Daily Page | Zebrality | 2010 Football Pool | General Chat | Latest Comments

You are on an individual archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • Double Rainbow Guy in Windows Live Ad
  • Skeptoid.com on the Myers-Briggs Personality Test
  • New Glarus Brewing invites fans to weigh in on its 2011 beer schedule
  • UW the big loser in Big Ten realignment
       [ 14 comments ]
  • Glee, Flight of the Conchords featured on 9/26 Simpsons premiere
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Zenyatta Stakes reverting to old name meaning Zenyatta will not be able to win the Zenyatta stakes
  • Target to sell Facebook Credits gift cards
  • Officials: Suspect holding hostages at Discovery Channel
       [ 1 comment ]
  • New Big Ten divisions to be announced 7 pm ET tonight
       [ 77 comments ]
  • UEFA enacts vuvuzela ban
  • Blair: Bush world view had 'immense simplicity'
  • Best. Horserace Call. Ever.
       [ 1 comment ]
  • The Media Loses Readers and Viewers to its Own Radicalism
  • Great Debate: Can Rodgers overtake Favre?
       [ 20 comments ]
  • Homeowne's Fight Involves Flag Tied to Tea Party
  • Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Authorities Were on High Alert for Possible Hijack Attempt
  • Behind the hurricane hype
  • UW-Madison: 17th-best damn university in the whole damn world
  • Social media votes on Aaron Rodgers' beard
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Not so cuddly now: It's claws the psycho squirrel
  • Top 5 Floating Sheep Maps
  • Texas Rep. violated rules, steered scholarships to relatives
  • The smell of freshly-cut grass is actually a plant distress call
  • Why can't Barack Obama tell the world about American tolerance?
  • Anyone Who Wants to Cut Entitlements Clearly Has No Place on a Commission Devoted to Fiscal Responsibility
  • The great Obama-Axelrod-etc. mystery
  • Is the Trade Gap to Blame for Slowing GDP Growth?
  • The six wives of Henry VIII in the movies
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Who's Stupid?
  • Brewers' Gallardo robbed at gunpoint
  • Want to be class president? Not if you're black, in one Miss. school
  • Lance Armstrong Wants To Tell Nation Something But Nation Has To Promise Not To Get Mad
  • Most humble and most arrogant Presidents
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Singles: best soundtrack of the 90's
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Observation Deck: Packers-Colts
  • David Hasselhoff to Compete on ABC's Dancing With the Stars!
  • Solution to the Ground Zero Mosque Dilemma
  • Trapped miners in Chile assuming different roles
  • 'Sportwriters on TV' back on the air ... in Chicago
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Polish man, shot in head, notices five years later
  • Inside the secret world of Trader Joe's
  • Report: Wisconsin & Iowa will be in separate Big Ten divisions
       [ 10 comments ]
  • That buzz you hear? Must be mosquitoes, not interest in Gophers
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Death of a Hero: Brett Favre's Tragic Fall from Grace
  • Rand vs. Ron? Cordoba House Drives Wedge Through The Paul Family
  • Former RNC chairman Ken Mehlman: I'm gay
  • Greeks 'discover Odysseus' palace in Ithaca, proving Homer's hero was real
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Angry Birds eyes a movie/TV deal
  • Coffee shops to customers: get the hell out
       [ 3 comments ]

     

  • What's next in the schools?

       September 10, 2008

    One of the things that Sarah Palin has been accused of is wanting abstinence-only sex education taught in schools. She's said she's "I am opposed to explicit sex education." Because of her daughter's pregnancy, critics are quick to say "A ha!" and point to Bristol Palin's pregnancy as the natural consequence of a lack of sex education.

    Personally, if I had a daughter, I'd chop up birth control pills in her food as soon as she turned 13. But that's just me. Other parents feel differently, and that's the point. Parents should be responsible for this type of thing. Instead of asking what kind of sex education we should be teaching in schools, why aren't we asking why in the world we're teaching sex education in schools in the first place? Between parents, the Internet and the playground, I'm quite sure that curious children can learn plenty. Wouldn't the time spent on sex ed and the money spent on health class teachers be better spent teaching kids, oh, I don't know, reading, writing, math and science?

    Somehow, we've started to expect public schools to teach everything. Just yesterday, I was reading an article about how bike-friendly Wisconsin is. Naturally, the comments to the article quickly degenerated into a "bikes suck!" "cars suck!" argument (seriously - these must be the same people who constantly shouted "Ogg sucks!" out of their dorm rooms years ago). One commenter suggested:

    Better still would be to make it part of primary or secondary educational curriculum. It's a little strange when you think about it—most people receive no bicycle education at all, and many bicycle facilities are designed as an afterthought to roads—is it really such a mystery why bike riders don't behave predictably?

    I'm aghast at the kind of society that move on when people receive no bicycle education at all. The horror. Clearly we must remedy this with a required quarter-long class taught by some Bicycle Federation member for the low, low price of $35-$50K with state benefits. Whew! We all dodged a bullet there!

    Maybe sex education, driver's education, bicycle education and the like don't belong in schools at all. For years, Wisconsin's DNR has successfully managed a hunter education program. It doesn't take up valuable class time and parents don't have to subject their kids to it if they don't want to. Sounds good to me.


    Posted by at September 10, 2008 09:10 AM

        The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1672

     

    Trackback Entries

     


    Comments

    #  September 12th, 2008 5:22 PM      Squibbly
    I agree that sex ed and some of those other extracurricular projects are best taught at home by loving parents who want to keep their kids safe, but its hard to ignore the fact that there are way too many parents that are abdicating their responsibilities to the schools. Do you think that having these programs actually decreases the number of parents who have meaningful discussions with their kids on these important topics? You know, the parent thinking "Gee I'm sure glad they talk about that stuff at school so that I don't have to."

    Personally I don't want the schools teaching my child something that I feel I could better teach, and that is MY responsibility to teach.  
     

     

     


    To leave a comment you must be logged in.
    Log in here
    or Get an Account here.


      page rendered in 0.2452 seconds | ©2004, 2005 Dummocrats.com