Wisconsin DA Threatens Arrests Over Sex Ed
WrongSizeGlass writes "USA Today is reporting that the DA of Juneau County, Wisconsin, is warning teachers that they could face arrest over the new sex-ed curriculum. District Attorney Scott Southworth said a new state law that requires students learn to use condoms and other contraceptives 'promotes the sexualization — and sexual assault — of our children.' Southworth also said, 'I'm not looking to charge any teachers. I've got enough work to do.'"
In the US, religionists hate sex that isn't rationed according to their superstition. Americans, by and large, are religious, willfully ignorant, and ruled by fear. Any pleasure not rationed by preacher or priest is evil.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I've always seen the comma there: "Your rights, online". Makes a big difference. But yeah, this is more idle-worth than anything else.
No, I actually think its a good thing. It seems like US really needs this, and I would had been proud of my parents if they would had fight for a more open and sexually aware world for me. The truth is, everyone is going to have sex and 99% of people are going to do it during teenage. There will be problems if they don't know how to do it safely. It's fucking hilarious/sad that a teacher that teaches safety practices is threaten by an arrest to do so.
Gee, is this the same Scott Harold Southworth who was named a "CNN Hero" when he adopted a crippled Iraqi boy when he was deployed with the WI National Guard? Even though he's not married?
from: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0707/15/sm.02.html
And so now he thinks sex education is child abuse?
-=Maggie Leber=-
It does promote doing dangerous stupid stuff online. "I don't really worry about it. Norton will protect me."
Why do they require this? Christian families (Such as my own) don't want our kids to learn this at school. It's my personal belief that kids should be taught this at home. However, I'm not saying that it should be banned. But why not make it voluntary? Parents should be able to choose whether or not sex-ed is right for their own kid. The state shouldn't tell us that our kids have to go through their particular sex-ed programs. I remember when my dad gave me "The talk". Most awkward ten minutes of my life, but there is no way I'd have wanted to learn that in school. If it was a voluntary program, I doubt there would be so much fuss over this.
It's like you're trying to say violence and killing aren't natural human functions.
I'm sure the guy knows that the odds of a successful prosecution are nil. He's grandstanding for God.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
At last, 10 years of Paedophile and Child Pornography hysteria are beginning to pay off dividends. It begins with Sex Education classes, which by now are probably liability time bombs for all adults involved. It won't end there though. This has been the Endgame all along; a return to the social mores of the 1950s or earlier.
Child porn hysteria is toppling the fucking Catholic Church! What hope does your feeble "Free Society" have?
May the Maths Be with you!
Since there is no empirical evidence for any of the supernatural claims made in the Bible, then yes, you are blindly following your preacher and books. Sorry. Doesn't the good and bad of life make more sense when you reject the idea of gods? It sure does to me.
Teaching kids safe sex is crucial but all this person sees is "sexualization"? It doesn't make me question sex-ed, it makes me question what's in the mind of this D.A.
that she is a 'Nerd In training'.
I have never been happier.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Just to play devil's advocate... what about consensual rape? I mean, juveniles aren't capable of legally consenting in the eyes of the law... so even though *in reality* they are consenting, in the eyes of the law they are victims of a crime (like statutory rape).
IF (and that's a big if) graphic sex ed does lead to greater incidence of sexual activity among kids under the age of consent, then he's probably technically correct.
I do think he's most likely grandstanding for political reasons, though.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
No, these were the best legislators we could get that weren't making more money in the private sector. The *best* lawyers are still private and laugh at how horrible our elected ones are. They then skewer them in court and hug there money on the way home.
Or in slashdot:
1. Be awesome in the private sector.
2. Don't run for office.(Replace this with ????? for old school fans)
3. Profit!!
So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
???
You mean that these effects are caused by religion, or that you think they would be prevented by religion? I can't tell.
I know that *I* see the effects as being caused by religion, and not even all religions, but only by a group who are destructive of society in an attempt to increase the number of followers.
E,g,, I don't blame the Unitarians, the Friends, or the Mennonites (among others). I don't blame any religion that emphasized responsibility more than ignorance and self-control. (N.B.: self-control is a delusion. The ego is not the center of the mind. But blending ignorance with a belief in self-control is a true recipe for disaster.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I would love to watch this fool try to prove that sex education promotes sexualization of a child much less sexual attacks or whatever.
You might love to see him "prove" that until you remember that in his line of work, "prove" doesn't mean "demonstrate conclusively by scientific evidence," it means "convince 12 citizens of Juneau County Wisconsin."
To add to Martin Blank if you feel you haven't been shut down enough.
Religion---------------------% have been divorced
Jewish------------------------30%
Born-again Christians---27%
Other Christians-----------24%
Atheists, Agnostics------21%
Facts suck I know.
I lived most of my life in Wisconsin, and had friends who were caught for this very thing, maybe 15-17 years old at the time. They were both given the charge of statutory rape, but the judge posed the question, "So what did they do, rape each other?" Then he quite wisely threw out the case.