Wish you well, in spite of all you’ve gone through, may the future be kind to you.

The best time to start sex education is to decide what age you would like to talk to your child, the subtract at least 8 years.

You don’t talk about fight club.
You don’t talk about fight club.
When someone says stop, or goes limp, even if he’s just faking it, the fight is over. (Reading this Rule Nick, I think you may have already won.)
Only two guys to a fight. (Just JettBoy and Nick)
One fight at a time.
They fight without shirts or shoes. (Uh Oh, I thought this was Fight Club, not Brokeback Mountain.)
The fights go on as long as they have to.
If this is your first night at fight club, you have to fight.

And E, give Nick a break — He’s watched all those evil movies and it has somehow warped his brain. I’d recommend a Christmas movie marathon of “Legacy” and “Man’s Search For Happiness.” I was going to recommend “Johnny Lingo” but I think it is responsible for turning an entire generation gay.

But how would Jettboy ever show his face again in priesthood meeting, after getting the #@&*%)*% kicked out of him by a gay man? LOL!!

1. Sex is not wrong…but is like driving a car…there are dangers to be aware of and decisions to be made that are best handled by those who are old enough to safely operate it so it doesn’t hurt self or others.
2. Pregnancy facts and myths – especially the girls need to understand these because they will be the ones dealing with the consequences directly.
3. Personal responsibility…it doesn’t matter what I teach or what rules I put in place, the teen needs to understand their free agency leaves them responsible to dealing with consequences of using that agency.
4. Abstinence, while uncommon in society, is possible to those committed to something. Future family relationships are influenced by decisions made by these young teens.

Bottom line, treat the teens with respect because they are the ones making the choices.

I hear you, but I just got done watching Fight Club and I think you and JettBoy need to settle this mano e mano.

Just remember, like the temple, the first rule of Fight Club is you don’t talk about Fight Club.

Jettboy, rather than flying off on a defensive rant, why not actually read my comment, including the clear acknowledgement that the stories I told were not representative of all LDS members?

The whole you watch violence, but not sex argument is a false relationship…That said, there is a huge difference between the two in social responses. Sex outside of marriage is shown in movies as acceptable and socially normal. Violence, and especially horror slash, is often not shown as acceptable.

Perhaps you’re watching a skewed sample of television and/or cinema, Jettboy. I could readily provide a list of films where extra-marital sex has been presented as unacceptable or abnormal, with horrible consequences. I could also readily provide a list of films where violence is shown as acceptable, normal, and ultimately the defining element of heroism, masculinity, patriotism, etc., with highly-favorable consequences. (Speaking of that, ever notice how action heroes can do hundreds of thousands of dollars in property damage, but NEVER face any consequences for doing so??)

If someone can prove that watching slasher or violent movies increases the chances that violence and murder become acceptable then my views on this will change.

From my reading over the years, Jettboy, neither sexual or violent media presentations have been conclusively proven to increase similar behavior on the part of viewers. Researchers have put forth studies to demonstrate both of these hypotheses, but their work has been heavily criticized. If you’re being consistent, you should be questioning the behavioral influence of both sex and violence in the media, rather than assuming the relationship regarding sex, but dismissing it out of hand regarding violence. Of course, you may have other completely justifiable reasons for not viewing media portrayals of sex, such as the fact that your particular faith teaches against it.

Again, I reject both types of movies and believe there are many people who do. I just don’t buy into the equivalency argument.

If you thought that I was making an equivalency argument, Jettboy, you misunderstood my comments. Personally, I don’t feel the need to completely shun portrayals of either sex or violence in the media. It depends, rather, on how those aspects of human existence are portrayed, and what message they are used to convey.

In the example I used above, my ex-wife forbade the viewing of “Mamma Mia”, on the basis that the plot involved Meryl Streep’s character having had sex with three different men, none of whom she was married to, approximately twenty years prior. The events portrayed by the film were played out as a consequence of those choices, i.e. Streep’s character had a daughter as a result, and when it came time for that daughter to marry, her own paternity was in question. There were no depictions of sexual activity in the film, and there was no suggestion that Streep’s character continued to be promiscuous in any way.

Now, if we were to apply my ex-wife’s “reasoning,” we could make a list of media which should be “banned” on the basis that at least one main character had extra-marital sex within the past twenty years. Like my ex-wife, we could refuse to make any allowance for intervening repentance on the part of those characters. That way, we could protect ourselves from such dangerous, obscene materials as: The Holy Bible, The Book of Mormon, any biography of Benjamin Franklin (and a host of other notable American heroes), many of our own ancestors’ life stories, and the list goes on and on!

Good luck with that.

That said, there is a huge difference between the two in social responses. Sex outside of marriage is shown in movies as acceptable and socially normal. Violence, and especially horror slash, is often not shown as acceptable. In fact, its excitement (if you will) is based on the idea that it is NOT normal. If someone can prove that watching slasher or violent movies increases the chances that violence and murder become acceptable then my views on this will change. Again, I reject both types of movies and believe there are many people who do. I just don’t buy into the equivalency argument.

Why not tell the kids how great sex is if you do it right? This sex phobia is incredible, especially since we all got here through our parents doin’ the nasty. Teach them about contraception. Teach them to abstain until they are emotionally ready. Teach them to avoid STDs. Teach them where to get information and help if they need a different teacher. Teach them how life pretty much sucks if your sex life sucks.

Then let them govern themselves and bring you grandbabies.

I really appreciated anon’s comment. Thanks for sharing.

I heard a joke once: “Why do Mormon girls always get pregnant? –Because it would be a sin to carry a condom.” You can insert “Catholic” or any other religion with an investment in it’s member’s sexuality into that joke.

I think it’s an interesting point, bringing up violence in movies and sexuality. I think back to Larry Miller, the theater owner who refused to allow Brokeback Mountain to be shown in his theater, while at the very same time, the movie “Hostel” played. If we boil it all down, one has total disregard for human life, and the other was a love story. They just had the misfortune of having the wrong “parts” for loving each other.

My brother refers to this as “preference over principal”. I believe that if you asked any person in or out of the church what was more important, they would immediately say “human life”. (Well, okay, those who don’t adhere to the “Miracle of Forgiveness”, anyway.)I would go a step further and say that love trumps it all.

To illustrate, when I was in the YW Presidency, one of the Laurels (the president) became pregnant. Her mother sought me out, desperate to navigate what to do about it all (which was weird because I was this young 20-something and she was well into her 40′s). I gave her the best advice I could, and I stand by it: “Just love her. Your relationship with your daughter is more important than anything.”

We teach our kids that there is a sure-fire way to staying healthy sexually and NOT pregnant–abstinence; then we teach them about safety, and most important, that we love them no matter what.

We were asked if we agree that “parents are responsible for teen sexual behavior.” I believe strongly that parents are responsible for teens’ sexual education, but behavior?

The law of Moses forbade to hold a father responsible for the transgressions of the son, and I will accept responsibility only insofar as some infraction is the result of our failure to teach the correct principles. Modern revelation has the implication, too, that if parents do not teach, they are responsible, otherwise, the children are responsible for themselves.

Otherwise, comments #20 and 21 were very instructive, and #23 goes a long way, too. The WHY is very important to many people.

I’ll say it again, that I think sex ed for teens always comes too late. You should start at around 7/8 yo to get them before they’ve developed the teenagers’ don’t-trust-anyone-over-30 attitude.

I can only shake my head at the type of parenting that Nick describes by the family with 9 children. We need to understand that the overwhelming messages kids will get about sex in the general culture are unhealthy. If we do not provide them with a healthy understanding of sexuality, they are probably going to get into some type of trouble over their sexual behavior.