The Utah House has passed a bill banning any mention of contraception in sex education classes; if a - Polidicks

[b]Source:[/b] [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/abstinence-only-sex-educa_n_1297238.html]Link[/url] [quote]A bill requiring sex education classes to teach an abstinence-only curriculum moved closer to becoming a law in Utah Wednesday. The state House passed HB 363 in a 45-28 vote following extensive debate. The bill -- which now goes on to the state Senate -- would lift the current requirement that all public schools must teach sex ed in grades 8 through 12. If the bill passes, districts would decide whether to offer sex ed classes that teach an abstinence-only curriculum, or not offer the course at all. Republican state Rep. Bill Wright sponsored the proposal. "We've been culturally watered down to think we have to teach about sex, about having sex and how to get away with it, which is intellectually dishonest," Wright said, according to The Salt Lake Tribune. "Why don't we just be honest with them upfront that sex outside marriage is devastating?" The version of the bill that passed through the state House Wednesday would prohibit any instruction in contraception, though teachers would be allowed to answer student questions about safe sex. That provision is a departure from current law, which prohibits the advocacy of contraception and sexual activity outside of marriage. It also tightens the already-conservative regulations that sex ed curricula emphasize abstinence before marriage and fidelity after marriage and "personal skills that encourage individual choice of abstinence and fidelity." An abstinence-only sex education course, Wright said, would include lessons on friendship, dating and love. It could include lessons on the consequences of sex outside of marriage and a chapter on how to say no to sex. The lawmaker believes that poverty rates would drop if abstinence became a more common practice, the Daily Herald reports. Critics of the bill like Democratic state Rep. Carol Spackman said abstinence can't be taught without discussions of contraceptive failures, protecting yourself from sexually transmitted diseases. She adds that not teaching the consequences of sex among young people is "really immoral," The Salt Lake Tribune reports.[/quote] This will be the same affect as the Drug War. People are only going to do it more now. Has our country just gone terribly ass crazy mad?

It's Utah. Enough said.

That will help absolutely no-one. It's like refusing to mention the risks of fucking with electricty in a physics class; all it's gonna do is stop people entirely understanding things, and they may get hurt because of that.

It's okay. It's Mormon country in Utah. In Ohio, the mormons here refer to it as the mothership.

Backwards ass politics, religion really has no place in a government.

[quote] It could include lessons on the consequences of sex outside of marriage and a chapter on how to say no to sex.[/quote] "Kids if you have sex outside of marriage you'll have AIDS! Condoms are the devil's making!" Seriously, the fuck is wrong with Utah.

I've never been to Utah or heard about these remarks about them. Today I learned to keep it up.

and in about ten years the head lines will read: "Misguided legislation may be cause of recent skyrocket in unplanned pregnancy in young Adults."

[QUOTE=-Get_A_Life-;34855905]"Kids if you have sex outside of marriage you'll have AIDS! Condoms are the devil's making!" Seriously, the fuck is wrong with Utah.[/QUOTE] Mormons.

[QUOTE=Deaglez7;34855966]Morons.[/QUOTE]FTFY

Hate the state I live in.

[QUOTE=Deaglez7;34855966]Mormons.[/QUOTE] It's the high altitude in Utah that makes you make the bad decisions.

Michigan's been doing this for years.

Come on guys, they want more poor babies to endlessly buy products when they grow up. It's simple.

Hahaha the states have done it again

So essentially "herp durp don't have sex"? I love how they expect people to ignore the most basic of urges.

I'm ashamed to live in this shithole of a state.

[QUOTE=Wright is a huge idiot;34855777]"We've been culturally watered down to think we have to teach about sex, about having sex and how to get away with it, which is intellectually dishonest," Wright said, according to The Salt Lake Tribune. "Why don't we just be honest with them upfront that sex outside marriage is devastating?"[/QUOTE] Only, in many cases, it's not. [QUOTE]An abstinence-only sex education course, Wright said, would include lessons on friendship, dating and love. It could include lessons on the consequences of sex outside of marriage and a chapter on how to say no to sex. The lawmaker believes that poverty rates would drop if abstinence became a more common practice, the Daily Herald reports.[/QUOTE] Birth rates would fall, sure, if absolutely everyone in Utah didn't want to have sex. However, I hate how he seems to think abstinence is some magical concept kids don't know about. Believe me, kids know about not having sex, they just want to have sex, so they do. It's a school. Shouldn't they educate kids?

"We've been culturally watered down to think we have to teach about electrical appliances, about using electrical appliances and how to get away with it, which is intellectually dishonest. Why don't we just be honest with them upfront that using electrical appliances outside of killing foreigners is devastating? We all know that the best way to not get hurt by an electrical appliance is to never use them. Therefore, this House demands that schools don't teach anyone about electrical appliances, and if they do, this 'electrical appliance education' must only mention the fact that electrical appliances are literal tools of Satan that will steal your soul."

Dear Utah: Fuck you with a condom. Love, Dacheet

[QUOTE=blacksam;34856034]It's the high altitude in Utah that makes you make the bad decisions.[/QUOTE] Colorado hasn't been making many bad decisions lately.

[QUOTE=Penultimate;34856377] It's a school. Shouldn't they educate kids?[/QUOTE] Only if we like what they're teaching, and if it doesn't involve religion, get rid of it.

Yup, that's Utah alright.

the safest way to avoid pregnancy is not to bone the safest way to avoid choking is not to eat same logic, utah same logic

Possibly the dumbest thing that Utah has done in recent memory. And that's saying a lot. [editline]25th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Mon;34857208]the safest way to avoid pregnancy is not to bone the safest way to avoid choking is not to eat same logic, utah same logic[/QUOTE] Well. They do technically follow their beliefs. They marry when they want to fuck.

[QUOTE=Cone;34855811]That will help absolutely no-one. It's like refusing to mention the risks of fucking with electricty in a physics class; all it's gonna do is stop people entirely understanding things, and they may get hurt because of that.[/QUOTE] that's a poor comparison tbh you don't really have a reason to talk about that in a physics class. It makes a good idea for a physics problem (Resistance from one finger to another is 4000 ohms, 10 mA current along that path is fatal, what voltage is necessary?

Odd how this abstinence thing is actually backfiring. More people are getting laid and more people my age are having children, and only just this decade we started the Abstinence bullshit. My neighbor had a baby boy in September last year and she was 17 when impregnated, by her weed dealer.

[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;34856306]I'm ashamed to live in this shithole of a state.[/QUOTE] I know that feel bro. I live in Utah too and the shit here is so backwards. I was in Sex ed last semester, and we were talking about safe sex. "What's the safest form of sex?" "Oh, it's abstinence!" That's like saying the safest way to play dodgeball is to not play dodgeball. It's a contradiction.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;34857700]Resistance from one finger to another is 4000 ohms, 10 mA current along that path is fatal, what voltage is necessary?[/QUOTE] 40 volts?

[QUOTE=thisispain;34857872]40 volts?[/QUOTE] You're probably right but I was just giving an example from memory, as such the numbers are incorrect anyway. Here is the actual problem that was on my online homework a while ago [quote]The damage caused by electric shock depends on the current flowing through the body; 1 mA can be felt and 5 mA is painful. Above 15 mA, a person loses muscle control, and 70 mA can be fatal. A person with dry skin has a resistance from one arm to the other of about 1.4 × 10[sup]5[/sup] Ω . When skin is wet, the resistance drops to about 5700 Ω . What is the minimum voltage placed across the arms that would produce a current that could be felt by a person with dry skin? Answer in units of V[/quote] AP Physics B represent