Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tax-chick

I agree tax chick... and ALL who are here...did you see where the parents could have opted out their children?
This was not just something that the principal decided to do on their own...it was mandated by the state(sex-ed) to start in the fifth grade...the class could have been opted out of by the parents of the children...and face it moms and dads...middle school kids can and do have sex... that’s why the sex-ed starts in the 5th grade so they can be at least somewhat prepared...just because something is discussed does not mean it is condoned.
just sayin


37 posted on 06/13/2012 11:17:17 AM PDT by bignevermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: bignevermo
just because something is discussed does not mean it is condoned.

I think it's very unlikely that the principal discussed oral and anal (or any other) sex acts in terms of categorical moral condemnation. (e.g., my first "politically correct" statement on the topic.)

However, that was not my main point. My point was that the parents should have known what was going to be taught. If they don't think this is suitable information for 5th graders, they need to be addressing it at the state level. I suspect that, if these people were asked if the school should teach the students about STDs, they would have said, "Of course!" without ever thinking it through.

38 posted on 06/13/2012 11:57:28 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Don't be so scared ... it's just a baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson