Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rochester.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!ray From: ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Planned Parenthood posting Message-ID: <11043@rochester.UUCP> Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 11:07:53 EDT Article-I.D.: rocheste.11043 Posted: Wed Aug 14 11:07:53 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 22:24:41 EDT References: <639@ttidcc.UUCP> <10929@rochester.UUCP> <1473@pyuxd.UUCP> Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept. Lines: 39 > > Any responsible parent would definitely tell their children not to have sex. > >From Rich Rosen: > Any sensible American child would definitely ignore that "responsible" (and > I most certainly question the use of the word) parent. Which is precisely > why real information should be passed on to kids, precisely because of > parents whose sex education for their child consists of that responsible > statement "Thou shalt not have sex". > I seem to have touched a raw nerve with Rich concering parents. He is having a great deal of trouble remaining objective. Why would a sensible American child or any child for that matter ignore his parents? Who should they decide not to ignore? So you want to pass on "real information to kids"? Who are you going to elect to do this? At what age are they going to receive this information? Let's see, we can start with Santa Clause. People can come around the home and convince 3 year olds that Santa doesn't exist. To hell with the joys of Christmas and the wonderful imagination of a child. How about pictures graphically depicting death camps during WW2. Why should a child be told that the the world is a pretty and safe place to be alive. C'mon folks let's here it for 'real information'. To blazes with the petty concern of parents wishing to buffer their children from the horrors of the real world till their old enough to understand. I will agree that some parents are only that in name alone, and don't deserve the responsibility of raising kids and perhaps are not capable of properly raising children. Let's face it, almost anyone can be a parent, it doesn't take any special education or intelligence, just doing what comes natural causes parents to exist fortunately or unfortunately depending on how their children affect society. But on the whole, the responsibility of children rests on the parents, it has always worked just fine that way. If, as of late, it is not working out so well, then not only are some parents to blame, but also the interference outside the home. Someone said, I don't remember who, but I agree whole heartedly, "The way to destroy a society is to erode its base, which in essence is the family." I don't give a crap what you or anyone else on the net thinks, but I personally believe that this very erosion is going on all around us all the time right now. Nothing could make us weaker than 250 million alienated estranged Americans.