how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
895 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
EAP
join:2000-01-15
Lafayette Hill, PA | What is the harm ? Everyone misses the point. The person was convicted of this:
"risk of injury to a minor, or impairing the morals of a child."
That is such BS. I have yet to see proof of ANY harm (or impairing anything) to anyone, regardless of age, from viewing pictures. The whole thing is laughable.
This is simply a matter of hysterical moralists, conducting a witch hunt. Those who are most upset about their "children" viewing such material, are simply putting their own twisted views into the minds of the children who supposedly looked at the stuff.
There is no assumption that simple accidental viewing of nudity or depictions of sex viewed by children will cause:
1. them to explode
2. deviant behavior now or in the future
3. perverted acts now or in the future
4. "loss of innocence" (whatever that is)
5. paralysis
So to even get hyped up about it is just ridiculous. Oh, the kid saw a porno picture --- Sooooooooooo what!
4. | |
|  | | Re: What is the harm ? Exactly. The incident was an innocent accident (even if the images were far from innocent). Still, if you have ever talked with a teacher about parental reactions, you'd know that parents can get vicious. Especially around the age (7th grade) that the teacher was in. I should know. My wife teaches 6th and 8th grade and frequently comes home with stories that can make you understand why so many teachers don't make it past their first year. (Just recently, she got a harassing e-mail from a parent because she followed standard operating procedures in disciplining a child. Luckily, the matter worked itself out but the parents still don't think they did anything wrong.) | |
| | | | Re: What is the harm ? I use to tutor HS kids in Math and Science for a special program, and these kids know more than their parents think. If you would have overheard any conversation, you'd think there was no hope for the future. | |
|
 cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5
 ·Frontier FiOS
| said by EAP:There is no assumption that simple accidental viewing of nudity or depictions of sex viewed by children will cause... The funny thing is that in the 5th grade (at least around here), it's mandatory curriculum as part of health education for students to learn about reproduction. As part of that, everyone pretty much sees graphic pictures of nude men and women. Now they aren't in the middle of the act, but it's not like they haven't ever see it either.
Besides, I bet you 3/4 of the kids in the class could probably tell you very quickly more then a hand full of porn sites.
--
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? | |
| | | | Re: What is the harm ? said by cdru:The funny thing is that in the 5th grade (at least around here), it's mandatory curriculum as part of health education for students to learn about reproduction. As part of that, everyone pretty much sees graphic pictures of nude men and women. Now they aren't in the middle of the act, but it's not like they haven't ever see it either. My wife has to teach sex ed later this year.... To middle school students... in an all girl's Catholic school. Now doesn't that sound fun.  The lesson should be easy at least. "Don't do it." As a bonus, since she's expecting our second child, she can say "Don't do it or *this* will happen to you!"
In all seriousness, she doesn't have to do any moralizing. That's left to the religion teacher. Still, teaching sex ed in an all girl's Catholic school is going to be a bit of a minefield as to what to show/discuss, what not to show/discuss, and how to present it all. I don't envy her one bit. | |
| | |  ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
 ·DSL EXTREME
| Re: What is the harm ? said by Jason Levine:My wife has to teach sex ed later this year.... To middle school students... in an all girl's Catholic school. Sex ed at a Catholic school...
...sounds like an oxymoron if you ask me.  | |
| | | |  hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | Re: What is the harm ? said by Thaler:said by Jason Levine:My wife has to teach sex ed later this year.... To middle school students... in an all girl's Catholic school. Sex ed at a Catholic school... ...sounds like an oxymoron if you ask me. LOL, sure does. However, they gotta tell them how to do it if they want their religion to survive.
Kinda funny
--
An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church.
An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said.
An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.
--Madalyn Murray O'Hair | |
| | | | | | | Re: What is the harm ? Catholic schools are generally better at these things this public schools. Catholicism has a long tradition of using logic and using it consistently.
I actually know a guy who was taught evolution in a Catholic school, so I imagine that Catholic school sex-ed will involve condoms, although probably not rolling them onto bananas.
Too bad they ended their policy of covering up hands-on sex education techniques. | |
|
hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | said by EAP:This is simply a matter of hysterical moralists, conducting a witch hunt. Those who are most upset about their "children" viewing such material, are simply putting their own twisted views into the minds of the children who supposedly looked at the stuff. exactly
well said
--
An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church.
An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said.
An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.
--Madalyn Murray O'Hair | |
| | | said by EAP:Everyone misses the point. The person was convicted of this: "risk of injury to a minor, or impairing the morals of a child." That is such BS. I have yet to see proof of ANY harm (or impairing anything) to anyone, regardless of age, from viewing pictures. The whole thing is laughable. This is simply a matter of hysterical moralists, conducting a witch hunt. Those who are most upset about their "children" viewing such material, are simply putting their own twisted views into the minds of the children who supposedly looked at the stuff. If the teacher is guilty, the parent should face the same prosecution and penalty if their kid happens to walk in on them naked or involved in, uh, "naked activities"... | |
|
1 edit | You've done a great job at putting the issue on its head. Who knows what the porn images comprised? It might not have even been good ole-fashioned, doggy style or otherwise, heterosexual sex.
In any case, it's akin to asking your child to watch you and mommy have deep, hot passionate sex. It's just not appropriate for someone who is still developing physically and mentally. This applies especially boys where the testosterone is really coming on strong. It's IRRESPONSIBLE, straight up.
I'm just guessing you've become desensitized to this sexed up culture of the 21st century. | |
| | EAP
join:2000-01-15
Lafayette Hill, PA
1 edit | Re: What is the harm ? reply to vinnie97
My point is that regardless of what the image was -- even if it was 4 nuns, 3 cows and 10 midgets, sodomizing quadrapeligic senior citizens -- I defy you or anyone else to prove that ANYONE, regardless of age, suffers actual "HARM" or "injury" from viewing such an image.
I have never seen a child or anyone else melt, explode or otherwise become a sexual deviant from viewing an image (ANY image). The fact that some people may find something revolting, disgusting or inappropriate, doesn't mean it caused harm.
Whether something is not "appropriate" is not the same as saying something should be or is a crime.
Of course it is not "appropriate" in a school for children to view porn. But something being not "appropriate" is not the same as something being worthy of criminal charges.
The way you handle it is to use common sense and logic. You talk to the teacher and find out what happened. If it is warranted, perhaps the teacher is reprimanded or fired. You discuss intelligently with the classroom what happened, and make it a learning/educational opportunity about appropriate behavior.
Perhaps you also see what technical options their might be to avoid inapropriate material in a classroom -- whether inadvertently or not.
But to make a court case out of it where someone could go to jail for 40 years -- over IMAGES -- is simply a reflection of our overly "religious" and paternalistic society gone wrong. | |
| | EAP
join:2000-01-15
Lafayette Hill, PA | And what would happen to a child if he/she watched mommy or daddy having sex?
Would the child be harmed?
More likely a weird reaction by the parents would cause harm (like filing charges against the other parent for not locking the door).
In fact, the child would probably either:
a: laugh or;
b: be grossed out and embarressed
Neither of which warrant criminal charges.
I'm not desensitized. I'm just not afraid of images anymore then I am afraid of sound.
| |
| | |  BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL
 ·Comcast
| Re: What is the harm ? said by EAP:I'm not desensitized. I'm just not afraid of images anymore then I am afraid of sound. I dunno about that... Pics of my parents doing it would scare me. Also, Celine Dione is a sound I am afraid of *shudder*
--
"There's no such thing as a soul. It's just something they made up to scare kids, like the Boogeyman or Michael Jackson." - Bart Simpson | |
|
 tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | said by EAP:Everyone misses the point. The person was convicted of this: "risk of injury to a minor, or impairing the morals of a child." That is such BS. I have yet to see proof of ANY harm (or impairing anything) to anyone, regardless of age, from viewing pictures. The whole thing is laughable. Good point.
40 years? Rapists have gotten shorter sentences. People who have killed other human beings have served less time in prison. And I haven't even broached the topic of teachers who have actually slept with their students. (subsequently bearing said student's child and then marrying them)
"Witch hunt" doesn't even begin to describe this debacle.
--
I cannot stand demagoguery. If you disagree with my stance, you're a blithering twit. You're not a twit, are you? | |
|
| |
|
