Condoms For First Graders?

We're talking about giving a safety device to a child, and you relate that to giving guns, drugs and alcohol to children? Reach a little farther...



Nobody is encouraging sex -- they're encouraging safety, if anything.

Safety device ha ha ha ha :woot: I'm going to use that one tonight. Hold on baby, let me put on one of these "safety devices". Oh GD you liberals are a trip. Ha ha ha

I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.

P.S. I am running a pool for the rest of you: I will cover all bets at 2 to 1 against.

I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.

Children shouldn't be having sex.

No, the welfare of a child is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.

#1 - kids no sexy time - agreed. There should be no problem reaching a group consensus on this one.

#2 - kids are the responsibility of parents and society at large. No way we will reach a consensus here.

I am going to try something new and different for our Warpath discussions: What can we agree on? Really. Start out broad, if we can narrow it down, great. If we have to broaden, it, fine. But let’s work on finding a statement, relevant to this discussion, that we can all agree on. Is there one?

Let me throw something out there:
1. “Six year olds should not be engaging in intimate sexual activity of any kind.” – Nice, broad terms. Can you reasonably define the terms of this statement for yourself so that you can agree with it. I am not concerned with what six year olds are actually doing – This is a statement concerning the standards we uniformly hold as a society regardless of whether individuals within the society occasionally don’t comply with the standard.

Here’s a trickier one:
2. “The sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” Again, can you reasonably define the terms of this statement in such a way as to agree with it? If not, how would you change it to make it something we could all agree on?

I would hope we can come to an agreement on No.1. I think No.2 will be trickier.

In terms of "everyone", let make this a real challenge. I challenge Matty, saden, buster, bud38, TTE, SS84, firstdown and GhettoDog, to find a statement that they can all agree on as to No.1 and No.2.

I dare you gentlemen. I believe each of you intelligent enough to understand the concept. I am not, however, so sure that each of you is willing to see what is "right" about someone else's point of view as to allow for finding a commonality. Quite frankly, I expect you to fail.

Shock me. I double dog dare you.

Haha, nice. I can agree with both 1 and 2, but I have never really been arguing that point anyways.

If it makes any difference, the point I was arguing is censorship really. If/when I have kids, I will not be concerned about sheltering them from information, but instead I will strive to teach them critical thinking so they may be able to make their own reasonable conclusions. Exposure to information is not the problem as I see it. However, it is each parent's right to teach their kids how they like, and to shelter them if they like.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick Asks Provincetown's School Committee To Revise Condom Policy - wjz.com (http://wjz.com/national/school.condom.policy.2.1772020.html)

Just remember what's been done in the name of security and for the public good.

Children shouldn't be having sex.

No, the welfare of a child is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.

And right out of the gate we have a fail. You even going to try TTE?

No.2 said that "sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” If a child (however you define it) is sexually active, you don't think this has any effect on the public health i.e. the transmission of STD's, increased poverty rates, higher educational costs?

Your statement about parental provision for the welfare of the child relates to the appropriate solution to a public health issue. Before we get to the solution, however, I just want to see if we can agree on the problem. Do you see children having sex as a problem for society as a whole? Is it your belief that children's sexual activity has no effect on our society's public health, that any ill effects from the activity will harm only those actually engaging in it? If kids start having sex, it will have no detrimental effect on the body politic?

And right out of the gate we have a fail. You even going to try TTE?

No.2 said that "sexual activity of children is a public health issue that affects the entire society, not just the individuals involved or their immediate families.” If a child (however you define it) is sexually active, you don't think this has any effect on the public health i.e. the transmission of STD's, increased poverty rates, higher educational costs?

Your statement about parental provision for the welfare of the child relates to the appropriate solution to a public health issue. Before we get to the solution, however, I just want to see if we can agree on the problem. Do you see children having sex as a problem for society as a whole? Is it your belief that children's sexual activity has no effect on our society's public health, that any ill effects from the activity will harm only those actually engaging in it? If kids start having sex, it will have no detrimental effect on the body politic?
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_g_4mPcMAn_y5M:http://www.freefoto.com/images/11/06/11_06_13---Merry-go-round--The-Hoppings--Newcastle-upon-Tyne_web.jpg