I’m glad people responded to my comment on sex-ed. Mainly because I can see now that it was taken not exactly how I meant it. I’ll clarify…
1) The Conservative bunch doesn’t want their kids hearing about sex from a secular perspective (though from what I’ve seen, they all too often can’t teach it themselves), and this is understandable, so it makes sense that they would call for it not to be in public schools. The Not-so-conservative bunch isn’t quite as fearful of the secular education, and knows that a system will help ensure that kids know what’s going on.
2) Both sides of this argument come from the “Christian” standpoint, and like I said in the first comment, I won’t choose sides. But from that standpoint, sex of the premarital variety gets lumped in with drugs and rock ‘n’ roll as part of the ‘trifecta from hell’. So, using that logic, that they’re all bad and equally so, shouldn’t we treat them the same? Hence my statement.
3) I’ll be honest and admit that the necessity/nature aspect hadn’t entered my brain when I wrote the post. But looking at it from the previously mentioned standpoint, it seems kinda moot to me.
4) I guess I’m just saying that there are some things that don’t sit right no matter how you look at them. Time for my opinion: the incessant argument about sex-ed could be solved by parents getting guts and teaching their kids, and if they teach them well, then it doesn’t matter what the schools do or don’t teach, the kids know what’s up and can do what they do (or don’t do) in an informed manner.
Hopefully I’ve done a halfway decent job of thinking this through and saying what I meant.
Comments still welcome. Thanks everyone.