Hopefully the Florida bill will get stuck in commitee.

But what kind of sex ed? If I had any kids I'd op them out of absinence only because of the lies, hetero only crap, the really horrible gendering, and the deemphassis of consent. That shit's damaging.

"Other opponents questioned why it [the bill] was needed since the primary purpose of sex education in the state is to teach abstinence."

The article implies that the sex ed was focused on abstinence, although it did not directly state it was abstinence-only. The article was kind of vague on that point, to me.

[T]he new measure would remove ambiguity in the current law regarding punishment based on the viability of the fetus.

Really? Because I think viability is a pretty fucking objective assessment. "Can this thing live outside the womb? If yes, it's viable. If not, it's not viable." Very simple.

FEMily, viability is unfortunately quite ambiguous. How do you determine it? 51% of premies born at this week survive, 49% don't? I think that's about the determination now, which puts it at 26 weeks. But considering 24 weekers can maybe survive and wind up severely disabled, and 40 weekers can die instantaneously, there's no real objective measure at all. It's a matter of statistics and hope. I think this is a big part of the reason why legislating from viability is hugely problematic.

This is probably going to sound nasty, but I knew a girl whose parents opted out of sex ed. She went to the library while everyone else was doing it. (We did not have abstinence only sex ed.)

This girl had six older siblings. Three had children as teenagers, either by getting pregnant, or getting someone pregnant.

FEMily, viability is unfortunately quite ambiguous. How do you determine it? 51% of premies born at this week survive, 49% don't? I think that's about the determination now, which puts it at 26 weeks. But considering 24 weekers can maybe survive and wind up severely disabled, and 40 weekers can die instantaneously, there's no real objective measure at all. It's a matter of statistics and hope. I think this is a big part of the reason why legislating from viability is hugely problematic.

Well, we know viability doesn't begin at 8 weeks, or 10 weeks, or 15 weeks. While there may be some give and take, there are obvious stages of pregnancy when viability is absolutely impossible. Judging viability is much more objective and can actually be assessed, unlike "unborn child." Replacing "viability" with "unborn child" doesn't help matters. It just makes it more complicated and shows that viability doesn't matter as much to these lawmakers as giving rights to a zygote.

well done, florida. the last time i checked, our species has been classified as homo sapiens sapiens. that act is moot. am i the only dork around that took a physical anthropology class?

prarielily,
Same here.When I was in 5th grade the only girls who became pregnant by the time they were 15 were those whose mothers felt it was inappropriate for a young child to be learning about that kind of thing.

I dont know if i wrote the last post in order (I have the flu, and am taking meds)....
but I meant that during the sex ed film shown during 5th grade the two girls whose mothers kept them from the class because they felt it was wrong became pregnant when they were 15 (one of the girls at 14 but delivered at 15).

The article implies that the sex ed was focused on abstinence, although it did not directly state it was abstinence-only. The article was kind of vague on that point, to me.free online games