TEACH SEX ED, GO TO JAIL
May. 30th, 2010 01:29 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogThis is a little old, but it’s only just been brought to my attention and it’s not only apropos in relation to the previous post, but also worth passing on in case you haven’t seen it:
ITEM: The Wisconsin state govt passes a law that tells schools if yr going to teach sex ed, you have to teach students “medically accurate, age-appropriate information”, including how to use birth control and prevent sexually transmitted diseases. It also requires the classes to include information about how to recognize signs of abuse and how alcohol can affect decision making.
Juneau County district attorney Scott Southworth – a Republican, as it happens – duly sends teachers a letter warning them that if they show students how to use contraceptives, they can be arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
Here’s his argument (from the actual letter):
You can also watch Southworth explain himself to Anderson Cooper here if you like.
Basically Southworth is taking the old “if you give kids condoms yr encouraging them to have sex” routine (also known as the “kids won’t have sex unless you give them condoms” argument), which has been around for ages, and combining it with the notion that minors having sex with each other amounts to sexual assault under Wisconsin law to conclude that anyone who teaches them how to break that law safely is an accessory.
IF they teach sex ed, that is. The law allows school districts to opt out and not teach any sex education at all if they don’t like the curriculum requirements.
See what just happened there?
FUN FACT: Under the same law, in cases where the school districts do teach sex ed under the new criteria, parents can also opt to pull their kids out of the classes. No word on whether the parents who don’t pull their kids out could also be arrested under the same logic (like they do in, say, Georgia).
Obviously, I think the “if you give kids condoms yr encouraging them to have sex” line is jabbering nonsense, and that not teaching teens how to use contraceptives correctly is irresponsible, if not criminally nelgligent. So I’m not objective about this, is what I’m saying.
But it may be a moot point. Apparently a campaign is underway to get enough signatures for a recall election for Southworth’s job.
Which will probably make him a hero and martyr for the usual suspects, if he isn't one already.
Let me roll it,
This is dF
ITEM: The Wisconsin state govt passes a law that tells schools if yr going to teach sex ed, you have to teach students “medically accurate, age-appropriate information”, including how to use birth control and prevent sexually transmitted diseases. It also requires the classes to include information about how to recognize signs of abuse and how alcohol can affect decision making.
Juneau County district attorney Scott Southworth – a Republican, as it happens – duly sends teachers a letter warning them that if they show students how to use contraceptives, they can be arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
Here’s his argument (from the actual letter):
You can also watch Southworth explain himself to Anderson Cooper here if you like.
Basically Southworth is taking the old “if you give kids condoms yr encouraging them to have sex” routine (also known as the “kids won’t have sex unless you give them condoms” argument), which has been around for ages, and combining it with the notion that minors having sex with each other amounts to sexual assault under Wisconsin law to conclude that anyone who teaches them how to break that law safely is an accessory.
IF they teach sex ed, that is. The law allows school districts to opt out and not teach any sex education at all if they don’t like the curriculum requirements.
See what just happened there?
FUN FACT: Under the same law, in cases where the school districts do teach sex ed under the new criteria, parents can also opt to pull their kids out of the classes. No word on whether the parents who don’t pull their kids out could also be arrested under the same logic (like they do in, say, Georgia).
Obviously, I think the “if you give kids condoms yr encouraging them to have sex” line is jabbering nonsense, and that not teaching teens how to use contraceptives correctly is irresponsible, if not criminally nelgligent. So I’m not objective about this, is what I’m saying.
But it may be a moot point. Apparently a campaign is underway to get enough signatures for a recall election for Southworth’s job.
Which will probably make him a hero and martyr for the usual suspects, if he isn't one already.
Let me roll it,
This is dF
