A federal judge in Washington on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration’s recent changes to the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, which hit groups around the country that teach classes on healthy relationships, abstinence and contraception.
The Trump administration, he wrote “is perfectly entitled to formulate its own views about how to stem teen pregnancy — or even whether it is worth preventing at all — and to pursue policy initiatives consistent with its viewpoint. But it is not at liberty, under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), to impose conditions on grant recipients that Congress did not intend or that are unreasonable or unexplained.”
My college sociology professor would, for some reason, go into abstinence only rants.
Being the contrarian I am, I fact checked everything she said. For example, she claimed the CDC said that condoms were 100% ineffective at preventing pregnancy and STDs. So I pulled up the webpage on contraception and called her out.
Her favorite thing to say was that sex ed was like giving kids keys to a car and expecting them not to drive. Eventually I started responding, “No, it’s like teaching them how to drive so they can do it safely when they’re ready.” Her response was always to change the subject.
To her credit, despite me constantly arguing with her, I still got a B in the class (skipped an exam}.
The next semester she banned laptops from her classroom. She tried to ban mine, but I got disability services involved (ADHD).
Something tells me she should have her teaching license revoked permanently.
I agree, but I think teaching at a community college is a good punishment.
I had some excellent professors at community college, some people want to teach way more than they want to be part of “academia”.
She specifically wanted to be at a university. She did for one semester and wasn’t asked to come back.
For whom? Her, or the poor students stuck with her?
Her. She wasn’t happy about the university not inviting her back after one semester.
Her phrase is exactly what abstinence-only sex education is.
When kids grow up, they find their own keys and ignitions quite easily. So they have the keys and the ignition/car, and abstinence-only sex ed is like “no driving” driver’s ed. But they have the keys and they’re sitting in the car and they have somewhere they want to be.
I also imagine that abstinence-only sex education doesn’t usually mean teaching safe “outercourse”, mutual masturbation, etc…so they have the keys and the car, somewhere they need to be, and nobody tells them about taxis or busses or bicycles…
Quite a few find those things before they grow up.
This debate is completely lost on me.
Someone was trying to explain that the reason she sends her kids to a private school is because she doesn’t want them to learn about sex when they’re too young.
I don’t get it.
I genuinely don’t see the problem with kids knowing everything their curious minds want to know about reproduction.
She said they’re too young to process it. I think she means they’re too young to process the weird moral overlay she wants them to adopt.
They just don’t want to talk to their kids about it. Simple as that.
These people don’t like discomfort. They don’t like to step out of their little bubble. Thats why they work to get rid of anything that makes them uncomfortable, like queer people, black people, ect. They don’t want to accept that kids grow into adults and they themselves are just uncomfortable talking about sex so what comes out is “j-just don’t, ok?”