I don't know.  As soon as  kid hits puberty they should probably be given sex education.   Also I don't think it would hurt kids to be informed of what what the word gay or lesbian means, and that such people exist.  

You don't have children?

Anything mom or dad say is to be flat out ignored as vile lies.  After mom and dad have explained about birds, bees, menstrual cycles, estrus cycles, pregnancy, birth, loving relationships vs one night stands, your oh-so-intelligent offspring come home one day and inform you that one of their friends at school said babies were found under the cabbage leaves in the cabbage patch and therefore, it is the truth.

As a parent, I would take any assistance I could to make sure the truth stuck in the little darlin's heads.  Teachers, doctors, nurses, anyone who actually knew what they were talking about.  It takes just one time of your child telling you that you lied to them and so-and-so's mom or dad told them the truth -- and what they repeat is exactly what you told them in the first place.  I soon learned to be grateful at least they were learning the truth and I didn't care where who said it first - me or the teacher or the doctor or Johnny's mom .......

Depends so much on the context.  Yes, I don't think 5 year olds need to be told about the difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality.  However, if Bobby has two dads, and the other kids are calling him a fag - and they probably don't know what they are saying but are most likely just repeating what they heard elsewhere - then the other children need to be restrained from being the natural little brats all children are.  And if that involves a lesson in "all families are equal" then the other moms and dads should support that lesson. 

Alternatively, if Suzy asks the teacher, "what is a Lesbian?" the answer should not be "ask your parents".  There is a reason Suzy is not asking her parents.  And dragging her parents into the discussion may be physically harmful to Suzy.  We should all be aware of the possibility.

Or we could all go back to the good old days - like when I was young in the mists of time.    Prior to the mid to late 1970s in the state of Arizona, it was against the law to discuss birth control with an unmarried woman.  No matter her age.  Is this law a slippery slope leading to such absurdities?  Probably not, but the two are good examples of over kill when the situations that triggered the laws were probably not that big of a deal.

A law that prohibits teachers from teaching.

Hmmmm....

Tennessee curriculum:

 Academic Vocabulary

Arts education

Computer technology

Career Guidance

English

English as a second language (???)

Foreign Language

health/PE/Wellness

Math

reading

Science

Service learning

Social Studies

Which is why it's about all sexuality and not just gays, right?

This is no different than saying you can't talk about inter-racial couples. It doesn't even have anything to do with teaching a damn thing according to the video, you can't even talk about it. So when some kid asks the gay teacher what he did yesterday, he can't tell them about anything he did with his same-sex partner because the kids' heads would clearly explode if they find out not every couple is exactly like their parents.

How do you not see this is nothing but another stick to beat the gays with?

Where is your line*? Should they teach creationism? Should they teach k-8th how to masturbate properly? Should they teach that we should dominate "lesser" folks so we can take their oil? Should the schools teach proper maintenance of a ps3 and x-box? Should the schools have a class on teaching kids how to text better and faster? lol This is a bit of what I was saying in the other thread about "lines". Teaching a child about sex was not always an accepted option, now it is and wallah we have more kids having kids. Some people think it's ok and some don;t. Once again I think this should be handled by the parents, but big brother is stepping up because the parents are stepping down.

http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=tncode

49-6-1005. Sex education

Well, no.

It's not 'case closed' because teachers in Tennessee are not capable of being 'academic' about sex, and sexual orientation.

If they're incapable, they do not meet the minimum criteria for the job. There are plenty that do.

In public schools, teaching is not a 'right', it's a 'privelege', and as such, it is conditional.

I'm not disagreeing with this point, however, I'm not for any gag order either.

This law seems to be specifically about a gag order on the topic of homosexuality.

That's blatantly discriminating against homosexuality.

Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a mile...

I don't want any unqualified people in classrooms, period.

Non sequitur.

Homosexuality is not a threat to the public.

As recently as 1988, living together without being married was on the AZ books as "notoriously cohabitating" and it was illegal.  I tried to get everyone I knew who was notorious to join me down at the city jail and turn ourselves in.  I was notoriously living with my now husband - we weren't married at the time.

I figured if even 1/4 of the notoriously cohabitating inhabitants of Tucson showed up, the law would get changed.  The politicians were arguing about it at the time.  Unfortunately, the conservatives in the AZ legislature won and the law may still be in effect for all I know.  You think Tennessee is behind the times, I don't live in AZ for many reasons and that is one of them.

My point was, if a question is asked, it should be answered.  Right then.  Appropriately for the child's age.  While you may have been the most wonderful parent in the world, I can certify that I was not and am not.  If the teacher is full of it, then I can straighten out the child later.  If the teacher can shed some light on the subject that is has some truth in it, I'm all for it.

Not all parents are perfect, you know.  Which is why schools are doing more than teaching the 3 r's. 

Not sure what simply defining the word "gay" has to do with being social workers, or why it should take so long that it would take anything away from the rest of the curriculum.

Oh, sorry. Seems this is settled as well. Forget my posts then.

Everybody agrees again. Yay !

  Bonobo chimps figure out homosexual behavior all by themselves.  No one "teaches" them either, and no school curriculum is needed.  So ?

  Actually I don't have a problem with school children of a certain age being educated about homosexuality and what it is in the behavioral sense.  I don't see that it serves a purpose to perpetuate naivete about such matters.   I would include instruction relating to matters of civility that persons who are homosexual should not be subjected to persecution and abuse.   Beyond that, who knows ?   

  In an purely academic discussion of homosexuality I would try to avoid anything that I considered to be overly proselytizing be it  pro or con.    For me I would liken it to teaching school kids a course on comparative religion and in a manner that could best be described as informative yet dispassionate.

Right, because as Harvey Milk once asked in a debate of a homophobe "Do you teach it like French?"

It would suck for children to know that there are people different than they are.

I don't know about what you would teach a kindergartner other than, "that person is who they are", but as they get older I don't see a problem with discussing sexual preference. It would tie into sex ed and both heterosexuals and gays need to know that both oral and anal sex can spread disease and that condoms are not a 100% safety, although they do reduce the risk.

You don't dump all that info on them at a young age. You start out with "That person is just like you and deserves to be happy just like you", Then the older they get depending on their individual maturity you introduce body mechanics.

What you don't do to any kid is keep them dumb and raise them to fear what they don't understand. Something unfortunately you seem to have suffered from at the hands of society when you grew up.

Back atcha.

You agree with the law or not?

I haven't seen a course labeled 'Sex Education' but, I would assume it entails descriptions of the human sexual reproductive process and not how to achieve an orgasm or how to masturbate. So, if this is the case, I don't see why gay relationships would be included in such a class.

However...

If you read the curriculum, in the section called 'Family Life', page 11, it says, ' analyze how respectful and tolerant behaviors can reduce prejudice, discrimination and bullying (e.g. race, culture, disabilities and gender)'

At the beginning of this section it says, 'Describe a variety of family structures (e.g. two parent, single parent, blended, extended, foster and adopted) and how they change over time. (page 8  )

I sincerely hope that some talented Gay Rights attorney takes this to court.

You can't teach a Family Life course and exclude discussion of homosexuality. You can't teach 'respectful and tolerant behavior ' while being disrespectful and intolerant of gays - well, I guess they can in Tennessee.

You know, the more I think about this, the angrier I become.

Other than specific aspects of human reproduction, I don't think other aspects of sexual relations should be taught in schools BUT, if they have a course that entails teaching respect and tolerance and family life in general, to exclude homosexuals is discrimination - to say the least.

Isn't this Bill unconstitutional??

How can they get away with this??

Christ, this is like excluding evolution from the curriculum - only worse because it involves actual, living human beings.

What would be the legal/proper process to go through if one wanted to protest this Bill?

No it is not unconstitutional. They can teach whatever they want or don't want in public school. The only exception is when the explicitly religious comes up. Your only legal recourse is to contact your representatives and/or hold protests at the state capitol, and vote new people in next election.

The answer is no, Rob.  From growing up where sex education in the schools was illegal and it was illegal for even your doctor to talk to you about birth control if you were an unmarried woman (no such restriction on men, btw), no.  Not teaching kids about sex does not prevent them from having sex, unprotected sex, risky sex.  Just the opposite - you get all kinds of nonsense about douching with cola for pete's sake.

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/conceive.asp

For a long list of other nonsense.  And no, I do not know enough about birth control - particularly the newer formulations and devices - to feel confident that my facts are current. 

Comprehensive sex education programs are more likely to prevent teen pregnancies when the students realize how easy it is for most women to get pregnant.  Yes, we all know or know of people who have had/are having problems conceiving.  For all too many young women, conceiving is all too easy.  It is also easy to contract a STD (sexually transmitted disease).  If I had known what risks I was taking - but I didn't, and so I was lucky, not smart.

Sex education should never be a substitute for parental involvement - but that is true for reading, 'riting, and 'rithmatic as well. 

Um, and you think these people will be responsible about educating their children about anything?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/apr/23/sex-education-julia-sweeney

Pay attention to the way the 9 year old asks about gay and lesbian couples. She merely states their names, no funny words, no name calling, no hint of thinking they are odd; just plain curiosity. Don't hide sexuality from children, teach them. 

Too true. I didn't think anyone would care to point that out. In some cases kids having babies is actually propogated by these people. It does seem like the welfare jockeys have more kids after all and as my grandmother used to say "ignorance breeds ignorance".

I agree, although in some respects the whole argument reminds me of the creationism/evolution debate. In the end, I don't think it matters a hill of beans, kids don't pay attention in school anyway. Do you even remember what your 6th grade teacher said? I don't. I was too busy thinking about Michelle, Tara and Carmen.

The only way anyone could effectively keep their children from learning about sex or homosexuality is to homeschool and never let the kid into public or on the internet. So while I understand the frustration with the petty dictators that are our politicians, I have a hard time getting too worked up over this particular issue. Especially since the schools are obviously failing to teach anything of true importance- have you seen anyone under the age of 40 trying to count back change? They can't do it without a computer. Schools have obviously failed miserably in teaching basic math, economics and history. As we continue into the future, those who are unable/unwilling to educate themselves will be at a severe disadvantage. Fortunately, the internet makes self-education easier than ever.

Pretty sure I didn't suggest that either. Same effect, really. But a teacher has to teach. Parents can, as you say, decide not to give a damn.

Never said there aren't any problems. I just don't think that sex-ed at school is one of them.

*looks out of the window and lols*

Actually, most of western europe is a "rich neighborhood", I guess, compared to the rest of the world.