Father arrested for protesting school board about sexually explicit book

[Sparko]

There's too much wrong with your question (even from a scientifically literate Christian perspective) to answer it straight.

In other words, you recognize your logical failure but don't want to admit it.

[DesertBerean]

The analogy is to the way many conservative parents, teachers, and churches tell teens that condoms are a hoax that don't lower the chance of STIs, particularly HIV.

If there ARE people in Christianity teaching teens that, then they've already failed in their obligation to teach what the Bible says. Sex is a moral issue first and foremost, and secondly a hygiene issue.

Condoms are OK within marriage. Condoms in use during premarital and EXTRA marital sex are not. In other words, condoms are neutral...unless of course one doesn't subscribe to contraception to begin with.

[Carrikature]

The point is, it is none of the school's nor the governments business to raise our children. It is the business of the parents. If parents want their children exposed to sexually explicit material, then they can get it for them. But the school has no business doing so.

This is, of course, false. Primarily, you fail to grasp how curriculum is determined in the first place. Parents are ultimately responsible for selecting who determines such things. The schools will, and should, follow that majority within certain limitations. Of course, those responsible should look beyond a given parental unit's desires and look to what the child needs to succeed in life. Ultimately, that is the school's charter. 'Academics' is a uselessly broad answer.

Some things can't be taught in schools. Some things shouldn't have needed to be taught had the parents been doing their jobs. Unfortunately, they haven't been, and it's in the interest of the country to educate and limit things like STIs and teen pregnancies. The government, as a representative of the nation as a whole, certainly does have business rearing our children. In fact, that's part of what we pay taxes for.

[Carrikature]

If there ARE people in Christianity teaching teens that, then they've already failed in their obligation to teach what the Bible says. Sex is a moral issue first and foremost, and secondly a hygiene issue.

Condoms are OK within marriage. Condoms in use during premarital and EXTRA marital sex are not. In other words, condoms are neutral...unless of course one doesn't subscribe to contraception to begin with.

It's not an 'if'. The issue is not solely one of misinformation, but also one of failing to provide information in the first place. Yes, I would agree that the parents have already failed their obligations. Unfortunately, that failing gets to be supported by the rest of us. Small wonder that we express interest in limiting the side effects and take steps to mitigate the repercussions.

[claymore]

Seasanctuary
I think you are being a little unfair to teenagers. You would probably be surprised at the number of teens who do not engage in sex in high school.

Yes we should educate children and teens about their biology. Including talking to them about their hormones. However we don't need to give them the "Game of Thrones" treatment. Some Teens are more sensitive to certain graphic descriptions. Some people can't stand minor imagery of violence and others can't handle sexual imagery. Being respectful to peoples sensitivities is not that hard to do. You can talk to kids about mature issues such as sex, but it doesn't have to be in an overly graphic way. Not long ago I managed to go through high school without being exposed to graphic material. There are thousands of books that can deal with mature topics without the mature imagery.
We definitely should not be encouraging teens to engage in practices that they are not mature enough to handle. Also teaching them that it is perfectly acceptable to not have sex. Remember, premature sex can be harmful to some teenagers who might not have a proper understanding of a healthy relationship. Especial when you mix in alcohol, social media, pressure, bullying, the social hierarchy of high school.

"If orgies were the typical teen experience, then it absolutely would be the right thing to do to have lessons on safe, respectful orgy planning"

Is their such a thing as "safe, respectful orgy planning for teens?"

[Sparko]

This is, of course, false. Primarily, you fail to grasp how curriculum is determined in the first place. Parents are ultimately responsible for selecting who determines such things.

Yeah the parents (well EVERYONE in that district who can vote) elect school board members. But that doesn't mean the parents know what the board members are going to do in their term. In this case it looks like the trust is being broken. Once elected, the parents don't determine anything, unless the board lets them vote on matters and takes that into consideration. They don't have to.

The schools will, and should, follow that majority within certain limitations. Of course, those responsible should look beyond a given parental unit's desires and look to what the child needs to succeed in life. Ultimately, that is the school's charter. 'Academics' is a uselessly broad answer.

Some things can't be taught in schools. Some things shouldn't have needed to be taught had the parents been doing their jobs. Unfortunately, they haven't been, and it's in the interest of the country to educate and limit things like STIs and teen pregnancies. The government, as a representative of the nation as a whole, certainly does have business rearing our children. In fact, that's part of what we pay taxes for.

That's pure bullcrap. I will ask you what I asked Sea. IF the situation was that the school board decided for some reason that Islam and Sharia law was the best way to raise children, and they instituted that in our schools, would you still be saying that the schools have a right to raise our children?

[Carrikature]

Yeah the parents (well EVERYONE in that district who can vote) elect school board members. But that doesn't mean the parents know what the board members are going to do in their term. In this case it looks like the trust is being broken. Once elected, the parents don't determine anything, unless the board lets them vote on matters and takes that into consideration. They don't have to.

If the voters aren't seriously taking into consideration possible curriculum decisions made by the board members, they've already failed. In this case, according to your own link, the book in question has been used since 2007. It's not as if the school board members pulled a fast one. So much for that line of reasoning.

That's pure bullcrap. I will ask you what I asked Sea. IF the situation was that the school board decided for some reason that Islam and Sharia law was the best way to raise children, and they instituted that in our schools, would you still be saying that the schools have a right to raise our children?

You're overly fond of hyperbole and ad absurdum, but it really only serves to make your own position look ridiculous. Establishing Islam is already a legal violation. Asking about Sharia law isn't even a coherent question. Despite that, it would still rely on interpretation of the Qur'an, which would also be a legal violation. In point of fact, it's an outright lie to say that this is the same question you asked Sea. It's not. You asked him about Creationism and Evolution. However, the same fundamental errors appear in this version. You don't clearly grasp how the system works or why, and you falsely make it seem as if no parent has any control whatsoever in the process. The biggest difference is that Sea has the prudence to simply decline to answer whereas I bothered to waste the time on a fuller response. In the end, I suspect the result will be identical.

It's also pretty inane to describe the schools as having a 'right to raise our children'. They don't have that. What they do have is authority granted by the general public (and funded by tax dollars) to educate (and yes, raise) children according to certain guiding principles and in accordance with decisions made by elected representatives. Yes, that also includes things that a given parent or set of parents may disapprove of. That doesn't invalidate their authority. Rather, it comes with the territory inherent in any system whereby a majority's voice and will is heard and enforced. Finally, it's perfectly allowable for a parent or group of parents to seek alternatives provided the children meet certain education requirements.