Keep up the Great work Dwyer!

[Geek]

Wouldn't those issues be best left to the parents? When getting to how to handle emotional aspects of anything, peer pressure, etc., it's my personal belief that those issues should not be blanket taught by the school. The science of human reproduction, the science of puberty and thus what to expect - well sure. But, how (or even whether) to handle STD's and the emotional feels of puberty sound like parental issues. If the schools covered all aspects of the controversies associated with sex, that'd take a full school year going full time on nothing else. I think what most people assume is that the school would only teach one side of a controversy - thus enforcing only one idea that may not be the same as the parents (teaching to accept something their parents would like to teach them to only tolerate). Schools should teach facts, not weigh in on controversies, in my opinion.

Just a FYI...Your karma was grey so I am glad you told me what color it was supposed to be

 

[This_person]

Okay, so you can't find an insurance company that charges differently per child, thought so. Also if a company covers same-sex unions along with standard marriages what makes you think that they would have to cover non-married partners? Blowing smoke a hobby or a profession for you?

Wow. You're right, I'm wrong. Feel better? (this is just easier)

 

[This_person]

It's an unfortunate reality that teachers often have to confront those issues when teaching sex ed, even when they make an effort to stick to the reproductive mechanics. It's often difficult to separate the factual from the emotional in the area of sex, especially for teenagers. And some teens feel more comfortable talking about those issues with their teachers than with their parents, which is another unfortunate reality.



Why would they? Some high schools teach courses on comparative religions, and the objective is not to favor any one religion. Surely teachers can handle sexual controversies could be handled with the same type of neutrality.

I agree with the first half of this - that kids often feel easier to talk with someone other than their parents and that it's hard to separate those issues, AND that it's unfortunate. Fully agree with all of that.
As for the second part, it's not that many teachers couldn't, I think most could. I just think that when you talk public school, lawsuits and ACLU-types make being honest and truly neutral almost impossible. I mean, it's a constant news fact that parents are going after schools for somehow hurting their children because they give them fair grades, or that kids can't say something Christian in school because it may offend a Muslim or Jew (though other religions can and should be discussed by these same kids). It's the fear they'd be restricted from being fair. The Ward Churchill's of the world are in the higher level of schools, where kids can fight back either in the classroom or by not taking the classes. The public primary and secondary schools don't allow for any of that.