Debate: condoms in school?

1. Does it work on all kids or work on some kids? Stop being so vague.

2. If you don't mind pregnancy and other diseases then knock your self out then.alexside1

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

[QUOTE="jshaas"]I vote no. Sex is a big deal, and it should be treated as such. I know today's world is filled with sex everywhere, and that's what is desensitizing us to it. Giving kids condoms is telling them it's okay to have sex, and it's not. Once they start, they'll wonder what it feels like without the condom... I did. Teaching them abstinence is the best way to prevent the spread of disease and pregnancy. With that they should also be taught how to control their urges. Taking the position of "they're going to do it anyway" is just dismissing the responsibility we have as parents/adults to teach our kids. It's flat out laziness. I have an aunt that took that approach about her son drinking alcohol. Now, he's 20 with 3 DUI's and could very well pass as an alcoholic. This whole mentality saddens me, and I feel this is why our society is heading in the direction it is. Everyone usually blames the parents for everything when it comes to what kids are, or are not, doing... except this.sSubZerOo

No it isn't :| its facing a little thing we like to call REALITY.. Schools already teach the consquences of sexual activity including everything there needs to be known about it.. Teens need to be taught how to use contraception correclty and to have the possibility to ask the school nurse for a condom.. This in no way trivializes sex, but teens are still going have it they should have the access and education to be as safe as possible.. Contraception is by no means full proof but its far more realistic to look at things now to realize that teens are going to have sex whether you like it or not.. Schools are suppose to be teaching these people to become adults.. Being adult means you not only know the consquences of sexual activity, but the knowledge in how to use contraception if they do wish to have sex.

I agree with you bro

school should be a place of learning, and socialization not a place where you can get safe sex tools. Thats disgusting.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

Why though? What's wrong with it?

raynimrod

Because they do not hold all necessary factors constant. For one, people generally "need" (meaning "it would be healthy for them") to eat about one meal during school hours. This is why food is offered. The same doesn't quite hold for having sex.

A better argument would focus solely around reducing teenage pregnancies and STD transmissions, IMO.

I completely agree with you. As I said yesterday, my only reason I even started mentioning food was because someone said that if it was available, it wouldn't encourage people to eat. But giving someone access to condoms encourages sex. People then started to argue semantics (which are irrelevant to this discussion) so I continued arguing irrelevant semantics to try and make a point.

OK. I won't interrupt again. (however, you are capable of greater things)

[QUOTE="alexside1"]1. Does it work on all kids or work on some kids? Stop being so vague.

2. If you don't mind pregnancy and other diseases then knock your self out then.Teenaged

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Because they do not hold all necessary factors constant. For one, people generally "need" (meaning "it would be healthy for them") to eat about one meal during school hours. This is why food is offered. The same doesn't quite hold for having sex.

A better argument would focus solely around reducing teenage pregnancies and STD transmissions, IMO.

coolbeans90

I completely agree with you. As I said yesterday, my only reason I even started mentioning food was because someone said that if it was available, it wouldn't encourage people to eat. But giving someone access to condoms encourages sex. People then started to argue semantics (which are irrelevant to this discussion) so I continued arguing irrelevant semantics to try and make a point.

OK. I won't interrupt again. (however, you are capable of greater things)

I appreciate your apparent confidence and high opinion of me though, mate. :).

I know, it's probably not good to argue such silly things when the points are already in our favour.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"]1. Does it work on all kids or work on some kids? Stop being so vague.

2. If you don't mind pregnancy and other diseases then knock your self out then.alexside1

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"]1. Does it work on all kids or work on some kids? Stop being so vague.

2. If you don't mind pregnancy and other diseases then knock your self out then.alexside1

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

You see, the reason that I think this may be worth considering is that if the number of teen pregnancies are reduced, then the number of future welfare recipients would also diminish. In turn this could reduce government spending in the long run. I don't have a solid opinion either way on the issue due to the fact that I haven't seen any data on this, but it is something well worth considering. I am tempted to think that it would work.

[QUOTE="alexside1"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]1. Generally, what would you say? Does it work well enough to say its the only thing needed or that it gets the job done? Is it satisfactory in any level?

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

Teenaged

[QUOTE="alexside1"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]1. Generally, what would you say? Does it work well enough to say its the only thing needed or that it gets the job done? Is it satisfactory in any level?

2. If you prefer unprotected sex then knock yourself out then.

coolbeans90

You see, the reason that I think this may be worth considering is that if the number of teen pregnancies are reduced, then the number of future welfare recipients would also diminish. In turn this could reduce government spending in the long run. I don't have a solid opinion either way on the issue due to the fact that I haven't seen any data on this, but it is something well worth considering. I am tempted to think that it would work.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] It works most of the time. People who are unaware of the possible consequences are most likely to have an effect on practicing abstinence. If people want to screw education and taking the risk than that's their responsibilities. I don't mind that the school system are required to sell condoms to students. What I do mind though is that cost of their condoms is coming out my tax money.

alexside1

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] It works most of the time. People who are unaware of the possible consequences are most likely to have an effect on practicing abstinence. If people want to screw education and taking the risk than that's their responsibilities. I don't mind that the school system are required to sell condoms to students. What I do mind though is that cost of their condoms is coming out my tax money.

alexside1

You see, the reason that I think this may be worth considering is that if the number of teen pregnancies are reduced, then the number of future welfare recipients would also diminish. In turn this could reduce government spending in the long run. I don't have a solid opinion either way on the issue due to the fact that I haven't seen any data on this, but it is something well worth considering. I am tempted to think that it would work.

Yes, but you're using no numbers and no data to form your current opinion.

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]It works? You mean that most teenagers follow to the advice of abstinence? You cant really know that. All you can somehow know is what percentage of those who didnt follow it were lead to unexpected pregnancies or STDs.

Teenaged

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

You see, the reason that I think this may be worth considering is that if the number of teen pregnancies are reduced, then the number of future welfare recipients would also diminish. In turn this could reduce government spending in the long run. I don't have a solid opinion either way on the issue due to the fact that I haven't seen any data on this, but it is something well worth considering. I am tempted to think that it would work.

raynimrod

Yes, but you're using no numbers and no data to form your current opinion.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] I'm relying on my personal experience when I made that statement teenage.alexside1

What works both ways? Me saying that you cant really know that?

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] That requires lots and lots of numbers and data if you want your plan into action.alexside1

Yes, but you're using no numbers and no data to form your current opinion.

Because otherwise it makes the opinion ill-informed.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] It works most of the time. People who are unaware of the possible consequences are most likely to have an effect on practicing abstinence. If people want to screw education and taking the risk than that's their responsibilities. I don't mind that the school system are required to sell condoms to students. What I do mind though is that cost of their condoms is coming out my tax money.

alexside1

You see, the reason that I think this may be worth considering is that if the number of teen pregnancies are reduced, then the number of future welfare recipients would also diminish. In turn this could reduce government spending in the long run. I don't have a solid opinion either way on the issue due to the fact that I haven't seen any data on this, but it is something well worth considering. I am tempted to think that it would work.

True. No hard numbers, but there are some factors which we can looks at. Condoms en masse are relatively cheap. Welfare checks, not so much. Keep in mind that teenage pregnancies result in people entering the work force early instead of finishing high school, let alone go to college. It is statistically speaking, very unlikely that these are going to be two parent households in the long run. In summation, a single parent coupled with a lower education attainment, a corresponding low skill/low pay job and a kid to boot, methinks the case could readily be made that condoms may pay themselves off.

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]Sorry but your personal experience isnt enough.

Teenaged

What works both ways? Me saying that you cant really know that?

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="raynimrod"]

Yes, but you're using no numbers and no data to form your current opinion.

raynimrod

Because otherwise it makes the opinion ill-informed.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"]Look I can't go around and invade people's privacy like that if I really want to know 100% certain. All I can do is make educational statements base on my experience. It works both ways on the "you can't really know that".alexside1

What works both ways? Me saying that you cant really know that?

Since you cant know in any way the percentage of teenagers who do abstain from sex, then you cant know.

We cant judge if abstinence sex ed works by the percentage of teenagers who were lead to unwanted pregnancies or STDs but by the percentage of teenagers who actually abstained, since, you know, thats what abstinence sex ed wants to achieve.

Since you cant know in any way the percentage of teenagers who do abstain from sex, then you cant know.

We cant judge if abstinence sex ed works by the percentage of teenagers who were lead to unwanted pregnancies or STDs but by the percentage of teenagers who actually abstained, since, you know, thats what abstinence sex ed wants to achieve.

Teenaged

Edit: you know this software is REALLLY pissing me off you know.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Since you cant know in any way the percentage of teenagers who do abstain from sex, then you cant know.

We cant judge if abstinence sex ed works by the percentage of teenagers who were lead to unwanted pregnancies or STDs but by the percentage of teenagers who actually abstained, since, you know, thats what abstinence sex ed wants to achieve.

alexside1

Edit: you know this software is REALLLY pissing me off you know.

[QUOTE="alexside1"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Since you cant know in any way the percentage of teenagers who do abstain from sex, then you cant know.

We cant judge if abstinence sex ed works by the percentage of teenagers who were lead to unwanted pregnancies or STDs but by the percentage of teenagers who actually abstained, since, you know, thats what abstinence sex ed wants to achieve.

Teenaged

Edit: you know this software is REALLLY pissing me off you know.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] I think we can track it. If we track the number of the students that open admitted in having sex. We can at least make a good education guess base on it. This isn't bullet proof though.

Edit: you know this software is REALLLY pissing me off you know.

alexside1

Thats gonna be hard.

[QUOTE="Nintendevil"]

[QUOTE="Deihjan"] Enjoy your death, Human race.kamikaze_pigmy

How much money a person has shouldn't be considered. Thats unfair just because someone has little money doesn't mean they can't be an amazing parent

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

[QUOTE="alexside1"] Why do I even need numbers and data to even have an opinion?alexside1

Because otherwise it makes the opinion ill-informed.

Correct, you do. I haven't claimed how much something will or won't/does or doesn't work.

[QUOTE="kamikaze_pigmy"][QUOTE="Nintendevil"]...And to elaborate in order to have kids you must pass a few IQ tests and basic financial requirements.

ChaelaMcchubble

How much money a person has shouldn't be considered. Thats unfair just because someone has little money doesn't mean they can't be an amazing parent

People will act like its a joke. Guarantee that they'd be used for pranks or randomly throw on the ground.

Depends on the type of school.. If it was a male only school then there would be a problem imo O.o

Yes, at all schools. All. If someone asks for it it should be given to them because not having it isn't going to prevent them from having sex, it will only prevent them from having safe sex. And I've yet to see a study that linked giving out condoms to increased sex in teens. Even if such a study exists, I would not see the big deal. It's time society realized sex is not some horrid evil thing that must be shunned.

Yes, at all schools. All. If someone asks for it it should be given to them because not having it isn't going to prevent them from having sex, it will only prevent them from having safe sex. And I've yet to see a study that linked giving out condoms to increased sex in teens. Even if such a study exists, I would not see the big deal. It's time society realized sex is not some horrid evil thing that must be shunned.

Pixel-Pirate

This whole debate could really go a lot better if people stopped using poor analogies like food and drugs.

This whole debate could really go a lot better if people stopped using poor analogies like food and drugs.

worlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

This whole debate could really go a lot better if people stopped using poor analogies like food and drugs.

YellowOneKinobi

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

This whole debate could really go a lot better if people stopped using poor analogies like food and drugs.

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

Yes, at all schools. All. If someone asks for it it should be given to them because not having it isn't going to prevent them from having sex, it will only prevent them from having safe sex. And I've yet to see a study that linked giving out condoms to increased sex in teens. Even if such a study exists, I would not see the big deal. It's time society realized sex is not some horrid evil thing that must be shunned.

Pixel-Pirate

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"] Isn't the point of condoms at schools "public safety"? I'm not sure how the "clean needles" comparison is invalid.YellowOneKinobi

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

Because teens are going to have sex, no matter how much we tell them not to, and giving them access to safe sex is preferable to the spread of STDs and teen pregnancies.

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

worlock77

Because teens are going to have sex, no matter how much we tell them not to, and giving them access to safe sex is preferable to the spread of STDs and teen pregnancies.

As well as teaching them how to use contraception..

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

Because teens are going to have sex, no matter how much we tell them not to, and giving them access to safe sex is preferable to the spread of STDs and teen pregnancies.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Good point. Valid. But I'm still not sure how the following sentence is finished. "Schools should give out condoms because _____________________________ ." YellowOneKinobi

Because teens are going to have sex, no matter how much we tell them not to, and giving them access to safe sex is preferable to the spread of STDs and teen pregnancies.

As well as teaching them how to use contraception..

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

This whole debate could really go a lot better if people stopped using poor analogies like food and drugs.

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"] Isn't the point of condoms at schools "public safety"? I'm not sure how the "clean needles" comparison is invalid.jshaas

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

"Should be" isn't relevant. There are a lot of things that "should be" but aren't, and a lot of things that "should not be" but are. We can talk about "should" or "shouldn't" all day, but at some point we have to look at the reality of the situation.

[QUOTE="jshaas"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

Firstly drugs are illegal, sex is not. Secondly sex is a fact of life for most people, drugs are not. I don't know of a single person I went to school with who used hypodermic drugs. Most, however, had had sex before graduation (to hear them talk anyway).

"Should be" isn't relevant. There are a lot of things that "should be" but aren't, and a lot of things that "should not be" but are. We can talk about "should" or "shouldn't" all day, but at some point we have to look at the reality of the situation.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="jshaas"] I think the legality of it is irrelevant. Some people think drugs should be legalized, and some people think sex before marriage is morally "illegal." That's why we have two positions on this and any other debate. I also don't think that because sex is more prevelant, the drugs anology fails. Sex is not something kids in high school should be doing... just like drugs. Each has consequences that are well beyond the maturity level of most kids that age. But, they're tempted to do things that they shouldn't. Some do these things, and some don't. So, yes handing out free condoms can be argued to be like handing out clean needles.YellowOneKinobi

"Should be" isn't relevant. There are a lot of things that "should be" but aren't, and a lot of things that "should not be" but are. We can talk about "should" or "shouldn't" all day, but at some point we have to look at the reality of the situation.

No more so than the store selling the condom or the condom manufacturer itself is.

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

"Should be" isn't relevant. There are a lot of things that "should be" but aren't, and a lot of things that "should not be" but are. We can talk about "should" or "shouldn't" all day, but at some point we have to look at the reality of the situation.

No more so than the store selling the condom or the condom manufacturer itself is.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"] Perhaps this is splitting hairs, but an 18 year old student (at least in my state) is NOT legally allowed to engage in sexual inercourse with an 16 year old student. Is the school then participating in the crime of statutory rape?YellowOneKinobi

No more so than the store selling the condom or the condom manufacturer itself is.

Sorry but it isn't. It's giving students the means to protect themselves.

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

No more so than the store selling the condom or the condom manufacturer itself is.

Sorry but it isn't. It's giving students the means to protect themselves.

Which is the more effective form of birth control? Allowing teens access to condoms or pretending that teens are not having sex. Sure, the ultimate solution is to convince teens to avoid sex until they are physically and mentally mature enough to handle the situation. But that type of thinking is completely un-realistic.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="YellowOneKinobi"] I think the difference is that school faculty are in a position of authority over the student body. So giving out condoms could amount to condoning their use. YellowOneKinobi

Sorry but it isn't. It's giving students the means to protect themselves.