Quantcast
Utah

Hundreds fill Capitol Rotunda to urge sex ed bill veto

Comments

Return To Article
  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    March 15, 2012 12:04 a.m.

    I am LDS and lived in Utah for 38 of my 41 years. Although I am not necessarily surprised by this anti-sex education agenda, it's censorship at it's worst as I see it.

    Trying to define education and pregnancy stats that can't be argued here in Utah. Still, some believe a very narrow idealism should trump what works better for society as a whole in an imperfect world. I am disappointed and feel as if some Utah politicians and eccentric folks are trying to put Utah back in time three decades.

    Our local leaders keep trying to combine church and state like fundamentalists in parts of the middle east. In Utah or elsewhere, church and state should try to be separate by balancing the two with some basic sense of reason. I mean really. I have been somewhat general in my opposition, but relative to common sense, what specific arguments can be made that will cause the relative censors to listen?

    Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Desnews tries to censor me here for having this opinion.

  • On the other hand Spanish Fork, UT
    March 15, 2012 1:10 a.m.

    Memo to Bill Wright: the Utah Legislature has been known to get things wrong.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    March 15, 2012 4:34 a.m.

    "but many of her friends and other people she knows were not so lucky, ending up pregnant or getting sexually transmitted diseases. From her experience, sex education in her Salt Lake area high school was practically non-existent."

    This isn't a valid criticism as the principle taught is prevention altogether. Do children need more information than being taught to 'stay away'? That's a different debate. Should the state or parents be the ones responsible to teach it? Again, a different debate.

    Some people want the state to do everything for them. Some people want the state to 'be parents' in place of those who aren't doing their job. My parents hardly taught me anything and I learned most of what I know from school. My teachers also told me that urges were natural and I shouldn't feel guilty for acting on them. This is inappropriate and urges and actions are completely different things. Being taught such things were inappropriate. So I am a direct result of what these 'state parent' activists are pushing. I was taught a belief, contrary to their claims, many still got pregnant, weren't cautious, etc.

    The government isn't our parent. We govern. We don't 'get governed'.

  • billmosby Salt Lake City, UT
    March 15, 2012 5:48 a.m.

    More informative sex ed would definitely help, or at least not hurt. Several years ago, I lived in an area (Rigby, ID) where it was either nonexistent or ineffectual. Kids of middle and high school age joked about the high school in the area having school colors of "pink and blue", and often remarked that the school mascots, the Trojans, had never been seen in the area. (Trojan is a brand of condom, in case some haven't heard of it). More seriously, girls very often got pregnant intentionally around the age of 16 and up as a means of getting out of caring for their mothers' later children and getting their own lives started. I have personal knowledge of that in the case of 4 sisters in a family I knew very well.

    In other words, sex ed can't hurt in this day and age, the secret's already out.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    March 15, 2012 5:54 a.m.

    "The bill still allows for instruction on physiology and anatomy but prevents more graphic information from entering the curriculum, such as various forms of contraceptives or the intricacies of sexual intercourse, Barlow said."

    Please inform me what is so graphic about condoms or a pharmaceutical pill. If folks are really truly terrified about those words, I now understand what all the fuss is about over this issue. They want to do away with the whole topic because they shudder every time they hear the word "sex." I'm glad I'm not married to such a person.

  • Steven S Jarvis Orem, UT
    March 15, 2012 6:12 a.m.

    I beg to differ with the one woman in the article saying if t weren't for sex ed her son would be 6 instead of 2. That just doesn't make any sense scientifically since the genetic material doesn't last more than 48 hours. Its more accurate to say that because she acted differently her two year old son doesn't have a six year old sibling.

  • BYU Papa Cedar Hills, ut
    March 15, 2012 6:17 a.m.

    I think Sex Education is appropriate but would schools be able to provide contraceptive devices as they did in California, Teach personal phylosophy about sexual issues, abortion and other family matters. What restrictions would be applied. Also, how would these restrictions be monitered. Is there a possibility that this could lead to sexual relations between Teachers and Students. This has been happening a lot lately in the news. Maybe parents should take a more active role with some help if necessary.

  • Utah_1 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 15, 2012 7:08 a.m.

    If you actually read the current law:

    53A-13-101

    and then compare it to the enrolled version of

    2012 HB 363

    I believe you will find that the intent of the current law remains, with added parental input and an option for the local school not to teach the class if they don't want to follow the law.

    The bill allows a local school to provide the class if they follow the law. Currently we have schools in Utah that are required to provide the class and the claim is that some schools are not following the current law. Some have even questioned if the State School Board was following the current law.

    If that is the case, either the law needs to be clarified, or we add teeth to the law, or both. HB 363 clarifies the law assuming the schools will follow the law if it is clear.

    The movement to shift the content of the class from current law significantly either way didn't pass. Many that are upset at HB 363 do not like the current law and wanted to change it to have fewer restrictions.

  • One American West Jordan, UT
    March 15, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    "The issue is never the issue." The issue is not "sex education". The issue is "sexual liberation".

    USA Today: ÂMore sex education in public schools will not reverse the damaging legacy of the sexual revolution unless the clear message is premarital chastity and marital monogamy.Â

    This writer continues: ÂThere are many defects in sex education courses. The philosophy behind them is to ridicule chastity, scoff at fidelity, and glamorize sexual adventurism. They teach there is no such thing as right and wrong. ¦

    ÂThirty years of advocating sexual liberation has brought raging venereal diseases and rampant teenage pregnancy. ¦

    ÂMost sex education in the public schools morally disarms the students rather than giving them moral sensitivity to help them make the proper sexual choices. ¦

    ÂSex education fights the modesty and morality endemic to human life (Tottie Ellis, ÂTeaching about Sex Endangers Children, 16 Mar. 1987, p. 12A).

    Tomorrow is the 25th anniversary of this article. It is just as true today as it was then.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    March 15, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    Science has found that abstinence-only programs actually increase the pregnancy and birth rates of teens. "States that prescribe abstinence-only sex education programs in public schools have significantly higher teenage pregnancy and birth rates than states with more comprehensive sex education programs". Search sciencedaily for abstinence-only to get more details.

  • One American West Jordan, UT
    March 15, 2012 8:13 a.m.

    One more time. Hopefully, without the formmating problems/errors desnews.com apparently has when pasting text from another source.

    USA Today: ÂMore sex education in public schools will not reverse the damaging legacy of the sexual revolution unless the clear message is premarital chastity and marital monogamy.Â

    This writer continues: ÂThere are many defects in sex education courses. The philosophy behind them is to ridicule chastity, scoff at fidelity, and glamorize sexual adventurism. They teach there is no such thing as right and wrong. ¦

    ÂThirty years of advocating sexual liberation has brought raging venereal diseases and rampant teenage pregnancy. ¦

    ÂMost sex education in the public schools morally disarms the students rather than giving them moral sensitivity to help them make the proper sexual choices. ¦

    ÂSex education fights the modesty and morality endemic to human life (Tottie Ellis, ÂTeaching about Sex Endangers Children, 16 Mar. 1987, p. 12A).

  • Rynn Las Vegas, NV
    March 15, 2012 8:19 a.m.

    To think that kids won't do anything if they aren't taught anything is ignorant.
    I stayed in off-campus housing while attending college in the Provo/Orem area several years ago. As I was moving into my apartment, an 18 year old girl was getting ready to move out: She had gotten pregnant and her parents wanted her to move back home and marry her boyfriend.

    To expect that not one kid in Utah will be sexually active because they aren't being taught sex education is foolish. It's still going to happen. Just with less information (and probably more instances of unplanned pregnancy, etc.)
    Just as most kids who do not believe in being sexually active before marriage are not going to give it a try just because they're taught about birth control.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    March 15, 2012 8:34 a.m.

    This is probably a good cause but the sponsors of the petition is one of the most liberal and very progressive groups or lobbyists. What is their ulterior motive as they would normally be for planned parenthood.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    March 15, 2012 8:46 a.m.

    With ÂAbstinence OnlyÂ, I suppose even mentioning the Stork is now considered illegal in Utah.

  • Cincinnatus Kearns, UT
    March 15, 2012 9:07 a.m.

    @JWB

    It is obvious that you haven't paid attention to this debate. The petition was started by a retired bus driver who lives in Murray, UT. He used a readily available program, Signon, that facilitates the collection of signatures. Yes, Signon is operated by Moveon, but they were not the ones who started the campaign, or even publicized the campaign for that matter.

    I have seen several comments on these boards to this effect and in the news stories where Gayle Ruzicka has basically claimed the same thing. This is an obfuscation- attack the software and the organization that makes it available, rather than acknowledge that a local citizen wanted to make his, and other voices heard, in this debate.

    Try coming up with a logical argument about the bill, the pros and cons, rather than attacking an organization that provided a method to collect the signatures, but has very little, to nothing to do with the campaign itself.

  • Harry Case CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA
    March 15, 2012 9:27 a.m.

    Unfortunately, since the advent of sex education in school, the percentage of teens who are promiscuous has risen dramatically. It seems clear to me that it has made the problem worse.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 15, 2012 9:43 a.m.

    Re:BYUPapa

    Don't know where you got your info about CA. Didn't happen in our schools..

    CA state doesn't require schools include sex Ed, but 96% do.

    CA law recognizes that while parents and guardians support the teaching of medically accurate, comprehensive sex education in schools, they have the ultimate responsibility for teaching their children about human sexuality; they may choose to withdraw their children from this instruction.

    EC sections 51937 and 51938 explain that parents or guardians must be notified by the school at the beginning of the school year about planned comprehensive sexual health education and HIV/AIDS prevention education, be given an opportunity to review materials, and be given the opportunity to request in writing that their child not participate in the instruction.

    CA state law in grades seven through twelve sex education classes shall include:

    abstinence from sexual activity
    STDs, including their transmission, treatment, and prevention and information about the effectiveness and safety of all Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved methods reducing the risk of contracting STDs
    the effectiveness and safety of all contraceptive methods approved by the FDA
    the California law allowing parents to surrender newborn babies to hospitals or other designated sites without legal penalty.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    March 15, 2012 9:53 a.m.

    Cincinnatus

    I have been following this. If you look at Signon it is part of the moveon group that is an organization of liberal and very progressive ideas that are usually connected with the Democratic Party now with conservatives in Utah of either party. It has connections with planned parenthood who may have something to gain or lose through this process.

    This is an emotional issue for many but people need to be cautious about giving their personal information to an online promoter that can use that information for other purposes. This is a quick way to get sort of a petition without going around the neighborhood, stores, malls, etc. but people giving out information without knowing who they are really giving it to for an emotional issue may not be the way to go.

    Hopefully, though, the Governor will veto the bill that is probably not well written nor well thought out.

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    March 15, 2012 10:11 a.m.

    I had sex ed in HS too....didn't learn a thing! Are you really stupid enough to believe that a health teacher in the high school capable of teaching your kids all there is to know about sex and love making? And are you really suggesting that you want these people to be ones having this conversation with your kids? Not ME!!

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    March 15, 2012 10:33 a.m.

    I have mixed feelings about this.

    In my high school, in our health class we were required to have our parents sign a consent form before listening to our teacher teach about sex, HIV/AIDS, etc. My parents did not sign it because they thought it was their responsibility to teach me, not my teacher.
    Basically what the class taught was: You should not have sex until you are married. Abstain from sex until you find that special person you want to share your life with, but IF you do have sex, the ways you can protect yourself from pregnancy are...and they gave about 50 ways.

    It was a ridiculous class anyways. Teach about abstinence then give ways around it. How about the parents actually take the responsibility to teach their kids, or someone outside the education system? If it is a person the student looks up to and admires, they may actually listen better.

  • pmccombs Orem, UT
    March 15, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    When Bill Wright says that we have a government that is "representative" rather than "populist" in nature, what he means is that he represents his own, personal religious ideals rather than the people of Utah. Because that would be too populist, you know. And anyway, we know that the Founding Fathers also gave us the State of Utah legislature. Yes, the State of Utah is a Federal Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. Right? That's what we say when, much to our annoyance, people get what they ask for rather than the righteousness that we know is really best for them. Well, let us all be grateful that at least Bill Wright knows what's best for us.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    March 15, 2012 11:11 a.m.

    @TOO

    You're right. Too much information and too much education for our kids is a BAD thing. Ignorance is bliss.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    March 15, 2012 11:28 a.m.

    CHS 85

    I said nothing about ignorance. Read my post again before you put words in my mouth.

    I merely said that if it is from someone they respect (many students don't respect their teachers), they may listen more carefully.
    I listened to my parents and it taught me a lot. The teachers just gave ways that you could protect yourself if you weren't willing to abstain. That actually encourages pre-marital sex. I thought my parents did a great job focusing more on why it is important to wait then what I can do to protect myself. I think many high-school students would feel the same way.

  • Carson Provo, UT
    March 15, 2012 11:35 a.m.

    Wake up, It's Time to clean out the Utah Legislature. They refused to listen to the people on this Issue and E-Verify, Vote them out n November!

  • Jillian West Jordan, UT
    March 15, 2012 11:43 a.m.

    Parents should not be released of the responsibility and privilege of teaching reproductive information to their children. I am assuming that that is what is meant by Âsex education.Â

    If I am misinformed on this; do you really want to inform and teach how to have sexual intercourse and sexual relations without responsibility and commitment?

    Teaching them in an industrial-like one-size-fits-all program, especially such a morally sensitive subject, indicates they should all think and act the same. The consensus seems to be Âall the animals and creatures do it  you can too  without conscience, just caution! Please not my children!

    Our children are NOT all the same! Within families, teaching can be conducted in ways more suited and tailored to the individual child. In home teaching is guided on the individual's personal values. Can't we just stop focusing on selfish pursuits and start teaching and taking care of our children?

    If several thousand signatures appear on an online petition and multiple thousands more are not on the petition, should an opportunity to vote be given to the people? What ever happened to the value of the voice of the majority?

    Stop parental laziness and apathy!!!

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 15, 2012 11:45 a.m.

    re:TOO

    So, if a parent tells his/her kids not to drink but then adds the caveat IF you do drink, don't drive is that giving the kid permission to drink?

    I don't think so. Its fully "arming" the adolescent when you send them out into the world.

    I think a parent(school) can teach principles of abstinence but also give them information to protect themselves if they choose to disregard the advice of adults. Sure, they may also choose to not protect themselves and engage in sex, but at least it won't be a result of ignorance.

    Parents who don't want their child to have sex ed can choose to "opt out."

  • LValfre CHICAGO, IL
    March 15, 2012 12:59 p.m.

    Really .... Utah is just a joke to us outsides sometimes. The amount of influence religion has on Utah politics is just sickening. How many years did people have to drink alcohol behind a curtain in Utah?

    Just keep hiding people from everything .... from anti-LDS literature, from Google searches, from alcohol, from knowledge of sex .... ignorance is bliss. That's a very flawed concept and you're hurting these young kids.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    March 15, 2012 1:09 p.m.

    The paranoid parents afraid of sex education can get under my skin. Yet, I believe the good majority of them are better equiped to teach their own kids. So do it.

    Let the others who are more vulnerable to the issues where sex ed can be helpful be taught.

    I understand having abstinence as a value. But even with our own kids, we are foolish if we try and force them to live the way we want. Sex happens despite what is taught in school.

    Teens will be teens. And they are exposed to sex everywhere. They talk to each other and some balanced perspectives can be a positive outside the home.

    I am not saying the home shouldn't be the base for discussion on the birds and bees. I am saying kids will be exposed to the relative content here.

    Growing up in Utah, I have actually witnessed a few who were opposed to sex education that didn't teach there kids about sex themselves. Basically, their children where teenagers who asked questions at school that elementary students would. Some parents might prefer this later stage introduction. However, two individuals ended up with a teen pregnancy reality (both age 17).

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    March 15, 2012 1:17 p.m.

    @CHS 85

    I believe your parents did a great job for you.

    But as for contraception encouraging sex? There is always that fear for some, and I think there is some level of truth to it. But I see the stats and the greater good in favor of sex education. Too many are afraid of what will happen with sex education and not what will happen without it.

    Your parents are not able to help everyone else's kids (at least not to a large degree). I don't think we should overlook those kids because we are so fearful of sex talk. It happens in school rather it's taught or not. Do your work at home and let you kids leave the nest as well.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 15, 2012 2:07 p.m.

    Re: LValfre CHICAGO, IL 12:59 p.m. March 15, 2012
    "Really .... Utah is just a joke to us outsides sometimes"

    Rod Blagojevich is the second llinois governor in a row to go to prison for corruption. While we may not be providing birth control to our school children at least none of our former governors are doing time in federal prison. If I were living in Chicago I wouldn't be laughing at Utah.

    While chastity and morality may be a little old fashioned it certainly beats what ever comes in second.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    March 15, 2012 4:25 p.m.

    @gdog3finally

    I don't think your comments were actually directed at me, but your line "I believe your parents did a great job for you" made me laugh out loud.

    My parents taught me next to nothing about sex other than don't do it. I never had a talk with my dad about protection. My very religious parents did did a HORRIBLE job preparing me for a happy and healthy sex life. As a result of my own misbehavior and lack of training, I was a pretty "wild" child in high school. I have since repented and moved on, but I'm lucky I never impregnated anyone or contracted any diseases.

    Saying DON'T isn't enough. Not nearly enough. Getting your "learnin' from the streets" is not the way to teach your children. As amoral as you all seem to believe that teaching sex education is, it is better than the sex education I received in the 80s.

    BTW, my own child know far more about having a happy and healthy sex life due to the outstanding teaching she has received from my wife and I. She is pretty awesome and has a very happy outlook on life.

  • LValfre CHICAGO, IL
    March 15, 2012 4:43 p.m.

    "Rifleman

    "Really .... Utah is just a joke to us outsides sometimes"

    Rod Blagojevich is the second llinois governor in a row to go to prison for corruption. While we may not be providing birth control to our school children at least none of our former governors are doing time in federal prison. If I were living in Chicago I wouldn't be laughing at Utah.

    While chastity and morality may be a little old fashioned it certainly beats what ever comes in second."

    1. Chicago is corrupt as all heck and I'm not proud of it.

    2. "While chastity and morality may be a little old fashioned it certainly beats what ever comes in second." What comes second? Also, morals are subjective so stop using the word morality ignorantly as if your's are the only right ones.

    I'm not saying teach to have sex .... but to pretend people don't and to only teach abstinence is just ridiculous. It's just like pretending people don't drink alcohol (as they do behind the curtain) ...

    You can't shelter your kids forever, they have to learn. You can only keep them ignorant to the realities of life for so long.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 15, 2012 7:56 p.m.

    Why is it the government's duty to educate children about sex?
    Or to not touch hot stoves?
    Or to wash their hands?
    Or to tell the truth and not steal?

    PARENTS should be raising children, not the government schools or "a village."

    Parents are free to teach their children anything they want to about sex, indeed they should.

    This is a good bill, and I urge Governoer Herbert to sign it, and for the protesters to home and start teaching their own kids.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 16, 2012 4:31 a.m.

    Re: LValfre 4:43 p.m. March 15, 2012
    "Also, morals are subjective so stop using the word morality ignorantly as if your's are the only right ones."

    No, chastity and morality are constants like the laws that govern gravity and mathematics. Those who understand that basic principle have a responsibility to teach those concepts to their children.

    Wise parents understand that they can't shelter their children from evil. For that reason those parents provide their children with the knowledge they need to protect themselves while those around them take the easy path that leads to heartache.