idol, got out of their lazy-boys to rush down to the polls to make sure gays couldn't marry but has an adolescent pregnancy rate like this just makes my head feel like exploding.
 
2006-08-15 11:14:48 AM
There were 490 female students at Timken High School in 2005, and 65 were pregnant,

65 of them... that I know of.
 
2006-08-15 11:15:27 AM
cv
They're going about this the wrong way. They need to ban music with sexy lyrics. That's what's causing all the pregnancies.

At least that's what I read on the Intar-web.


Yeah, but they'll still be able to download sexy song lyrics from the intra-web.

Maybe we should get the internets' tubes tied.
 
2006-08-15 11:15:47 AM
Sex doesn't always = pregnancy so I would assume more than 13% of these girls were having sex. Let's assume as high as 65%. In some schools a 65 is technically passing so it appears their sex education progam is working nicely.
 
2006-08-15 11:16:44 AM
muninsfire

It's quite possible for two parents to work full time and still have time for their kids. Not saying that plenty of people don't use that as an excuse. When people care about their kids, they'll make sure they learn what they need to learn, regardless of their work schedule.

Not that you were implying working parents = bad parents. :)
 
2006-08-15 11:16:56 AM
cpux:

EVERY SPERM IS SACRED!


Even Wooly Mammoth Sperm! What about those snowflakes...
 
2006-08-15 11:17:46 AM
And the kicker is it's probably a pro-life state to boot.
Have fun raising your kid's kids gramma and grampa!
Ha! Ha!
 
2006-08-15 11:18:37 AM
tiiger

mediarebellion.com

Penn and Teller's Bullshiat on Abstinence (Clicky)


"fark you in the neck!"

/awesome link
 
2006-08-15 11:18:49 AM
"Sex is more complex than the information about drugs and alcohol," said Bill Albert.

should have been:

"Sex is more complex than the MISinformation about drugs and alcohol," said Fat Albert.
 
2006-08-15 11:19:11 AM
Sex doesn't always = pregnancy so I would assume more than 13% of these girls were having sex. Let's assume as high as 65%. In some schools a 65 is technically passing so it appears their sex education progam is working nicely.

Wouldn't they get a 35% then? Or maybe an 80% because 80% of the sexually active ones aren't pregnant. Or 87%.
 
2006-08-15 11:20:09 AM
In my HS, sex ed was part of health classes, in which we also were taught how to clip our fingernails properly.

'Cause chicks don't dig dirty fingernails.
 
2006-08-15 11:21:17 AM
Stacked Librarian: Not that you were implying working parents = bad parents. :)

Nah.

But some parents who would otherwise, if one were staying home to raise the kids, take a bit more time to explain things, would not do so on account of the fact that both are working.

If that makes any sense.
 
2006-08-15 11:22:08 AM
So I'm getting nostalgia for high school reading this. One in five chicks at my school got preggers during the time I was there.

/and they were all fat and busted
 
2006-08-15 11:25:15 AM
www.firstpregnancy.com

Leggo of my preggo!
 
2006-08-15 11:27:03 AM
I blame home schooling!
 
2006-08-15 11:27:59 AM
While I agree that abstinence based education is ineffective at best, we should consider that the school district in question is seriously farked. Seriously.

I know a couple of HS teachers who tell us that in a lot of schools like that, babies have become near status symbols. Kids want babies, they want to have them, they want to have the attention and treatment they get when they have them, as well as when they're about to have them.

My guess is that though safe-sex education will help a little bit, nothing will help as much as changing the mindset of kids who WANT to have babies.

How do you do that? Beats me. I wish I knew. I really do.
 
2006-08-15 11:29:43 AM
had to take health class freshman year of HS, and living in MA it covered all the bases. the teacher (a really cute 20-something year old woman no less, aaawweeesoooommmeee) showed us how to use a variety of contraceptives like condoms, jellies, IUD, diaphragm, etc. we also learned all about STI's and stuff too.

nobody i know of went out and had sex because of the info we learned in that class. but i guess knowledge is a very scary and very dangerous thing, to certain people in certain circles.
 
2006-08-15 11:29:49 AM
tick1111

you owe me a new keyboard
 
2006-08-15 11:30:24 AM
muninsfire

Nah.

But some parents who would otherwise, if one were staying home to raise the kids, take a bit more time to explain things, would not do so on account of the fact that both are working.

If that makes any sense.


I know you aren't implying that all working parents are bad but I know too many stay at home mom's who don't give a fark about their kids and let the schools to all the work too.

My husband and I both work but always have time to talk and spend quality time with our girls.

I know it is really idealogical but if parents would start acting like parents and not as friends or try to be cool there would be less problems with society as a whole.
 
2006-08-15 11:32:26 AM
Maybe you're a good parent but the underlying issue is your daughter is a cum dumpster.
 
2006-08-15 11:32:55 AM
these asswipes simply forgot that you LEARN things at school. like things about sex that we all should know. like how to get preggers, and how NOT to get preggers.

Maybe we should try that?

then watch what happens to the pregnancy rate.
 
2006-08-15 11:34:56 AM
stiletto_the_wise I really hope you're trolling.

And if you're not trolling, exactly how well, physically and emotionally, do you think a 8 year old can handle having a child? 8 year olds are not women, and should not be pregnant. It is sad and wrong.
 
2006-08-15 11:35:20 AM
Bludrose: I know you aren't implying that all working parents are bad but I know too many stay at home mom's who don't give a fark about their kids and let the schools to all the work too.

Oh, definitely. You couldn't pay me enough to be a teacher these days, what with the quality of 'home life'....

My husband and I both work but always have time to talk and spend quality time with our girls.

Good fer you. Many people don't--they're 'too tired' after work or whatever.

I know it is really idealogical but if parents would start acting like parents and not as friends or try to be cool there would be less problems with society as a whole.

Be nice. Probably won't ever happen again.

/Cynical.
//Haven't had enough coffee yet.
 
2006-08-15 11:35:21 AM
I have to agree with Bludrose. You are completely correct the number one problem is that parents want to be friends with their kids.

If people would realize that kids aren't your equal but are infact a bunch of dumbasses running around doing some of the stupidest shiat ever then maybe shiat would be getting better.

/First fark post.
//Love the slashies.
///Not that old.
 
2006-08-15 11:43:14 AM
Electrify

You asked a good question: Why do some Christians, perhaps even the majority in the USA, end up in such ridiculous predicaments as being afraid to teach about sex at all? If you are curious, read on...

Out of the Reformation came the reclaiming of the Christian doctrine of focusing on Christ and His work rather than the individual's subjective feeling about their salvation or relation to God. A return to a medieval mysticism, Pentecostalism, and much of modern American Evangelicalism has run full steam back into the arms of a subjective experience about God.

If our relationship to God is dependent upon me measuring myself to the perfection of Christ every day one of two things will happen: I'll either become a pietist and really think I'm pulling it off (these are the Christians that non-believers can't stand, the proverbial hypocrites) or I'll become a skeptic and stop going to church at all (or perhaps picking a different mystical religion that I feel I can accomplish).

The churches that promote this kind of doctrine end up legalistic and are also the most licentious. The two go hand it hand, and you can see it most clearly in modern times with the fall of televangelists. In history it was the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church. The common "bible only" church that follows this doctrine will make the mistake of not talking about sex at all, because they want to stop their kids from sinning. They may even go so far as to make them sign celibacy pledges or such. Note the focus, the focus isn't on salvation through Christ and His atonement for our sins, but on the believer. The more the focus is on the believer, the worse it gets. The Christians become schizophrenic not knowing whether they have ever done enough or are good enough.

Christianity is then sold as a "fix" for sin. How many of you still reading this went to a church when you were younger that told you Christianity would help you stop being bad, and then realized that you probably weren't' any better, and couldn't keep up with all of the rules regardless? One can't talk about it in the church either, because in pietism admittance to struggling with sin is a sign of failure. So what do one do? The most common thing is to leave the church forever and become a non-believer.

The sign of success in these churches is the defeat of sin in ones life through proper moral teaching and better technique. This is impossible, and will destroy a person, as they have to jump through more and more hoops every day to "feel saved" and "experience Christ." Christianity is not turning vice into virtue; it is the turning of virtue in grace.

Whenever the focus of a church is on the individual's personal experience about Christ and not on Christ Himself, the person in the pew is hurt. Christianity is about Christ's finished work on the cross that saves people. No sin, even sexual sin, is beyond the power of the atonement. Sin is a terrible thing, but Christ's death and resurrection is more powerful still.
 
2006-08-15 11:43:43 AM
As far as the kids wanting to get pregnant for attention, I'd definitely buy that.

Kids do all sorts of destructive shiat to get their parents' (and teachers' and peers') attention. I suppose something like this would get them ALL kinds of attention.

I remember they showed us the video of the woman giving birth. That was enough to make me be careful. What was ridiculous was that our parents had to sign a note giving permission to let us watch the video. Methinks it would have made more sense to make the parents sign a form if they wanted their child NOT to see the video. That way, the ones with negligent parents (who probably need to see it more) aren't the ones left out.
 
2006-08-15 11:43:55 AM
The real problem is not that people are expressing their sexuality at a young age. The problem is parents allow their children to be children far too long. They don't expect them to emotionally mature, don't treat them anything like it, all in the name of not taking childhood away from our babies or some krap like that. So when the age comes that they sexually mature, their heads aren't anywhere near being ready to handle the repercussions of the actions. This issue I have to put nearly complete blame on the parents. These ill trained animals are just acting on what their bodies are starting to feel. And man, do the girls get the curves.
 
2006-08-15 11:46:45 AM
TFA: According to the Canton Health Department, statistics through July 2005 showed that 104 of the 586 babies born to Canton residents in Aultman Hospital and Mercy Medical Center had mothers between the ages of 11 and 19.

What a waste of perfectly good stem cells.
 
2006-08-15 11:47:37 AM
SlowTimedRapid
How do they get these statistics? Are hospitals required to report teen pregnancies to the teenagers' schools?

Maybe they, oh I don't know, count the pregnant chicks?
 
2006-08-15 11:48:00 AM
Mr. Coffee Nerves: --never take your dates to see Otis Day and the Knights at a juke joint

Technicality: the events depicted occurred in the 1960s and the movie was first released in the late '70s.
 
2006-08-15 11:48:35 AM
mesmer242: And if you're not trolling, exactly how well, physically and emotionally, do you think a 8 year old can handle having a child? 8 year olds are not women, and should not be pregnant. It is sad and wrong.

Biologically, an adult of a species is one capable of bearing offspring. Despite what religious fundies would have us believe, puberty happens long before age 18. If you are capable of getting pregnant, you're physically capable of having a child. Nobody shoved the embryo up there before the plumbing was ready.

Incidentally, I believe studies (do a few searches if you're curious) suggest that women are more fertile and have healthier babies the closer they are to puberty.

Now, are teenagers FINANCIALLY equipped to raise a baby? Probably not, but that's what extended families are for. My point is, there's nothing sad about natural human reproduction.
 
2006-08-15 11:48:41 AM
My almost 19 and almost 23 year old girls are still flat bellied.

And the oldest is married, so I guess we did OK on that score.

On Calculators.

My 15 yo boy has learning issues. Special Ed. But he can do simple algebra and some harder math. A calculator just takes away the drudgery for him. Allows him to spend more time actually thinking about the problems instead of tedious math.

My 14 yo is genius. His problem in math is that he refuses to show his work. According to him, how can he show work he never does? He looks at the problem and knows the answer. So how can he show that?
 
2006-08-15 11:50:07 AM
UWOP! aisle seat...
 
2006-08-15 11:52:17 AM
pics?
 
2006-08-15 11:59:15 AM
Blues_Fan

And I think that's a good use for calculators. I'm betting your son COULD do the computations he's plugging in if he had to. The issue is the kids who are pretty much handed calculators in elementary school and never learn how to do the computations themselves.

It is silly to make kids do computations in their heads when they aren't the main focus of the problem. I could use a calculator in calculus when I was doing definite integrals and other things where computing the final number wasn't really the point of the problem.

If you ask my sister in law (who is 20 years old) the square root of 25 or the remainder if you divide 7 into 15, she'll actually sit there and GUESS rather than think or write it out.
 
2006-08-15 12:01:06 PM
Like "New Math" ?

For the most part, "new math" may refer to various things but as I have known it, it relies more on problem solving.

Despite what some people in this thread say (so obviously it varies), I got nothing out of memorizing multiplication tables.

The theories of "new math" teaches you how to do the math and why you'd do it. Then it teaches you to use a calculator when necessary.

I knew kids who could do 3-digit by 3-digit multiplication problems in mere seconds. So freakin what? But you ask them how many pieces of wood are needed if 348 people each need 138 pieces of wood (don't ask why) and they don't even know where to begin.

It amazes me when people pull out calculators to figure out tips, for instance. I don't need to do multiplication because I know that 10% plus half of 10% tip equals a 15% tip (then I can add some for good measure). Yet people either use a calculator or do hand-multiplication. Or rely on a card.

So I'm all for "new math." Parents sometimes complain about kids having to solve train problems or word problems. Those parents enjoy stupid children. Application of math is what 99% of people are going to use; those who go into math theory are good in math anyway.

I could make the same rant about college stats. I've taken stats with two different professors (but the same basic class at two different universities). One taught us how to hand calculate. The other said, "Here is the formula and why it works, now let's use a computer." Ask me to do a stat by hand and I'll laugh at you. But I covered so many more different tests; and when to use them in the latter class that the one class probably equals four or five hand-calculation classes.
 
2006-08-15 12:02:54 PM
As ridiculous as their sex-ed program is (or was), the education (or lack of) not really the issue. When I was in high school, it was socially unacceptable to get pregnant and have a kid. Nowadays, it's actually "cool" to get knocked up. By the time my sister graduated high school in 1993 (four years after me) there was no longer any stigma associated with teenage pregnancy.
I find it hard to believe that the 65 girls at Timken were unaware of how babies were made... it's more likely that they were either unconcerned with getting pregnant or actually wanted to have a baby. For those of you unfamiliar with the Akron/Canton area of Ohio, Timken is a poor high school in an economically depressed city. For kids from poor homes, having a kid is actually a step up for them financially since they can begin to collect welfare for themselves. Go welfare!
 
2006-08-15 12:04:03 PM
psh, amateurs... when I was a senior, the freshman class had about 39 girls pregnant at once... thats outa a class of about 200
 
2006-08-15 12:04:08 PM
Ok eggheads, she said reading books too, what great advances have been made in the field of reading since 1988?

If you follow the Bush plan....NONE.
 
2006-08-15 12:04:46 PM
Blues Fan

My 15 yo boy has learning issues. Special Ed. But he can do simple algebra and some harder math. A calculator just takes away the drudgery for him. Allows him to spend more time actually thinking about the problems instead of tedious math.

We used some calculators in math class but this was during trig and calculus. They were never a crutch, more of a tool. We'd be given an equation, asked where the zeros where, where the positives were, any undefined points, etc, etc. Then we'd be asked to graph. We'd change things in the equation and saw how the graph changed. It was an awesome tool. Honestly.

To that extent, I wholeheartedly agree with the use of calculators in your son's school.

The problem arises that most of your everyday math is not calculus, trigonometry, or even algebra. It's basic arithmetic. So while calculators have allowed your son to study more conceptual math, the practical aspect of it will always require a crutch for him. That's not exactly a good thing either.

Perhaps math should be treated as two subjects. One is the everyday stuff, the other is the applied or conceptual stuff. Yeah, it's great to solve a differential equation or understand what an eigenvalue is (don't ask, it's been a long time for me), but mostly these days I just add up the items on the grocery list in my head or calculate what those pants will cost me after I take off that 25% discount. Most people don't have a calculator handy for that, and neither will your son. Methinks that though he gets great benefit from using a calculator in trig next year, he should also be drilled separately on arithmetic which he will need for every day use.

/see both sides of the issue
//calculators are irrelevant. teachers make the difference and should know if a child will make it both in higher level classes as well as the supermarket.
///my 0.02 dollars.
 
2006-08-15 12:07:09 PM
I really don't understand why the problem has anything to do with the school. Teh secks is not rocket surgery. What the hell do you need a text book for? Seriously, How hard is it to sit your kid down for 5 minutes and say "This is what it is, we can't stop you from doing it, but if you do, put this on, or you will have babies or it might burn when you pee". Worked for me. "Oopses" happen, but that's the law of averages. JUST TALK TO YOUR KIDS! Sometimes I'm ashamed to live on this continent.....
 
2006-08-15 12:08:19 PM
Blues_Fan: My 15 yo boy has learning issues. Special Ed. But he can do simple algebra and some harder math. A calculator just takes away the drudgery for him. Allows him to spend more time actually thinking about the problems instead of tedious math.

Surely at high school you can't be expected to do much by hand any more. We were pretty much required to have calculators from age 13/14 and by age 16 they were strongly recommending graphic calculators.

Although I'm not convinced that the books really need to be updated if it's not for wear and tear.

I thought our math program was relatively up-to-date, but the most recent stuff we did was on the RSA-Algorithm which was developed in 1977. You certainly dont want to be doing those calculations by hand.

I get the impression that most high schools here (i moved from scotland to the us) seem to draw the line at univariate calculus, which must leave students woefully underprepared to pursue degrees in engineering fields.

Egoy: Teaching methods are constantly changed and better examples are used

Surely the Teaching should be doing the Teaching and not the textbook.
 
2006-08-15 12:08:48 PM
I don't see what the problem with having books from 1988 is.

When I was in high school, a majority of my books were published in 1988.

/graduated in 95
 
2006-08-15 12:09:11 PM
grahams: Egoy: Teaching methods are constantly changed and better examples are used

Surely the Teaching should be doing the Teaching and not the textbook.



The Teacher should be doing the Teaching. Someone should teach me how to preview.
 
2006-08-15 12:11:41 PM
Well I can see how the math text books from '88 would need to be updated. I remember back in the summer of '91 when they invented the number '3' and how it revolutionized the whole math world. Anyone stuck with those primitive '80s books are living in the stone age.
 
2006-08-15 12:11:42 PM
Catholic school in Ontario. Sex Ed. class was part of mandatory gym in grade 9. Teacher told us 'here's what the church thinks.... k, now, here's how you use a condom. if you have sex, you have to use one of these' this was followed by slides of what i can only describe as the most awful pictures of STD's i've ever seen. I haven't taken a condom off since... :S
 
2006-08-15 12:12:25 PM
The idealistic simpletons who say that there's nothing wrong with young teens (and younger!) having sex are just flat out not being realistic. They cannot support these kids and get an education. It's probably not going to be a fun life for parent or child. That's just reality.

But part of me is starting not to care any more. If we could just end welfare, AFDC, TANF, food stamps, etc, then I don't really care any longer who pumps out crack babies by age 14. Just don't make me pay for it.

The fact that the cost of raising and feeding these kids comes out of my paycheck is what makes it my business.
 
2006-08-15 12:13:09 PM
WOW

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/medina.asp
 
2006-08-15 12:14:48 PM
SlowTimedRapid
Abstinence-based is best even from a scientific perspective

Pls cite one accredited scientist who agrees with this statement, or, better yet, stfu.
 
2006-08-15 12:16:43 PM
rga184: Perhaps math should be treated as two subjects.

When i went to scotland, it was pretty much like that.

You'd do standard grade math which would be arithmetic, trig and simple calculus. Everyone would have to do that.

Beyond that there was higher math, that most people planning to go to college did. That would bring in more complex calculus (ode's etc...) and develop better problem solving skills.

Beyond that there were a number of advanced courses. I took the Pure Mathematics one which had a lot of more theoretical stuff like number theory, groups, sets, basis'. I also did Applied Mathematics which looked are things like mechanics problems, and started introducing things like fourier transforms.

That's what blows my mind about homeschooling. I'd be hard pressed to teach the stuff I learned in high school even if my kids chose the exact same specialization as I did.

My mother is an excellent teacher, but I can't imagine how she'd start explaining what was ordinary about an ordinary differential equation - it's just not what she does.
 
2006-08-15 12:19:14 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

If we could just end welfare, AFDC, TANF, food stamps, etc, then I don't really care any longer who pumps out crack babies by age 14. Just don't make me pay for it.

Problem is, you'd still be paying for it. If we stop all aid, some people (mostly children) will start starving or dying from exposure. Then, even if we let them die, we have cleanup costs to deal with. And unless we start turning people away from hospitals, there's cost in there too. At least if we support them, some will contribute to society later. It's a lose-lose situation, which is why i'm in favor of as much sex ed as humanly possible, since we can't just sterilize everyone at birth (would be reversible upon request any time after age 18, no questions asked. Would at least eliminate unwanted children)


/if you can't have a heart, a head for math works almost as well
 
2006-08-15 12:19:59 PM
PeopleFirst: Thank you. Even though putting your essay being here is a bit like reciting Shakespeare during a cockfight.
 
2006-08-15 12:21:07 PM
grahams:

In the U.S., ODEs are usually not taught until the second year of university. A homeschooled student who is ready to study ODEs will typically just graduate and attend college instead of getting them at home.
 
2006-08-15 12:21:29 PM
"This is what it is, we can't stop you from doing it, but if you do, put this on, or you will have babies or it might burn when you pee".

There's a lot more to it than that. A common mistake in couples that use condoms and still get pregnant/sick is that they place it on the penis backwards and try to roll it down. When they realize they did this, they turn it right over and put it on. Meanwhile, the outside of the condom has already been contaminated with pre-ejaculate risking disease/pregnancy for the girl.

Also, condoms aren't 100% effective in preventing pregancy. Kids should be informed that condoms help, but they aren't a guarantee. They should be informed of how effective different combinations of birth control are (condoms and spermicide, condoms and diaphragm, condoms and sponge). They should be informed what lubricants can be used in what condoms (female condoms and condoms classic are made of different materials). They should be informed of their alternatives should one person in the couple have a condom allergy.

Then they can decide if the failure rate of condoms is not worth the risk or if they should use another form of protection in addition to condoms if they still decide to have sex.

Finally, kids need to be taught that sex is complicated. There are emotional and power issues at stake which can be confusing for a 16 year old. In many latin american countries, girls get pregnant despite education on condoms because the boyfriends simply manipulate them by saying "if you make me wear a condom, I'll just go somewhere else". Of course, it's easy to tell them to say "fark off arsewipe" and be done with them, but the societal, gender and maturity issues are also a reality that sex ed has to deal with. It's tough to convince a 15-year old latin girl that she doesn't need to be with a guy who manipulates her and uses their relationship as a bargaining chip for sex. Machismo is very much alive and well in many cultures around the world (and through immigration, immigrant cultures in the US).

So, no, you just can't tell them to put on their happy hat if they're going to have sex. There's a lot more to sex than just the basic manual:

IN, OUT, REPEAT IF NECESSARY.

I could think of at least a month's worth of lessons right off the bat.

/two weeks would be dedicated to finding porn on teh intranets
 
2006-08-15 12:21:30 PM
No child left behind.

Just say "No".

Abstinance Only.


Hey, how's that all workin' out for ya?
 
2006-08-15 12:23:03 PM
The first Sex Ed class at my school was a video of a woman giving birth. After a 60 minute video of this womans screaming, none of the girls were giving it up for anyone.

The rest of the program gave all the facts of life, but that first class was enough to keep all the girls clean for a while.
 
2006-08-15 12:25:23 PM
When I saw the headline I thought "man it is good my old elementary school was in the press".

/Jose De Diego Community Academy in Chicago
/man those were good times
 
2006-08-15 12:25:53 PM
rga184: Perhaps math should be treated as two subjects.

grahams: When i went to scotland, it was pretty much like that.

Is that why it's called maths over there?
 
2006-08-15 12:26:21 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: The idealistic simpletons who say that there's nothing wrong with young teens (and younger!) having sex are just flat out not being realistic. They cannot support these kids and get an education. It's probably not going to be a fun life for parent or child. That's just reality.

When I was in high school people were having sex. Guess what? There weren't a lot of girls getting pregnant or teens getting STDs. We all knew about condoms and birth control. Most of my girlfriends were on the pill in high school. The combination of that and condoms really cuts down on teen pregnancy. The problem is when you have a government telling schools not to teach sex ed, the parents aren't doing their job, and all kids see on TV and in movies is sex. You want to talk about reality? The reality is you can't live in this type of society, not teach sex ed, think that birth control is a sin, and then think that your daughter is not going to get pregnant someday.

But part of me is starting not to care any more. If we could just end welfare, AFDC, TANF, food stamps, etc, then I don't really care any longer who pumps out crack babies by age 14. Just don't make me pay for it.

Tough titties. You vote for people who tell schools they can't teach sex ed, can't hand out free condoms, you support a government that thinks the solution is abstinence only programs... You deserve to pay for welfare. In fact, I hope the amount you pay goes up...
 
2006-08-15 12:26:29 PM
Whoa. Total Fark. Cool. Thanks, anonymous donor!
 
2006-08-15 12:26:40 PM
You mean Ohioans don't know what causes pregnancy?
 
2006-08-15 12:27:30 PM
Quackedtheduck

I agree. I'm not arguing against sex ed. I'm arguing against the "biologically they can have babies so go for it" people.

Not having a heart is pretending that there is no problem.
 
2006-08-15 12:27:47 PM
something else I forgot to add:

The more you talk about sex in any context, place or company, the easier it will be for a person to talk about sex in general. A girl who has never discussed sex anywhere to any significant extent will have a hard time discussing it with her first boyfriend (and viceversa for a boy).

The pure act of having a class that discusses ad nauseam the mechanics of sex, the complications, the positive aspects, and the language (penis! vagina! cervix! condom!) trains kids to be able to talk about this stuff without major qualms when they need to.
 
2006-08-15 12:28:52 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

I was arguing against your not wanting to pay for welfare/food stamps/etc. I don't think the people arguing that an eleven year old should be having babies are really worth responding to.
 
2006-08-15 12:29:28 PM
WillisBueller

That's becasue in Ontario, safe sex education isn't optional. Becasue we aren't retarted.
 
2006-08-15 12:30:21 PM
(I liked typing that)


You're right, he CAN do them, but he'll only one done.
In his case, the calculator is a tool that allows him to internalize a concept without concentrating on the drudgery.

It is, I think, a good thing.

/
 
2006-08-15 12:32:05 PM
cornreaper: Is that why it's called maths over there?


Probably. I'm becoming too Americanised.

In britain we tend to keep the plurality of our contractions, so statistics becomes stats.
 
2006-08-15 12:32:30 PM
pwhp_67 You deserve to pay for welfare. In fact, I hope the amount you pay goes up...

WTF??

Dude see a doctor. (Probably one that I pay for.) Your meds aren't working any more.
 
2006-08-15 12:36:20 PM
Ambitwistor: In the U.S., ODEs are usually not taught until the second year of university. A homeschooled student who is ready to study ODEs will typically just graduate and attend college instead of getting them at home.

That would explain why the american students at my university struggled.

Granted our admissions department tended to be a little distracted by big piles of foreign money and make statements like "don't worry if you haven't done calculus, you'll pick it up as you go along".

I'd have been bored as hell in high school without this stuff, there's only so much time you can spend playing cards and sneaking off to the pub.
 
2006-08-15 12:36:34 PM
grahams
In britain we tend to keep the plurality of our contractions, so statistics becomes stats.

Interesting. In Canada we say math, and stats. I can't think of any other examples tho.
 
2006-08-15 12:37:19 PM
germ87 FB- (pronounced Eff-Bee-to-the-dash) is who you're refering to. Never met the Farker, but have read the remnants.

baorao when is your employer ever going to say I want this done, error free, without the use of technology?" With the condition of the power grid infrastructure, you MAY want some electricity-free backup.

And for all you "Haw-Haw on the red-state fundies" types out there, please check the voting record for Canton, OH. I think you'll find it a Blue island w/in the boundaries of the school district.
 
2006-08-15 12:37:36 PM
rga184, i think it's a little more difficult to get pregnant than you believe. usually, a tiny speck of pre-cum just won't do it in most cases. also, a condom is extremely effective protection against both pregnancy and STI's when used correctly. other than that, i agree that sex education should be extensive. kids who want to have sex will have sex whether or not they are educated and know the risks and how to minimize them. trust me, i just graduated from HS in 2004 and i'm young enough to remember.

SkArcher:
The first Sex Ed class at my school was a video of a woman giving birth. After a 60 minute video of this womans screaming, none of the girls were giving it up for anyone.

The rest of the program gave all the facts of life, but that first class was enough to keep all the girls clean for a while.


ahhh, you could probably pitch that to these school systems as a viable alternative. abstinence-based sexual education coupled with scare tactics. cuz you know, scare tactics make the world go round.
 
2006-08-15 12:37:52 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: WTF??


You're either a troll or one of the ignorant voters who has been a part of the problem.

We have a government that is bowing to the religious right and sex ed is becoming a thing of the past. This kind of a problem should be decreasing not getting worse. How the hell can teens not know what causes pregnancy and not know how to have safe sex? This is not the Victorian Age!

Then you come along and your big solution is to end social programs like welfare and food stamps.

Yeah, that'll help. Thanks for your input...
 
2006-08-15 12:38:20 PM
Yes, it's the fault of sex ed curriculum and not the slutty teenagers.
 
2006-08-15 12:39:06 PM
rga184, you are officially my new hero. Now how do I elect you president?
 
2006-08-15 12:39:08 PM
girlienerd: When I was in high school, it was socially unacceptable to get pregnant and have a kid. Nowadays, it's actually "cool" to get knocked up.

Sad but true. Today, many younger teens see a baby as an accessory/doll they can dress up in cute little Baby Gap outfits & hand over to their own Mommy or Auntie to raise. You can see the connection with how they name their babies, too; kids are given bizarro names in a oneupmanship contest over which teen mom can be more creative. These girls rarely connect teen mommyhood with no more spending sprees at the mall/changing diapers constantly/3AM feedings/having a hard time finding a boyfriend or husband who doesn't mind raising another man's kid/etcoontil it's too late.

I half suspect a lot of these teen moms encourage their non-pregnant "friends" to have a baby simply because misery loves company.
 
2006-08-15 12:40:41 PM
should be kid/etcoontil it's too late.

/curse my metal body R2, I wasn't fast enough!
 
2006-08-15 12:40:54 PM
Not having a heart is pretending that there is no problem.

Or offering ineffective, unrealistic "solutions" such as those based on some peoples' personal views of morality, rooted in myth, instead of viable solutions that will actually help teens. Then, shaming, ostricizing and disgracing said teens when they do what comes naturally.

They are set up to fail, so that these sanctimonious SOB's can judge them and feel better about themselves. That is not having a heart. And indeed the opposite of Jesus' teachings...
 
2006-08-15 12:41:39 PM
Oh, Cripes. Late to the party.

The only Planned Parenthood chapter in my province just had to shut down its women's health clinic for lack of funding. This means that women who don't have a family doctor are going to have a harder time getting routine gynecological exams, among other things.

And yet, all our local fundies can complain about is that Planned Parenthood will refer a woman to an abortion clinic if that is her wish. Never mind all the other services they provide, PP is EEEVILL!!!

/let's make students all sign a chastity contract, yeah, that'll work
//fundies are still fighting here to make abstinence the focus of the sex ed. program
///i should point out to them how well that's working in Ohio
 
2006-08-15 12:42:07 PM
/ellipsis trouble
 
2006-08-15 12:42:29 PM
rga184

LOL, yes, my statement was overly-simplistic, but my point is still there. The onus of the sexual education of a child rests with the parents, or if they are too chicken shiat or ignorant to do it themselves and/or they live in Kentucky, then a meeting with the family doctor will suffice. Schools have enough on their plate with academics and fostering social interaction. And since they handle those tasks sooooo well with a whole generation of stupid kids and gangs popping up, do you really want them meddling in your teenager's sexual life too?
 
2006-08-15 12:43:07 PM
Quackedtheduck

I agree that society will pay in one form or another. But to have a plethora of programs that actually provide an incentive to have more babies and a financial disincentive to find work is what I am arguing against. It could be a long long discussion. I do not disagree with the things you stated. You were being realistic, but so am I. I am just looking at a little bigger picture with longer term consequences.

Having a third of our national output go to entitlement programs is just an enabler. People expect it now. People actually talk about their right to have public money now.

The more we pour into it, the more we perpetuate the problem. It's like going out and continually buying booze for the alcoholic. THAT is what I consider to be not having a heart.

Yes it would hurt some in the short term to stop fueling the problems. But in the long term, people are better off when they have a job and support themselves (hard to argue against), and so is society.
 
2006-08-15 12:43:34 PM
StandsWithAFist: . You can see the connection with how they name their babies, too; kids are given bizarro names in a oneupmanship contest over which teen mom can be more creative

Yeah--better hope that Suri's school never does "Oklahoma" or she'll never hear the end of that.

.....oh, wait, we're talking about teen parents, not the ones with the mindset of teens. My bad.
 
2006-08-15 12:44:00 PM
The poster misperceives the underlying purpose of sex ed.

Pursuant to the Rosie O'Donnell/Hilary/bull-dyke agenda, having sex is an absolute right that has been denied women by the sinister male conspiracy, and should be enjoyed by all females regardless of age or pre- vs. post-pubescent status. Explaining to them exactly how to do this, rather than how to avoid this, insures pregnancy as an inevitable consequence.
 
2006-08-15 12:44:46 PM
Bhopper

Or offering ineffective, unrealistic "solutions" such as those based on some peoples' personal views of morality, rooted in myth, instead of viable solutions that will actually help teens.

How's this for an effective, realistic, viable solution, that's not based in myth, and will help teens:

Close your legs.
 
2006-08-15 12:47:44 PM
BlindMan: How's this for an effective, realistic, viable solution, that's not based in myth, and will help teens:

Close your legs.


Assumes that teenagers will listen to the old fogey telling 'em to not have sex, and not immediately assume "oh, they're being old and don't want me to have any fun", just like they assume when they're given curfews, etc.
 
2006-08-15 12:47:55 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre
Having a third of our national output go to entitlement programs...

Talk about funny math...
 
2006-08-15 12:48:33 PM
Throbblefoot Spectre


Having a third of our national output go to entitlement programs


Are you quite sure about that figure? Can you link to a source?

Otherwise you make some good points, but I don't think ending these programs is the way out. A cultural shift would be vastly preferable. With good job opportunities, good education, etc., the incentives to go on public assistance are miniscule. That might be a better idea than letting the unwanted children (who are, after all, not guilty for the mistakes or stupidities of their parents) suffer and probably die.
 
2006-08-15 12:48:38 PM
BlindMan:
Yes, it's the fault of sex ed curriculum and not the slutty teenagers.

nobody is claiming that the pregnant teens are completely free from blame, i think you are missing the point here.

increasing the effectiveness of the sex ed programs at schools such as this one are a realistic way that we can work to reverse this negative, life-ruining trend of having kids early and often (especially when the state/country picks up the bill). preaching abstinence at teens is an idealistic, ineffective program without roots in reality. for this reason, it should be abandoned in favor of something that works. while calling the teens slutty may be true and satisfy your need to categorize everything as black or white, it does not help anyone or change the situation.
 
2006-08-15 12:48:57 PM
grahams: Beyond that there was higher math, that most people planning to go to college did. That would bring in more complex calculus (ode's etc...) and develop better problem solving skills.

Whoa. How long/what age is graduation from highschool there? Here in Canada it's 4 years of highschool (up until then they've learned pretty much nothing but arithmetic and fractions) ending at 17/18. Hard to get students far in 4 years, and most middle school teachers are not subject-rotated, so they're just "teachers" not specialized "math teachers". As a result, it's damn hard to even get through differentials by graduation - they don't even touch integration (which is as far as it went when I was in highschool).
 
2006-08-15 12:49:40 PM
kitabel: Explaining to them exactly how to do this, rather than how to avoid this, insures pregnancy as an inevitable consequence.


When I was in high school we didn't have a single student who was pregnant.

So what you're saying is that there was not a single teen girl in the entire school who was having sex?

Because, see, I had been thinking all these years that it had a lot to do with us teens knowing enough about sex to know that we needed to use birth control. Silly me...
 
2006-08-15 12:52:27 PM
BlindMan: Yes, it's the fault of sex ed curriculum and not the slutty teenagers.

Yes, the teenagers are slutty. We've established that. Now, given that they're slutty, how do you propose to deal with the problem?

1) tell them not to screw, and then get to be smug and call them slutty when they plop out a crotch-dropping.

2) teach them how to screw safely so that their inevitable sluttiness is less likely to produce offspring.

Consider - option (1) results in the birth of an unwanted child who must go through life with an imbescile for a parent, and (2) means that you get to be a little less smug.

Obviously, you must choose (2).
 
2006-08-15 12:52:42 PM
DammitIForgotMyLogin:
img117.imageshack.us

Your link will haunt me. Quite possibly the most disturbing image of a Dr. I have ever seen.
 
2006-08-15 12:54:20 PM
2006-08-15 11:43:14 AM PeopleFirst

An eloquent and thoughtful post. Coming from a Southern Baptist background myself, I totally empathize and understand your thinking.
 
2006-08-15 12:55:49 PM
Nowadays, it's actually "cool" to get knocked up.

No it isn't.
 
2006-08-15 12:55:54 PM
I only recently went bareback for the first time ever.....wow. Night and day!
 
2006-08-15 12:57:10 PM
Pxtl: Whoa. How long/what age is graduation from highschool there? Here in Canada it's 4 years of highschool (up until then they've learned pretty much nothing but arithmetic and fractions) ending at 17/18. Hard to get students far in 4 years, and most middle school teachers are not subject-rotated, so they're just "teachers" not specialized "math teachers".

In scotland you do 7 years of elemetary/primary school (starting at age 4/5) followed by 4-6 years of high/secondary school. There's generally no such thing as middle school.

You can leave as soon as you are 16, so you have to complete a minimum of 4 years of high school. Most people at my school did all 6, taking them to 17/18.

Even in my school, of the 6 or 7 maths teachers, only about three would take the advanced courses. I'm not sure if that was personal choice, but I have a sneaking suspicion that they'd struggle to teach it.

As a result, it's damn hard to even get through differentials by graduation - they don't even touch integration (which is as far as it went when I was in highschool).

Interestingly we did univariable integration at the same time as differentiation and long before doing differential algebra.
 
2006-08-15 01:00:49 PM
BlindMan
How's this for an effective, realistic, viable solution, that's not based in myth, and will help teens:

Close your legs.


Wow, you sure picked an appropriate nickname, for as we've seen since the beginning of time, that don't work.

But anyway, "close your legs" doesn't speak much to teen boys, does it? (unless you're speaking of missionary style boy on boy sex, which I somehow doubt)

Let me guess... you're from the school of thought where young men should trick, persuade, pressure, perhaps even intoxicate girls into giving it up, and "bag as many" as they can, as your abstinence rules only apply to young women?
 
2006-08-15 01:01:13 PM
kitabel:
Pursuant to the Rosie O'Donnell/Hilary/bull-dyke agenda, having sex is an absolute right that has been denied women by the sinister male conspiracy, and should be enjoyed by all females regardless of age or pre- vs. post-pubescent status. Explaining to them exactly how to do this, rather than how to avoid this, insures pregnancy as an inevitable consequence.

wow. just wow. so the purpose of sex ed isn't to educate about sex? see, cuz i didn't think the name left much to interpretation. let me guess: english literature class is a plot by the british to regain control of "the colonies" through the use of books. teaching our students to read, instead of how to avoid literature, insures a complete take-over by the british as an inevitable consequence.

on a serious note: i knew about sex by 2nd grade. i knew exactly how to do it. so why haven't i gotten anyone pregnant? (and no, the answer is not because i don't have sex, although i didn't start having it until midway through HS)

/tinfoil hat equipped
 
2006-08-15 01:01:28 PM
During my high school years, no student was pregnant. It was an ugly all male cast (it's co-ed now). The place is run by a group of Marist Monks so unless you were one of the school priest's "special boys", nothing went on inside the school. What happened at the all girls school down the street didn’t count against us….
 
2006-08-15 01:02:02 PM
anticleversheep

BlindMan:
Yes, it's the fault of sex ed curriculum and not the slutty teenagers.

nobody is claiming that the pregnant teens are completely free from blame, i think you are missing the point here.

increasing the effectiveness of the sex ed programs at schools such as this one are a realistic way that we can work to reverse this negative, life-ruining trend of having kids early and often (especially when the state/country picks up the bill). preaching abstinence at teens is an idealistic, ineffective program without roots in reality. for this reason, it should be abandoned in favor of something that works. while calling the teens slutty may be true and satisfy your need to categorize everything as black or white, it does not help anyone or change the situation.


You make some good points, however... merely trying to patch up the short terms consequences of a social phenomena

It's mistaken to think that teenagers are getting pregnant because they don't know any better. In places where illegitimacy is high, of COURSE kids know what can happen because it's happening all around them with people they know.

I'm going to be uncomfortably specific here, but the biggest problem (statistically) is in the black community so lets consider that as an example. The illegitimacy rate is around 75% now. That means that teen/unmarried pregnancy is not the exception it's the EXPECTATION. Telling people to wear a condom is going to make fark all difference if they're actually thinking very realistically of a teen pregnancy.

Some can say that I'm being ungenerous in that regard and that it's all accidental there, but 75% is not accidental and that's also not confirmed by the experience of people I know. As an example a black guy I know, with a master's degree and a good job but nonetheless from an inner city single mother upbringing is now about 30. His mother ACTIVELY encourages him, not to get married, but just to get some girl pregnant so that she can have a grandbaby.

It's the culture (and I'm by NO means confining this to the black community) that's gone off the rails. You can cut the teen pregnancy rate a couple points (maybe) but that does fark all about the social rot that will eventually bear fruit of one kind or another. Reducing teen pregnancy a little bit is just guising the problem of underlying moral decadence and decay of essential social instituions.

I'm not contending that abstinence programs are more or as effective as others in terms of final impact on pregnancy rates. However I appreciate that they are often genuinely (if generally hamhandedly) attempting to address the basic concerns that other's aren't... and honestly if you can't manage to instill some kind of sexual ethic and general moral character in future generations (rather than shielding people from the natural consequences of their actions) western civilization is headed in the shiatter anyway.

A generation of paris' hilton's simply can't happen.
 
2006-08-15 01:02:29 PM
Interestingly we did univariable integration at the same time as differentiation and long before doing differential algebra.

And this helps people get jobs at the differential algebra factory when they graduate high school.

/I kid because I love
 
2006-08-15 01:02:49 PM
2006-08-15 10:08:28 AM Mr. Coffee Nerves [TotalFark]

Sex Ed books from the 80's?? Dear Lord, those kids aren't learning anything except:

--hold out for the perfect guy driving a red Porsche 944
--never masturbate in the pool house without locking the door
--never trust fat southern strip club owners
--accept challenges from the best skier on the mountain, since the quirky -- yet hot -- girl can teach you to be an Olympic pro overnight
--always pay your two dollars
--never take your dates to see Otis Day and the Knights at a juke joint
--posing as a male student to facilitate your journalism career can have unexpected romantic side-effects
--the name "Corey" is a career death sentence


That's damn funny sir! Damn near spilled my drink. My vote for the win!

/paid my two dollars
 
2006-08-15 01:05:55 PM
My high school showed us a video of a woman giving birth. I think that scared us pretty dern good...

I'm pissed off at my (Catholic) elementary school, which decided it was a good idea to show us FOURTH GRADERS a taped late-term abortion to "show us the consequences of fornication."

Gave me nightmares for two farkin' years.
 
2006-08-15 01:06:19 PM
Are you quite sure about that figure? Can you link to a source?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/


Socialized medicine alone make up 21% of the 2007 $2.2 trillion Federal Budget. Not counting a myriad of other entitlement programs, housing and urban development, etc.
 
2006-08-15 01:07:42 PM
cornreaper: And this helps people get jobs at the differential algebra factory when they graduate high school.

I know I use calculus, algebra, trig, stats and very occasionally number theory in my day to day work... I'm paid well for it.

I dont suppose you need it for stacking boxes at kmart.
 
2006-08-15 01:08:27 PM
BlindMan: I'm going to be uncomfortably specific here, but the biggest problem (statistically) is in the black community so lets consider that as an example. The illegitimacy rate is around 75% now. That means that teen/unmarried pregnancy is not the exception it's the EXPECTATION.

Family First Aid

The teen birth rate has declined slowly but steadily from 1991 to 2002 with an overall decline of 30 percent for those aged 15 to 19. These recent declines reverse the 23-percent rise in the teenage birth rate from 1986 to 1991. The largest decline since 1991 by race was for black women. The birth rate for black teens aged 15 to 19 fell 42 percent between 1991 to 2002. Hispanic teen birth rates declined 20 percent between 1991 and 2002. The rates of both Hispanics and blacks, however, remain higher than for other groups. Hispanic teens now have the highest teenage birth rates. Most teenagers giving birth before 1980 were married whereas most teens giving birth today are unmarried.


You were saying?
 
2006-08-15 01:08:33 PM
stiletto_the_wise I doubt they've done research on pregnancy in grade-schoolers. And everything I saw said ages 20-24 are the most fertile.

I don't think grade schoolers are emotionally capable of handling the birth of a child, even if better diets/cow hormones/genetic mutations have made them physically able to. I don't think 8 year olds should be having sex. I think that the emotional, physical, and financial reprecussions of having a child at age 8 is freakin' sad.

Sometimes a normally happy event, such as the birth of a child, is sad. That's why plenty of people support abortion in the cases of rape and incest even if they don't support abortion otherwise. And actually, don't-want-children folks (which there are plenty of on fark) would be sad if they had a child, because they just don't want one or they feel that we've overpopulated the planet or some other reason that I don't really agree with but respect their right to have.

BTW, I am totally for comprehensive sex-ed, starting a young age. I think abstinence-only is stupid and dangerous. It's heartening to see communities change their policies on sex ed when they realize the practical implications of a poor sex ed program.
 
2006-08-15 01:11:13 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

Can you link to something more specific? I'm lazy.
 
2006-08-15 01:11:56 PM
The people who think that not teaching kids about sex will keep them form having sex need to know one important thing: You don't need the intellect of a three-year old to figure out sex on your own.

Case in point:

Way back in the misty days of my youth, about three years after the invention of fire and a week after the last dinoasur died, I worked on a three week garden maintenanc project for a hospital (asylum) for the severely retarded. People with the minds of three-year olds and less. People who can't even learn to tie their own shoes. Anyway, we were clearing all of the brush and removing all of the branches from the trees that were less than six feet off the ground. From the doorway to the "garden" you could now see all the way to the edges without obstruction.

I asked one of the hospital staffers why we were doing this. He said it was because the wards were always running off into the underbrush and having sex. And the women were all getting pregnant with babies they could not take care of.

If people this developmentally disabled (I hate that phrase) can figure out to put Mr. Happy in Mrs. Happy then any reasonably functional 13-year old can. It's not rocket science.
 
2006-08-15 01:16:17 PM
portscanner: Graphical calculator? These kids nowdays dont have to use their brain at all any more! When I was in school the only caclulator we were permitted were the type you pull out. A slide rule!

Listen, Grampa, you're not allowed to even TOUCH my graphing calculator. I don't wanna spend 2 hours explaining how the tubes carry the maths up to the screen, mmm-kay?

/strokes T-89 protectively...
 
2006-08-15 01:16:58 PM
Math problem:

If 65 pregnant high school kids are on a train headed west going to Ohio and a 1988 math book is traveling east thru time. How long does it take the School Board to update the sex education?
 
2006-08-15 01:17:07 PM
Blindman, I'm curious if you ever had, or tried to have, intercourse outside of marriage? Please answer honestly here.
 
2006-08-15 01:18:47 PM
I was like "Daughter? No, she's my girlfriend, she's getting some work done. We're gonna have a smiley-face pancake at IHOP afterward."

Woah. Evil. dude. Evil. heh....
Almost as bad as that t-shirt that reads:
"I swear, I didn't know she was 3".

That poor girl in Peru. That article was a sad read.
First over how confused that child had to be, being pregnant at 4 through a hormonal glitch, not to mention not even knowing (for sure, meaning who) as to HOW she got pregnant, and then over the natural state of the child being inclined to play with her dolls instead of the baby.

It was a fascinating article, but still sad to read.
 
2006-08-15 01:25:20 PM
DupeOfURL: With the condition of the power grid infrastructure, you MAY want some electricity-free backup.

Yeah, until he says "great work. now print i- aww damnit, the power is out". And most calculators are battery powered, so unless you are talking about an EMP blast you would probably have that.
 
2006-08-15 01:26:03 PM
Quackedtheduck Can you link to something more specific? I'm lazy.

Just google "federal budget pie chart" for a simplified view. But without the details it gets a little to vague, and subject to the interpretation of whoever made the pie chart.

For example of vagueness of interpretation, here is one that lists "social programs" as 58% of the budget. But it's not clear what they are putting in that category.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/fed_budget.htm

This site http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm lists "human resources" as 33%. But they don't include socialized medicine, and they do include other things like the Department of Education.

That is why I prefer to go right to the federal budget.

In any case, there is little doubt that social programs (including medicine) make up a huge percentage of our federal and state budgets. I really wasn't making up the one third estimate.
 
2006-08-15 01:27:48 PM
Quackedtheduck
Can you link to something more specific? I'm lazy.

I *think* he's reffering to Medicare and Medicaid as "socialized medicine," but I'm not sure anyone could be that callous? ThrobblefootSpectre - is it your contention that retired American seniors who paid taxes all their life should simply be left to die in the streets when they get sick? I would ask about aiding newborns too, but we're already 36th in infant mortality, behind countries like Macau and Cuba. But that must make you happy, right? Let those low-income babies die! That's more for me. Die! Die!
 
2006-08-15 01:30:24 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: That is why I prefer to go right to the federal budget.


Can you give me the page number where you found that 1/3 estimate because I looked through it and I don't see that anywhere...
 
2006-08-15 01:30:37 PM
I am just glad that none of the babies to be are mine.

/got nothing
//ain't getting any
///slashies keep my mind of that fact
 
2006-08-15 01:35:09 PM
Bhopper: is it your contention that retired American seniors who paid taxes all their life should simply be left to die in the streets when they get sick?

Yep, I really enjoy people dying in the streets.

You jump to the silliest conclusions.
 
2006-08-15 01:38:22 PM
pwhp_67: Can you give me the page number where you found that 1/3 estimate because I looked through it and I don't see that anywhere...

I already did.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
 
2006-08-15 01:45:13 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: I already did.

No, you didn't. I looked through that document and nowhere in it does it say, "a third of our national output go to entitlement programs".

Show me where it says that or admit you pulled it out of your ass...



From Wiki:

The President's budget for 2007 totals $2.8 trillion. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures:

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $466.0 billion (+4.0%) - Defense
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
* $32.5 billion (-15.4%) - Foreign affairs
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government
* $1.1 billion (-47.6%) - Energy



Which of those are you adding together to get 1/3?

And why do you think that they are "entitlement" programs?
 
2006-08-15 01:46:26 PM
To combine the two main topics being discussed, partial differential equations blow.
 
2006-08-15 01:50:27 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

You'd think things like the Dept of Ed would be a huge portion of that, and you weren't talking about Medicare in our original conversation. I'd like to see what the proportion is for the programs you actually mentioned, such as welfare, food stamps, etc. That would be a more relevant statistic. I don't want to accuse you of being purposefully disingenuous, but...
 
2006-08-15 01:51:27 PM
And using pwhp_67's numbers, what you were talking about, welfare, is 2%. I hardly think that's a serious drain on our resources.
 
2006-08-15 01:53:05 PM
pwhp_67:

$394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
$367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
$276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related

That's $1 trillion dollars from a $2.8 trillion budget.
 
2006-08-15 01:55:33 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: That's $1 trillion dollars from a $2.8 trillion budget.


And you're a troll...
 
2006-08-15 01:56:01 PM
Quackedtheduck And using pwhp_67's numbers, what you were talking about, welfare, is 2%. I hardly think that's a serious drain on our resources.

You are looking at the percentage change number. Look again. That's not percentage of the budget.

Or else how could 20 billion be 11%

* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government

when 367 billion is 2%

* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
 
2006-08-15 01:57:19 PM
pwhp_67: And you're a troll...

???? How so?

Tell me how I am wrong.
 
2006-08-15 02:01:12 PM
You jump to the silliest conclusions.
This from someone who actually believes "a third of our national output go to entitlement programs"?

But, please, enlighten me -- if you don't want the elderly to die in the streets, what are they to do if your wish comes true and all social saftey nets are erradicated?

Funny, incidentally, that all the corporate welfare we dole out (which far eclipses aid given to the citizenry) and the war in Iraq (finanaced by whoring out our nation to red China) are left out of the budget. But you have no problem w/those, right?
 
2006-08-15 02:02:14 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

Oh ok, sorry, didn't read that carefully enough. So what is the true figure for welfare as a percentage of the budget, since Medicare wasn't what you were originally talking about?
 
2006-08-15 02:09:30 PM
Quackedtheduck: Oh ok, sorry, didn't read that carefully enough. So what is the true figure for welfare as a percentage of the budget, since Medicare wasn't what you were originally talking about?

I was referring to all entitlement programs. The true figure is about 1/3 of the budget.

The term "welfare" is usually only applied to direct monetary payments. Getting money in the mail.

"entitlement programs" includes all programs where you are having goods and services paid for by taxpayers. Including housing, food and medical care.
 
2006-08-15 02:11:18 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: Tell me how I am wrong.

Having a third of our national output go to entitlement programs is just an enabler.

Socialized medicine alone make up 21% of the 2007 $2.2 trillion Federal Budget. Not counting a myriad of other entitlement programs, housing and urban development, etc.


Medicare, Medicaid, and Unemployment are not "enabling" people to have kids they can't support or to stay at home and not work, which is what you were suggesting in your earlier posts.

Medicare and Medicaid are for seniors who can't afford the rising costs of healthcare. Unemployment is paid to people who were working and then lost thier jobs. It is also not paid out indefinitely: You get back according to what you put in. That is the bulk of the 1/3 you keep talking about.
 
2006-08-15 02:12:43 PM
The fact of the matter is, this government has decided that a portion of the money I work for should be taken away from me and given to someone who has done the world the great service of getting old.
 
2006-08-15 02:15:45 PM
pwhp_67 said it before I could. If you're not going to give stats on what you were actually talking about, I guess this conversation's over.
 
2006-08-15 02:17:12 PM
Bhopper: But, please, enlighten me -- if you don't want the elderly to die in the streets, what are they to do if your wish comes true and all social saftey nets are erradicated?


I don't advocate ending all social programs. I advocate not having them be a disincentive to support yourself. If you have someone handing you money, then you come to depend on that. Like living in your mom's basement. Once mommy is gone, then suddenly you find that you are unable to support yourself.

I advocate not getting people dependent on public assistance in the first place. It is a more humane policy.

Like your question earlier. "ThrobblefootSpectre - is it your contention that retired American seniors who paid taxes all their life should simply be left to die in the streets when they get sick?

No. My contention is that if they didn't have to pay the high taxes all their life, if they were allowed to keep the money they worked for, then they wouldn't be stranded in the street in the first place. It's neat how that works about letting people keep the money they work for.
 
2006-08-15 02:20:12 PM
Pull this article out every year. This has been going on in Canton for years. Must be related to the proximity of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
 
2006-08-15 02:20:16 PM
If abstinence worked, there wouldn't be any procreation.

Now remember kiddies, it's only dirty if you're doing it right.

'nuff
 
2006-08-15 02:28:17 PM
BlindMan: How's this for an effective, realistic, viable solution, that's not based in myth, and will help teens:

Close your legs.


That's been tried, it's not effective (65 out of 490 female students are pregnant), it's not realistic (teenagers have been screwing each other behind the bikesheds since well before either you or I was born), and as a result it's not viable.

You get that? Promoting abstinence to teens doesn't work.
 
2006-08-15 02:29:09 PM
The problem with the abstinence morons here is they don't understand the difference between what would work in a perfect world and what obviously doesn't work here on earth.

Sure, abstinence guarantees a pregnancy-free teenhood. But to assume that telling kids not to have sex will result in their not partaking is blindly optimistic, muddled thinking.

The only solution is complete, factual sex education. No religion, no bullshiat, everything you need to know education. Sure, mention that not having sex is a great idea, but prepare them as if they're going to anyway (because they are.)

Keep religion and morality out of it. That's the only answer.
 
2006-08-15 02:29:13 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: My contention is that if they didn't have to pay the high taxes all their life, if they were allowed to keep the money they worked for, then they wouldn't be stranded in the street in the first place.

You would still need Medicare/Medicaid. People who retired 10 years ago had no idea that healthcare would cost what it does today. Add to that the increase in property taxes, the increase in oil costs, shiat, the increase in everything and how do you expect most people to be able to pay for everything they need to once they retire?

Also, what about people who were counting on pensions only to have the company they worked at for 30 years either cut their pension, benefits, or eliminate it altogether?

There is nothing wrong with providing for people. Nobody is living high on the hog as a welfare recipient. And considering that we have a government that encourages companies to open manufacturing jobs overseas and eliminate them here, we're kind of running out of jobs that pay livable wages.

You think you pay too much for "entitlement/enabler" programs now? You ain't seen nothing yet...
 
2006-08-15 02:33:36 PM
I worked at Planned Parenthood for years in the 1990's. And lemme tell ya, rga184 is right on the money. Teens and pre-teens just plain do not know the facts. A week didn't go by without several girls in there who had positive pregnancy tests because they had NO IDEA that pre-ejaculate fluid contained sperm (or viruses and bacteria, for that matter). We constantly got girls in who had no idea that they needed to be using more than one method of birth control--they would come in for a (positive) pregnancy test and be aghast when they learned after the fact that there were drugs like many antibiotics that interfered with the pill. They would have no idea that flipping a condom around could and oftentimes would result in a pregnancy. I saw these things every single day without exception. It was scary and sobering and I can't emphasize highly enough that knowledge is vitally important and teaching abstinence only does NOT work.

BTW, for your farkers who are proud that you've had The Talk with your 10, 11, 12, or 13-year old, you're too late. The youngest pregnancy test I had to give was to a nine-year old girl. I gave positive pregnancy tests as a matter of course to 11-year olds. Talk to them the second they are old enough to learn body parts. If you wait til 10, well, that's when the girls who give birth at 11 are having sex. With 12-year olds. Talk to them NOW.
 
2006-08-15 02:35:02 PM
BlindMan, i agree with you that the problems associated with teen pregnancy are exacerbated by some aspects of our culture. however, i do not expect public school systems to instill morals into students. i feel that is more the job of the parents, and a lack of parenting can cause the cultural phenomena that you cite.

so, ultimately it would be great if sexual education were not abstinence based, and parents spent more time on raising their kids to be productive citizens. however, in my opinion the role of the schools regarding sexual education is simply to educate the students, making them more aware of the hazards and ways to avoid said hazards; the parents are to raise their children to whatever moral standards they see fit.
 
2006-08-15 02:35:51 PM
When people realize that they can vote themselves entitlements, it become a sith hole.
 
2006-08-15 02:38:55 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: Tell me how I am wrong.

Because, as pwhp_67 alludes to above, you're incorrectly defining "entitlement programs." Please - define "entitlement program" as you see it...

The Dept of Education, and many, many other items on your chopping block are NOT entitlement programs, at least not in the way you're attempting to pevert the term.

Now I know that the Plutocratic dynasties in America who finance outfits like PFNAC and Heritage Foundation, etc want you to think this way, but that don't make it so.

Your proposition would literally dismantle the American dream. Pure capitalism begets anarchy, just as socialism begets totalitarianism. There MUST be some controls, and, yes, some measures taken to help the less fortunate. The degree of which is open to debate, but to suggest cutting "a third of our national output," is not only remarkably cruel, it would lead to a degree of social unrest that would ultimately destroy our economy (and your portfolio) anyway.

The purpose of government is to protect its citizens. This includes not only external threats such as washed-up dictators who have no weapons of mass destruction, but internally as well -- to give Americans opportunity, aka, "The Pursuit of Hapiness." Ever run across that term?
 
2006-08-15 02:39:52 PM
pwhp_67: You think you pay too much for "entitlement/enabler" programs now? You ain't seen nothing yet...


Yep, Hey something we agree on.

This is part of the reason for the position I take. The number of workers per number of entitlement recipients is shrinking. It will continue to shrink.

It is obvious that the notion of "workers will pay for all your needs in the future" just isn't going to be economically viable for much longer.

People need to start planning for themselves instead of relying on government to do it for them. The promise of "you will always be taken care of by society" is part of what prevents people from bothering to plan for themselves.

I believe it would be better to have a non-intrusive government that doesn't forcibly take from workers to pay for the other workers that it forcibly took from 20 years ago. That's just messed up.
 
2006-08-15 02:43:43 PM
plong: I went to a Catholic HS in Ohio, and we were taught "sex ed" in Religion class, senior year. It consisted of the teacher telling us that the pope did not approve of premarital sex, or of any type of contraceptive device. So he ended up telling us about his own wife's rhythm method, and how she would chart her temperature, and then they would have sex when it was the right time of month. One word for that: Eeeeeewwwww. Seriously, in school I learned more about sex in 5th grade at the public elementary than I did in 4 years of HS.

???

I went to Catholic school for 12 years in one of the a very conservative archdiocese (cincinnati) and we had sex education from the time I was in fourth grade right up until I was a senior in high school. This was a while ago, too, like 1984.

Were you hitting the sex-ed pre Vatican II?
 
2006-08-15 02:45:23 PM
"What Suzy, you got pregnant? You little whore! Oh hey, Chad, you got laid today? Atta boy, let me buy you a beer!"
 
2006-08-15 02:47:36 PM
some of the school's demographics

household income 9455 vs 41650 (state avg)
Adults 25+ w/college degrees 8% vs 21% (state avg)
Grad rate 51% vs 82% (state avg)

poor + uneducated = pregnant teen
 
2006-08-15 02:50:09 PM
portscanner: Graphical calculator? These kids nowdays don't have to use their brain at all any more! When I was in school the only caclulator we were permitted were the type you pull out. A slide rule!

How did you play snake and during class? I would imagine a slide rule would take all the fun out of Tetris since you could just draw the shapes you need.
 
2006-08-15 02:52:13 PM
My graphing calculator plays tetris, doom AND pac man.

When I tried to store a variable in physics class (not during a test, I wasn't cheating) I had no more memory left.

...so I played tetris.
 
2006-08-15 02:53:31 PM
Bhopper:
The purpose of government is to protect its citizens. This includes not only external threats such as washed-up dictators who have no weapons of mass destruction, but internally as well -- to give Americans opportunity, aka, "The Pursuit of Hapiness." Ever run across that term?

i agree with Bhop here. see, there's this thing we're all a part of, called America. no, it isn't just made up of rich people. some of us believe that while we may be financially well off, we would like to see other fellow Americans have some of the same opportunities that we have. there are ways to make the welfare system harder to cheat without completely scrapping it. people will always exist who find ways to beat the system, no matter what the system is or where it is implemented.

i feel many republicans who would like to get rid of welfare do not realize that while it does enable some people, and it is cheated by some people, many people are helped immensely by it. these people are also Americans, despite being less fortunate, and the welfare system works as a kind of handicap for people who were dealt seven deuce off-suit in the poker game of life. so, lay the fark off them, and let them have a chance. i bet nobody on welfare drives a nicer car or lives in a nicer home than you do, so chill.
 
2006-08-15 02:53:47 PM
Bhopper:

I didn't say the Dept of Education was part of entitlements. In fact I pointed it out as something improperly grouped, in a certain oversimplified pie chart.

to give Americans opportunity, aka, "The Pursuit of Hapiness. Ever run across that term?

Ah, but this is not a guarantee. Everyone should have the right to pursue thier own happiness, but there are no guarantees. If you don't bother trying to work for yourself, then confiscating other workers wages is not a just solution.


Look, I'm not saying we should let babies die in the street. I'm saying we shouldn't encourage people to have more babies than they can support.

I'm not an anarchist by a long shot. I simply believe in small unobtrusive government. Live and let live. Having big goverment trying to run our lives is not a good thing. Also see my reply to pwhp_67.
 
2006-08-15 02:54:04 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: I believe it would be better to have a non-intrusive government that doesn't forcibly take from workers to pay for the other workers that it forcibly took from 20 years ago. That's just messed up.

The government takes from us in order to finance the military, kill people in Iraq, pay Congressmen $165,000/year plus all of their medical and other expenses, pave roads, build highways, pick up your garbage, hire police, firemen, and emergency workers, run the DMV, and countless other purposes.

But you're against taking care of the elderly and the poor because you think they won't bother to try and support themselves.

So if you're correct then there should be a very small percentage of employees contributing to 401(k) plans and other retirement accounts because most of them are expecting to be taken care of when they retire.

It also sounds like you favor a national healthcare system which is good to hear. That way, we can do away with Medicare and Medicaid because healthcare would be provided to everyone anyway.

We should also not allow local governments to raise property taxes on anyone who is retired because that would be impossible to accurately plan for. What would you expect your property to be valued at in 10 years? In 20 years? You just can't predict something like that.
 
2006-08-15 02:57:34 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre

My contention is that if they didn't have to pay the high taxes all their life, if they were allowed to keep the money they worked for, then they wouldn't be stranded in the street in the first place.

But this contention is false. The world ain't perfect. Far from it. Let's take veterans as an example. This Admin has repeatedly cut their benefits -- do you support that? Do you think something like providing mental health services to veterans is a "disincentive" for them to support themselves?

I advocate not having them be a disincentive to support yourself. If you have someone handing you money, then you come to depend on that.

Not sure where you live, but nearly all pure welfare is long gone in my state -- we have "Work for Welfare" programs, and even those typically expire after a set period.

But where does your theory end? Should we put an end to all road work and maintainence? We're handing all the drivers money (in a form of services). I assume public education is long gone too, right? As I posted earlier, your argument extends itself all the way out to a survival-of-the-fittest (or most connected) anarchy. Just as Russia is becoming - is that what you long for?

I advocate not getting people dependent on public assistance in the first place. It is a more humane policy.

Almost no one on public assistance WANTS to be on it. Let's take one more example -- a manual laborer who worked on Enron pipelines all his life. Now, he's lost everything thanks solely to the malfeasant actions of management. People who, incidentally, strongly support your POV on ending so-called entitlement programs. What happens to him in your scenario?
 
2006-08-15 03:02:00 PM
pwhp_67: So if you're correct then there should be a very small percentage of employees contributing to 401(k) plans and other retirement accounts because most of them are expecting to be taken care of when they retire.

Savings rates in this country are less than 2% of wages. I'll bet that more households have cable TV than have retirement savings accounts. That is irresponsible, and I shouldn't have to pay for the mess it causes in the future.


It also sounds like you favor a national healthcare system which is good to hear. That way, we can do away with Medicare and Medicaid because healthcare would be provided to everyone anyway.


No. Your health is your responsibility. Just like it is your choice to smoke or do drugs or go skydiving. I do not believe it is just to confiscate workers wages to pay for national healthcare.

Government does not have the right to tell you not to drink or smoke. But on the other side of the coin, government does not have the right to tell me that I must pay for your healthcare when you get sick.
 
2006-08-15 03:04:15 PM
Bhopper: Let's take one more example -- a manual laborer who worked on Enron pipelines all his life. Now, he's lost everything thanks solely to the malfeasant actions of management. People who, incidentally, strongly support your POV on ending so-called entitlement programs. What happens to him in your scenario?


Don't forget that Enron employees were strongly "encouraged" to put most of their 401(k) money back into Enron in order to make the company stronger.

When Enron tanked so did all of the retirement plans; many of those people were either already retired or very nearly there. How do you rebuild your retirement fund when you're 55 years old?
 
2006-08-15 03:04:24 PM
I'm saying we shouldn't encourage people to have more babies than they can support.

ahhh, okay. completely agree. So I assume (hope) you're pro-choice?

Having big goverment trying to run our lives is not a good thing.

completey agree here too (believe it or not). For example, Legalize all consenual crimes at once.
 
2006-08-15 03:05:59 PM
Let me be the first to say that this story is OLD.

I attended a school in this very district (not this school) and it is an abstinence only sex-ed system. We were given the Tab A/Slot B version of sex education and little else. There was no information about the consequences of having unprotected sex, STDs, contraceptives, healthy relationship choices or what to do if you become pregnant.

If schools are going to teach sex education, they need to teach about everything. There is no such thing as "safe sex", but there is such a thing as "safer sex" and the kids in Canton don't what either one is.

I knew a few girls from the Catholic school up the street from Timken. They have a pregnancy rate too, but we'll never know what it really is since their parents can afford to pay for the abortions.
 
2006-08-15 03:07:19 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre we get it, you are a traditional republican, and nothing anyone can say or do will ever change that. you are for a small, unintrusive govt. that is great.

now, how do you feel about sexual education programs and how they influence the rates of teenage pregnancy? that's what this article was about, right?

/right?
 
2006-08-15 03:12:15 PM
"Abortions for all!"
"Booooooooo!"
"Very well, abortions for no one!"
"Boooooooooo!"
"Hmmmm......abortions for some, minature American flags for others!"
"Yaaaaaaaay!"


/anyone?
 
2006-08-15 03:13:05 PM
Supercheeks: They have a pregnancy rate too, but we'll never know what it really is since their parents can afford to pay for the abortions.


That's what I hate most about pro-life fanatics. You make abortion illegal and what happens? Only rich people get them. So what, exactly, does that accomplish?

It reminds me of TV in the 1950's. Was Ozzy and Harriet a typical American family? fark no, but because that was all you saw on television we could believe that it was true and we could happily think that was how the rest of the world saw us...
 
2006-08-15 03:16:13 PM
So what, exactly, does that accomplish?
Hmmm... more poor children to be recruited into the military if they don't succumb to a life of violent crime or addiction first?

/just a guess
 
2006-08-15 03:22:36 PM
anticleversheep now, how do you feel about sexual education programs and how they influence the rates of teenage pregnancy? that's what this article was about, right?

Sex ed? Oh right. I remember.

Yes I suppose that got a little off topic, but then most fark threads do.

Sex ed is obviously very needed. It is a good thing. But also be sure to teach that a child is a huge financial responsibility as well. Quote the average costs of raising a child. Point out how much of a drag it would be on your 14 year old social life. Don't just show a picture of a happy looking suburban mom and dad with pretty shiny baby. Be realistic.
 
2006-08-15 03:36:36 PM
Someone may have already posted this, but no matter how thin you slice it, ThrobblefootSpectre is talking out of his ass. The GDP of the US was $11,750,000,000,000 for 2004, or $11.75 trillion. I think he might have been meaning "1/3rd of the federal budget", not "a third of our national output".

/apologies if this was already corrected
 
2006-08-15 03:38:35 PM
How do you rebuild your retirement fund when you're 55 years old?

Freedom 105?
 
2006-08-15 03:48:56 PM
GavinTheAlmighty Um, dude, the pregnancy part hasn't changed, but the knowledge about STDs and the protection methods have.

/you can have my recently-developed birth control pills when you pry them from my cold dead hands
 
2006-08-15 03:50:49 PM
theorellior:

Yes, I meant 1/3 of our federal budget, as you can see I continued to say federal budget in the following posts. I mispoke on that first statement however, and I stand corrected.

In my defence, one mistake is not "talking out of my ass". I stand by the point I was making.
 
2006-08-15 04:00:18 PM
dyn.ifilm.com

That's why I choose anal sex. Sure it hurts a little, and I wind up walking funny for a day or two, but I think my future's worth it!
 
2006-08-15 04:03:07 PM
teh buttsecks rocks.....so wrong, but sooooo right....
 
2006-08-15 04:49:39 PM
Bhopper: Almost no one on public assistance WANTS to be on it.

Isn't that like saying almost no one who is fat WANTS to be fat? It doesn't matter what they say they want, when it comes time to do the things that they have to do to fix their situation are they going to do them.
 
2006-08-15 04:52:04 PM
2006-08-15 03:12:15 PM cornreaper

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
 
2006-08-15 04:54:31 PM
How do you rebuild your retirement fund when you're 55 years old?

Lie, cheat, steal, fraud...

Either way you take care of your retirement.

You either make enough doing that or get caught and the government provides it in a nice cosy 'barred retirement home'.
 
2006-08-15 05:03:42 PM
Headcheese: It's simple, really. Someone should just tell them to not have sex.


haha...
 
2006-08-15 05:06:10 PM
Ahh, Drew Junior, sometimes it seems like you love to pick on me...

We hear in the media all the egregious cases of welfare abuse. But how often do you hear about the truly needy, which are the VAST majority of recipients? People who, through no fault of their own, were dealt a bad hand and need help? Never.

Many people DO get off public assistance. As I pointed out above, many states have a number of months/years limitation on welfare anyway.

More importantly, our bureaucracy makes it difficult to get off. If you're able to land a part-time, minimum wage paying job, for example, you're immedietely cut off from all assistance -- you wind up worse off than you were.

I am not "pro-welfare" by any means. But when you keep cutting things like education, college grants, decent medical care, family planning, etc while giving the ultra-wealthy more and more -- when you pass draconian bills like taking away federal college loans because of one drug arrest (essentially consigning someone who had a chance to a life of low-income) well, something's gotta give, right?

And, you, I'm pretty sure, are against abortion? How can you rectify your forcing an unwannted being into the world - who's parents can't possibly support him - with your anti-assistance sentiment? Is this not the child paying for the sins of the parent? Does lack of family planning - birth control access and abortion - not swell the welfare roles?
 
2006-08-15 05:12:46 PM
Bhopper - a spokes-weenie for the socialist party said :
"Does lack of .. birth control access .. not swell the welfare roles ?"

What a crock - condoms & various spermicides are available at any local grocery store. There is your access.
 
2006-08-15 05:24:01 PM
Donald_McRonald: Eh, they live in Canton, it's not like there's anything better to do.

Exactly. I thought that 65/490 in Canton was proof your sex ed class was working pretty well. Surprised its not 65 that aren't pregnant.
 
2006-08-15 05:31:27 PM
canner508, you're late to the party, trolltard.
 
2006-08-15 05:31:30 PM
muninsfire: binnster: Ok eggheads, she said reading books too, what great advances have been made in the field of reading since 1988?

About 18 years' worth of new writing.


Because that old crap written by old farts like Shakespeare, or Faulkner, or Steinbeck, like anything by anyone over 25, or anything that doesn't have pictures...who wants to read that old crap. We should only be letting kids read great new authors, like... I dunno... People Magazine? That would be good.

Bhopper: Almost no one on public assistance WANTS to be on it.

Oh, please. For many, it's the only way of life they know. And the thought of getting off welfare for a $9 an hour job gives them the dry heaves.
 
2006-08-15 05:42:53 PM
Rodeodoc, how do you know this? (and min wage is $5.15, btw)
 
2006-08-15 05:52:00 PM
Bhopper: We hear in the media all the egregious cases of welfare abuse. But how often do you hear about the truly needy, which are the VAST majority of recipients? People who, through no fault of their own, were dealt a bad hand and need help? Never.

I think you have me confused with someone else but anyway...

Sorry can't blame the media for this one, I worked as a social worker. If anything most of the media goes out of its way to portray welfare recipients favorably, victims of uncontrollable circumstances.

Yes many states do have limits on some benefits, why do you think that is? People, a lot of people, where on it for decades, families were on it for generations. Sure these people said they wanted to get off welfare but did they do anything about it like go back to school or get job training? I'd work for months to get someone accepted into an exclusive training program only so they could drop out after 2 weeks because the 40 minute bus ride was too long.

Without any incentive to get off public assistance people where perfectly happy to stay on it indefinitely. People called the term limits and family size limits draconian too when Clinton signed the welfare reform bill, but you seem to be in favor of those things.

I don't know what bureaucracy you are referring to, but most programs allow you to work, and actually encourage it, and your benefits are adjusted so you still are above a minimum income level.

You mention being ineligible for guaranteed student loans if you have a drug conviction. That's what happens when the government takes our money and then we have to beg to get it back, they can make the rules.

What would make you assume anything about my views on abortion based on my comments?
 
2006-08-15 05:57:08 PM
What could possibly go wrong after taking the Pledge of Allegiance, any reference to religion, dress codes and discipline out of our schools and pounding cultural tolerance and liberalism into the heads of the students?

I realize it sounds like I'm a Christian Jihadist, but I'm not. Just the facts of what has happened over the past generation.
 
2006-08-15 06:05:45 PM
Bhopper

Actually minimum wage varies by state. Here in Florida I think it's $6.50. and Alaska it is $7.15. In Kansas it's $2.65 and you have to work OVER 46 hours to get overtime too. In Louisiana there is NO minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm
 
2006-08-15 06:23:39 PM
Sex is a biological drive, not a moral choice.

You might be able to morally delay it ....but eventually it's gonna happen either planned or unplanned.
 
2006-08-15 06:25:47 PM
islander: What could possibly go wrong after taking the Pledge of Allegiance, any reference to religion, dress codes and discipline out of our schools and pounding cultural tolerance and liberalism into the heads of the students?

They don't have any of that nationalistic faith based hoo doo in Sweden and they also have the lowest rates of teen pregnancy. Oh yeah..they EDUCATE re; biology and sex.
 
2006-08-15 06:26:31 PM
DrewCurtisJr,

I believe we had some nice discussions in the past on religion politics and the two together. Remember, when you asked me what the diff between a dentist committing acts of sin and a minister was?

I therefore assumed you were anti-abortion, so apologies if I'm mistaken.

At any rate, you clearly know more about the subject of welfare than I do. But I'd like to point out that this thread only ended up this way because a poster advocated cutting a third of our "entire national ouput" cuz they were "entitlement programs" -- how I got to be the defender of welfare now is beyond me.

Nevertheless the income gap in this country is currently the largest it's been since the Gilded Age of the 20's, and is growing. This is a result of policy skewed to the Plutocrats, and an unhealthy sign for ANY democracy. Welfare's not the answer, but not cutting education, job training, etc would certainly help.
 
2006-08-15 06:35:00 PM
islander:

If an employee is subject to both the federal and state minimum wage laws they are entitled to the higher of the two. The state wages that are below the federal minimum level only apply to specific exempt industries.
 
2006-08-15 06:40:10 PM
Bhopper: I believe we had some nice discussions in the past on religion politics and the two together. Remember, when you asked me what the diff between a dentist committing acts of sin and a minister was?

I don't remember that, possible because I was drinking, but that sounds like something I'd say.
 
2006-08-15 06:51:02 PM
DrewCurtisJr

You're absolutely correct as with most laws the most benefit etc. is the one used, or as you have stated; the higher of the two. I was not relying upon exemptions, and special considerations just general rules.

I thought that if you worked more than 8 hours in a shift you were entitled to overtime , as that is what I had to pay when I was in business. However, now in Florida, there is no such mandate. And my son can work 11 hour shifts and not get overtime as long as he does not go over 40 hours in a week.

I only find it amazing that there is such disparity from state to state.
 
2006-08-15 06:51:18 PM
Rodeodoc: Because that old crap written by old farts like Shakespeare, or Faulkner, or Steinbeck, like anything by anyone over 25, or anything that doesn't have pictures...who wants to read that old crap. We should only be letting kids read great new authors, like... I dunno... People Magazine? That would be good.

Because nothing worthwhile has been written in the past 18 years that an English teacher may want to address?

Please.

/Nowhere do I say to ignore Shakespeare, Milton, Burns, Thoreau--but ignoring the more modern authors would be just as stupid as removing Julius Caesar from the curriculum.
 
2006-08-15 06:56:21 PM
try the O.W.L program, friends.

My CHURCH has a better program for sex-ed than these nutjobs......

(abstinence only is BS.)
 
2006-08-15 07:00:15 PM
Larjmarj

Unfortunately, the primary function of our public schools in Florida is teaching kids to do well on FCAT tests so schools get increased funding and pay raises. They care little about sciences and exact answers are not required.

They spend more time espousing personal views than facts in most classes.

I have been amazed to see how very little they actually cover in biology classes and other sciences, but they do give away free condoms.

My son is in a Magnet Program allegedly for "advanced students", and I would hate to see what goes on in the "regular" classes.
 
2006-08-15 07:13:31 PM
All the talk about school sex-ed programs is fine and dandy, and they could be better, but as a parent I think it's my own responsibility to make sure my daughter doesn't come home pregnant.

If there's that many pregnant kids, I wouldn't be blaming the school for it.
 
2006-08-15 07:22:56 PM
My dude made a documentary about this last year...we live about 30 minutes north of Canton. TRT is about 24 minutes, and it's a tad slow at points.

It's still pretty cool, check it out.

http://josephgseaman.com/outbreakvideo.wmv
 
2006-08-15 07:49:05 PM
so... you tell you kid sex is bad mmmkay, and that's bad. you tell your kid sex is gooooood, and that's bad. you tell them don't, so they will. you tell them to, and you're a horrible parent.

not being a parent, and never even getting the "talk" or sex ed (which didn't matter because i already knew), i wonder if anyone just comes out and tells their kids that sex, contrary to the amount of time "adults" spend obsessing over it, really is just a minor part of life (and/or love) - and the majority of times you're exposed to it, it's only purpose is to persuade you. whether it's blatant advertising or part of a show (which depends on ratings; money from advertisers)... rarely will it ever be about "sex", but rather, your attention. also, sex ≠ love. having sex doesn't prove you love someone... and the whole idea of "proving" something via biological function is kind of an empty gesture to begin with.
of course, this would do little to stop kids from farking, but i think a mass chill out over the topic is in order. a society less obsessed combined with proper education would benefit everyone.

/newton's 3rd applies to everything
 
2006-08-15 10:02:41 PM
Absenence education isn't the problem absenence only is. Not having sex, does drop the odds of STDs and pregancy to 0. But, not telling horny kids that condoms drop the rates to 0.001 is child abuse.
 
2006-08-15 10:15:22 PM
We just need to start actually CHARGING and CONVICTING statutory rapists. They're not supporting their spawn anyway, so I think a large dose of public humiliation and/or jail time is in order. Registered sex offender status accompanies your second offense of farking a 12-year old. Anybody see a problem with that?

As it stands now there is ZERO punishment beyond the idle threat of child support enforcement...IF you can get the girl to name the father, assuming she could narrow it down to a few likely suspects.

The 10-year-old statistics I have suggest that 2/3 of births to teenage girls are fathered by adult men age 20+. The 65 pregnant girls in this story makes the math easy...probably 43 new daddies who should be doing time if the laws already on the books were enforced.
 
2006-08-15 10:56:47 PM
Why all the talk about abstenence only? I thought they said the books were from the '80s? That was condom promoting, early in the aids epidemic time.........

Plus, why blame the schools for kids getting pregnant? It's 100% the parents/family's responsibility to teach this to the kids.

Reading to the comments here reminds me that personal responsibility is a foreign idea to a huge percentage of the population.
 
2006-08-15 11:16:26 PM
The rates of both Hispanics and blacks, however, remain higher than for other groups. Hispanic teens now have the highest teenage birth rates. Nuff said!
 
2006-08-16 01:46:06 AM
Too bad society's so set against youth having sex with older folks who know more about not getting pregnant.

The stupid leading the stupid.
 
2006-08-16 01:54:29 AM
SilentMattCanuck: ELEVEN??????? Kids can get PREGGERS at age 11??
NO WAY JOSE!


Yup. It is relatively common for girls to begin puberty at age 9 or 10.


Headcheese: It's simple, really. Someone should just tell them to not have sex.

That's exactly what they're doing. That's why they're having problems.


Wizzin: a)Birth control
b)Keep legs closed

Pick one. It isn't that complicated.


Well, they chose 'b', and that isn't working.
Why do you have to only choose one of them? Why do people think that advocating responsible sexual practices is the same as telling people to "go have sex"? It isn't!! No matter what you preach, some people will heed the abstinence message, and some people won't. Giving the people who don't a way to protect themselves seems worthwhile to me.


rga184: The pure act of having a class that discusses ad nauseam the mechanics of sex, the complications, the positive aspects, and the language (penis! vagina! cervix! condom!) trains kids to be able to talk about this stuff without major qualms when they need to.

QFT. Thank you!!!


BlindMan: How's this for an effective, realistic, viable solution, that's not based in myth, and will help teens:

Close your legs.


That won't do at all.
It's INeffective, NONrealistic, NONviable, and based completely on a mythological reality that has never, and will never exist: teenagers with raging hormones, a newfound facination with sex, and a slightly underdeveloped decision-making ability, NOT having sex. This approach won't help anyone, least of all teens.

Obviously you didn't read the article, because the "Close your legs" message is precisely what was being used on this HS campus. It has a pregnancy rate of OVER 10% of it's female students. Holy crap, now thats what I call ineffective.
 
2006-08-16 02:17:26 AM
On the math issue:

I started with a calculator in 6th grade... When I started my school's algebra series.

I started using a graphical calcuator when I was a junior when I started the calculus series.

I went into college doing Calculus, and I was the first student at my community college to take Differential Equasions my 4th semester there.

I will openly admit that I failed a partial diff eq class cause I took diff eq about 2 years beforehand, and really hadn't kept up with it (I'm a CS/IT major, I'm honestly not ever using it, unless there's a really really specialized problem I'm working on.). However at the end of this year I'm graduating with a CS/IT Bachelor's Degree with a mathematics minor.

And honestly, since I've had a calculator since 6th grade, I am shocked by the overall incompetence of my contemporaries NOW. Calculating subnets without a calculator is beyond them, and I do it without a problem without one...
 
2006-08-16 05:15:27 AM
To write it down

THAT YOU GET NOT PREGNANT IF YOU ARE ABSTINENT, DEOS NOT IMPLY THAT PREACHING TEENAGERS TO STAY
ABSTINENT WILL PREVENT TEENAGERS TO GET PREGNENT

/in philospphy this is called logic haow you handel it in religion i don t know
 
2006-08-16 06:44:41 AM
I'm pissed, I graduated from Timken too. Why didn't I meet any of the loose people? But then again, when I graduated, I only knew of one pregnant person in the entire school.
 
Displayed 326 of 326 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report