Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » IGNORANCE ONLY
  • IGNORANCE ONLY

    Filed at 3:46 am under by dcobranchi

    NC is getting ready to offer parents a choice for sex ed in school:

    1) Comprehensive sex ed
    2) Abstinence only sex ed
    3) No sex ed at all

    And this is an improvement over the existing law.

    The Republicans, as usual, aren’t happy:

    In a vote falling mostly on party lines, the committee rejected a Republican request to take the word “only” out of a description of the abstinence-based curriculum: “abstinence only until marriage.”

    Bill Brooks, president of the socially and Christian conservative Family Policy Council, said after the committee meeting that the word “only” in the description is bad, that it will push parents away from the abstinence curriculum and toward the comprehensive program.

    “The way it’s written in the bill is a pejorative term,” Brooks said. “You get the form home for your child and it says ‘abstinence-only’ or ‘comprehensive sex education,’ well, what sounds better? Well, certainly I want my child to have the best. I don’t want him to have just ‘only.’”

    AO is the name. Jeez!

    7 Responses to “IGNORANCE ONLY”


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    April 8th, 2009
    at 7:09 am

    “Well, what sounds better?”

    Exactly! 🙂

    Nance


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    April 8th, 2009
    at 8:39 am

    Until the last year, Rs have been at the top of the class in manipulating “how it sounds” to create the sleight of substance they want (the Democrat Party, choose life, marriage protection, teach the controversy, parent rights etc etc) — are they losing their touch?


    Comment by
    sam
    April 8th, 2009
    at 10:23 am

    No, JJ they aren’t so much losing their touch as much as the rest of the country is finally figuring out their trickery, or so I hope.

    I imagine a lot of us on the left/progressive side have grown tired of their semantic manipulation, but they are so damn good at it. Look at the way they made people scramble to not be seen as liberal and they way they’ve almost make liberal an insult.

    Of course that same semantic manipulation is why I prefer the term progressive. I feel it puts me/us on the side of progress and shows those on the right in the stuck in the past light they deserve.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    April 8th, 2009
    at 2:27 pm

    Well, you have a way with words my friend. Did you see I borrowed your “interstellar being” phrase the other day? 🙂

    Seriously, you may be wasting a potentially lucrative, progressive way with words, until you put your voice into some marketable form that could pay for beer and car repairs at the least. (I’ve thought this before and meant to mention it to you.)


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    April 10th, 2009
    at 9:02 am

    Abstinence-only is ignorance-only!

    There’s fear, confusion and angst.

    As one who is personally pro-life but supports every woman’s right to choose as a national policy — with the caveat that abortion should always be the last resort, a decision that cannot be made cavalierly and with the goal that abortions should be rare — this case is troubling on so many levels.

    It says as much about the cavalier misuse of abortion as a contraceptive as it does about the growing sexual carelessness of teenagers. It should put every parent on notice to talk with — not ”to” — their teens about personal responsibility and life’s tough choices.


    Comment by
    Forest Crump
    April 12th, 2009
    at 10:40 am

    Okay, all you need to know about sex is; Don’t have it. This actually translates into choice (3) No sex Ed at all, because I just taught the whole abstinence curriculum.

    I saw a pamphlet from a sex Ed class on STD’s, hell I didn’t know ¾ of the diseases on it because they didn’t exist when I was a teenager and for most of my adult life—hell that should be enough to scare anyone into abstinence without any moral or religious teachings or meaning added to it.

    While I am at it, I don’t understand their insistence on seven earth days of creation. The Catholics tried to burn at the stake anyone and everyone who put forth the concept that the earth IS NOT the center of the universe however, a few of us survived.

    I’ll believe in seven-day creation when they can show me the ‘Four corners’ of the earth. People who hold to these myths have limited capacity for reasoning and understanding, thinking is not something they engage in and they do not want anyone else engaging in it either—this is the way that it is and you do not need to know anything else.

    In addition, they have created God in their own image, one that is jealous and revengeful just as they are, one who brings things into judgment just as they do, one that shows favor to one over another just as they do, one that one day will destroy the earth just as they are doing—A god of limited capacity sitting on a throne like some earthly king.

    “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!”
    “They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. Everything they do is done for men to see:”

    They condemn men to live under the laws of their interpretations not the laws of nature and certainly not the laws of an intelligent creative force, not the laws of pure thought, which has the power to create physical objects.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    April 13th, 2009
    at 9:05 am

    Hmmm, “scared into abstinence” didn’t stop most of us from driving as teens though. Remember those terrifying bloody car crash movies they showed us in high school — ALONG WITH giving us an approved operator’s handbook, practical rules and support to get licensed.

    What what if driver’s ed were taught as abstinence-only? Just say no to cars! (Don’t think I haven’t been tempted, and my 19-year-old really is still a driving virgin by choice. . .not because I forbade it or terrified her though.)