Jest to trzodowy plakat ale ka偶dy rodzic wie, 偶e tre艣膰 tekstowa jest prawdziwa.
>chcemy Mickiewicza i poezji jego a nie seksualizacji dziecka niewinnego
Tymczasem Telimena i Tadeusz w mrowisku:
The thing is, the complete opposite is true.
Kids do think about sex, they do it pretty often after certain age. Now, if they don’t get a checked, substantive education about the subject they will simply seek alternative sources – friends, internet, tv, mass media in general. And _this_ is what causes young pregnancies and unhealthy behaviors.
Sex ed isn’t also about having sex but it is about learning what is consent, teaching about your boundaries and how should you respect others’ boundaries, it is also designed to help young people with complexes regarding their bodies (“I’m not pretty enough”, “My penis is too small”, “My breasts are not big enough”, “I’m fat and all these women are super petite”).
It’s nuts that these people don’t see that. When I was a kid, adults usually ignored the issue probably taking it between the lines of “Children don’t think about stuff like that”. They were indeed very wrong.
We were just taught to be super secretive about stuff like that as it was taught that it’s “bad”.
A kto to Mickiewicz 馃槈
Conservatives are mentally ill, change my mind.
Ciekawe co ci ludzie by powiedzieli na wie艣膰 偶e do pierwszych masturbacji potrafi dochodzi膰 ju偶 w 偶yciu p艂odowym 馃槀
Ah yes misinformation. You can see there’s no source. If they know that it’s bad, where’s the source? Where’s the experiment? So many information is absent. Clearly a misinformation.
Were this true, the Church wouldn’t need to enforce the shame in young people.
Apogeum skrajnie konserwatywnych zaburze艅 psychicznych. Maksymalny poziom zmy艣lania problem贸w. Seks by艂, jest i b臋dzie wsz臋dzie bo jest nierozerwaln膮 cz臋艣ci膮 偶ycia homo sapiens. No ale to edukacja seksualna b臋dzie rozbudza膰 erotycznie dzieci (!?).
You may or not believe a stranger from the internet, but 90% of such anti-governement activism is in huge part of Russian disinformation origins. Be careful what you see and read.
Agree. Keep perverts away from childrens.
Smutne 馃檨 … dezinformacja robi swoje
Well, first is wrong, second may be confirmation bias, but last one make good point. Sex ed shouldn’t present it only as pleasure. I’m not saying to go full on catholic teachings [althou I’m catholic] but something about moral meaning and basic responsibility should be talked about. And this is important. TALKED. Not presented with one specific dogma, that is obviously perfectly right and the best. Let them think about it themselves, but present discussion
Dobrze ze teraz bez edukacji seksualnej m艂odzie偶 wcale nie wchodzi na czerwone tuby i nie my艣li, 偶e tak to wszystko wygl膮da.
Dobrze ze teraz nie ma toksycznych relacji w rodzinach z 10 dzieci z kt贸rych kobieta tak naprawd臋 chcia艂a jedno.
“naturalne procesy poznawcze” ju偶 nie istniej膮 od kiedy mn贸stwo dzieci ma nielimitowany dost臋p do internetu, a na nim nielimitowany dost臋p do pornografii. olbrzymie ryzyko wpadni臋cia do tego do艂ka zawczasu sprawia 偶e tym bardziej jest sexed konieczny xD. niestety dla polak贸w katolik贸w 艂膮czenie kropek jest zbyt trudnym zadaniem
> coraz wi臋cej niechcianych ci膮偶 u nastolatek
… meanwhile in USA abstinence-only states have the highest pregnancy rates and highest abortion rates in the country. Lack of awareness is clearly not doing them any favours.
And let’s be clear on one thing: *teenagers fuck.* It’s in their best interest to know the risks involved before they begin – and that age can be as low as 15.
OP has no moral compass and yet, in his pride, thinks he knows better.
No OP, you’re wrong. You can’t tell right from wrong.
Co jak co, ale niestety to prawda
Okay then ask Them to provide any scientific research that says Sexual Education WILL lead to these “consequences”. Or is it just made up to scare people into submission?
Z wyj膮tkiem Mickiewicza, reszta to dok艂adne t艂umaczenie z ameryka艅skich naziol贸w i Quanon.
Except for the Mickiewicz reference, the rest is direcly translated from Quanon and US nazi materials!
The insidious thing about this messaging is that it associates certain facts that while true have nothing to do with the boogeymen it tries to create:
– Sex ed is not very stimulating in a school environment. Some of us remember it. It was more awkward than anything else.
– Absence of it does not prevent hormones from doing their thing and absorbing what the internet, porn, and personal experiences among peer groups teach them anyway. (Don’t worry though, the church will ban those, too on its way back to the dark ages.)
– None of those programs actually incentivize adolescents to get into hook ups.
– How in the friggin hell are prepubescent children supposed to even feel motivated to do those things without sufficient chemistry having kicked in yet? If the church is so concerned with pedophilia, why don’t they deal with the problem IN THEIR OWN INSTITUTION?
It’s absolutely vile what the church has turned into (or rather, remained as backwards as it’s always been with modernized propaganda techniques).
There are so many actual big problems that we need to confront as a country and some people believe this is the thing to focus on when current government is so “progressive” that the big change they propose regarding religion classes in schools is to have them as first or last lesson to make life easier for kids who don’t participate.
Rozumiem 偶e ten punkt drugi, to napisany na podstawie faktycznych bada艅 statystycznych, co nie? I jakiegokolwiek konsultowania si臋 z ekspertami w sprawie psychologii, co nie?
Swoj膮 drog膮, jak tak mo偶na Piotra S. po艣miertnie profanowa膰
dont let them know about how freud potrayed sexuality development in children…
also “innocent” but wont ban porn because what their priests will jerk off to?
no bo to wszystko by艂o zarezerwowane dla ksi臋偶y. A ksi臋偶om 艣wiadome dzieci si臋 nie podobaj膮
W spos贸b naturalny czyli od koleg贸w z klasy kt贸rzy nakryli swoich rodzic贸w w sypialni, a potem na艣ladowanie ich z r贸wie艣nikami w szkolnej 艂azience?
27 comments
Bottom left is wild.
Jest to trzodowy plakat ale ka偶dy rodzic wie, 偶e tre艣膰 tekstowa jest prawdziwa.
>chcemy Mickiewicza i poezji jego a nie seksualizacji dziecka niewinnego
Tymczasem Telimena i Tadeusz w mrowisku:
The thing is, the complete opposite is true.
Kids do think about sex, they do it pretty often after certain age. Now, if they don’t get a checked, substantive education about the subject they will simply seek alternative sources – friends, internet, tv, mass media in general. And _this_ is what causes young pregnancies and unhealthy behaviors.
Sex ed isn’t also about having sex but it is about learning what is consent, teaching about your boundaries and how should you respect others’ boundaries, it is also designed to help young people with complexes regarding their bodies (“I’m not pretty enough”, “My penis is too small”, “My breasts are not big enough”, “I’m fat and all these women are super petite”).
It’s nuts that these people don’t see that. When I was a kid, adults usually ignored the issue probably taking it between the lines of “Children don’t think about stuff like that”. They were indeed very wrong.
We were just taught to be super secretive about stuff like that as it was taught that it’s “bad”.
A kto to Mickiewicz 馃槈
Conservatives are mentally ill, change my mind.
Ciekawe co ci ludzie by powiedzieli na wie艣膰 偶e do pierwszych masturbacji potrafi dochodzi膰 ju偶 w 偶yciu p艂odowym 馃槀
Ah yes misinformation. You can see there’s no source. If they know that it’s bad, where’s the source? Where’s the experiment? So many information is absent. Clearly a misinformation.
Were this true, the Church wouldn’t need to enforce the shame in young people.
Apogeum skrajnie konserwatywnych zaburze艅 psychicznych. Maksymalny poziom zmy艣lania problem贸w. Seks by艂, jest i b臋dzie wsz臋dzie bo jest nierozerwaln膮 cz臋艣ci膮 偶ycia homo sapiens. No ale to edukacja seksualna b臋dzie rozbudza膰 erotycznie dzieci (!?).
You may or not believe a stranger from the internet, but 90% of such anti-governement activism is in huge part of Russian disinformation origins. Be careful what you see and read.
Agree. Keep perverts away from childrens.
Smutne 馃檨 … dezinformacja robi swoje
Well, first is wrong, second may be confirmation bias, but last one make good point. Sex ed shouldn’t present it only as pleasure. I’m not saying to go full on catholic teachings [althou I’m catholic] but something about moral meaning and basic responsibility should be talked about. And this is important. TALKED. Not presented with one specific dogma, that is obviously perfectly right and the best. Let them think about it themselves, but present discussion
Dobrze ze teraz bez edukacji seksualnej m艂odzie偶 wcale nie wchodzi na czerwone tuby i nie my艣li, 偶e tak to wszystko wygl膮da.
Dobrze ze teraz nie ma toksycznych relacji w rodzinach z 10 dzieci z kt贸rych kobieta tak naprawd臋 chcia艂a jedno.
“naturalne procesy poznawcze” ju偶 nie istniej膮 od kiedy mn贸stwo dzieci ma nielimitowany dost臋p do internetu, a na nim nielimitowany dost臋p do pornografii. olbrzymie ryzyko wpadni臋cia do tego do艂ka zawczasu sprawia 偶e tym bardziej jest sexed konieczny xD. niestety dla polak贸w katolik贸w 艂膮czenie kropek jest zbyt trudnym zadaniem
> coraz wi臋cej niechcianych ci膮偶 u nastolatek
… meanwhile in USA abstinence-only states have the highest pregnancy rates and highest abortion rates in the country. Lack of awareness is clearly not doing them any favours.
And the protesters are just idiotic. The program for the new subject [is known](https://www.infor.pl/prawo/dziecko-i-prawo/edukacja/6764194,edukacja-seksualna-obowiazkowa-w-szkolach-od-1-wrzesnia-2025-r-konsultacje-publiczne-podstawy-programowej.html), and according to that ages 11-13 would be learning mainly about basic biology while 14-15 would be learning about more in-depth subjects. No indication of any hedonism.
And let’s be clear on one thing: *teenagers fuck.* It’s in their best interest to know the risks involved before they begin – and that age can be as low as 15.
OP has no moral compass and yet, in his pride, thinks he knows better.
No OP, you’re wrong. You can’t tell right from wrong.
Co jak co, ale niestety to prawda
Okay then ask Them to provide any scientific research that says Sexual Education WILL lead to these “consequences”. Or is it just made up to scare people into submission?
Z wyj膮tkiem Mickiewicza, reszta to dok艂adne t艂umaczenie z ameryka艅skich naziol贸w i Quanon.
Except for the Mickiewicz reference, the rest is direcly translated from Quanon and US nazi materials!
The insidious thing about this messaging is that it associates certain facts that while true have nothing to do with the boogeymen it tries to create:
– Sex ed is not very stimulating in a school environment. Some of us remember it. It was more awkward than anything else.
– Absence of it does not prevent hormones from doing their thing and absorbing what the internet, porn, and personal experiences among peer groups teach them anyway. (Don’t worry though, the church will ban those, too on its way back to the dark ages.)
– None of those programs actually incentivize adolescents to get into hook ups.
– How in the friggin hell are prepubescent children supposed to even feel motivated to do those things without sufficient chemistry having kicked in yet? If the church is so concerned with pedophilia, why don’t they deal with the problem IN THEIR OWN INSTITUTION?
It’s absolutely vile what the church has turned into (or rather, remained as backwards as it’s always been with modernized propaganda techniques).
There are so many actual big problems that we need to confront as a country and some people believe this is the thing to focus on when current government is so “progressive” that the big change they propose regarding religion classes in schools is to have them as first or last lesson to make life easier for kids who don’t participate.
Rozumiem 偶e ten punkt drugi, to napisany na podstawie faktycznych bada艅 statystycznych, co nie? I jakiegokolwiek konsultowania si臋 z ekspertami w sprawie psychologii, co nie?
Swoj膮 drog膮, jak tak mo偶na Piotra S. po艣miertnie profanowa膰
dont let them know about how freud potrayed sexuality development in children…
also “innocent” but wont ban porn because what their priests will jerk off to?
no bo to wszystko by艂o zarezerwowane dla ksi臋偶y. A ksi臋偶om 艣wiadome dzieci si臋 nie podobaj膮
W spos贸b naturalny czyli od koleg贸w z klasy kt贸rzy nakryli swoich rodzic贸w w sypialni, a potem na艣ladowanie ich z r贸wie艣nikami w szkolnej 艂azience?
Comments are closed.