McGuinty backed down on this a while ago.
My apologies then. I guess I don't keep up much with what happens in Canada.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
McGuinty backed down on this a while ago.
a few weeks ago i was using the restroom and my nine year old cousin walked in on me. she said why are you BLEEDING!? (Obviously it was that time of the month.) I knew her mother (my first cousin) hadnt told her the facts of life even though people can get PREGNANT at that age! So i told her what was that and why it happens every month. I told her not to tell, because her mother would KILL me. But the girl needed to know for god's sake!
Parents (and non-parents like me) still pay taxes for public schools even if they school their children elsewhere. I have no kids, but I still have a dog in this fight; I pay the same taxes everyone else does for public schools, even though I have no children.
You have a point here. I wouldn't discount your opinion because you don't have any children. The point I am making is that no child is forced into a public institution. Parents can still choose whatever kind of schooling they wish (although, regrettably, that is changing. Look up the homeschooling debate in California). If parents want a strict religious education for their child, they can still get it (for the most part).
Overall, I think a system that distributed education dollars to the schools of the parents choice or to fund homeschooling would be the most free and most fair system we could devise as a society. It balances liberty and egalitarianism nicely.
Home-schooling operates with rules and regulations. Parents must teach what would have been taught in the school system; often with the same text books and curriculum. Subject to inspection and testing of the students. So mandatory Sex Ed would not be circumvented by home-schooling, depending on the state.
You have a point here. I wouldn't discount your opinion because you don't have any children. The point I am making is that no child is forced into a public institution. Parents can still choose whatever kind of schooling they wish (although, regrettably, that is changing. Look up the homeschooling debate in California). If parents want a strict religious education for their child, they can still get it (for the most part).
Overall, I think a system that distributed education dollars to the schools of the parents choice or to fund homeschooling would be the most free and most fair system we could devise as a society. It balances liberty and egalitarianism nicely.
Out of curiosity, is any form of sex ed taught in a religious school? Never been in one, so I have no idea.
Home-schooling operates with rules and regulations. Parents must teach what would have been taught in the school system; often with the same text books and curriculum. Subject to inspection and testing of the students. So mandatory Sex Ed would not be circumvented by home-schooling, depending on the state.
Out of curiosity, is any form of sex ed taught in a religious school? Never been in one, so I have no idea.
To answer your question: Yes. I went to Catholic School for well over half of my primary and secondary educational years (1993 to 2001). It started in the 5th Grade for me and it coincided with some age appropriate talk with my parents regarding sex. They segregated the male and female students and had one teacher teach each group.
It depends on the religious school. The sex education at a Unitarian Universalist school is going to be vastly different then at a Baptist Academy. Abstinance only programs get a lot of press and are used in religious schools who have a Taboo view of sex.
Generally, though, they do teach students about sex and the moral issues surrounding it. I'm not advocating anything about their efficacy, I just know that it is taught.
This is the argument, boiled down to the essence:
The state has the right to take action to protect itself from economic costs incurred by the poor choices made by citizens.
In other words, if parents won't teach their children about sex, the the state suffers economically and therefore must protect itself by doing the teaching instead of the parents.
However, this means that the state has the right to make you exercise, lose weight, eat a healthy diet. Our poor nutrition and lack of exercise and obesity cost the state FAR MORE than teens having babies. Do you agree? If you agree that the state has the right to protect itself from the poor choices its citizens make, then you must agree.
Your argument about the costs of non-interference has merit. However, it also implies costs in terms of interference in all other aspects of our freedom. I don't approve of giving away of freedom to save money.
I'm sorry -- it sounds like you crossed the line quite seriously there. You did owe the young lady an explanation and reassurance that you were OK. However, more than a brief & somewhat sketchy explanation tied to the circumstances (I'm OK; it's natural and part of being ready to make babies...) was for the parents to decide, not you. And you owed your cousin immediate notice about the incident, and what you said. If you're concerned that perhaps your cousin is uncomfortable or unwilling to give an age & developmentally appropriate explanation -- you could have offered to make it a joint conversation between the three of you.
There's just no easy answer. Even more frustrating is when someone outside inflicts their view of what's appropriate to be taught -- or omitted -- in your child's education.
And you don't think the child's mother deserved and NEEDED to know that her 9 year old was engaging in sexual activity? How would you feel if the roles were reversed, and your sister/sister-in-law kept a secret like that from you?Maybe i could have gone to my cousin's mom. But then i would have had to tell her what my 9 year old cousin had told me before - that she had already tried sex before! and that she wants to have a baby! **** I'm not going to refuse to answer such a question. She asked me what it is. Im not gonna run to her mom and say You tell her what it is cause im not going to. Esepcially when the girl at 9 years of age had already had sex and is saying she wants to have a baby NOW. **** that!
I never said it shouldn't be taught. I said that the schools were not the best place, in my opinion. They are, effectively, the place of last resort. Nor do I support using cutesie names for body parts, or at least not without also teaching the proper names. But I will say that someone deciding when to teach another person's children about this is overstepping the parental boundaries. I rather suspect your opinion on that may change should you become a parent.and btw. Teaching BC is part of biology. You teach about how humans reproduce. Then teach ways humans have come up with ways to limit the size of their families, or to have no kids. Teaching that "we believe people should remain abstinent until married" is behavior. and how we should act.
So, I think BC should be taught. and how to use it and failure rates and success rates when using it and stuff. as well as parts of the body and their correct names. as stacy said, Those are facts. I think the state should intervene in that. But parents can teach their kids about abstinence if they like. I really dont care. It is a behavior and not a fact. But the kids have to know all the facts about sex, BC, how to use it and such. In that, I think the state should have say.
I told my then 12 year old cousin about the word penis and periods and stuff. Her mom got mad at me.
Good point. Page 2 of the article has a section titled, "Parents in outer space' which applies to what you just said.
The state has a concern. It does not have a right. There's a difference.
The state pays a lot more money for the health effects of obesity.
Tell me what right the state has to tell me how to live. Can they order me to lose weight? To take exercise? To turn over my family history or my genetic code to evaluated for predisposition to certain diseases?
Arguing that it costs money does not make it the domain of the government. Lots of things cost money. Freedom is not for sale.
Maybe i could have gone to my cousin's mom. But then i would have had to tell her what my 9 year old cousin had told me before - that she had already tried sex before! and that she wants to have a baby! **** I'm not going to refuse to answer such a question. She asked me what it is. Im not gonna run to her mom and say You tell her what it is cause im not going to. Esepcially when the girl at 9 years of age had already had sex and is saying she wants to have a baby NOW. **** that!
Speaking as a mother, I'm begging you to tell your cousin's parents about this. A 9 year old who has "tried sex" is likely the victim of molestation, or needs more supervision (at the very least!) I don't think you did anything wrong by explaining what was going on, but if you care about her, PLEASE tell her mom about her "trying sex" and wanting to have a baby. This is very dangerous behavior and not something that your influence is sufficient to stop.
Blade -- the more I think about this, the more you have a serious problem here. It is not particularly normal for 9 year olds to "try sex." They may play doctor; given an opportunity they're likely to explore the differences in their bodies. At 9, it's more typical for the girls to chase and torture boys with threats of kisses than anything more. You need to inform the girl's mother -- and if you have such significant concerns about her reaction that you feel you cannot do this -- you need to at least discuss it with someone from Family Services. There's a possibility of abuse or assault -- or simple neglect -- that needs to be addressed.yeah i know. very dangerous. I'm afraid her mom will get mad at her though and punish her or something. She doesnt need that me thinks. She neecds to be educated.
I actually have a lot of influence on 9 year old tbh. She calls me her fave cousin and follows me around like that poem 'i have a little shadow that goes in and out with me and what could be the use of him is more than i can see' a few weeks ago i was out to a party at my uncle's house with my bf, Bruce, and she hung around us all night. It is because of this trust and love for me and im her fave and she feels she can talk to me about stuff that I believe she came to me and told me about trying sex and wanting to have a baby because she loves babies. something she never told anybody else. She didnt go to her mum (i dont blame her really knowing my relatives at times) I guess since I know my own relatives, that I dont completely trust her mum to do the right thing. So where does that leave me? I guess i'm in a dilemma here.
yeah i know. very dangerous. I'm afraid her mom will get mad at her though and punish her or something. She doesnt need that me thinks. She neecds to be educated.
I actually have a lot of influence on 9 year old tbh. She calls me her fave cousin and follows me around like that poem 'i have a little shadow that goes in and out with me and what could be the use of him is more than i can see' a few weeks ago i was out to a party at my uncle's house with my bf, Bruce, and she hung around us all night. It is because of this that I believe she came to me and told me about trying sex and wanting to have a baby because she loves babies. something she never told anybody else. I guess since I know my own relatives, that I dont completely trust her mum to do the right thing. So where does that leave me? I guess i'm in a dilemma here.