The Stupid people are making noise again. yup the Ignorant, Indifferent and totally anal retentive Morons known as conservatives ( damn now I have to take  another shower and sterilize my fingers for saying that nasty dirty word), here is a thought lets go to ALL the school these Block Headed Ignorant Idiots have convinced to not teach SEX Education to. Now their organization MUST pay for all medical cost that the pregnant girl incurred when her parents could NOT cover the Medical Costs.

I wonder how much they would protest if they had to PERSONALLY foot the bill for their sick, twisted and unrealistic out look of teen having or not having SEX. Anyone checked the Phony christian right with their make believe family values and the Anti American corporate OWNED republican phony make believe family values.

No thanks keep these Clowns, BOZOS and IDIOTS far away from me and mine they are a TRAIN WRECK waiting to be identified and then denied.

NEWS FLASH for the jesus freak crowd, "THE HUMAN SEX DRIVE IS THE STRONGEST DRIVE KNOWN TO MAN" denying it it and FAILING to teach it is proving you are a FOOL and living in DENIAL, ask any of your past and present pastors that have been caught with their DICK in HAND they will tell you the same.

The only two concerns that I see as valid is that other-than-scientific terms are being used. In a school setting, I do have a big problem with that.

The other is that it is being taught in 7th grade; I would hold off on it until 10th grade.

10th grade?!  That's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too late.  In the US, puberty in boys begins around age 12, and girls get their periods on average at age 12.5.  When they're all in 7th grade.  With all the estrogens in the environment now (food, plastics, etc.) girls as young as 8 are getting their periods.  To hold off on sex ed until kids are in 10th grade, with raging hormones and drivers licenses and hardly a clue about their bodies, would be completely insane and irresponsible.

Wow, we all knew that conservatives were throwbacks to the Neanderthals but this really takes the cake. The only way to protect children is to arm them with information. This has been done in almost every other first world country in the world and none of these countries have nearly the unmarried mother problem the US does, or the sexually transmitted diseases, or the emotional turmoil, the high youth suicide rate etc. etc. In fact having had two young sons myself, I know that their first lesson on the birds and the bees in school was at a very young age. They both responded with "Yuch!" These lessons did not in any way steer them to early exploration of sexual activity. In fact it was just the diametric opposite.

Sex education should  be explicit.

Come on, let's catch up! I mean they have trany princesses at Target now, why cant we teach about it in school!?!?!

Greg Pfundstein?  More like Greg PRUDEstein!  OHHHHhhhhhH!!!hhh!!!!HHhhooooohhhh!!!

The best and most comprehensive safe-sex information I ever got was from this full color, live model leather daddy pamphlet down on christopher st. Not that I needed the info, but you know what I'm saying. 

The things they taught us in school (based largely on a video published by a tampon company with product placements all over the place for whichever kind give women toxic shock syndrome) couldn't hold a candle to the life saving information in that blatantly gay leaflet. Because like any good tea-bagger will tell you, if you want something done right, it should come from private industry.

Not only are their (the religious conservative rights') kids running around getting pregnant, their learning to run around  behind their parents backs, re-inventing their own morals.

American sexual repression has been improving the sex lives of Americans for years. 

Who the hell cares about sex ed? They lost that battle. Kids don't really use it. Kids don't really need it. EIther adults in their life know whats up, or they end up pregnant. The schools tried to help. The schools were forsaken. Now kids go wherever they want to fullfill their biological imperatives regardless of what their parents believe.

Suck on that, middle america!

 Its not as bad as you think it is. Teenage pregnancies are far lower now than 20 years ago, so some things are working.
And who cares? I do as motherhood for a teenage girl is the strongest indicator of life time poverty taxpayers will be paying for (not to mention the higher crime rates).

I was kind'a'sort'a playing devils advocate - teach it in schools, or they will seek it out in leather shops & on the internet. 

I don't believe those are inherently effective methods to counter teen pregnancy - but I do believe the existance of such things should make the prudes' argument moot.

I agree with you. Sex ed is important, and effective. 

To right-wingers and the religious heads that fuel this debate: When else do we trust a teenager's sense of restraint?  And why let them go into the world with no knowledge of what they'll encounter?

My guess: it makes the religious uncomfortable and they don't want to talk about it.  Why else do they try to deny what people really want?

Not just trust them-- trust their INSTINCTS.  Because EDUCATING them & then trusting them is a clear path to disaster!  Better to let them run ignorant.

The most annoying thing about this article is just about EVERY study shows teaching the kids nothing about sex or just preaching abstinence ALWAYS results in more teen pregnancies. Even studies financed by conservatives get the same results. But, why let the facts interfere with their perception of reality?

It's not about reality to them. It's about forcing their ideology on other people. The actual results of forcing that ideology don't matter to them in the end - if a teenage girl gets pregnant, it's because she's a dirty sinner who didn't spend enough time in church, not because she's a normal horny teenager who was dumb and didn't use contraception.

 And what do you call it when liberals force their ideology on people? Teaching kindergartners about homosexuals for instance. What's more important, teaching kids how to put on a condom or reading because judging by the scores the NYC school system can't seem teach kids how to read

Ideology? We are discussing facts.
Good luck finding a reputable survey showing less sex ed results in a lower teenage pregnancy rate.
Nobody ever said driver's ed ever meant more car crashes.

This is not about forcing an ideology on anyone (on the side of liberals, at least).  This is about educating children about matters of health that will, probably, affect them all at some point in their life.  

And, what have you been smoking that you see kindergartner's getting taught about homosexuality? Where in this article or any linked media do you see the word 'kindergartner'?

ETR Associates' Sexual Health literature is for 7th and 8th grades - appropriate since that is when children hit puberty and become interested in sexual matters.

"Teaching kindergartners about homosexuals for instance"

Yeah, because homosexuals totally never existed in history before.

Abstinence is the only thing that should be taught.  It worked for that nice girl Bristol Palin.

Abstinence is the only thing that should be taught.  It worked for that nice girl Bristol Palin.

Do you know for a fact that Bristol Palin never received comprehensive sex education i.e. received abstinence only education?  I tried searching online and can't find a source that says anything definite one way or the other.