Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion Subject: Re: Planned Parenthood Message-ID: <1788@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 25-Sep-85 12:59:14 EDT Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1788 Posted: Wed Sep 25 12:59:14 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 1-Oct-85 07:43:05 EDT References: <1620@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1737@pyuxd.UUCP> <1664@umcp-cs.UUCP> Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week Lines: 110 Xref: linus net.politics:10532 net.religion:7381 >>>The main problem with most current programs >>>(and here I think I'm more concerned with sex education than last ditch >>>sorts of things) is that, in their zeal to avoid offending the extreme >>>liberals, ... [WINGATE] >>I.e., anyone who recognizes that proper education about sexuality is a >>necceary part of responsible adolescence and adulthood. [ROSEN] > No, it's those people who refuse to recognize the fact of moral authority as > it proceeds from the schools and other governmental agencies. Refuse to recognize the "fact"? My, my. > Rich, as usual, has ignored my statement above that I think kids should learn > about sex and birth control information. I would also point out that what is > "proper education" is entirely dependent upon one's ideological outlook. I have acknowledged that statement of yours. However, I question your statement about proper education being "entirely dependent upon one's ideological outlook. To bs sure, this is absolutely true regarding people's opinions about what proper education is. I reiterate that your labelling as "extreme liberals" those who would simply give the facts as they stand without the additional contamination of an injection of "moral issues". Those "moral issues" are just tack-on's from religious belief, and thus have no place in generic proper education. >>>they refuse to approach the moral issues at all, thus tending to imply that >>>there aren't any, and that it is OK to do what you please. Well, maybe it >>>is OK, but I'd at least like to see them say "Yes, there are moral >>>questions about such and such, but it is not our place to talk >>>about them." >>Perhaps that's YOUR job as a parent to say such things if you feel they >>are appropriate. Frankly, I am more repulsed at the notion that some yutz >>is going to imply religious morality to my children in school where it is >>totally inappropriate. > Well, I for one am not at all repulsed by your false implication of what I > said, mostly because I'm used to it. Where does it say I was referring to you, Charles? There are other "yutzes" in this world besides you, you know. :-) It's interesting how many people seem to WANT to be "attacked" by me so desperately that they "find" attacks where there are none to be found. > If you read the passage above, what I did NOT say was that ANYONE in a > school or PP should make statements about what is right or wrong. My > suggestion is rather that they should make the kids aware that there is > considerable controversy on the subject-- and not just on religious grounds, > as Rich falsely alleges. What "controversy" can you concoct for us that is NOT on religious grounds? *You're* accusing *me* of falsely alleging??? > I also don't see why the law should protect Rich's viewpoint simply because > he believes in atheism. So much for Wingate's perspective on religious freedom. > The deliberate avoidance of morality by the schools endorses the position that > there are no moral constraints at all. Why this position deserves > protection is quite beyond me. As are many other things in this world, it often seems. I've only spent several lifetimes explaining the notion of minimal morality and non-interference necessary for societal regulation from a rational non-religious perspective. Anything more than that is personal preference, most often based on religion, and has no place in the school. >>Not everyone feels that pre-marital sex is the heinous awful thing that you >>think it is, and their children should not be subjected to whining moral >>impositions. > So what? Not everyone believes that premarital sex is perfectly fine under > any circumstances, and their children should not be subjected to > implications that it is. You see? And what I am suggesting would do > neither. Gee, Charles, could you please delineate for me, in detail, what is not perfectly fine about it, from an exclusively non-religious viewpoint? >>>A teenage girl who has had one abortion already and is about to have >>>another really needs to be confronted with the moral issues involved, >>>even if no answers are given. >>Sounds to me like another example of parents not doing their job in the first >>place and expecting someone else to pick up the slack. > Well, unfortunately this is a fact of life. What an elegant way to dismiss questions and points raised about something. > Anyone who pays attention to > social statistics is aware that the teenage pregnancy rates in the ghetto > are very high (and also the illegitimacy rate). The effects from this upon > society are considerable. One might as well start rambling on in the same > way about teen age criminals. Whether or not you blame the parents, the > problem is still there. At the moment our public policy encourages these > births, with accompaning expense to society in terms of welfare, health > care, crime, housing, and whatever else. We have chosen to foster growth of > the ghetto-- and by "we", I mean in this case those who are in favor of > continuing the present system. "One" might as well. I can think of a number of reasonable alternatives some of which you yourself have proposed. But aside from dispensing of birth control information (I know abortion may not be to your liking), what alternatives can you offer that do not reek of impositional morality? -- "Wait a minute. '*WE*' decided??? *MY* best interests????" Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com