The Teaching of Safe Sex Education in Public Elementary School

NOTE: Safe sex education discourages sexual intercourse. Safe sex education teaches children, much like you intend, to not have sex. Safe sex education merely teaches children who will make the incorrect decision of engaging in sexual intercourse the means to avoid pregnancy. I am not advocating or supporting premarital or sex in childhood. My arguments advocate teaching safe sex education to children. All arguments proposed criticizing me for corrupting children by encouraging sexual intercourse are invalid. That is not my stance. That is not topical to this debate. Invalid opinions do not carry in a debate round. You offer your harsh opinions, and you state that they are correct because you say they are correct. This isn't justification, it's enraged ranting. Your debate format consists of calling me "plain and simply wrong". This accomplishes absolutely nothing. If I were to follow the same strategy, then I would call you "plain and simply wrong". So, we are both wrong, and nothing is accomplished. That's excellent rhetorical implementation… I'll give you a simple analogy. Math students have to show their work for mathematical equations. If you do not show your work, you do not receive full credit, and may not receive any. Now, as I stated in my constructive, "Today's debate must be restricted to "whether these teachings should occur in public elementary school." The highlights of all your debates circle around insulting your opponent. If kids are so unintelligent, then why do you consistently lose? Your winning percentage is lower than the Miami Dolphins'. "That's why the drinking age is below 21". I'll give you a history lesson, old man. While my youth restricts my intellect, your old age has resulted in memory loss. The drinking age was changed from 18 to 21 in the 1980s. Am I to assume that the prior generation of 18 year olds was more capable, mature, and intellectual to the point that they were rewarded with the right to purchase alcohol? I will concede that you consider yourself intellectual. However, there is a difference between being a supposed "intellectual" and being "well-read" Well-read, in simple terms, means that you know what you talk about. You seem to instead take the stance of a jargon attacking Republican by using the words "communist" and "Marxist" to insult a liberal. Read what I say carefully. In my first refutation, I clearly states "To assume makes an a$$ out of you and me". "You are infested with marxist thought, my young friend." If you wish to use the concept of "Marxism", please first read what he wrote and understand it. You'd be surprised how different the concepts of "stereotypical communism warding off capitalism" is from Marxism. Now, moving on to the chronological order of your ill-presented arguments: ""(1) Every …… of their lives there is NO SUCH THING AS "safe sex" and there are a number of nightmares as a parent, of which you are not, and sexual activity at a young age at all is one of them, condom or not."" Firstly, this is addressed above in the note. Obviously, parents do not want their kids to be sexually active. The role of a public school is to provide sufficient education and training for students to make the transition of maturity and knowledge into adulthood. "Safe sex" is defined as a relative term to unprotected sex. Safe sex, to provide a definition, uses contraceptives to prevent pregnancy. There is such a thing as safe sex, unlike what you stated. What you meant to say is that there is no such thing as "completely safe sex". Seat buckles are not completely safe, but they are still the best available alternative. There are no absolutes in anything. ""(2) Safe …… to happen. Ok what is "safe sex" - please define and how do you avoid the EMOTIONAL aspects as a child too young to understand"" Safe sex is defined above. Avoiding the emotional aspects of a child too young to understand is curbed slightly by safe-sex education, however, children cannot be sheltered and curbed from the evils of society. Santa Clause and other imaginary entities were created to build a barrier between children and reality. However, it is the child's decision when to break down this barrier themselves. When they do so, they are voluntarily progressing into adulthood with free will. The same is done when a child decides to engage in sexual intercourse. ""(3) Judge …… kids have not clue and thats why the drinking age is 21 non-parents have no clue on what it is like to be a parent ... you are a kid and are clueless. period."" Once again, you are assuming. You only know me based on my profile and what I have written. I, on the other hand, judge you by only what you have said. Specifically incorrectly defining "communism" and "marxism" leads me to conclude that you do not know what you are talking about. My age makes me legally an adult, and unless you continue to belittle other individuals on this site, then you yourself are more childish and immature than any of the teenagers you argue against. ""(4) You … burden Ok, whatever. you can use fancy words that doesnt mean you have a clue of what it is like to have complete responsibility for other human beings"" Can you not handle fancy words, the ambrosia of the articulate and intellectual? I don't need to know what it's like. This isn't a competition of life experiences. It is a competition of presented arguments against one another. No matter how old or experience in the "real world" I am, so long as I am able to argue better than you, then I am correct. ""(5) You …… safe sex. No I Dont. the Public schools, or the government schools, have NO BUSINESS teaching others children about sex, .... Hers is where the EVIL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS LIES"" I will then cite another source that is not "evil". UNICEF (a charity organization of the UN dedicated to improving the lives of children worldwide, if you are unfamiliar with it), promotes safe sex education as the best means to educating young citizens worldwide. It is the best solution to preventing teenage pregnancy without promoting it. Proponents of comprehensive sex education, a.k.a. safe sex education, which include the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the Society for Adolescent Medicine, and the American College Health Association all argue that sexual behavior after puberty is prolific in the 21st Century, and it is therefore crucial to provide information about the risks and how they can be minimized; they also claim that denying teens such factual information leads to unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Or these credited sources may be too liberal, communist, and Marxist to hold warrant. As cited by the think-tank Advocates for Youth: To date, no published studies of abstinence-only programs, the alternative to teaching safe-sex education, have found consistent and significant program effects on delaying the onset of intercourse. (5) to (6)- Sex is evil. Yes, and I will repeat, I AGREE WITH YOU. HOWEVER, PREGNANCY IS MORE EVIL. PREVENTING PREGNANCY PREVENTS YOUR EXTRA EVIL ABORTIONS. Do you want more babies to die…? (7) I did not call capitalists evil. You did not address the issue. You danced around it. rBGH causes puberty in earlier ages in females. Females can get pregnant. Pubescent females are the target audience for sex education. (8) Ironic that you respond to my statement with even more stereotypes and classifications… Ann Coulter's titles aren't a credible source either. She has a mental disorder. To make this public to the entire debate.org community, I wish to challenge you on the following topic: Resolved- Real debates are won by citing sources and not petty name-calling. Think you can handle going Con? Happy Holidays The Colonel