From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:42:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.062907.6352@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.233732.20913@anasazi.com> briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec30.200357.21464@lclark.edu> snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) writes:
>>
>>[stuff deleted]
>>>
>>>Okay....Now remember I am the person who supports you and your individule
>>>rights.......Now are you willing to allow a class on sexuality that
>>>shows homosexuality and heterosexuality in the same unbiased light, a
>>>class that would be optional????
>>
>>Why would homosexuality or hetrosexuality have to be taught?  That is if
>>the class focused solely on the biology of human reproduction, the means of
>>suppressing such reproduction, and the types and symptoms of diseases
>>transmitted through such reproduction,
>
>    Disease can be transmitted through non-reproductive sexual contact.
>Are you suggesting that those diseases, the types of contact that
>can potentially spread them, and the methods of preventing that
>spread should be excluded from the curriculum?

The class should deal with all STDs, and their means of transmission and
symptoms.  Sorry if I didn't make it clear.

>> moral questions regarding sexuality
>>can be dealt with in a psychology class.
>
>    I don't think anyone is asking for the moral aspects be
>examined in the sex ed course.  All anyone is asking for is
>equal time.

Equal time for what?  The class focused on the biology of reproduction, and
diseases control.  Very public health kind of stuff.  The moral questions
are things like when do you have sex with someone?  Why?  What do religions
say on the subject?  And things of that nature where generally there are
two sides to the coin.  These are the kind of questions dealt with in the
psychology course.  So, I don't see what you're asking for in regards to
equal time.

>
>>At the public high school I went to, Sex-ed was a 6 month course taught by
>>a biology teacher.  The class was taught in a very clinical manner
>>resticted to information of only biological content (reproduction,
>>pregnancy prevention, disease control) and it was required.
>
>     How useful was that class to gay students?

Very useful, I would guess, since we had no publically avowed 16 year old
homosexuals.  Disease control is useful regardless of orientation, STDs
doesn't discriminate.  The class didn't talk about oral copulation, sodomy
(that has such a religious connotation, is there a better euphimism, anal
sex isn't much better.), as it purpose was to prevent pregnancies and diseases,
not on how to.  So, for what it was intended, I think it did its job.  As for 
usefullness for gays,  I don't know.

>>Sexuality, as part of Psychology was reserved for Junior's and Seniors, and
>>you had to have parental permission to take the optional course.  Once in,
>>everything was open for discussion, much to consternation of the
>>administration.
>
>    Sounds like a good idea to me.

It was good.  Lust, sex, religion, homophoby, orgies, homosexuality,
assisnations, everything was open for discussion.  There was no such thing as 
a wrong or right topic.  The teacher, who as also the football strength coach,
encouraged players to take his class, and then would shatter their narrow
minded thinking patterns.  He'd show you a picture of an aborted fetus, and
then ask how it made you feel.  They he'd show you pictures of starving
children, deformed children, etc, and ask how that made you feel.  Everyday,
it would be something provocative like that.  His point was show you that
there were no absolutes, just opinions and theories, and that you should
always try to look at the otherside of things.

At 17, it was a rough class.  At 15, I couldn't have handled it
intelligently.  Anything less than Junior I agree it would have been
inappropriate for.  But once in, it was an eyeful.

I still think this is the best way to provide sex-education, and
enlightenment, tolerance, and all that other nifty social enginneering
to kids.  At the right age, and of their own valition.

>				-Phil
>
>-- 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
>philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
>Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12622 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11041 alt.politics.clinton:19343 alt.politics.bush:15201 alt.politics.homosexuality:8677