paghat wrote:

In article , Sheila
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:

OK. That last paragraph is precious. Could you please provide at least two
sources (web links, scientific journals) for that ridiculous information,
preferably sources NOT connected with any religious organization?

By the way, some say I attribute too much to linguistic skills, but your

inclusion of an apostrophe in "girl's" reveals a lot about you.


Yep, when you have no arguments then pick out an error in typing or
spelling or putting an apostrophe in the wrong place. Insults replace
the need to have valid arguments.

Conversely, when you have no basis for silly assertions, whining &
whinging about feeling insulted replaces debate, even invalid debate.

What silly assertion are you talking about? What whining and
whinging(whatever that means) and felling insulted are you talking
about?
I'm not doing any of the above, just pointing out that she was
substituting that for debate.


I have lived and I have grandchildren and friends with grandchildren, so
I do know what is going on. Experience counts you know.

If you had valid arguments, you could have focused more on the request for
evidence of an assertion that on the surface appeared assinine &
incorrect. If you had any evidence for your amazingly silly assertions,
you would've provided it, instead of saying you're old & you just know.

Your assertion was that sex education "encourage sexual activity" and
"makes it harder for girl's [sic] to say 'no' to a guy."

I echo Doug's request: where do you get this crap? Out of your ass?

If you have to talk with a potty mouth, then talk to someone else!



Because here is the truth, according to the US Teenage Pregnancy
Statistics Special Report, & the "Survey of Sex Education Provision in
Secondary Schools" from the organization AVERT which is struggling to
lower the incidence of HIV & AIDS in teenage childrne.

Less than half the schools in America have adequate sex education. The
better the sex education program, the lower the teenage pregnancy rate.
Less sex education, more teenage pregnancy. WITH sex education there is a
loweredincidence of HIV and AIDS. Without adequate sex education fewer
girls learn "relationship negotiation skills" which arm them with a far
BETTER chance of saying "no," avoiding date-rape, & getting home without a
venereal disease.

Deal with this: Those who oppose adequate sex education in the schools
destroy the lives of children whose lives didn't need to be destroyed. Our
current president pandering to the religious right & perhaps his own idea
of God has sided with those who are fighting AGAINST adequate sex
education, without regard for what would actually protect children. So he
too is a danger to children.

And yes, some people will want to just insult you for deploring what
protects children best, quite justifiably insulted too. But be glad about
it because it gives you a chance to whine & whing that you were insulted,
rather than learning & growing sufficiently that you will no longer be
promoting mistruths & misguided notions that endanger even your own
vaunted grandchildren.



There is far more problems with teen pregnancy than years ago when sex
education wasn't in the schools. Yes, the last year or so, teen
pregnancy has come down, but it nowhere near the levels when I was
young.
But of course, you know all the answers!

This is my last post to you.