Ask The Wise Man

Posted in the Columbus Forum

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 40 of76
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Cats rule.”

Since: Dec 09

Chardon Ohio.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jan 26, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?
Hi sweetie!!,how are you today?.
der schwarze

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 26, 2013
 
TheWiseMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it will not open.
It was not meant to open. It is in a door. der schwarze must have lost the key.
TheWiseMan

San Antonio, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jan 31, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?
Because you are in a car.
TheWiseMan

San Antonio, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Feb 9, 2013
 
I also have a great sense of humor.
adif understanding

Lancaster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Feb 9, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?
It has to do with how the two got their name.

A drive way was originally a path from the road allowing you to drive up to the house or building. Originally, they were off shoots of significant length connecting a maintained road. In the past, they didn't maintain as many roads as we do now and what would be the roads normally connecting the houses were more or less paths. When the paths became roads, the length of the driveways became shorter and the name stuck around.

A parkway gets it's name from a park as in the city park. It is a road originally built to go to and through parks (generally a city park). Some times these parks have been long removed and even moved to other locations and the parkway still bears the parkway title, but at one time, it either went to or through a park.
sidekick

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

How do you take the porn industry to the next level? LOL!
adif understanding

Lancaster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Feb 12, 2013
 
sidekick wrote:
How do you take the porn industry to the next level? LOL!
You get rid of the pope and stand back and wait for all sorts of wickedness to happen.

Pretty soon, Debbie does Dallas with be a require screening for health class and sex education. I'm not sure why a lot of people on the left like it when young children are promiscuous but it seems like the going trend when they claim celibacy has no place in sex education.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Feb 12, 2013
 
adif understanding wrote:
<quoted text>You get rid of the pope and stand back and wait for all sorts of wickedness to happen.
Pretty soon, Debbie does Dallas with be a require screening for health class and sex education. I'm not sure why a lot of people on the left like it when young children are promiscuous but it seems like the going trend when they claim celibacy has no place in sex education.
Dunno anyone who claims it has no place.

It is abstinence only that has been shown to be profoundly ineffective.

Why do conservatives think that sex has no place in sex education?
adif understanding

Lancaster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Feb 12, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Dunno anyone who claims it has no place.
It is abstinence only that has been shown to be profoundly ineffective.
Why do conservatives think that sex has no place in sex education?
No, not in my travels. They are against any form of abstinence education at all.

Conservatives do not think sex has no place in sex education. They think that sex education should be taught in ways that do not encourage the children to have sex. Why is it the liberals seem to want children to have sex?

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Feb 12, 2013
 
Abstinence ineffective?

Really? If one is practicing abstinence, how can one contract an STD or get pregnant? Oh yeah, the condom broke...

It's "ineffectiveness" lies in its non-practice. Duh.
adif understanding

Lancaster, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Feb 12, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
Abstinence ineffective?
Really? If one is practicing abstinence, how can one contract an STD or get pregnant? Oh yeah, the condom broke...
It's "ineffectiveness" lies in its non-practice. Duh.
There have been some studies indicating that no matter how much you tell some children to be abstinent, they will ignore that teaching and engage in sexual conduct anyways. I think that is where they think it is ineffective. But I also think that it happens largely where conflicting teachings happen. Sex education seems to be an area of parenting in which each parent will have different ideas in how it should be done. This is one reason why the states entered into the field- to ensure their government version was pushed.

Anyways, I have seen parents who claim it's perfectly natural for their 14 year old to be having sex and they don't care one bit. I have also seen the same parents bitch and complain about a baby they have to take care of when that 14 year old is 16 or 17. Look at Abio-genesis and creation theory. The school pushes Abio-genesis and a lot of people still claim God created life.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Feb 13, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
Abstinence ineffective?
Really? If one is practicing abstinence, how can one contract an STD or get pregnant? Oh yeah, the condom broke...
It's "ineffectiveness" lies in its non-practice. Duh.
No.

Abstinence only education is ineffective.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Feb 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

adif understanding wrote:
<quoted text>No, not in my travels. They are against any form of abstinence education at all.
Conservatives do not think sex has no place in sex education. They think that sex education should be taught in ways that do not encourage the children to have sex. Why is it the liberals seem to want children to have sex?
Well, you look at it this way.

You have a curriculum that is only allowed to teach about abstinence. And you have a curriculum that teaches about abstinence as one of a toolbox of options included under the general heading of responsibility.

Then you compare the outcomes of those two curricula, looking at things like delaying sexual behavior, STDs and teen pregnancy.

Now, most rational people would go for the one that does a better job of delaying sexual behavior, lowering the incidence of STDs and resulting in teen pregnancy. You seem to think that all these people are liberals.

Then we have some people who walk around with their eyes shut, their hands over their ears and singing as loudly as they can to shut out any ideas. These people don't care what the results are--there is only one right way. These people support abstinence only education.

“Hi-Yo Silver! Away!”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Feb 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you look at it this way.
You have a curriculum that is only allowed to teach about abstinence. And you have a curriculum that teaches about abstinence as one of a toolbox of options included under the general heading of responsibility.
Then you compare the outcomes of those two curricula, looking at things like delaying sexual behavior, STDs and teen pregnancy.
Now, most rational people would go for the one that does a better job of delaying sexual behavior, lowering the incidence of STDs and resulting in teen pregnancy. You seem to think that all these people are liberals.
Then we have some people who walk around with their eyes shut, their hands over their ears and singing as loudly as they can to shut out any ideas. These people don't care what the results are--there is only one right way. These people support abstinence only education.
Excellent post.
Adif understanding

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Feb 13, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you look at it this way.
You have a curriculum that is only allowed to teach about abstinence. And you have a curriculum that teaches about abstinence as one of a toolbox of options included under the general heading of responsibility.
Then you compare the outcomes of those two curricula, looking at things like delaying sexual behavior, STDs and teen pregnancy.
Now, most rational people would go for the one that does a better job of delaying sexual behavior, lowering the incidence of STDs and resulting in teen pregnancy. You seem to think that all these people are liberals.
Then we have some people who walk around with their eyes shut, their hands over their ears and singing as loudly as they can to shut out any ideas. These people don't care what the results are--there is only one right way. These people support abstinence only education.
As I said, every liberal that I have met has been against abstinence education of any kind. You might be the first I have seen to publicly say it's ok.

Your rant about who liberals are is inconsistent with what I said. Now go back and read it just so you are clear. I did not say liberals wanted abstinence and other forms of sex ed, I said they all wanted it without abstinence education. You are the first who thinks it is ok that I have seen talking about it.

Now, what you described is not a liberal or conservative thing. It's a proper thing, one that approaches the subject respectfully and is what I originally described.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Feb 13, 2013
 
Adif understanding wrote:
<quoted text>As I said, every liberal that I have met has been against abstinence education of any kind. You might be the first I have seen to publicly say it's ok.
Your rant about who liberals are is inconsistent with what I said. Now go back and read it just so you are clear. I did not say liberals wanted abstinence and other forms of sex ed, I said they all wanted it without abstinence education. You are the first who thinks it is ok that I have seen talking about it.
Now, what you described is not a liberal or conservative thing. It's a proper thing, one that approaches the subject respectfully and is what I originally described.
Go back and read Tony's example from Texas. The law in Texas specifies that the bulk of a sex ed curriculum MUST be focused on abstinence. But Tony was all bent out of shape that some districts--with the support of parents and guided by research were incorporating a more comprehensive approach.

Now--I challenge you to find and cite a liberal, or anyone who believes that the concept of abstinence should be banished from a sex ed curriculum.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Feb 13, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Abstinence only education is ineffective.
Interesting, considering only a generation or two, that WAS the bulk of "education". Sure, we got the mechanics, too. Just no condoms over cucumbers ala Jocelyn Elders. And in my generation, out of wedlock births were exponentially lower, too. As was the rate of STDs. And most STDs back then were easily treatable, if caught, via antibiotics.

So, again? How does abstinence only education HURT? It hurts when you proceed with a confused message: "Abstinence is the only gauranteed way of 0 pregnancies and 0 STDs, BUT...if you use condoms or birth control, the rate is not bad..."

So again, if abstinence only education is ineffective, how effective has the mixed message been? While the US fertility rate has declined again, the birth rate to unmarried women is over 40% still. The rate is about 34.2 per 1,000 in the age range of 15-19.

Again? Yes, the rates of dropped considerably in 1991.

Can you say it's due to the Jocelyn Elders' methods? I can't. 15-19 is the highest risk age group. Combine that with the wide availability of abortion and there ya go... This only addresses the rates of births, not pregnancies. It also doesn't address the exponential growth of STDs and the reason they've become resistant to antibiotics as well as the explosion of HPV and HIV/AIDs. Multi-faceted problem that can't be resolved unless it IS with an emphasis on abstinence--both for preventing pregnancy and STDs as well as for emotional/psychological growth. Both for hetero- and homosexuals--good practice, is it not?
Adif understanding

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Feb 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Go back and read Tony's example from Texas. The law in Texas specifies that the bulk of a sex ed curriculum MUST be focused on abstinence. But Tony was all bent out of shape that some districts--with the support of parents and guided by research were incorporating a more comprehensive approach.
Now--I challenge you to find and cite a liberal, or anyone who believes that the concept of abstinence should be banished from a sex ed curriculum.
I don't care what Texas law says. You aren't listening. You need a q tip or something? I said ever liberal I know and have talked to until this very thread does not want abstinence taught at all. Nothing at all, do you understand that? It has nothing to do with abstinence only or any state's implementation of it, it has to do with the entire concept of abstinence period.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Feb 13, 2013
 
Adif understanding wrote:
<quoted text>I don't care what Texas law says. You aren't listening. You need a q tip or something? I said ever liberal I know and have talked to until this very thread does not want abstinence taught at all. Nothing at all, do you understand that? It has nothing to do with abstinence only or any state's implementation of it, it has to do with the entire concept of abstinence period.
So--it shouldn't be so difficult to come up with a citation or two. Who are all these liberals who are opposed to the inclusion of abstinence in sex education?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Feb 13, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting, considering only a generation or two, that WAS the bulk of "education". Sure, we got the mechanics, too. Just no condoms over cucumbers ala Jocelyn Elders. And in my generation, out of wedlock births were exponentially lower, too. As was the rate of STDs. And most STDs back then were easily treatable, if caught, via antibiotics.
So, again? How does abstinence only education HURT? It hurts when you proceed with a confused message: "Abstinence is the only gauranteed way of 0 pregnancies and 0 STDs, BUT...if you use condoms or birth control, the rate is not bad..."
So again, if abstinence only education is ineffective, how effective has the mixed message been? While the US fertility rate has declined again, the birth rate to unmarried women is over 40% still. The rate is about 34.2 per 1,000 in the age range of 15-19.
Again? Yes, the rates of dropped considerably in 1991.
Can you say it's due to the Jocelyn Elders' methods? I can't. 15-19 is the highest risk age group. Combine that with the wide availability of abortion and there ya go... This only addresses the rates of births, not pregnancies. It also doesn't address the exponential growth of STDs and the reason they've become resistant to antibiotics as well as the explosion of HPV and HIV/AIDs. Multi-faceted problem that can't be resolved unless it IS with an emphasis on abstinence--both for preventing pregnancy and STDs as well as for emotional/psychological growth. Both for hetero- and homosexuals--good practice, is it not?
Well, here is a nice scholarly article summarize a good bit of comparative research: http://www.moappp.org/Documents/articles/2006... .

A piece of the evidence that must be figured in is the failure rate of those who pledge to remain abstinent. Like all other forms of pregnancy or disease prevention there is a human factor that must be accounted for. Condoms serve much better when used 100% of the time than when they are used sporadically. Likewise, the efficacy of the pill starts to fall off when the user forgets to take it frequently. And the reality is that many who pledge abstinence do not delay sex until marriage (heck--even George didn't wait). And the issue then becomes that those who slip up in their commitment but have little knowledge of some basics with regard to hygiene and responsibility are the ones who are MORE likely to end up with an STI or unintended pregnancy.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 40 of76
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

71 Users are viewing the Columbus Forum right now

Search the Columbus Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Lois Lerner linked to another erased hard drive 19 min Male 58
OH Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) 38 min trkk drvng retard 29,058
Is Barak Obama responsible for the current bord... 1 hr Reality Speaks 154
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 4 hr Logan 818
City Council to consider regulations for Uber, ... 5 hr JessieCups 1
Treating the vermin like vermin 6 hr yeah baby yeah 1
Columbus mayor to DNC: Pick us or lose Ohio 6 hr Reality Speaks 6
•••
•••
•••
•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••