On Tuesday 30 July 2002 3:05 pm, you wrote:
> [Mermaid]I dont think kids should be having sex when they should be
> studying in school or expanding their minds. There is a time and place for
> everything. The formative years are the basis of a good foundation.
> Sexuality should be explored. Allowing children to engage in damaging
> sexual activity even before they are sexually mature or physically
> developed is a stupid idea, at best. The incidence of STDs in children is
Attempting to repress instinct is an amusing thing to try. People (especially
teenagers) are naturally curious, and by hiding all exposure to sexual
activities will never work, especially when all those hormones are at work.
I'm with Herm on this, good sex. ed. is the best way. My parents tried their
hardest to limit my exposure to sex, and Mermaid, you know how horny I am.
Maybe if they were a lil' more open about it, I would have turned out
differently :)
(Also, the definition of a child varies from country to country, so which
definition do you use? Hell, even in the US, the definiton varies from state
to state, as demonstrated in an earlier post by Herm on ages of consent).
> more proof that they should be educated and not let loose out in the world.
You know what they say about Catholic Girls....
> Especially in a world of predators who regularly abuse these kids sexually
> in an elitist or red neckish manner. It is a travesty that children have
> STDs. It is unacceptable. This will only result in really bad seeds if
I think there is a cultural aspect here. Maybe someone could post some
statistics about STD infections of different age groups from different
countries. Do countries which are more open about sex have lower or higher
STD infection rates?
I have no idea where to find these stats, or what they are, but I'd expect to
find that countries which expose people to sexual education at younger ages
will have lower rates of STD infections, while conservative states will have
much higher STD rates, as well as higher teen pregnancy rates. Of course,
this hypothesis doesn't include states that have limited access to
contraceptives (both barrier and oral).
(Of course, statistics can be used to prove anything)
> these diseases can be transmitted to their next generation. I am amused
> when I see television commericals which sell three day treatments instead
> of five day treatments for herpes. There is your next generation.
US culture. Minimum amount of work is more important than the benefits.
===
Mark 'Nurgle' Collins
http://www.thisisnurgle.org.uk
Stupid IRC quote of the <variable time period>:
<phoenix> insider, you'll have to excuse nurgle, he's the epitamy of evil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:16 MDT