But what if she was sharing cigarettes with classmates like so many teens do? Would you be as adamant in your stance? How about Tampons? Or Bible passages?
I think some people here put prudery in front of their
common sense. This girl is a community hero, and should not have been suspended
unless she was talking back to her teacher, or disobeyed a reasonable request
that didn't violate her 1st ammendment.
******
"Your comparison to cigarettes, tampons, or bible passages
is absurd."
No, it is not. They are all things that a student might
cover their costume with on Halloween. How would you respond to each? Would
each be a disruption?
******
kasandra21 (16 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 2:48 PM (# 85 of 373)
My earlier comparison to drugs and drinking was in reference to the "they will do it anyway, so why not make it "safe"? argument. I hardly think that equates to handing out drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes in a school.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sashoo (457 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 2:54 PM (# 86 of 373)
I would agree with Kas. They are apples and oranges.
Giving out cigarettes and alcohol encourages risky, dangerous behaviour, while handing out condoms encourages safer, less-risky behaviour.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What I find offensive about the school's reaction is that
this is because it was because the free items were condoms. They are not
explosive, they are not restricted, they are not absorbant, people don't
burn them to get high, they contain no sugar, and they don't imply that
the Earth was literally made in 6 days.
They are pieces of rubber or plastic that when used in
the right conditions, greatly reduce the risk of pregnancy and disease.
If the teacher had a problem with the costume, they should
have just asked the girl to remove her shirt, and return to a normal teen
automaton that doesn't think for themselves, or speak out against regressive
local policies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sashoo (457 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 2:56 PM (# 88 of 373)
Unless of course one wants to make the argument that giving out condoms encourages kids to go and have sex or somehow forces them into it.
I've never understood that one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
computer_saskboy (76 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:02 PM (# 89 of 373)
"I've never understood that one. "
Good, because if you do, then you really don't understand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
computer_saskboy (76 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:06 PM (# 90 of 373)
I can say with absolute certainty, as a man, and once a boy, that you need a girl FRIST to have sex, NOT A CONDOM FIRST.
Stop giving Boys access to girls if you want to cut down on teen sex. It would be way more effective than controlling the distribution of birth control is. And just as stupid.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
teach*here (0 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:09 PM (# 91 of 373)
They are not explosive, they are not restricted, they are not absorbant, people don't burn them to get high, they contain no sugar, and they don't imply that the Earth was literally made in 6 days.
Saskboy, this is my all-time favorite of your posts. LOL!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i-do-what-i-want (0 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:10 PM (# 92 of 373)
mine too! LOL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
osumprude (0 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:17 PM (# 93 of 373)
OK. I give up.
Young people should not have access to condoms.
Condoms lead to sex.
Therefore, eliminate condoms and there will be no sex among young people.
Yeah !
:: head firmly in the sand -
or some other dark place where the sun don't shine :)
::
*********
mykenzies (0 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:40 PM (# 97 of 373)
"computer_saskboy (76 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 3:06 PM (# 90 of 96)
I can say with absolute certainty, as a man, and once a boy, that you need a girl FRIST to have sex, NOT A CONDOM FIRST.
Stop giving Boys access to girls if you want to cut
down on teen sex. It would be way more effective than controlling the distribution
of birth control is. And just as stupid.
*LOL* post of the year!"
**********
And it should be noted that peers have as much influence
on kids as parents do, so you do want to try to make sure they have good
peers surrounding them. Sadly though, if your kid is taking sex advice
from peers over you, then you've failed as a parent some how. A kid should
have the mental tools to sort out junk that peers distribute.
And I still maintain that distributing condoms is appropriate
behaviour for teenage girls, in public. And even public schools if it is
not during class. These prude parents are probably less concerned if Sally
gets a report off the of the Internet than if they get a free condom at
school from some girl just having clean fun.
**********
If the parents object to their kids seeing a real-live condom, then they can just seize it when the kids comes home with it, saying "Look Ma, at the cool baloon this girl gave me!"
Kids can even see people being killed in video games in
public malls. Do the parents stop their kids from going to malls? Kids
need to LEARN HOW TO DEAL WITH ADULT STUFF, or they will make POOR ADULTS.
**********
"Handing out condoms is not teaching safe sex."
I agree. Handing out car keys is not dangerous driving. Not that that has to do with anything we're talking about.
It is up to the recipient to properly use whatever they are given. Period. If teens getting the condoms don't know that, their parents are failing sex education. If a kid doesn't know enough not to drive a car when they don't know how, the parents failed to teach them not to try driving without learning. SAME THING.
The problem is it is more instinctual to have sex than
drive a car. Yet we have driver's ed at 15, and sex ed is taboo? Sheesh.
"
"By passing out condoms, you're acknowledging having
sex," he said. "Our school's position is abstinence."
"
That guy is an idiot and he should be sued for slander.
***********
I'll thank everyone for posting here, even if you are
wrong.
"My point (as I said many times and no one would listen) is that I don't want another teenager taking it upon herself to teach my kids (or others, for that matter) about condoms, or any other sex ed topic. I also don't want another teen helping to enable younger kids to do something that they may not be ready for."
You seem to miss the point that kids are not ENABLED to have sex by putting a plastic condom in their hand. The part that enables them is built in.
And so what if another kid "teaches" others about condoms? If you've done your job as you say you have, then your kids will call that kid on their mistaken information, using their critical thinking skills you've bestowed on their able brains.
The only kid that isn't ready to hear something, is one that doesn't know how to call BS on something that stinks.
***********
A dress code doesn't apply on Halloween, for obvious
reasons.
"How many "PRO kid handing out condoms to other kids" actually have a kid in school right now?"
Irrelevent. Logic is logic because it always applies.
***********
"and hand out what may be defective condoms (who knows?)"
Any condom may be defective, even store bought ones. That is why you have sex only in situations where you're OK with the risk. Stopping the street trade in free condoms isn't going to teach people that.
I think a kid is more likely to be harmed by not having easy access to condoms.
"Sasboy.. logic is logic..
Not really. "
No, Really. And it's Saskboy, as in Sask. the province. :-)
************
"Its like telling someone to put out a fire by throwing
water on it. Might work in most situations.. but if you know more facts,
you know this advice can be dangerous in other circumstances."
It is like a teenager telling someone to put on a condom
if they have sex.
Or
If a kid listens to a peer saying that the best way to
put out a grease fire is to throw water on it, wouldn't you be criticizing
that SCHOOL for not teaching the kids at age 8 that you put baking soda
on it, or put on the lid?
"Do you really want another kid to teach your kid about
birth control? "
No, but they'll try anyway. A suspension isn't in order
though. Try telling them WHY, not sending them home to sit in front of
the TV and watch soap operas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
computer_saskboy (76 )(view author's auctions)
11/04/03 6:28 PM (# 279 of 373)
The arguments the principal was giving for the suspension
don't even make sense. They are wrong, and obviously based on his own predjudices
about teen sexuality. He isn't a clear thinker, or a clear speaker.
*************
"Saskboy-- I agree she shouldn't have been suspended. Sent home to get a more appropriate costume, yes.. not suspended. "
Even that I'd say was reasonable, although not really fair.
This is at: http://forums.ebay.com/db1/thread.jsp?forum=124&thread=400021204&start=60&msRange=
for a few weeks. Or at http://www.wftv.com/education/2604761/detail.html
O_sum notes that a person with a condom is as likely to have sex, as a person with a Bible is as likely to be a Christian.
