Ted Haggard

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

you know exactly what I'm talking about,but you wish to politicize the problem. This country was founded with societal morals and they've slid a long way. I dont call the new morality where everything goes is morality at all...it's chaos.

timm-- i think it's an issue that one way or another has to become politicized. this whole ted haggard and mark foley thing is hilarious because they're the people doing the very same they've built their lives around condemning.

it gets political when people vote against abortion and for a war. they say that abortion is wrong because the 'child has no voice' but the childern in iraq who are blown to smithereens in the name of democracy don't have much of a say either, yet they support doing anything we have to in order to get what we want in Iraq. It's a potent example.

i do get what you're saying about politicizing the conversation, but this is one of those issues that sort of necessarily has to be politicized. these people who want to legislate morality so that we do not live in a chaotic "anything goes" society -- they are well served to make sure they aren't doing the same things they are denouncing, ya know?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

timm-- i think it's an issue that one way or another has to become politicized. this whole ted haggard and mark foley thing is hilarious because they're the people doing the very same they've built their lives around condemning.

it gets political when people vote against abortion and for a war. they say that abortion is wrong because the 'child has no voice' but the childern in iraq who are blown to smithereens in the name of democracy don't have much of a say either, yet they support doing anything we have to in order to get what we want in Iraq. It's a potent example.

i do get what you're saying about politicizing the conversation, but this is one of those issues that sort of necessarily has to be politicized. these people who want to legislate morality so that we do not live in a chaotic "anything goes" society -- they are well served to make sure they aren't doing the same things they are denouncing, ya know?

It's the WRONG example,Brian! OK..so these 2 Bums get caught..so that makes the message bad too? I don't think it does. You can check your States' Preamble to its' Constitution to see what was set down by our leaders. It might surprise you. The breakdown of this society is a result of family breakdown and that society became lawless and unwilling to follow its leaders. The recalcitrant child imposing its' will....

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

It's the WRONG example,Brian! OK..so these 2 Bums get caught..so that makes the message bad too? I don't think it does. You can check your States' Preamble to its' Constitution to see what was set down by our leaders. It might surprise you. The breakdown of this society is a result of family breakdown and that society became lawless and unwilling to follow its leaders. The recalcitrant child imposing its' will....

absolutely does not make the message necessarily bad-- that's another debate we've had

however, the big point of what I was saying is gentlemen like these two are the main reason that people are very uncomfortable when talking about fixing the moral breakdown in this country. how do we fix it? we listen to our role models...our pastors and congressmen? and then they betray us by being hypocrites.

these examples of people who can't practice what they preach make people uneasy about ANYONE with a moral agenda.

morality starts at home and it is parents who need to instill a moral upbringing in their children. we can disagree over how to define that morality, but i know we can all agree on most of the things (ie we don't teach our kids to have sex at age 12, we don't teach them to get drunk and high in 8th grade, we teach them that killing people and stealing is wrong...things like that). it's depressing, it almost seems like there is no way to fix it. how do we start to fix it when the family is the core teacher of morality and values, but the family is breaking down at unprecedented rates and our families are outsourcing their parenting to day care centers so that we can go to work to keep up in the rat race of debt we're in and not get evicted from the house that the family spends a total of one hour a day together in?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

absolutely does not make the message necessarily bad-- that's another debate we've had

however, the big point of what I was saying is gentlemen like these two are the main reason that people are very uncomfortable when talking about fixing the moral breakdown in this country. how do we fix it? we listen to our role models...our pastors and congressmen? and then they betray us by being hypocrites.

these examples of people who can't practice what they preach make people uneasy about ANYONE with a moral agenda.

morality starts at home and it is parents who need to instill a moral upbringing in their children. we can disagree over how to define that morality, but i know we can all agree on most of the things (ie we don't teach our kids to have sex at age 12, we don't teach them to get drunk and high in 8th grade, we teach them that killing people and stealing is wrong...things like that). it's depressing, it almost seems like there is no way to fix it. how do we start to fix it when the family is the core teacher of morality and values, but the family is breaking down at unprecedented rates and our families are outsourcing their parenting to day care centers so that we can go to work to keep up in the rat race of debt we're in and not get evicted from the house that the family spends a total of one hour a day together in?

i agree that it all starts at home. problem comes in when too many parents are too 'busy' to take care of their kids..want to be the kids best friend, rather than a parent and do their job. don't wanna make your kids follow rules (and children are very much creatures of habit and routine--whether they follow a good or bad routine) and set limits, don't want to be the bad guy? don't have kids. kids can make plenty of friends at school, they only get one set of parents.

[timmgirvan]

I can see that the problems are becoming clearer to you also. And yet the school system proposes to give 11-12 yr old girls a shot to lessen the chance of STD's or pregnancy. Doesn't that sound like they are subliminally promoting a lifestyle?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

I can see that the problems are becoming clearer to you also. And yet the school system proposes to give 11-12 yr old girls a shot to lessen the chance of STD's or pregnancy. Doesn't that sound like they are subliminally promoting a lifestyle?

Timm, the shot to which you are referring is to help prevent cervical cancer, which can result from genital warts. You're saying better to promote morality by keeping a cancer vaccine from women? "Don't have sex, girls! You might get cancer!" Dear God.

I think schools should give kids complete, thorough sex ed (and the HPV vaccine, while they're at it) because it's a health issue. Condoms are a matter of public health, as are contraceptives of all kinds (kids need to know the pill prevents pregnancy, not VD, for one). It's up to the parents to talk to their kids about the moral ramifications of sex, and they should. But it's not the government's place to teach "morality" by concealing information. Kids should not be denied a life-saving shot or clinical information. It's not going to encourage promiscuity; it's going to encourage teenagers who are going to have sex anyway to use protection. About half of all kids who make abstinence pledges break them within a year, and the majority of those kids don't use any sort of birth control, because they already believe they're doing something "bad" so why be intelligent about it?

Plus, once they are out in the world, how are we again going to have the same opportunity to educate young Americans about their own bodies? How much sex ed did you get in a classroom setting once you were out of high school? (Sorry, in the field experience doesn't count, unless you were sleeping with your sex ed teacher) I got a grand total of 15 minutes-- freshman year of college, a teacher's aide came into Writing Workshop I and showed us how to put on a condom. And that was because I went to college. Where again are we going to be able to educate people about what is, all said and done, a health issue?

HPV vaccines and comprehensive sex ed for all public school students, say I. And then the kids can go home and talk to their parents about what they learned. Now there's a concept... parents talking to their kids about sex...

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Timm, the shot to which you are referring is to help prevent cervical cancer, which can result from genital warts. You're saying better to promote morality by keeping a cancer vaccine from women? "Don't have sex, girls! You might get cancer!" Dear God.

I think schools should give kids complete, thorough sex ed (and the HPV vaccine, while they're at it) because it's a health issue. Condoms are a matter of public health, as are contraceptives of all kinds (kids need to know the pill prevents pregnancy, not VD, for one). It's up to the parents to talk to their kids about the moral ramifications of sex, and they should. But it's not the government's place to teach "morality" by concealing information. Kids should not be denied a life-saving shot or clinical information. It's not going to encourage promiscuity; it's going to encourage teenagers who are going to have sex anyway to use protection. About half of all kids who make abstinence pledges break them within a year, and the majority of those kids don't use any sort of birth control, because they already believe they're doing something "bad" so why be intelligent about it?

Plus, once they are out in the world, how are we again going to have the same opportunity to educate young Americans about their own bodies? How much sex ed did you get in a classroom setting once you were out of high school? (Sorry, in the field experience doesn't count, unless you were sleeping with your sex ed teacher) I got a grand total of 15 minutes-- freshman year of college, a teacher's aide came into Writing Workshop I and showed us how to put on a condom. And that was because I went to college. Where again are we going to be able to educate people about what is, all said and done, a health issue?

HPV vaccines and comprehensive sex ed for all public school students, say I. And then the kids can go home and talk to their parents about what they learned. Now there's a concept... parents talking to their kids about sex...

What about the kids who aren't doing that? What does that teach them? That it's "ok" to engage in sexual interaction at such a young age? I agree with you on this being a parent issue. Parents aren't talking to their kids...

For the record, we learned about the "birds and the bees" in elementary school. All kids should be taught about it... it's life.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

What about the kids who aren't doing that? What does that teach them? That it's "ok" to engage in sexual interaction at such a young age? I agree with you on this being a parent issue. Parents aren't talking to their kids...

For the record, we learned about the "birds and the bees" in elementary school. All kids should be taught about it... it's life.

If the parents don't teach them, Mark Foley will.
No condoms needed.