[- - e r i k - -]

That is debatable.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

That is debatable.

Everything's debatable.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Sex education does discourage unsafe sex, but again the point was that raising your kids under tenets that may discourage them from having premarital sex is not dangerous.

Not inherently, no. In practice, it's exceedingly rare for abstinence-only education and fully informational sex education to coexist — they tend to think teaching kids about sex nullifies the abstinence-only education.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Not inherently, no. In practice, it's exceedingly rare for abstinence-only education and fully informational sex education to coexist — they tend to think teaching kids about sex nullifies the abstinence-only education.

My point was that raising your kids under tenets that may discourage them from having premarital sex is not dangerous. I wasn't really touching on them both being taught together, but you bring up an interesting point. You said "they tend to think teaching kids about sex nullifies the abstinence-only education", what do you think?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

My point was that raising your kids under tenets that may discourage them from having premarital sex is not dangerous. I wasn't really touching on them both being taught together

Well, I hope we can agree that not teaching safe sex — regardless of what else you teach them — is risky. That's what I was saying: Abstinence isn't a dangerous idea, but it's usually taught in a dangerous way.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

but you bring up an interesting point. You said "they tend to think teaching kids about sex nullifies the abstinence-only education", what do you think?

I agree with them that giving people honest information about sex makes those people more likely to do it than feeding them ignorance and FUD. I still think that even Machiavelli would have trouble viewing that as reasonable justification, though. And it doesn't exactly nullify the effect of abstinence teachings — it just takes the FUD (which I don't think any idea system should rely on) out of the equation.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Well, I hope we can agree that not teaching safe sex — regardless of what else you teach them — is risky. That's what I was saying: Abstinence isn't a dangerous idea, but it's usually taught in a dangerous way.

I don't understand what you mean by; "it's usually taught in a dangerous way".

I agree with them that giving people honest information about sex makes those people more likely to do it than feeding them ignorance and FUD. I still think that even Machiavelli would have trouble viewing that as reasonable justification, though. And it doesn't exactly nullify the effect of abstinence teachings — it just takes the FUD (which I don't think any idea system should rely on) out of the equation.

What do you mean by FUD? Granted, most of the studies I've seen conclude that teaching abstinence-only is not enough, but unfortunately there's little to suggest safe-sex teaching is working either. I'm trying to find some more now, but they're all long on fluff and anecdotal stories, short on real stats.