>>>>Go fig....
>>>>Education works
>>>>
>>>Does it?
>>>There has been sex education in school systems for decades and the out of wedlock birth rate has soared.
>>
>>I think you need to separate the out-of-wedlock birthrate from the teen birthrate. The latter has fallen considerably.
>>
>>http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.htm
>>
>>"Fewer babies were born to teenagers in 2010 than in any year since 1946."
>>
>
>
>>>The knee-jerk assumption that if something needs to be taught to kids, it needs to be taught in school systems is way off base.
>>>Trying to make school systems cures for dysfunctional families - among other things- has led to rising school budgets and declining academic achievement.
>>>The school systems here are overloaded with nonsense like sex education, day care -anti-bullying sessions, anti-bias sessions, grief counselling, ad nauseum.
>>>Incidentally, many of the teachers teaching this nonsense are divorced single parents.
>>
>>As one who was bullied in school and as the parent of a child who was bullied, I think anti-bullying education is absolutely required.
>>
>>Tamar
>
>>What has changed at the same time is the number of adults who are deciding they don't need marriage, and the number of women who decide to raise kids on their own. I'm far less concerned about a 35-year-old woman who decides to have a child while she still can than a 16-year-old who gets pregnant by accident.
>>
>
>I don't agree.
>That's another feminist bias.
>I suggest that a 16 year old with a husband is in a lot better shape to raise a child than a working 35 year old single mother, simply because the 16 year old can stay home with the child.
>

That 16-year-old shouldn't stay home with the child. She should be in school. The 35-year-old may have planned for several years, including putting away the money to be able to stay home for an extended period. The 35-year-old is also likely to be much better equipped emotionally to raise a child, which while incredibly rewarding, is also incredibly stressful.

>>As one who was bullied in school and as the parent of a child who was bullied, I think anti-bullying education is absolutely required.
>
>Bullying is a fact of life.
>My drill sergeant was a world class bully, and he was a good leader.

That's not possible. Bullies are, by definition, not good leaders. Bullies are those who pick on people weaker than themselves to build themselves up.

>I don't see how anyone but a bully could have done that job.
>Kids will bully other kids. Adults will bully other adults in certain settings.
>Walk on to a Wall Street trading floor to see some big time bullies in action.,
>That's how life goes.
>My son was the neighborhood punching bag for a while. My wife used to intervene but I left them alone.
>That all changed when he started wrestling and looked like Conan the Barbarian.
>
>That said, I can see a case for getting the parents of those bullying kids to stop them.
>However, those parents don't go to school, do they?
>

Bullying is, in many ways, a bigger problem today than it's ever been, thanks to the Internet. It used to be that a bullied child could go home and get some relief. Today, the bullying can follow them 24 hours a day. There are far too many cases of kids who were bullied to the point of suicide. It is a societal problem, and thus requires societal solutions. That means schools and much more.

Public schools are supposed to be places that all kids can get an appropriate education. When we don't address bullying, we prevent some kids from doing so (and we tacitly endorse the bully's strategy).

Tamar

>The presumption that the school should be the distributor of societal ethics is flawed in my judgment on both a practical and philosophical basis.