AZ Republican State Sen. Pushes Bill to Prohibit Discussing "Homosexuality" in Sex-Ed Classes

Oct 2019
4,868
1,846
International Falls, Minnesota
Spending more than you are bringing in doesn’t matter anymore. I wonder why!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Didn't matter when Obama was President. The Feds are certainly bringing in more than when he was President.
 
Jan 2015
57,260
17,682
Great State of Texas
It's okay if you want to hide your inability to respond behind the word "unworthy". Most people probably expected that.
And, it's okay if you want to keep asking stupid irrelevant questions.

Most people would probably expect that.
 
Oct 2019
4,868
1,846
International Falls, Minnesota
Again, I'd love to see you explain why. What do you even mean by "a good thing"? Do you think government should be in charge of teaching morals about sexuality, or for that matter teaching morality in general? Shouldn't that be the job of churches for the religious, and personal study for the non-religious?
I never mentioned religion. Teaching morals is a good thing. It might keep you out of jail. The school system doesn't allow violence or drug use or smoking on the campus. No alcohol allowed. That's moral behavior.
 
Last edited:

Rasselas

Moderator
Feb 2010
74,275
52,995
USA
I'm sorry, but failing to teach about how STDS are transmitted does not make a solid excuse to teach the intricacies of packing fudge.
Here, I'll help. This article summarizes state laws requiring what must be included in a sex-ed curriculum in AZ: Sex ed in Arizona: How does it work? What are schools allowed to teach?

Key points?

1. Sex-ed is AZ is voluntary.
2. Local districts decide the specifics of the sex-ed curriculum within guidelines set by the state.
3. Those guidelines include "defining" heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bi-sexuality.
4. Those guidelines include that sexually transmitted diseases have serious consequences.

There's nothing in the curriculum where anyone is taught HOW to have sex of any kind. In fact, state law requires telling students that abstinence is the only way to 100% avoid consequences of sex like disease and pregnancy.

I'm pretty sure the change being suggested here would FORBID local communities from making decisions about what they would teach in sex-ed.

In other words, what the hell are you talking about?
 

StanStill

Former Staff
Dec 2013
14,305
16,612
Work
And, it's okay if you want to keep asking stupid irrelevant questions.

Most people would probably expect that.
How is it stupid or irrelevant to ask about what qualifies as perversion? People's sexual desires is quite on topic, from what I can tell.
 
Jan 2015
57,260
17,682
Great State of Texas
How is it stupid or irrelevant to ask about what qualifies as perversion? People's sexual desires is quite on topic, from what I can tell.
That's not what you asked.

You know your questioned was stupid and irrelevant as evidenced by your obvious back pedaling.

Have a nice day.
 

StanStill

Former Staff
Dec 2013
14,305
16,612
Work
I never mentioned religion. Teaching morals is a good thing. It might keep you out of jail. The school system doesn't allow violence or drug use or smoking on the campus. No alcohol allowed. That's moral behavior.
You don't need to mention religion. You mentioned the government (via the school system) teaching morality. Do you think that government is an appropriate teacher for morality?

The school system doesn't teach that alcohol is "a bad thing" per se. It's not allowed because it is illegal. Same for drugs. It's perfectly fine for schools to teach the very real dangers of using either one, because they are absolutely quantifiable risks. Both can be quite harmful. But it's certainly not the place of school to teach that drinking alcohol is "immoral".