Printable View
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303058,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21358971/
I can't comment on this right now cuz i have tons of homework but i thought you guys would find it interesting. Birth control vs. Abstinence, Parent negligence vs. media influences... Let the debating begin.
I do not think that the presence of free condoms and birth control will facilitate nonstop, non consequential carnal relations between middle schoolers. I do however, hope that the sex education that is planned to go along with this program is excellent. At the very least, they should teach them how use the condom...
Also, I hope that these kids are taught that herpes can be transfered through areas the condom cannot cover. As I said, I support this only with thorough sex-ed.
Two thoughts: Parents needed to give children permission to visit the health center. This seems like a reasonable precaution.
We know from rigorous studies that abstinence education does not work. We also know that a very small percentage of middle-schoolers will, in fact, get pregnant. My moral outrage at the thought of twelve-year-old girls getting access to birth control is outweighed by my horror at the thought of pregnant seventh graders.
Agreed entirely. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
That would defeat the purpose of even handing them out in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I have zero moral outrage at junior high kids getting birth control. Considering the sheer number of sexually active 13 and 14 yearolds (high school starts at grade 10, 15 yearsold here) I went to junior high with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
The fact of the matter is, kids do have sex. There's no real point in a moral outrage at giving them access to birth control.
Better having the precautions at 12, than a mother at 13.
I'm with Lemur.