Seattle Public Schools Ban Soda But Supply 11 Year Old Girls With IUD’s

Presently in Washington State, minors may obtain or refuse birth control services at any age without the consent of a parent or guardian  but they are prohibited from purchasing soda pop in public schools. 

Apparently relying on a few studies done by American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 13 public schools in Seattle are now offering long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) — IUDs and hormonal implants — to students as young as 11 years old.

While publications such as Salon applaud the move (See: “Seattle high school provides free IUD insertion on campus: “It’s not a hush-hush thing anymore””), it seems that the proponents of this policy tend to overlook that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considered and studied the use of IUD’s in adolescents aged 15-19; not children as young as 11. 

A few questions to ponder:

  • If the age of consent in Washington State is 16, why are public schools offering IUD’s and hormonal implants to children as young as 11?
  • Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse?  If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?
  • If Washington State Compulsory Education Law requires children between ages 8 and 18 to attend a public school, does it follow that parents of children in public schools forfeit their right to raise their children according to their own moral standards simply because they lack the time to home school them or the money to send them to private school?

Sources:

“A Seattle high school is taking birth control access to the next level”

“Seattle high school sparks outrage over policy which allows it to give IUD contraceptives to girls as young as ELEVEN – without seeking permission from parents”

“A Seattle high school is taking birth control access to the next level” (cited in Salon article)

This entry was posted in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Education, Health Care, Legal Analysis, Legal Theory and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

163 Responses to Seattle Public Schools Ban Soda But Supply 11 Year Old Girls With IUD’s

  1. Anonymously Yours says:

    You have to be kidding me. IUDs for 11 year old. The age of consent is 16. So if a 12 year old has sex with a 21 year old, may the defense use entrapment or state implied consent?

  2. I realize statistics show kids are sexually active at younger ages than in the recent past, but 11 seems both excessive and problematic.

    Kids should have childhoods before the cruel hormonal torments of puberty set it.

  3. Harvey says:

    Here’s how Colorado did it and cut teenage pregnancy and abortions by 40%. Now money for the program is running out. Republicans, ever mindful of protecting women, refuse funds to keep the program operating.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/06/science/colorados-push-against-teenage-pregnancies-is-a-startling-success.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

    Mr. Stone, usually a stickler for details, provides few in this case. I’m pretty damn certain a health professional will have a consult that records the health of the girl and the sexual history of the girl. Eleven is young; but what if the girl is having sexual relations at eleven? Is pregnancy preferred in that case? Also, the parental consent issue has been settled for a long time. Health professionals say parental permission is not the best policy.

    Tossing in the issue of soda pop is nothing short of hackery. Reproductive care for girls is important. Don’t muck it up with shit.

  4. swarthmoremom says:

    http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/06/conservative-media-complain-that-seattle-teens/204269 “Conservative media are attacking a Seattle program that has offered teens access to long-term contraceptive options through their schools since 2010. But long-term birth control methods such as those offered at the schools are recommended by experts as “first-line” options for teens, and efforts to provide access to such methods to teens and low-income women in Colorado have been wildly successful in reducing teen pregnancy in the state.”

  5. swarthmoremom says:

    Harvey, Townhall and Breitbart are also covering this.

  6. Harvey says:

    Ho, ho, ho, ho!

    Another of Bob’s links is from the Daily Mail. I ask you; how often do you suppose Mr. Stone consults the pages of The Daily Mail?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3148807/Seattle-high-school-sparks-outrage-policy-allows-IUD-contraceptives-girls-young-ELEVEN-without-seeking-permission-parents.html

  7. I. Annie says:

    Well, after the girl is pregnant she should abstain from soda pop anyway.

  8. I’m glad I have cats.

  9. I. Annie says:

    As we know from ‘reliable sources’, pregnancy at age 11 is perfectly healthy….

  10. swarthmoremom says:

    http://www.teaparty.org/report-schools-implant-iuds-6th-grade-girls-parental-notice-105859/ “(Life News) – Earlier this month, LifeNews.com reported on a high school in Seattle, Washington that is now implanting intrauterine devices (IUD), as well as other forms of birth control and doing so without parental knowledge or permission. – See more at: http://www.teaparty.org/report-schools-implant-iuds-6th-grade-girls-parental-notice-105859/#sthash.ypd5fRc4.dpuf Looks like the story began with an anti contraceptive website, More rightwing propaganda……….

  11. Bob Kauten says:

    Is there a reliable news organization that verifies this story?
    The cited sources, aren’t.

  12. Bob Stone says:

    SWM: “Looks like the story began with an anti contraceptive website, More rightwing propaganda”

    Harvey: “Mr. Stone provided this link. It is from CNS News. It is Right Wing.”

    Dear Left Wing Paranoids,

    I also provided you a link to the article in Salon which basically expanded on the original article in Grist.

    To wit:

    “While publications such as Salon applaud the move (See: “Seattle high school provides free IUD insertion on campus: “It’s not a hush-hush thing anymore””), it seems that the proponents of this policy tend to overlook that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considered and studied the use of IUD’s in adolescents aged 15-19; not children as young as 11.”

    Now, do either of you have anything of substance to share, or shall you continue wishing away facts by virtue of who happens to report them?

  13. Bob Stone says:

    Harvey: “Tossing in the issue of soda pop is nothing short of hackery. Reproductive care for girls is important. Don’t muck it up with shit.”

    Funny, I see the juxtaposition as highlighting just how out of touch with reality the policy makers happen to be.

  14. swarthmoremom says:

    http://www.salon.com/2015/06/02/seattle_high_school_provides_free_iud_insertion_on_campus_it%E2%80%99s_not_a_hush_hush_thing_anymore/ “For the students, accessing birth control can be a way of taking charge of their bodies and making sound reproductive health decisions. As one girl, identified as Karen, explained, getting a LARC felt like a way of protecting herself — but it also gave her an opportunity to get important information about safe sex.

    “Now that I [have birth control], now that I’ve been told about all the different options, I feel like I have a little more knowledge about it,” Karen said. “So now if someone were to talk to me, I’d be a lot more comfortable because I do know about it, I have information about it.”

    Ain’t that the point of education, after all?” Did the 11 years old’s skip grades? This a high school program.

    • Bob Stone says:

      SWM: “Did the 11 years old’s skip grades? This a high school program.”

      Denny Middle School, next to the high school, also has full access to the clinic at Chief Sealth.

      Middle School starts at 6th grade.

  15. Harvey says:

    Bob,

    How many 11 year olds have been provided with IUDs?

    Can you provide an article from a professional healthcare organization that decries the use of IUDs for sexually active menstruating 11 year olds?

  16. Bob Stone says:

    A few questions to ponder:

    If the age of consent in Washington State is 16, why are public schools offering IUD’s and hormonal implants to children as young as 11?

    Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse? If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?

    If Washington State Compulsory Education Law requires children between ages 8 and 18 to attend a public school, does it follow that parents of children in public schools forfeit their right to raise their children according to their own moral standards simply because they lack the time to home school them or the money to send them to private school?

  17. Harvey says:

    Bob,

    How many 11 year olds have been provided with IUDs?

    Maybe this is just a case of sloppy sensational reporting. “Middle school program” – middle school starts at 6th grade – therefore 11 year olds are provided with IUDs. Let’s have some facts.

    Can you provide an article from a professional healthcare organization that decries the use of IUDs for sexually active menstruating 11 year olds?

  18. swarthmoremom says:

    “Denny Middle School, next to the high school, also has full access to the clinic at Chief Sealth.” Just because they have access to the clinic does not mean that an 11 year old actually had an iud implanted.

  19. Harvey says:

    What a bunch of right-wing bullshit.

  20. Mike Spindell says:

    Call me out of touch but I think the idea is a good one and that is said as a father of daughters. The major threat to young women in this country is having their lives destroyed by unwanted pregnancies, at an age when they can barely take care of themselves. However, Right Wing Christian ideologues and their enablers in the Republican Party, have been working for years to block sexual education for children, as well as birth control in general. This has caused a rise in unwanted pregnancies over those States where this stupid movement has the most clout. At the same time these people who are in the forefront of the anti-Abortion movement also are on board for cutting any aid to unwed mothers.

    Guess what, sex is better for humans than soda pop.

  21. Harvey says:

    Bob

    How many 11 year olds have had an IUD implanted?

    Please provide a citation from an accredited healthcare organization decrying the use of IUDs on an 11 year old, sexually active, menstruating girl. Mind you, The Daily Mail will not suffice.

  22. Harvey says:

    my comments keep getting lost. Can anyone help? Sorry for the duplicates.

  23. Harvey says:

    I’d like to read the argument that a sexually active menstruating 11 year is better off pregnant than having an IUD.

  24. Bob Stone says:

    The Huffington Post article references the study I linked to in this paragraph:

    “While publications such as Salon applaud the move (See: “Seattle high school provides free IUD insertion on campus: “It’s not a hush-hush thing anymore””), it seems that the proponents of this policy tend to overlook that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considered and studied the use of IUD’s in adolescents aged 15-19; not children as young as 11. “

  25. Anonymously Yours says:

    Rule 32, unpublished. Be wary of anyone that posts anything that disagrees with others views, if so, be dismissive of the source as that is a good start in attacking the thread.

    If that doesn’t succeed, then start personal attacks on the person writing the article. I learned that one on another site.

  26. Harvey says:

    That study was done in 2012. Show me an article that says an 11 year old sexually active girl should not have an IUD.

    • Bob Stone says:

      Harvey,

      If Washington State Compulsory Education Law requires children between ages 8 and 18 to attend a public school, does it follow that parents of children in public schools forfeit their right to raise their children according to their own moral standards simply because they lack the time to home school them or the money to send them to private school?

  27. Harvey says:

    AY

    The use of The Daily Mail is insulting. It is a Kardashian Rag.

  28. swarthmoremom says:

    Bob S,I am not convinced that 11 year olds are actually having iud’s implanted.

  29. Elaine M. says:

    Harvey,

    I released three of your comments from the spam filter.

    Bob K.,

    I found one of your comments in there too.

  30. Harvey says:

    Bob

    Cite an 11 year old that had one implanted.

    Cite a health professional organization the decries the use of IUD for sexually active 11 year old girls.

    Tell me that you prefer a pregnancy for an 11 year old.

  31. Harvey says:

    I’m pretty damn sure that if a parent discovered that their minor child was using an IUD and they were determined to have it removed, they could manage just fine. The law provides privacy, not demands IUD insertion.

  32. Bob Stone says:

    SWM: “I am not convinced that 11 year olds are actually having iud’s implanted.”

    But you’re okay with school clinics providing 12 year old girls with IUD’s without parental consent?

    Got it.

  33. Bob Stone says:

    Harvey: “I’m pretty damn sure that if a parent discovered that their minor child was using an IUD and they were determined to have it removed, they could manage just fine. The law provides privacy, not demands IUD insertion.”

    Gee Harvey,

    You managed to avoid the entire issue by assuming it doesn’t exist.

    Bravo.

  34. Harvey says:

    Bob

    Was Bria 11 years old when she had the implant? Show me where it says she was 11. Keep in mind she might have started school late, might have been held back, might have missed a year due to illness, etc. Prove that she was 11.

    • Bob Stone says:

      Harvey,

      Do parents of children in public schools forfeit their right to raise their children according to their own moral standards simply because they lack the time to home school them or the money to send them to private school?

  35. Harvey says:

    Bulshit, Bob.

    You’re talking the usual right wing crap about parents forfeiting their rights. No rights are forfeited. They can have the IUD removed if they want. The law only provides privacy.

    I bet they can even proactively make an appointment with the clinic and raise holy hell that they don’t want their daughter to have birth control. Show me that that isn’t the case.

  36. Harvey says:

    Bob,
    I, too, can copy and paste:

    Please provide a citation from an accredited healthcare organization decrying the use of IUDs on an 11 year old, sexually active, menstruating girl. Mind you, The Daily Mail will not suffice.

  37. Harvey says:

    I guess the filter senses my annoyance with the crazy old man who keeps screaming about staying off his lawn and forfeiting parental rights. More comments into limbo.

    I’m done for tonight.

  38. Bob Stone says:

    Harvey,

    Issues don’t just disappear simply because you say so or you have guesses as to how things will “actually” work themselves out.

  39. I find it really hard to become exercised about this. Actually two issues. First of all, I do agree with banning soft drinks. There is a lot of research on the harmful effects of soda, both diet and regular. That is a separate issue, and worthy of a full diary post itself.

    Second, we have the matter of birth control being given to girls. As a parent and grandparent of girls, the easy way out is to deny they have sexual knowledge. Reality check. This is the internet age and De Nile is not just a river in Egypt. Kids are going to have sex. It happens. A number of Brandi’s classmates were pregnant before they got out of junior high. I would rather parents be upset with the school than have a pregnant teen, or preteen, daughter.

    Most of Brandi’s peers that got pregnant early dropped out of school. A few finished high school because they had ample support at home. Some that stayed in school ended up with two or more kids by the time they were high school seniors.

    I don’t think either of those policies are dumb. Sad that they are needed, but definitely not dumb.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Most of Brandi’s peers that got pregnant early dropped out of school.”

      Chuck,
      The difference with Brandi besides her own innate perceptive nature was good parenting. It is a curious fact that the highest rates of teen pregnancy is in the Bible Belt where they practice the cult of virginity.

  40. I. Annie says:

    http://m.snopes.com/2015/07/06/seattle-iuds-sixth-graders/

    “Although the CNS article produced a good deal of outraged and surprised reaction from readers, much of the topic it addressed isn’t unique to the Seattle area, the state of Washington, or even the United States as a whole. As the Guttmacher Institute (a non-profit organization that works to advance reproductive health) noted in a July 2015 brief, over half the states in the U.S. allow all minors 12 and older to consent to contraceptive services:

    The legal ability of minors to consent to a range of sensitive health care services — including sexual and reproductive health care, mental health services and alcohol and drug abuse treatment — has expanded dramatically over the past 30 years. This trend reflects the recognition that, while parental involvement in minors’ health care decisions is desirable, many minors will not avail themselves of important services if they are forced to involve their parents. With regard to sexual and reproductive health care, many states explicitly permit all or some minors to obtain contraceptive, prenatal and STI services without parental involvement. Moreover, nearly every state permits minor parents to make important decisions on their own regarding their children. In sharp contrast, the majority of states require parental involvement in a minor’s abortion.”

    From the American College of obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2012.

    “Intrauterine devices are safe to use among adolescents.

    Current evidence demonstrates the safety of modern IUDs. Although few studies have focused exclusively on adolescents who use currently available IUDs, good evidence suggests that the relative risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is increased only in the first 20 days after IUD insertion and then returns to baseline, while the absolute risk remains small (15–17). Bacterial contamination associated with the insertion process is the likely cause of infection, not the IUD itself.

    Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) — intrauterine devices and the contraceptive implant — are safe and appropriate contraceptive methods for most women and adolescents. The LARC methods are top-tier contraceptives based on effectiveness, with pregnancy rates of less than 1% per year for perfect use and typical use.”

  41. I. Annie says:

    I’ve got a comment in the spam filter, can anyone set it free?

    • Mike Spindell says:

      I. Annie

      Shame on you providing a link that debunks the essence of this article. http://m.snopes.com/2015/07/06/seattle-iuds-sixth-graders/
      The important task this article was performing was to vilify the “liberal mentality” and we all know that when doing so “good, conservative people don’t let facts stand inn the way of a good narrative. If the story fits the pre-judgment of the author, then it may not be true, but responds to the higher truth of liberal duplicity, which is that facts matter little in the case of pre-judgment.

  42. I. Annie says:

    I do my part, lol.

  43. I. Annie says:

    Thanks to whomever released my comment.

  44. Bob Kauten says:

    Thanks, I. Annie,
    I didn’t believe it for a second.
    I don’t claim to be a writer. But before I would post some astounding assertion, and get all righteous about it, I’d ask myself if such a strange thing is true. Particularly if I heard it from sources that frequently lie and exaggerate. In this case, a cursory search using google would have found the snopes.com discussion, as you did.
    If I don’t find a discussion on snopes.com, I check to see whether a story is only found on blogs (left or right), and nowhere else. If I can’t verify it, I don’t pass it along.
    This approach requires two things:
    1. A few minutes of my time;
    2. A desire to find the truth, even if a lie vilifies your opponent.
    The author of this teabilly rant on FFS wasn’t interested in spending the time, and wasn’t interested in telling the truth.
    Mike got it exactly right.

  45. Bob Stone says:

    That is easily the most useless Snopes article I’ve ever read.

    For instance:

    It fails to mention that Grist and Salon covered the story a month before the CNS story;

    It ignores the fact that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considered and studied the use of IUD’s in adolescents aged 15-19; not children as young as 11.

    And the author is also apparently completely ignorant as to how the Compulsory Education Law in Washington State and “state action” makes this a much more complicated issue.

    Thus the reason these questions came to mind:

    If the age of consent in Washington State is 16, why are public schools offering IUD’s and hormonal implants to children as young as 11?

    Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse? If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?

    If Washington State Compulsory Education Law requires children between ages 8 and 18 to attend a public school, does it follow that parents of children in public schools forfeit their right to raise their children according to their own moral standards simply because they lack the time to home school them or the money to send them to private school?

  46. Bob Stone says:

    The liberty interest at issue in this case-the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children-is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court.

    In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.

    The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make childrearing decisions simply because a [public school] believes a ‘better’ decision could be made.

    – Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)

  47. Bob, I keep reading your principle argument about the state taking away a right from the parents and I cannot really figure out what right is being taking away? The right for a parent to expose their child to the risk of pregnancy? They can remove the child from public school right, as long as they can provide an education that is valid, correct?
    It seems to me that instead the state is offering the potential right of access to this form of health care to young people if the think they need it. They are coincidentally also mandating education about the related science.
    Young people begin to experience puberty turning into adolescence as young as 10 but in an expected range of 12-25.
    I for one think this is an excellent program to have access to as an educator myself. I commend it.

  48. bettykath says:

    Wonder how long before this shows up in my email or social media. I used to get a lot of stuff that needed debunking. The article here says as young as 11, other articles say the earliest, by law, is 12, but none say how many, if any, 12 year olds avail themselves of the service, Soda pop in this context is a red herring. The program seems like a great idea. Parents who prefer their daughter gets pregnant can have the device removed. Wish it were in all schools.

  49. I. Annie says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/06/science/colorados-push-against-teenage-pregnancies-is-a-startling-success.html?_r=0

    “Over the past six years, Colorado has conducted one of the largest experiments with long-acting birth control. If teenagers and poor women were offered free intrauterine devices and implants that prevent pregnancy for years, state officials asked, would those women choose them?

    They did in a big way, and the results were startling. The birthrate among teenagers across the state plunged by 40 percent from 2009 to 2013, while their rate of abortions fell by 42 percent, according to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. There was a similar decline in births for another group particularly vulnerable to unplanned pregnancies: unmarried women under 25 who have not finished high school.

    The surge in Colorado has far outpaced the growing use of such methods nationwide. About 7 percent of American women ages 15 to 44 used long-acting birth control from 2011 to 2013, the most recent period studied, up from 1.5 percent in 2002. The figures include all women, even those who were pregnant or sterilized. The share of long-acting contraception users among just women using birth control is likely to be higher.”

  50. bron98 says:

    Bob stone:

    Did anyone mention that multiple sex partners has a negative effect on a woman’s immune system?

  51. bron98 says:

    Bob stone:

    You are precisely right, the state is supporting underage sexual activity. As the father of a daughter I cannot fathom any one supporting the idea of an 11-year-old having sex. They should be playing with dolls and on the soccer field not romping in the hay. They need to be children.

    Why do we let the lowest common denominator dictate our society’s values?

  52. bettykath says:

    Why does Bob still promote the idea of 11 year olds getting the contraceptive
    ?

  53. Bob Stone says:

    Caitlyn Laufey: “Bob, I keep reading your principle argument about the state taking away a right from the parents and I cannot really figure out what right is being taking away? The right for a parent to expose their child to the risk of pregnancy? They can remove the child from public school right, as long as they can provide an education that is valid, correct?”

    Caitlyn,

    That’s right. That’s why I tried to bring perspective to the state action by asking what if the parent can’t afford private school or can’t provide home schooling. However, even if the parent was able to provide alternate schooling, it would have no effect on the “state action” element and the ability of the parent to challenge the school in court.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_actor

    “It seems to me that instead the state is offering the potential right of access to this form of health care to young people if the think they need it. They are coincidentally also mandating education about the related science.”

    If that argument worked, there would be public schools teaching the Bible “coincidentally” as well.

    “I for one think this is an excellent program to have access to as an educator myself. I commend it.

    And there’s a whole line of Supreme Court case law showing why that’s irrelevant:

    E.g.

    “The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make childrearing decisions simply because a [public school] believes a ‘better’ decision could be made.” – Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)

  54. Bob Stone says:

    Bettykath: “Wonder how long before this shows up in my email or social media. I used to get a lot of stuff that needed debunking.

    Snopes has not debunked anything I posted. It’s all legally and factually true. (See also my post today at 1:37am)

    The article here says as young as 11, other articles say the earliest, by law, is 12, but none say how many, if any, 12 year olds avail themselves of the service,

    The law says “minors may obtain or refuse birth control services at any age without the consent of a parent or guardian.” It’s the fact that it’s being offered in public school that’s the problem. Also, how many children and of what age have availed themselves of the service is legally irrelevant. But there’s an interview with a kid who got one in 7th grade (i.e. 12) here:

    http://grist.org/living/a-seattle-high-school-is-taking-birth-control-access-to-the-next-level/

    “Soda pop in this context is a red herring.

    As I said before, the juxtaposition highlights just how out of touch with reality policy makers are in their obsession with thrusting the policy of the state onto children.

  55. Ridiculous Bob and not really addressing the point. The school is providing an additional option and information. Comparing the distribution of health knowledge to the distribution of fiction is silly. The parents have options should they choose to remove their children from the flow of information that all the other young people have.
    Isolation is of course difficult to enforce as ignorance always has been. However if you stare at the bars long enough I have heard that the world outside ceases to exist. At least Rilke thought so.

  56. Bob Stone says:

    Caitlyn: Ridiculous Bob and not really addressing the point. The school is providing an additional option and information. Comparing the distribution of health knowledge to the distribution of fiction is silly.

    I mentioned teaching the Bible in public school as a simple example of how “state action” triggers a bill of rights analysis — ultimately resulting in said Bible’s prohibition in public schools.

    Putting aside your dogmatic use of reason to demand acceptance of a proposition that lay outside the realm of possible experience (i.e. God does not exist), the bill of rights and its attendant case law exists to protect citizens from the edicts of totalitarians deriving power from nothing more than their delusional infallibility.

  57. bron98 says:

    “the bill of rights and its attendant case law exists to protect citizens from the edicts of totalitarians deriving power from nothing more than their delusional infallibility.”

    That about sums it up.

  58. Mike Spindell says:

    “the bill of rights and its attendant case law exists to protect citizens from the edicts of totalitarians deriving power from nothing more than their delusional infallibility.”
    That about sums it up.”

    Spoken by people who approve of child pregnancy, so that they can satisfy some personal prejudice towards what they “deem” liberal, thus illustrating that they bandy about terms about which they have no clue. Interestingly though, they would be absolutely against any governmental aid to the children then born out of wedlock. True conservative morality, or should I say lack of same. Also someone asked the ignored question, just how many 11 year old’s have actually received birth control? But we know the truth is not important, it is the “principle” of the thing that is the important thing, the principle is of course finding something with which to demonize liberals so one’s pre-judgments prevail.

  59. The essence of my thought is simple Bob the district or school is not taking away a choice it is actually adding one and it is providing accompanying education. To me this seems the very essence of freedom.

  60. I think part of what clouds this issue is the weird almost semi-property status of minors in our culture. The lack of capacity is a very real and very serious issue when dealing with minors, but nonetheless should the focus be on the freedom of the kids or the freedom of their parents? I know this: with some exceptions, you wouldn’t be able to stop most parents from trying to protect their children. It is not in their nature. We are a slow maturing species. We are evolutionarily hardwired to protect our young. Even from themselves.

  61. Actually, Mike, I’m going to call bullshit on that straw man. I don’t see any argument here for child pregnancy or against social services. The questions Bob raises are all valid questions that have little to do with right or left and more to do with wise or unwise or principled or not principled.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Actually, Mike, I’m going to call bullshit on that straw man.”

      Gene,

      I don’t believe that it is. I view unwanted, teenage pregnancy as a grave societal problem that has multiple bad consequences for both the mother, child and surrounding society. I also believe that underage sexual experimentation is human nature and actually sans pregnancy is positive. The problem in this country is that there is first the inanity of the Abstinence movement and it promulgation of an unrealistic view of sexuality and the second which they are trying to address in this instance.

      Now I will admit that my views on sexuality don’t represent the norm in this sexually obsessed/repressed country, but I think I have a better perspective than most on sexuality.

      • Mike,

        Valid points nonetheless those are not counters to arguments advanced “against liberals”. The questions raised by the column still have a neutral position on the political spectrum unless you count “principle based” as part of the spectrum (which technically it isn’t).

  62. If I understand this matter, it is not as if the school is “pushing” contraceptives. The prescribing physician or nurse practitioner will get a history from the kid applying. That includes whether they are sexually active or not. Second major question will be whether menses have begun, meaning they are potentially fertile. The third big question will be, “Are you pregnant?” Before any contraceptive is given, a pregnancy test will be given regardless of any previous answer. Many girls are menstruating as early as eleven or twelve, and are beginning to experiment with sex. That’s a bad combination all around. Ask their parents what the kid knows about sex, and the most common answer is going to be, “Nothing, she is too young.”

    The soft drink matter is different, and is a red herring distraction from birth control. The two cannot be lumped together in any kind of logical way. There is abundant research showing both regular and diet soda is bad for kids on many levels. Not selling those items as a matter of policy is no different than not selling tobacco.

  63. Bob Stone says:

    Gene: “The lack of capacity is a very real and very serious issue when dealing with minors, but nonetheless should the focus be on the freedom of the kids or the freedom of their parents? I know this: with some exceptions, you wouldn’t be able to stop most parents from trying to protect their children. It is not in their nature.”

    That’s why I asked these questions:

    If the age of consent in Washington State is 16, why are public schools offering IUD’s and hormonal implants to children as young as 11?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

    Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse? If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?

    It seems to me that parents of daughters under the age of consent, at the very least in middle school, have the right to rest assured that public schools will not adopt policies that contradict the intent and purpose of existing state laws.

  64. Bob Stone says:

    Chuck: “The soft drink matter is different, and is a red herring distraction from birth control.”

    Sorry Chuck, but I’ll say it again: the juxtaposition highlights just how out of touch with reality policy makers are in their obsession with thrusting the policy of the state onto children.

    “Instead of the concrete individual, you have the names of organizations and, at the highest point, the abstract idea of the State as the principle of political reality. The moral responsibility of the individual is then inevitably replaced by the policy of the State (raison d’etat). Instead of moral and mental differentiation of the individual, you have public welfare and the raising of the living standard. The goal and meaning of individual life (which is the only real life) no longer lie in the individual development but in the policy of the State, which is thrust upon the individual from outside and consists in the execution of an abstract idea which ultimately tends to attract all life to itself. The individual is increasingly deprived of the moral decision as to how he should live his own life, and instead is ruled, fed, clothed, and educated as a social unit, accommodated in the appropriate housing unit, and amused in accordance with the standards that give pleasure and satisfaction to the masses. The rulers, in their turn, are just as much social units as the ruled, and are distinguished only by the fact they are specialized mouthpieces of State doctrine. They do not need to be personalities capable of judgment, but thoroughgoing specialists who are unusable outside their line of business. State policy decides what shall be taught and studied.”
    ― C.G. Jung, The Undiscovered Self

  65. bron98 says:

    mike:

    I think 11 year old boys and girls should be boys and girls and not sexual beings, they have the rest of their lives for that. liberal sexual morality is based on the bonobos, screwing everyone any time to hold the tribe together.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      Bron,

      Humans are sexual beings from early ages, that is our nature. Unfortunately, our society is puritanically hypocritical when it comes to sex.

  66. bron98 says:

    “Individualism regards man—every man—as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being. Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful coexistence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights—and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members.”

    Guess who!

    The principal political reality is the individual for the individual comprises the state not the other way around. It’s quite interesting and always has been to be that liberals are so quick to embrace the concept of the state without embracing the concept of the individual. It is like trying to build a brick house and denying that brick is necessary for the construction. And then once the house is built denying that the house is made of brick.

    • There is a difference between the state and civilization although no civilization of scale has ever existed without government. They cannot. Without checks on behavior – the limitation of absolute rights found at the state of nature – to gain mutual benefit that includes protection from bad actors, civilization will collapse into anarchy. Absolute freedom cannot exist in communities is scale.

  67. Bob Stone says:

    “Absolute freedom cannot exist in communities is scale.”

    That’s why the social compact respects the bounds between alienable and inalienable rights. That’s why the order of operation begins with the individual having all rights and power; specifically delegating powers and surrendering rights AS NEEDED.

  68. Harvey says:

    A bunch of old white men discussing little girls, contraception and sex.

    Just what’s needed..

  69. bron98 says:

    I don’t know anyone who thinks that government isn’t required. The question is how much is enough. We certainly don’t surrender our rights when we form governments, we form governments to free us from the tyranny of all against all. We form governments to become more free, not less free.

  70. bron98 says:

    Harvey:

    Considering the fact that I used to have an 11-year-old daughter, I think it’s is acceptable to discuss whether or not the state as a right to do this. Society at least at this point does not allow children to sign contracts. All the HIPAA statements that I have seen require a parent to sign for minors.

  71. bron98 says:

    There is no such thing as absolute freedom just as there is no such thing as limited freedom. Freedom is freedom. I think the concept that you have in mind is called anarchy. And the concept of limited freedom is called tyranny. Freedom is when an individual can act in his own best interest with only limitations imposed by government which project the rights of other individuals. Rights which are limited to the protection of life, liberty and property.

  72. Harvey says:

    bron

    How many years ago was your daughter eleven years old? When did your daughter become sexually active? If she became sexually active as a minor, did you allow her to use birth control? Have you, PERSONALLY, used birth control? If so, what type of birth control did you use? Why did you choose that type of birth control? How many pregnancies have you had? While in a long lasting sexually active relationship, have you ever had to be the partner who is solely responsible for contraception? While a minor, were you ever in a position of becoming a single parent and having to raise the child?

  73. Harvey says:

    bron

    And fuck ‘society’. I want to deal with that eleven year old girl, FIRST.

  74. Bob Stone says:

    Bron: “And the concept of limited freedom is called tyranny.”

    No, in regards to the individual, tyranny is the exercise of power over an inalienable right.

    “We certainly don’t surrender our rights when we form governments, we form governments to free us from the tyranny of all against all.”

    “MEN being, as has been said, by nature, all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this estate, and subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent. The only way whereby any one divests himself of his natural liberty, and puts on the bonds of civil society, is by agreeing with other men to join and unite into a community for their comfortable, safe, and peaceable living one amongst another, in a secure enjoyment of their properties, and a greater security against any, that are not of it. This any number of men may do, because it injures not the freedom of the rest; they are left as they were in the liberty of the state of nature. When any number of men have so consented to make one community or government, they are thereby presently incorporated, and make one body politic, wherein the majority have a right to act and conclude the rest.” — J. Locke

    AND…

    “It cannot be supposed that they should intend, had they a power so to do, to give to any one, or more, an absolute arbitrary power over their persons and estates, and put a force into the magistrate’s hand to execute his unlimited will arbitrarily upon them. This were to put themselves into a worse condition than the state of nature, wherein they had a liberty to defend their right against the injuries of others, and were upon equal terms of force to maintain it, whether invaded by a single man, or many in combination.” — J. Locke

  75. Harvey says:

    The god damned arrogance of men!

    I’m sure 12 year old Bria, will take great comfort in the words of John Locke.

  76. Bob Stone says:

    Unspoken Rule #9 for Being a Liberal: “All solutions must be government-oriented: Liberals may not be as down on government as conservatives are, but on some level, even they recognize that it doesn’t work very well. So, why are liberals so hell bent on centralizing as much power as possible in government? Simple, because they believe that they are better and smarter than everyone else by virtue of being liberals and centralized power gives them the opportunity to control more people’s lives. There’s nothing scarier to liberals than free people living their lives as they please without wanting or needing the government to nanny them.” – Jon Hawkins

    The bill of rights and its attendant case law exists to protect citizens from the edicts of totalitarians deriving power from nothing more than their delusional infallibility.

  77. bron98 says:

    “The bill of rights and its attendant case law exists to protect citizens from the edicts of totalitarians deriving power from nothing more than their delusional infallibility.”

    This should be repeated ad infinitum until some how it makes its way into the public consciousness. Our collective consciousness as you prefer.

  78. Jon Hawkins is a fucking idiot, Bob.

    The simple fact of the matter is that not everything is best done for the maintenance of a healthy society on a for profit business model.

  79. Bob Stone says:

    “Jon Hawkins is a fucking idiot, Bob.”

    Irrelevant abusive ad hominem.

    I concur with his observations; having witnessed them first hand again and again and again.

    • And I formed an opinion based on his ridiculous use of blanket statements. That also does not change the validity of the observations that led to the assertion that not everything required maintain a healthy society can or should be done on a for profit business model.

  80. Bob Kauten says:

    Gene,
    “Jon Hawkins is a fucking idiot, Bob.”
    Then we need to stop Jon Hawkins. He’ll make more idiots, if he’s fucking.
    We have more than enough, already.

  81. pete says:

    “A bunch of old white men discussing little girls, contraception and sex.

    Just what’s needed..”
    ==========================

    ja

  82. Bob Stone says:

    Gene: “And I formed an opinion based on his ridiculous use of blanket statements. That also does not change the validity of the observations that led to the assertion that not everything required maintain a healthy society can or should be done on a for profit business model.”

    The mere fact that one does not like a generalization does not make it faulty. Almost every other sentence written by Mike Spindell is a generalization. That doesn’t mean he’s a “fucking idiot.”

    This is about sample size and I’m confident I’ve argued with enough liberals over the years to concur with Hawkins’ observations.

    What I don’t understand is how your tangent about business enters into this.

  83. Like. Don’t like. Doesn’t stop it from being a generalization that is 1) an informal fallacy as liberals are no more a monolithic block than conservatives are and 2) more of a polemic statement than a logical statement. That? Is a good indication Hawkins isn’t applying logic well or at all. Would you prefer the term “irrational jackass” instead of “fucking idiot”? I’ll stipulate that is probably more correct. Also, it isn’t technically ad hominem but insult since he is wrong because of logical errors, not because he’s John Hawkins.

    As for the tangent? What precisely is the alternative methodology to government provided social services? It is the for profit business model Libertarians are so fond of; privatization. Or are necessary social service to maintain a healthy civilization simply going to spontaneously appear out of thin air? There are a finite number of models to choice from and a) government provided and b) privately provided are the two major flavors.

  84. And lest you forget, at an ethical level, government owes duties to its citizens. For profit enterprise only services the profit motive.

  85. Bob Stone says:

    Certainty is not part of inductive reasoning. Simply because one can’t sample every liberal or conservative in the universe, it doesn’t follow that valid generalizations about them can’t be made.

    That inane argument aside, what does social services have to do with a general statement about liberals wanting to control every aspect of people’s lives?

    To wit:

    “All NY colleges to adopt ‘yes means yes’ sex assault policy”

    Legislation requiring universities in New York state to adopt a uniform affirmative sexual consent policy was signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday.

    The so-called “yes means yes” standard defines sexual consent between people as an affirmative, conscious and voluntary understanding to engage in sexual activity.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/07/us-usa-new-york-sexcrimes-college-idUSKCN0PH23Y20150707

    Look, a (soon to be mandatory?) affirmative consent kit!

    Included in the kit is:

    Consent Sex Contract
    Condom
    Breath Mints
    Pen

    Consent Kits are awesome, because they are designed to be:

    Easy
    Safe
    Photo Enabled
    Signature Proof
    Inexpensive
    Fun!

    http://instantconsent.com/collections/frontpage/products/consent-matchbook-consent-kit-with-condom-contract-consentconscious?variant=3589790401

  86. Bob Stone says:

    Delusional infallibility.

  87. Actually Bob the inane argument is based in an assumption of uniformity founded in political polemic. I never mentioned “every”. I never even mentioned “most”. What I pointed to was a lack of uniformity across a sample space that makes statements like Hawkins worse than useless as anything other than polemic. He’s inductively arguing a deterministic outcome, i.e. that liberals are bad and want to control everyone’s lives. Let me help you with that. In relevant part “liberal” (and therefore those who practice “liberalism”) means willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas, favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms and/or favoring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform. The desire to control the lives of others is by definition not a liberal value, ergo the assertion of Hawkins is something other than accurate. What it is though is a fine bit of polemic thinly disguised with a veneer of (facile) logic that reveals more about the speaker’s politics than about the object(s) of his statement as a matter of fact.

    Really, Bob, you started off with a really good principle based column, but Hawkin’s invective is risking riding that off the rails.

  88. Young people are becoming more and more independent which is actually a good thing since society started convincing all of us that we were individuals at a much earlier age a while ago. One of the issues that is facing many young people in our society now is the inability to navigate that space that exists between falling under the firm authority or care of your parents (which can be really Frigg’in young) and the time when they actually have access to resources and legal autonomy.
    Programs like the one in the article begin to address that issue. The program actually empowers a not so new, but emerging sub-strata of our society and maybe soon economy as well.

    I too would love for “kids’ to be able to just be kids. But I would guess that if we all thought back we could remember many instances where we saw that kids were not always just “kids”. Now with access to meta-media and communication young people are more “present” for lack of a better term than ever before.
    The sooner we begin to help them transition into the model and help ourselves and the rest of society do so the better off we will be.

  89. Now, what Hawkins may be suffering from is bad definitions. “Liberal” and “neoliberal” are no more the same thing than “conservative” and “neoconservative” are the same thing. Both neoliberalism and neoconservatism are gussied up fascism which does indeed contain a huge element of control vested in an oligarchy or strong leader. If that is the case, then Hawkins may be on to something. As it stands though his statement is nonsense.

  90. Bob Stone says:

    “In relevant part “liberal” (and therefore those who practice “liberalism”) means willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas, favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms and/or favoring individual liberty,”

    In “The Silencing”, Kirsten Powers, herself a proud liberal–but from a far more tolerant Jeffersonian tradition–exposes the illiberal left. You’ll learn:

    Why the illiberal left has become an Orwellian “big brother,” policing what it deems acceptable speech and opinions
    How the illiberal left is obsessed with delegitimizing Fox News
    How illiberal left pundits–even self-proclaimed “feminists” (and Powers names names)–engage in outrageously misogynistic and sexist dismissals of their female opponents
    How illiberal colleges and universities limit freedom of expression to tightly regulated “free speech zones” and ban speakers (even liberals) with whom the illiberal left disagrees
    How “truth” matters little to the illiberal left, for whom ideology is everything
    How is it that liberalism, once associated with open-mindedness and reason, has become a vehicle for irrational prejudice, ideological conformity, and the marginalization and punishment of alternative opinions? Kirsten Powers chronicles this troubling trend in perhaps the most important–and chilling–political book of the year.

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Silencing-Left-Killing-Speech/dp/1491591722

    • Mike Spindell says:

      You know Bob accuses me of only making generalizations and in a way he is right. I look at the world from an iconclastic view. That I am an iconoclast is provable because regarding the simplistic equation of politics as liberal v. conservative, I have written almost as many posts ridiculing liberals, as I have written posts lambasting conservatives. My generalizations come from the most part by relying on my own instincts and intelligence. Besides his disagreements with my political views I think what disturbs him most about me is that I have the temerity not to rely on anyone but myself when I make my arguments.

      Most of Bob’s arguments are made by citing authorities that he respects. His worldview has been sculpted by those authorities who have philosophized in ways that meet Bob’s own tendencies and so bolster his views. He is iauthoritarian in personality and so cites authority to prove his case. I on the other hand use my own quirky judgment caring little about what others, including Bob think of me. So from Bob’s view oerhaps I am a bit of a chaotic Schmuck, which is fine. I’m having fun and that is what matters to me.

  91. Bob Stone says:

    Caitlyn,

    I never meant to suggest that children should be sheltered. I grew up in the 1970’s; before it was called “free-range parenting.”

    Even so, there were always certain lines that the public school was not permitted to cross; things that were better left to the discretion of the family as opposed to the school. Such as not submitting children to religious instruction of any kind.

    IUD’s for middle school kids?

    Give me a break.

  92. Ooo. More polemic. How very exciting.

    “Why the illiberal left has become an Orwellian ‘big brother,’ policing what it deems acceptable speech and opinions”

    Bad punctuation aside, it almost sounds like she’s talking about neoliberalism, but in itself the term “illiberal left” is an oxymoron.

    “How the illiberal left is obsessed with delegitimizing Fox News”

    Left, right, whatever. FOX does a fine job of delegitimizing themselves. I say that an I think Obama should be impeached. FOX News is something, but news it isn’t.

    “How illiberal left pundits–even self-proclaimed ‘feminists’ (and Powers names names)–engage in outrageously misogynistic and sexist dismissals of their female opponents”

    Which has what bearing here? None at all. But I’m sure this person appreciates the commercial placement you’ve posted in place of a cogent rebuttal.

    “How illiberal colleges and universities limit freedom of expression to tightly regulated ‘free speech zones’ and ban speakers (even liberals) with whom the illiberal left disagrees”

    Again, no relevance to Hawkins or the issues raised proper. Even Hawkins had no relevance to the issue raised proper other than polemic.

    “How ‘truth’ matters little to the illiberal left, for whom ideology is everything”

    Really? Someone upset with people who have enough sense to see through FOX News bullshit as propaganda is concerned about truth? Interesting.

    “How is it that liberalism, once associated with open-mindedness and reason, has become a vehicle for irrational prejudice, ideological conformity, and the marginalization and punishment of alternative opinions?”

    Sounds a lot like projection, Rove-style.

    “Kirsten Powers chronicles this troubling trend in perhaps the most important–and chilling–political book of the year.”

    So good no doubt it’ll make my balls tingle, Bob. Poor ol’ conservatives bein’ repressed. I swear I may get the vapors!

    Next time you get the urge to use a sales blurb for a political polemic as the response to an argument? Why not just not and save the trouble. Had Ms. Powers made that post herself, I’d have deleted it as a violation of Rule 5.

    But at least I know where you’re getting some of your interesting ideas from now.

    It sounds to me that Ms. Powers wouldn’t know an actual liberal if they bit her on the ass.

    (NOTE: All ass biting activities require valid consent.)

    So she and Hawkins have that going for them.
    Which is nice.

  93. And just to be clear here, I do think giving birth control to eleven year olds is overreach for a variety of reasons.

    Just none of the hopped up “liberals want to control your lives” horseshit being regurgitated here.

    The return on such actions at such an extreme end of the sexual activity spectrum is probably minimal and it sends a mixed message to kids when they should be getting rational science based sex education instead. If they had that, the need for birth control later would be lessened (but still wise if not necessary).

  94. pete says:

    “(NOTE: All ass biting activities require valid consent.)”
    ==============

    Verbal or signed and does it vary by state?

  95. Elaine M. says:

    Fox News built a f**ked-up Frankenstein, dumb, angry and divorced from facts. Now Donald Trump will devour them
    Conservative media destroyed conservative politics. The right’s impossible to take seriously. Then came Trump!
    http://www.salon.com/2015/07/08/fox_news_built_a_fked_up_frankenstein_dumb_angry_and_divorced_from_facts_now_donald_trump_will_devour_them/

    Excerpt:
    Fox News –and the conservative media-industrial complex – have created a Frankenstein. His name is Donald Trump, and his political success is now a huge problem for the Republican Party. In so many ways, Trump’s political existence was inevitable. For years, Fox News and the conservative talk radio machine have played to the populist Tea Party id: fomenting fear, demonizing immigrants, and enabling every nativist anxiety imaginable. Now they’re paying the price.

    Donald Trump is practically a mirror image of the Fox News psyche. Most of his speeches consist of repackaged stupidities plucked right out of the conservative mediascape. It’s kind of brilliant, really. Trump knows his audience, and he beams back at them every idiotic thing they want to hear. Which, of course, is exactly what Fox News does…

    As a consequence, conservatives (on the whole) are now dumber, angrier and more divorced from the facts. To the extent that Fox News has nurtured the idiocy Trump represents, they’re responsible for his political life – they made it possible. The bile spewed by Trump might as well be Fox News talking points; it’s the kind of garbage you hear every day on their programs. And because so many conservatives get their news from Fox, Republican policymakers are forced to parrot those arguments to voters. This plays well with the base, but it alienates most of the country – as it should.

  96. swarthmoremom says:

    The guidelines of the program have not been established here. Some far right wing websites have reported data that they have received from lifenet, an anti-reproductive freedom organization. Many of these free contraceptive programs are run through Planned Parenthood so it could be a hit job on them. The goal of the right wing is to close the clinics.

  97. swarthmoremom says:

    post lost

  98. Bob Stone says:

  99. bron98 says:

    Can an 11-year-old girl sign a consent form to have sex with an adult male?

  100. bron98 says:

    Apparently so, old enough to… Old enough to breed. I used to think that saying was just for rednecks in the hills of Appalachia. How wrong I am. I guess the next saying of progressives will be “old enough to PEE, old enough for me.”

  101. Bron,

    No. Most states the age of consent is 18 although some it starts at 16 and moves on a “sliding scale” (no, really, keep your mind out of the gutter). Sex with an 11 year old is right out everywhere.

  102. What’s the matter, Bob? I agreed with your argument on principle, just not on polemic. I disagreed with Mike as well albeit for slightly different reasons (although his straw man did dance all over the “polemic line” so to speak).

    In many ways, beyond being a simple tool for the categorization of ideologies in an of themselves, the “political spectrum” is largely a hindrance to rational discourse. Some ideologies though are intrinsically evil and/or anti-democratic and extremists of all sort try to make political hay from demonizing “the other”. The chance for making actual progress is often hindered by trying to “score points”. Unless you’re railing against actual fascists, authoritarians, oligarchs and/or totalitarians, it really is a waste of time.

    So “whatever” is right.

    And Hawkins is still an irrational jackass.

  103. Gene,
    The Romans conquered the known world until they got to Scotland. It should have been a clue when they came upon a country whose national flower is the thistle, the national food is haggis, and the national musical instrument the bagpipes.

    The Celts didn’t fight fair either. They wore camouflage, came dashing out of hidden cover, attacking the rearmost part of a column. Overturned the food carts, set them on fire, and disappeared back into the woods. Army commanders can always expect unrest among the troops when there is no food to eat.

    So Hadrian built a wall to keep the barbarians out of his civilized world.

  104. They also had superior metallurgy. The bronze armor of the Legion didn’t fare too well against their primitive carbon steel. Of course, half-naked and painted with woad didn’t stand up too well to the bronze gladius of the Legion either.

  105. Gene,
    Ever hefted a claidheamh-mòr, aka the Great Highland Claymore? Five feet long. Mine is eleven inches across the quillons. By the time the Romans got there, the Picts had developed the squarehead axe. It was unique to the Picts, although you can now buy modern versions at your local Ace Hardware. It can be thrown with great accuracy.

    Ancient tartan cloth was dyed with vegetable dyes, which made them softer in color, and were natural camouflage material. After all, the dye came from the plants of the countryside. The bright colors we see now are the result of the invention of aniline dyes a little over a hundred years ago.

  106. Bob Stone says:

    [Bob and Bron are] “people who approve of child pregnancy, so that they can satisfy some personal prejudice towards what they “deem” liberal, thus illustrating that they bandy about terms about which they have no clue. Interestingly though, they would be absolutely against any governmental aid to the children then born out of wedlock. True conservative morality, or should I say lack of same. Also someone asked the ignored question, just how many 11 year old’s have actually received birth control? But we know the truth is not important, it is the “principle” of the thing that is the important thing, the principle is of course finding something with which to demonize liberals so one’s pre-judgments prevail.”

    “My generalizations come from the most part by relying on my own instincts and intelligence.”

    — Mike Spindell.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “[Bob and Bron are] “people who approve of child pregnancy, so that they can satisfy some personal prejudice towards what they “deem” liberal, thus illustrating that they bandy about terms about which they have no clue. Interestingly though, they would be absolutely against any governmental aid to the children then born out of wedlock. True conservative morality, or should I say lack of same. Also someone asked the ignored question, just how many 11 year old’s have actually received birth control? But we know the truth is not important, it is the “principle” of the thing that is the important thing, the principle is of course finding something with which to demonize liberals so one’s pre-judgments prevail.”

      “My generalizations come from the most part by relying on my own instincts and intelligence.”

      — Mike Spindell.”

      Bob,
      For once you quoted me correctly and yes I was pointing out that your article was less about your concern for 11 year old girls and more about your need to bash liberalism. Now I am only a “liberal” by your simplistic assessment of the word, which is yet another mis-characterization, though charitably I must say one of ignorance, not intentional error. Interestingly you accuse me of polemic after posting this nonsensical piece: “Unspoken Rule #9 for Being a Liberal: “All solutions must be government-oriented:” , as what? Was it a defense of your central thesis in your post, or merely a slip exposing your deep seated anger and authoritarian mindset, under the guise of an advocate for freedom?

  107. And what you complain about? Is it any different than Hawkins or Powers?

    No.

    Polemics only win arguments when the ideology attacked is fundamentally flawed in an irreconcilable way. Neither liberalism nor conservatism in the traditional senses of the terms are flawed in that way. Each has benefits and faults in solving certain kinds of problems. Neither is a universal tool but both are tools. Fascism or Objectivism, for example, are both irreconcilably flawed. They are broken tools.

  108. Bob Stone says:

    Was I talking about liberal ideology?

    Or was I talking about specific behavioral traits and connected ways of thinking?

    Whatever.

    • It is a fact that one can speak of more than one thing at a time just as one can say one thing and mean another or mean one thing and say something else altogether. Ambiguity, deliberate or not, is a hazard of communication.

  109. gbk says:

    I love reset buttons:

    Children too:

  110. I wouldn’t say your liberal Michael, i would say you are progressive. but I admittedly use my own dictionary.

  111. gbk says:

    Gene nailed it:

    “In many ways, beyond being a simple tool for the categorization of ideologies in an of themselves, the “political spectrum” is largely a hindrance to rational discourse.”

    I’ve never trusted nor subscribed to labels of ideology as they have always seemed to be a hindrance that someone felt a need to establish so that they have an argument to argue — much like practicing tennis against a wall.

  112. bettykath says:

    Washington State law allows pre-teens to get contraceptives, abortions, and pre-natal care without parental involvement. As a practical matter, the implementation is for those 12 and above. I doubt, however, that a pregnant, due to incest or otherwise, 10 or 11 year old would be turned away.
    —————————
    Repeat from snopes:
    In most cases, state consent laws apply to all minors age 12 and older. In some cases, however, states allow only certain groups of minors — such as those who are married, pregnant or already parents—to consent. Several states have no relevant policy or case law; in these states, physicians commonly provide medical care without parental consent to minors they deem mature, particularly if the state allows minors to consent to related services.

    26 states and the District of Columbia allow all minors (12 and older) to consent to contraceptive services. 20 states allow only certain categories of minors to consent to contraceptive services. 4 states have no relevant policy or case law.

    Moreover, under Washington state law, minors may obtain or refuse birth control services at any age without the consent of a parent or guardian. The King County (where Seattle is located) web site advises that reproductive services are available to teens beginning at the age of 12 and are offered on a confidential basis:
    —————————
    Wish that such information had been available to me at the appropriate time, age 10. I wasn’t sexually active at that time but the information would have prepared me for when I became sexually active just a few years later.

  113. bron98 says:

    I feel much better now, knowing that 12-year-olds are being given IUDs versus 11-year-olds.

    My wife and I give our children the human sexuality talk when they were in the fifth grade. I think we explained it pretty well and covered it pretty thoroughly. But at the same time we told them that there is a time and place for everything and that sex is something that could cause complications in their lives if they were too young.

    The sad part of this is that children who are babies are having babies and there are people who are willing to facilitate this activity. I guess I am a Puritan, it just strikes me as wrong to accept young children having babies.

  114. bron98 says:

    the reality is that human beings can be taught to act in ways that promote the best outcomes for their lives. I think our free will is able to overcome our lizard brain/monkey brain.

  115. Education is an introduction to opportunity.

  116. swarthmoremom says:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/07/texas-high-school-with-chlamydia-outbreak-has-abstinence-only-sex-ed/ Now in Texas they teach abstinence plus the tea party legislature now voted to lift the ban on soda pop. Abstinence plus soda pop must be the key. They have one of highest teen pregnancy rates as do many of these confederate states with no sex education.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “They have one of highest teen pregnancy rates as do many of these confederate states with no sex education.”

      SwM,

      But they’re free and Christian, what could be better?

  117. Bob Stone says:

    This Teen Had Sex with Another Teen, So a Judge Tore His Family Apart
    Same judge, same story.

    “At last America is realizing how Taliban-esque our sex offender laws can be. First came the story of Elkhart, Indiana’s Zach Anderson, which hit the front page of the The New York Times on Sunday (you read it here first). Zach, 19, had sex with a girl who told him she was 17 but turned out to be 14, and a judge decided that makes Zach a sex offender for life. Learning about his case, another family in Elkhart couldn’t believe it.

    Their son was living out the exact same story.

    As Fox28 reports, Darian Yoder, also a 19-year-old, met a girl on the same app Zach used, “Hot or Not.” The girl said she was 17 but turned out to be 13—a fact Darian learned months after the encounter, when he was arrested for sexual misconduct.”

    (cont.)
    http://reason.com/blog/2015/07/09/this-teen-had-sex-with-another-teen-so-a

    Like I was saying:

    If the age of consent in Washington State is 16, why are public schools offering IUD’s and hormonal implants to children as young as 11?

    Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse? If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?

  118. swarthmoremom says:

    Bob S “Could the the State be seen as emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse? If so, could this affect future statutory rape cases?” Highly doubt it. They are having plenty of sex at young ages in other states. They just have no protection and thus high rates of teen pregnancy. and chlamydia. Guessing the teen pregnancy rate is much lower in Washington than say Texas. It is really not that unusual these days for middle schoolers to engage in sexual activity. Not saying it is a good thing for them to be engaging in sexual activity at such a young age but that is the way it is.

  119. bron98 says:

    Three felonies a day. The state’s compelling interest is to keep us in line through fear of
    prosecution.

    “San Quentin” Quail, that’s what they used to call it for jailbait. I still find it remarkable that the state is, as Bob says above, “emboldening minors to engage in sexual intercourse.”

  120. swarthmoremom says:

    I might be the age of a grandmother but I am not so out of touch that I think a middle school or high school student needs a state’s encouragement to engage in sexual activity.

    • I remember puberty. I didn’t require any encouragement to try at all. Quite the opposite. And that is perfectly normal when the Hormone Fairy comes to town.

  121. swarthmoremom says:

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/02/22/1626061/teen-pregnancy-rural/ “The prevailing stereotype is that teen parenthood is primarily an urban and suburban phenomenon,” Bill Albert, the chief program officer for the National Campaign, told USA Today. But the group’s new data suggests that’s not actually the case.

    As the nation has increasingly focused its efforts on preventing unintended teen pregnancies, there has been significant progress. Although the U.S. still has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the developed world, teen birth rates have plunged to record lows as adolescents have begun to use more effective forms of birth control when they become sexually active. But that trend has been slower to take root in rural areas. Between 1990 and 2010, the birth rate dropped 49 percent for teens in major urban centers and 40 percent for teens in suburban areas — but just 32 percent for adolescents who live in rural counties.

    While teens across the country have largely been having less sex and using more contraception, teens in rural areas have actually been having more sex and using birth control less frequently. It’s not clear why that’s the case, but it could partly be because teens in rural areas still lack access to a range of comprehensive contraceptive services. There just aren’t as many sexual health resources in rural counties, where teens may have to travel farther to the nearest women’s health clinic. And deeply rooted attitudes about sex — including school districts that continue to cling to abstinence-only health curricula that don’t give teens enough information about methods to prevent pregnancy — may also play a role. Urban school districts, particularly in New York City, have made significant advances in expanding teens’ access to sexual education and resources, but there often aren’t similar pushes in rural places.

    The United States’ culture of sexual repression has also created an environment where teen sexuality is stigmatized, and adolescents may feel too embarrassed to seek out the resources they need. The National Campaign points out that teens may feel like they can’t buy condoms in their rural town where everyone knows their name.”

  122. bron98 says:

    We are talking about 11-year-olds not 16-year-olds. Although they should not be having sex either.

    I realize at some point, at some age there’s nothing you can do to stop a few million years of human evolution. But you can certainly try and put a damper on it.

    Promiscuous sex is not good for boys or girls, especially at a young age. From my reading on the subject, promiscuous sex is not healthy for anyone at any time.

  123. Bob Stone says:

    Washington State Statutory Rape:

    First-degree rape of a child to have sexual intercourse with a person less than age 12 years and the actor is at least 24 months older. Five years to life in prison

    Second-degree rape of a child to have sexual intercourse with a person who is at least 12 but less than 14 years old if the actor is at least 36 months older than the victim. Five years to life in prison

  124. Bob Stone says:

    The age of consent is the age at which a person is considered to be legally competent to consent to sexual acts, and is thus the minimum age of a person with whom another person is legally permitted to engage in sexual activity.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

  125. Mike Spindell says:

    Possibly if they were allowed to have a good sexual education, children of that age would understand that there is a wide range of sexuality available to them for experimentation, other than intercourse. Just as Bill Clinton expressed his sexual ignorance by saying “I didn’t have sex with that woman” and he was linking sex to intercourse, so too a good sexual education will let children understand that they can experiment as their hormones dictate, without risk of pregnancy. The sexual repression in this country is incredibly deep.

  126. swarthmoremom says:

    https://www.yahoo.com/health/title-x-the-federal-family-planning-program-is-123492140982.html “In preparing its budget proposal for the upcoming year, the GOP-led Congress has made moves to fully eliminate Title X, the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related reproductive health services, including contraception.

    Ninety percent of the people Title X serves have incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and 63 percent are uninsured. Six in 10 women who access health care services from a Title X-funded health center consider this their main source of health care.” Maybe all these programs will be soon gone and conservatives can jump for joy.

  127. Bob Stone says:

    This is about the state implicitly condoning an activity that it has already declared criminal.

    It’s about the state giving its implicit permission to potential statutory rape victims to ignore their lack of capacity to consent to sex and just focus on not getting pregnant.

  128. bron98 says:

    Eliminating title X funding is a major mistake on the part of Republicans since poor whites and minorities are a large part of democratic constituencies.

  129. swarthmoremom says:

    One could say that anyone that receives their birth control under state sponsored medicaid could potentially fall into that category.

  130. swarthmoremom says:

    Most of these middle schoolers are 7th and 8th graders having sex with each other. A relative has a middle schooler who is not sexually active but brings home stories.

  131. bettykath says:

    OT but a bit related

    http://www.innocenceproject.org/news-events-exonerations/children-sent-to-juvenile-detention-for-refusing-to-visit-their-father

    Three Michigan children have been incarcerated at a juvenile detention facility for over two weeks after an Oakland County circuit judge sent them away for refusing to see their father.

    During divorce proceedings, Judge Lisa Gorcyca ordered the children, ages 9, 10 and 14, to submit to supervised visits with their father. When the children refused, the judge held them in contempt of court and sent them to Children’s Village Detention Center until they turn 18 or until she reviews the matter. The children’s mother, Maya Tsimhoni, is not permitted to visit them at the facility.

    During a hearing last month, all three children refused to go on the court-ordered visits with their father. The oldest, Liam Tsimhoni, apologized to Judge Gorcyca for breaking the court order, but said he did not want contact with his father because he is violent and had hit his mother.

    “I’ve never seen anything like this,” the judge told the child. “One day you can watch this video and realize that you two have been brainwashed. Your dad is a good man. Your dad is a good man who loves you. You have been brainwashed. You are brainwashed.”

    The judge went on to compare the Tsimhoni children and the Manson family.

    “Dad, if you ever think that he has changed and therapy has helped him and he is no longer like Charlie Manson’s cult, then let us know and we can [review the matter],” Judge Gorcya told the children’s father, Omer Tsimhoni.

    Lisa Stern, an attorney representing the children’s mother, said about the children being sent to juvenile detention for simply not speaking to their father, “I know laws were violated and I know that the children were punished for crimes they did not commit,” according to the local Fox news station in Detroit.

    See the hearing transcript here.

  132. I am having a horrible internet connection on my landline and am thinking my phone did not post so if this a repeat i apologize.
    Gene i totally agree with you on the point of education about pregnancy risks and prevention are far more effective than abstinence education. abstinence has been our push for years and has been pretty much a complete failure right up there with the war on drugs and Lance Armstrong as an image of integrity.
    Unfortunately our society just seems unable to grasp the concept of awareness vs isolation, not that isolation is really an option unless you want to lock your princess up in a tower or become a Mennonite or Amish and even then it is seriously in doubt.
    That’s why Bob’s adherence to this battle dumbfounds me.

  133. Bob Stone says:

    Since when is objecting to public schools offering IUD’s to middle school girls equivalent to advocating abstinence??

    Holy crap!

  134. Bob Stone says:

    Just as the Bill of Rights prohibits public schools from indoctrinating students with religious education pursuant to a right wing agenda, so too must those rights protect parents and children from the grasp of “well intended” leftist indoctrination.

  135. Anonymously nYours says:

    Bob,

    There is a lot of ignorance or plain ignoring that this is morally wrong to offer an IUD to an 11 year old. The morally superior would disagree, but Jim Bakker advocated against homosexuals…. Look where that got him…. The morally unjust, will be the undoing of family values in this country….

    • Bob Stone says:

      AY,

      I actually came up with that last thought about indoctrination on a thread about that exact topic.

Comments are closed.