I need YOUR help! Examples of lies by Republicans

[Aeson]

The first sentence in the bill pretty much makes it a moot point to worry about though... right? No one has to take the course in any case.

This pretty much means kills the argument: (Since you'd have to claim it's age and developmentally appropriate... are you? )

(2) All (1) course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
Z-You're a lawyer, please interpret the bill for us:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/full...cSess=&Session

Can't right now. I'm just taking little mini-breaks in between processing papers that'll evict people from their homes and businesses.

(Sometimes I hate my job)

[Aeson]

Although I personally think our society is rather screwed up in this regard. I remember in 1st/2nd grade finding out about sex from magazines and friends, and this was in conservative values small town (and even no cable TV, certainly no internet). Pretending like kids won't get exposed to that sorta stuff is just ignorant.

What I didn't find out (even though high school) was the dangers of unprotected sex, how to protect myself (or my partner)... I found that stuff out on my own, and some of it the hard way. (Though thankfully not "the hard way" in a manner with no recourse, like so many others find out.)

I'd take teaching kids about that stuff early on over the system we had then (and in many places, still have) where parents just ignore the issue until it's too late. (And the taboo on the subject isn't helpful either.)

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Aeson
The first sentence in the bill pretty much makes it a moot point to worry about though... right? No one has to take the course in any case.

This pretty much means kills the argument: (Since you'd have to claim it's age and developmentally appropriate... are you? )

that misses the point of both McCain's assertions and Obama's defense.

Its the strikeout 6, replace with K that is the issue combined with the "shall" portion that Imran cited. Apparently through his vote, Obama thinks its appropriate to discuss std's and sex with 5 year olds.

[Vesayen]

Less discussion of that stupidity over kindergarten kids.

More lies, unethetical or illegal conduct from Republicans. You can throw in incompetence too.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
Its the strikeout 6, replace with K that is the issue combined with the "shall" portion that Imran cited. Apparently through his vote, Obama thinks its appropriate to discuss std's and sex with 5 year olds.

Are you saying it's appropriate to discuss std's and sex with 5 year olds? Because I don't see the strikeout of, "All (1) course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate."

[Naked Gents Rut]

Are you saying it's appropriate to discuss std's and sex with 5 year olds?

I'm sure some people would. There's certainly not unanimous agreement on what is "age and developmentally appropriate" to teach children in sex ed (at any age), which makes that line in the bill rather pointless.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Aeson


Are you saying it's appropriate to discuss std's and sex with 5 year olds? Because I don't see the strikeout of, "All (1) course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate."

No

Your guess is as good as mine as to how that jives with "shall"

[SlowwHand]

I think it's the parents responsibility for their children. I also think the age of 5 to have that discussion is utter bull****.

[Jon Miller]

With all the abuse that goes on with children, it is something that needs to be done even though it really shouldn't.

JM

[SlowwHand]

That's your opinion. That discussion won't address the situation. That's a little different.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
Your guess is as good as mine as to how that jives with "shall"

No, my guess is much better than your's.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Aeson


No, my guess is much better than your's.

Ok, then, what is the appropriate way to explain std's to a 5 year old?

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
I'm sure some people would. There's certainly not unanimous agreement on what is "age and developmentally appropriate" to teach children in sex ed (at any age), which makes that line in the bill rather pointless.

Of course. I'd be one of those people as well. Much better than having our kids stumble blindly though "sex ed" taught by porn and other little kids.

But the point of that statement isn't to allow it. It's to disallow it. Because what's "appropriate", while not unanimous... is dictated by the will of the people. And it's very clear that that is to not teach our kids about sex at that age. (And hardly at all...) If it's too hard to look at our society and see this, it is made obvious just in the nature of the attack on Obama itself itself. If it were a popular position, a majority position, to teach kids in K about sex, then it wouldn't be an attack at all. It would be a confirmation.

[asleepathewheel]

Then why the 6 was replaced with a K and not, say a 4?