Quantcast
Utah

Governor Gary Herbert vetoes controversial sex education bill HB363

Comments

Return To Article
  • SuziQ Springville, UT
    March 18, 2012 6:46 p.m.

    I agree that the bill ought to be called the non-sex education bill. I am a parent that teaches both sex education and moraloity in the home. But, I would like the school to teach the scientific facts of life. I am not worried about my children going out and having sex because they heard about contraceptives or gays in a biology or health class. There are other factors that lead kids to have sex. Ignorance is one of those things. Lack of parental involvement is another factor. Getting carried away by mistake also happens. The bill that was passed won't correct any of those factors. What is of more concern to me is the propensity of our legislators to pass laws that don't reflect the majority opinion. When 90% of the parents opt in to the current sex ed, I don't know why we want to change it. I think we ought to change the elected officials. Thank you Govenor Herbert for listening to all of the feedback, mine included, and making a good decision!

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:29 p.m.

    Fred44,

    I apologize. I didn't want to clarify to single anyone out- but I was not directing my comment to you. Another person made remarks I feel are inappropriate.

    I understand your point and I agree with it completely. I should state that "as long as democracy is satisfied/served then no imposing has taken place".

    Democracy is satisfied when we vote and willingly live by the outcome. A bill of rights, governors powers, and every other part of our government doesn't satisfy justice because they exist- but because we ordained them democratically. We not only agreed to vote, but we agreed to the terms and conditions of the vote (a bill of rights). So as long as we have agreed to live by the law, justice is served.

    There's obviously still disagreement on whether things are constitutional or not- but I believe I've sufficiently made my point in a way we can find at least some common ground.

    ---

    FYI: My dislike of people crying "imposing" is that it is often based on the prejudice that 'the other opinions' about the constitution are automatically unjustifiable and that this prejudicial argument is exempt from examination. All opinions/sources deserve equal consideration.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:02 p.m.

    The system worked, this time. That is the benefit of having the legislative, executive and the court process. The Legislature could still work to do their override, but a lot of them are up for reelection in November and want to get through the conventions and primary, if needed. Some Senator may not be up for reelection but every House member is and it is their Bill. Utah county and Eagle Forum may get by but not everyone. Maybe the Republicans that have bought into everything the Forum does are not really Republican Party members. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.
    Thank you, Governor, and the timing appears to have been convenient to impress the caucus attenders.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 17, 2012 8:57 p.m.

    Voice of Reason,

    You said: "First, if forging my parents signature made me dishonest- one would certainly have to look in the social mirror before making that claim. Nearly all children have lied to their parents or a teacher about something." I didn't say anything about you, I used the name Johnny in my example, but I would say that attempting to justify lying because others have done it, even if they are children does not make forgery or lying acceptable.

    Second you also said: "I refuse to accept when people say "imposing" when it was accomplished via our democracy." Even in a democracy the majority can impose things on the minority in an inappropriate way, which is part of the reason that we give Governors and the President the power to veto such legislation.

    For all of you that say the small unit within a health class that deals with sex education is an opt out, you are incorrect, it is an opt in. Parents must sign a waiver allowing students to participate. I would again reiterate that if students forge this or any other school form that is a parent student problem, not a school problem.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 4:51 p.m.

    I stated that a parents choice is the question at hand, and that a forgery would circumvent this choice. This clearly reveals that 'permission slips' don't solve the problem of voluntary participation according to the will of the parents.

    That was the only real point I was making, not that a youth was justified in doing it or that the act of forging negated anyone's opinions about this issue- only that it shows that parental choice is not preserved while this can happen.

    ---

    Furthermore, I will respectfully say that someone questioning my being taught honesty and integrity in my upbringing is inappropriate. Saying it to a complete stranger is without any amount of credibility. In the end, God will judge my dealings, my integrity, my honesty. God has the right, the authority, and the understanding to judge my life. Others commenting online certainly have no proper place doing so.

    ---

    On a side note: as much as many complaints, problems, abuses on here of prompted revisions in the comment policy- I still believe that further revision to build a more respectful environment would be beneficial and would represent the higher standards we all know we should promote in all our discourse.

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    March 17, 2012 3:01 p.m.

    Great job, Governor!

  • wear2manyhatz Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2012 2:11 p.m.

    I will be voting for Gen. Peter Cooke in November, I want to thank and congratulate Gov. Herbert for making a thoughtful and reasonable decision concerning HB363.

    Children do not learn about sex from their parents, and very few parents can teach about sex in an accurate and objective manner. I believe that what we all can agree on is that, as parents, it is our obligation to teach our children what our hopes and desires are for them; and that we have equipped them with the ability to make good choices and act responsibly. If not, then we have truly failed.

    It is also our obligation to assist our children when or if they do get into any kind of sexually-related or other kind of trouble, and not kick them to the sidewalk. That is a much bigger sin than pre-marital sex, getting an STD or homosexuality. And pray for they children who are not safe in their own homes!

    It is time for a few who believe they own our Legislature to be stopped. We all know what is right and wrong - for ourselves and our families - individually.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    March 17, 2012 2:00 p.m.

    Thank you Mr. Governor. Your services are no longer required. We elected representatives to do our will. They did that. Your job is to enforce the laws they pass. You failed. Goodby and good luck at your next job.

  • Gary Moore Bountiful, UT
    March 17, 2012 1:21 p.m.

    If parents don't "opt-in", how will their children receive instruction about anatomy? It doesn't seem like those parents who want biology taught, including the reproductive system, but not sexuality, have much of a choice.

  • seeswater Vernal, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:54 p.m.

    I'm curious - have teen pregnancy rates and STD rates gone up or down since we started sex education in schools? In bigger cities where condoms are handed out, does that stop teen pregnancy or STD's? Not at all - the only thing that's different is that abortions are on the rise. Let's be real. Sex education in our schools does one thing and one thing only. It allows people to feel good about themselves when their kids get pregnant or get STD's. It lets them say, I have no idea what happened because they were educated!

    Sex education belongs in one place and one place only - the home. This is cowardice and failure on the shoulders of the parents (I am also a parent, and include myself in this group). We need to communicate with our children. Teach them your values. Be honest with them and show them the realities of what happens when teenagers engage in sexual activity. Don't leave it up to some stranger reading from some state-mandated manual. That's just irresponsible!

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    March 17, 2012 12:44 p.m.

    Studies have shown that kids who receive sex education are more likely to postpone sexual activity than kids who don't. Abstinence can and should be emphasized at every age, with more comprehensive education (prevention of pregnancy and STDs) according to age appropriateness.

  • Enola BOUNTIFUL, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:43 p.m.

    Well, he will be getting my future vote. Thank goodness somebody in this state has some sense.

  • Ginger Ravenna, OH
    March 17, 2012 12:41 p.m.

    Outside of the state, e think the headline would be better written as "Governor Gary Herbert vetoes controversial sex NON-education bill HB363"

    Ignorance is ignorance. Kids that have already gotten the honest truth from parents already now. Kids that get some made up story from home, the street or the playground get corrections.

    The big problem seems to be that a teacher might mention heresies like gays pretty much like everyone else except in ne, not terribly important, aspect or that women brought up to a different set of beliefs may choose differently than you would. That's so scary.

  • Carson Provo, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    Thank Godness he did the right thing. We the people need to tell Ruzicka that she is not Running this State and we will make our ow choices.

  • Middle of the Road Home Town USA, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:22 p.m.

    "The bill drew condemnation from thousands who voiced their opinions through social media and in calls to the governor's office, fearing the bill could keep potentially life-saving information from students who might not receive it otherwise"

    These above kinds of concerns are addressed (likely) in health education class especially when it covers STDs. That has no conflict with parents regarding no mention of contraception or sex and/or teaching abstinence before marriage.

    Hooray for Governor Herbert. Vetoe on!

  • JRJ Pocatello, ID
    March 17, 2012 11:47 a.m.

    Hooray for your governer!!!!! As a teacher, I would like to go on record as saying that the school is NOT the place to teach sex. Math, Grammar, Science (including body parts and what they do, but no discussion on whether it is right or wrong, no discussion on homosexuality.) I know there are those who want to pick a fight about, "Well, some parents won't teach their children." While that is true, I still say the school is not the place to pass judgment on the morality of things. SEX EDUCATION BELONGS AT HOME. If you don't expect parents to take on a difficult subject with their own children, they will continually skirt it. If they know the schools will, yet again, take over their jobs, they will also continually allow that to happen. Thanks for having a back bone.

  • SusanTJ Sandy, UT
    March 17, 2012 11:15 a.m.

    Herbert has to go. Sex education, in the classroom, embarrasses children. Children have an innate God-given modesty. This is something parents should speak of in the privacy of their own home. They're perverting children. In the 1960's, when this started a group in California said: "If you start teaching sex-ed in the classroom ~ in thirty years you'll be handing out condoms!"

  • johnl Sandy, Utah
    March 17, 2012 10:36 a.m.

    I cannot believe we passed this bill in the first place. Have parents teach their kids? Gosh, in this 'individualistic' society you show me a teenagers who actually listens to their parents? Very few. They seem to pay more attention in classrooms among their peers.

    Thank you Governor Herbert!

  • Kathleen3 WARMINSTER, PA
    March 17, 2012 10:34 a.m.

    The coarse, vulgar, and uncivil behavior manifested by the majority of people in society today is the result of parents opting to turn their responsibilities to their children over to the rabid progressives in academia today.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:28 a.m.

    I think the fear of students forging a parent's signature to opt into a sex ed discussion is not as big of a concern as many here are making it out to be. Teachers are communicating with parents in so many ways other than just sending home a slip of paper. Teachers have websites, emails, text messages, and other social media they use to communicate with parents. Believe it or not, involved parents use the available technologies to keep up with what their children are doing in school. If you don't want your child to participate in a class activity, lesson unit, or book discussion, get involved. If you fear your child will forge your signature, it's time to reevaluate your parenting skills and figure what you can do to trust your own children to do the right thing.

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:24 a.m.

    Well done Governor! I can't believe there are those that feel that if we don't talk about sex, the problems will go away. Good to see someone is thinking about the children instead of just letting them be woefully unprepared. Kudos Gary!

    Now just be respectful in your tone to the Federal Government on the land issue instead of spouting inflammatory rhetoric, and you are starting to look like a respectable civil servant. It's good to see civility and common sense making a comeback, impressive sir!

  • @Charles the greater outdoors, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:22 a.m.

    @Henderson: maybe you could teach sex ed in your home?? Just a thought.

    As of yet, I have not heard any reason why the state should be involved in sex education.

    Frankly, it's pathetic that people shove all their duties and responsibilities on the government. But since the argument is that kids are going to have sex anyway so let's teach them how not to get STD's, HIV or pregnant let's also make sure that we have a class that teaches them how to drink and do drugs properly. They also need to know how to smoke marijuana too.

    After all, they are going to do it anyway, right?

  • Tracy M South Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:20 a.m.

    Congratulations to the Deseret News for writing an accurate story about HB363. There has been so much misinformation surrounding this bill. This is the first story that told the truth about how the bill got started, and how unnecessary the bill was in the first place.

  • ParkCityAggie Park City, Ut
    March 17, 2012 10:20 a.m.

    Gov. Herbert made the right decision here. We already had system in place to allow parents to opt their children out of sex education. This bill was just another attempt by a socially conservative group that is well "right" of the general population of this state to try and turn the clock back to the 1800's. Furthermore, abstinence only education is a complete failure. Facts are stubborn things and the facts are that studies show that AO education does not curb sexual activity amongst our youth. When it comes to sex education ignorance is not bliss, and most parents are reluctant to broach the subject with their children. Sex education should teach that abstinence IS the best the best method of avoiding pregnancy and social diseases. There are lots of reasons why some youth are sexually active, but learning about contraceptives in school isn't one of them. Why not explain the consequences of engaging in risky sexual behavior and how to best mitigate those risks? Ignoring the issues has only lead to more teenage pregnancies and teenagers engaging in other even more risky behavior. Covering our ears and closing our eyes wont make it go away!

  • DrGroovey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:09 a.m.

    It seems that those who supported this bill and that now oppose the veto, never even read the bill in the first place. This bill was designed to limit the choice of parents and educators It was designed to limit the available options for education on sexual matters. It was designed for a small minority to force their will upon the rest of society. It had nothing to do with encouraging promiscuity or any immoral behavior, yet that is what Gayle Ruzicka and the fascists in the eagle forum now claim.

    I appreciate a governor who supports free agency, and I question the motives of those who are so opposed to it. Gayle Ruzicka and her group support ideas that run contrary to LDS values and the values of most non-LDS people in Utah.

  • SP Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 10:05 a.m.

    The legislators talk about preventing our kids from being exposed to sexual topics. But they going to be exposed to these topics on the Internet and video, and the sources will not mention the risk, diseases, and emotional problems associated with those activities.

    We have to give our kids accurate information. I am a parent and I know I do a very amateur job in this area, when I get around to doing it at all.

    I appreciate those who are prepared and teach these topics with care and accuracy.

  • wear2manyhatz Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:44 a.m.

    @Iron Rod, Salt Lake City, UT

    We're not afraid of Ms. Ruzicka; we're sick of her! And we're sick of the legislators who bow down to her like she's some kind of god!

  • On the other hand Spanish Fork, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:25 a.m.

    @joeyslaptop, sex ed in Utah is already an opt-in program. Much ado about nothing?

  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:23 a.m.

    Thank God we have 1 sane republican

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:16 a.m.

    The concept of "Free Agency" prevails again.
    Remember that one folks?
    The Governor did, good on him.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    March 17, 2012 9:10 a.m.

    Glad the governor knows the difference between education and religious indoctrination.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    March 17, 2012 8:57 a.m.

    Gayle Ruzicka, President of the Utah Eagle Forum, said she was disappointed with the governor's decision. The veto, she said, gives students "a stamp of approval" to engage in sexual activities.
    "We had 64 legislators vote in favor of that bill," she said. "And one Republican who spends a couple days looking at it caves in to the pressure." ~ article
    =============

    Perfect example of our ÂOut-of-Touch extremest legislature.
    64 of a Republican legislation clearly does not truly Represent us in our Republic.

    The fact is, thousands and thousands have once again had to call the Governor to veto a bill that doesn't even come close to reality.

    And BTW  the veto gives students Âa stamp of approval to engage in sexual activities?!!!
    The is what I mean by extremeists and reality.

    Hardly.

    Good job Gov. Herbert.
    Thanks.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 8:47 a.m.

    Why is everyone so frightened of the Eagle Forum?

  • David H Layton, UT
    March 17, 2012 8:07 a.m.

    I'm glad that parents continue to have a choice. My only negative comment is that too many kids give themselves permission to be in the class by forging their parents' signature. I have spoken with the teachers who actually teach the class. They admit that they know some of the signatures are forged. They feel that they are teachers, not signature inspectors. It's not their job to ensure that the parental signatures are valid. Governor Herbert's decision was based on parental permission, not student permission. I wish there were a process to validate the parental signatures.

  • Bono American Fork, UT
    March 17, 2012 7:45 a.m.

    A Voice of Reason,
    Maybe your parents should have taught you a little about honesty and integrity and you wouldn't have forged their signature. Maybe even a little about responsibility.

    Just saying

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    March 17, 2012 7:36 a.m.

    The man did the right thing. See, Utah does not have to try to be more crazy than anyone else.

  • Springvillepoet Springville, UT
    March 17, 2012 7:24 a.m.

    Quite a few comments here talk about teens knowing more than their parents or knowing enough to 'teach the class.' That's the kind of exaggeration which leads to ignorant ideas about removing sex-ed from the schools in the first place. Knowing what sex is and having access to sex being depicted in pornography is a far cry from knowing the consequences of having sex or the prevention of diseases which punish an unfortunate indiscretion for the rest of a person's life.

    Sex ed courses are not, nor have they ever been about teaching students 'how' to have sex. Parents should teach their moral/theological viewpoint on sex, but also provide their children the opportunity to receive the latest and most accurate information about the realities of sex in order to dis-spell the rumor mill which exists among teens. Teens are still developing their cognitive abilities, and the more facts they hear, the better their chance is of avoiding problems, even as they begin long lasting, committed relationships.

  • stevo123 slc, ut
    March 17, 2012 7:22 a.m.

    Dr Groovey, I agree with your premise. Gayle Ruzika and a lot of their cronies are home schoolers, they do not have a horse in the race, but when its time to talk about what is taught to your kids in the public school, they want total control.

  • EJM Herriman, UT
    March 17, 2012 6:42 a.m.

    As a registered independent Governor Herbert ....you will get my vote in Nivember and if you don't get out of the convention run as an independent.

  • Ricardo Carvalho Provo, UT
    March 17, 2012 6:40 a.m.

    Thank you Governor Herbert for standing up to this troubling piece of legislation. Doing so in the face of pressure from your own part and the Eagle Forum took great courage. I think that the more moderate part of our State's population have are waking up to the dangers of extreme rightist politics. The overall population does not seem to be represented by the more extremes legislators who have worked their way into the legislature by virtue of easy caucus processes.

  • Dennis Harwich, MA
    March 17, 2012 5:59 a.m.

    The governor has some common sense but think of all the legislators that brought that bill to fruition. Replace them all.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    March 17, 2012 5:40 a.m.

    Current law on Sex Education in school "gives a license" for inappropriate sexual activity? Get serious! Some have so little faith in the rising generation it makes my stomach turn. Knowledge is power. Proper sex education at its core makes it more certain that young people understand the dangers and consequences of premature and or unprotected sexual activity.

    Sex education does not induce moral lapse as some have stated, whether taught by parents or by other responsible institutions, but sexual ignorance often leads to activities that ruin young lives. Herbert did the right thing. I glad to know there is at least one wise Republican in this state.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 4:37 a.m.

    Fred,

    First, if forging my parents signature made me dishonest- one would certainly have to look in the social mirror before making that claim. Nearly all children have lied to their parents or a teacher about something. My argument was only that 'permission slips' don't address this issue adequately- but our focus should be on the principle of whether we should teach this in school or if the government shouldn't be involved.

    One of your claims:

    "pick and choose which social issues we should teach and which we shouldn't" equates to "imposing a specific set of morals on everyone."

    You are right. This is the same as our laws that govern us. We impose that Murder is morally wrong and illegal. We don't impose anything about being rude to everyone, even though it isn't morally right in most people's opinion.

    Everything we legislate has a moral impact in one way or another. There is no amount of unfairness or wrongness by legislating issues requiring attention and leaving others alone. Bullying is a social problem. Sex is very much an individual one.

    On a side note: I refuse to accept when people say "imposing" when it was accomplished via our democracy.

  • CB Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 1:55 a.m.

    Just another effort to take away the responsibility of the parents and put into the feeble hands of the state. Not a proud moment for our governor.

  • joeyslaptop VANCOUVER, WA
    March 17, 2012 1:22 a.m.

    Sex ed should be an opt-in program! Give parents more freedom. If parents don't feel equipped to teach their children about human development, bodies, reproductive systems, and "alternative" lifestyles on their own, then they could borrow a video from the school or library that would help them. If children are demonstrating that they're already becoming sexually active before adulthood, then they could be required by the school to attend a "sex education" class before returning (like the "drug awareness" class required for kids caught with drugs at school).

    Sex education is not something to be taught in classrooms or assemblies - all at the same age in a one-size-fits-all manner. It's something very private, intimate, and special that you teach your children in private within the walls of your own home - on your terms when they're ready for it.

  • Utah_1 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 17, 2012 1:22 a.m.

    If you read the current law first,and then compare it to the bill,

    I believe you will find that the intent of the current law remains, with added parental input and an option for the local school not to teach the class if they don't want to follow the law.

    The bill allows a local school to provide the class if they follow the law. Currently we have schools in Utah that are required to provide the class and the claim is that some schools are not following the current law. Some have even questioned if the State School Board was following the current law.

    If that is the case, either the law needs to be clarified, or we add teeth to the law, or both. HB 363 clarifies the law assuming the schools will follow the law if it is clear.

    If you look at lines 135 to 140, you will notice the opt in was not removed for parents.

    The movement to shift the content of the class from current law significantly either way didn't pass. Many that are upset at HB 363 do not like the current law and wanted to change it to have fewer restrictions.

  • joeyslaptop VANCOUVER, WA
    March 17, 2012 1:21 a.m.

    Parents should not have to "opt out"! It should not be a part of the curriculum of elementary and jr. high schools. Governor Herbert is an idiot that needs to be thrown out of office. Using language like "parents know better than the state" to really say "the state will force it down everybody's throats unless jumping through hoops to opt out" is the trickery of evil people.

  • siriuddd phx, AZ
    March 17, 2012 1:05 a.m.

    Congratulations. Too bad we don't have this kind of sanity in Arizona.

  • Carpe Diem Syracuse, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:45 a.m.

    Bravo Governor Herbert! It's important for everyone to remember that politically this was a veto that will cause him to lose support from the uber-conservative wing of the base. Hopefully, the majority of us will remember the courage this veto required. I'm glad that he showed that courage for betterment of the state!

  • DavidNL Holladay, UT
    March 17, 2012 12:15 a.m.

    This bill was not discussed for even 15 minutes on the senate floor, and its floor sponsor, Margaret Dayton, refused to field questions. Ironic. If we can't get our legislatures to talk about sex education in the context of the legislative process, why would we -- or they -- think the average parent would at home? Parents approved of the existing law, and only a small percentage opted out. Herein lies the utter waste of energy and political will that was this bill! Nothing needed fixing! And the public made this clear via a statewide petition with 40,000 signatures, sharp criticism from respected education groups, rallies and general public outcry. I am pleased -- and frankly surprised -- that Herbert had the guts to stand up to a legislature. He's tougher and smarter than I thought. Now... can we let this die and start to focus on some of the real issues we're confronting in Utah, like the import of toxic nuclear waste!?!?

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    March 16, 2012 11:16 p.m.

    @fitness freak
    if the governor was as political as you claim he would have bowed to the eagle forum knowing that they are the iron fist of the republican party. Its nice to see at least someone in the republican party has a backbone.

  • tabuno Clearfield, UT
    March 16, 2012 10:58 p.m.

    Simply amazing. This veto decision puts Governor Herbert among the Utah Governors to remember in Utah history, especially going against a majority of his own party on a political issue that is so controversial, unlike education and health care and even the environment or taxes. By stepping into the socially hot-button topic of sex education with all its moral implications, Governor Herbert put himself unnecessarily into the middle of a storm, an action usually only reserved for an authentic political leader of any state or nation. Hopefully, state legislators and the public will take this opportunity to really begin to discuss the fundamental moral issues regarding a woman's right and a living entity's right to life together instead of yelling around each other.

  • Mom of Six Northern Utah, UT
    March 16, 2012 10:51 p.m.

    Smart move for the governor. It is too bad our legislature likes to live in a perverbial bubble. I guess they feel that Utah is Pleasantville where everyone comes from perfect homes and has perfect parental involvement.
    The Governor was correct, law as written is fine, giving parents who want to put their head in the sand the option to opt out. As a parent of six, I am the one to teach my children sex ed. By the time they reach high school, it is review. Unfortunatly, not all parents are comfortable with "the talk" or teaching their own children sexual matters. We need a cusion in place for those kids to get information that could be a life or death matter. After all, Utah does have one of the highest STD rates in the country. .....BTW I am an active LDS, Conservative!

  • Qwest Perfected Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2012 10:09 p.m.

    The best thing Governor Herbert has ever done.

    If you believe these topics should be taught in the home, then you can teach them at home. It would be too irresponsible to not give information to our children in a safe environment where they can get answers to the questions they may have. Not addressing these topics does not make them go away.

    Well done Gary.

  • DrGroovey Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2012 10:04 p.m.

    I have a new found respect for Governor Herbert. Perhaps the fascist wing of the republican party is not as strong as it often appears to be. Gale Ruzika and others may bring down their wrath upon the governor because of this veto, but he will be remembered for making the right choice. Write another chapter in Profiles in Courage for the governor.

  • Justmythoughts Provo, UT
    March 16, 2012 10:04 p.m.

    Thanks Governor....correct decision.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2012 9:57 p.m.

    The whole issue has been quite superfluous in the first place. Kids themselves know enough to TEACH the sex-ed class by the time they're 13. I work with kids all day. If parents haven't had "the talk" by the time the kids are 12, its too late, believe me!

    What I find interesting is that the Guv. chooses late at night at the beginning of a weekend to "announce" his veto.

    He's obviously been testing the "political pushback" and has his fingers crossed that his party won't hold him responsible, and, hopefully forget about the issue by Monday morning.

    Why not elect a NEW Guv?

    This guy is quite lacking when it comes to anything resembling LEADERSHIP ABILITIES!

    The Guv. is VERY POLITICAL!!

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 16, 2012 9:46 p.m.

    A Voice of Reason,

    If Johnny forges his parents signature it sounds like Johnny's parents should be having a talk with him not only about sex but about honesty. I have no problem eliminated sex ed because "parents should be teaching that". But then can we please eliminate all the other things from the curriculum that parents should be teaching? The legislature added suicide and bullying training to the list of growing social issues that teachers must teach students about. Lets either take on social problems in schools or lets not take them on. Don't pick and choose which social issues we should teach and which we shouldn't, because by doing so you are imposing a specific set of morals on everyone.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2012 9:18 p.m.

    Henderson,

    I was a forgetful in High School. I rarely did my homework even. So when I forged my signature in High School saying I could participate (cause I forgot to take the slip home)... that certainly gave my parents a 'say' in the matter, right?

    It's not a matter of whether the policy supports choice 'on paper' but whether 1) parents actually have their choices preserved and 2) whether the government should be teaching our children these things in the first place.

    This issue is one that may have very serious moral implications. Whether it's getting pregnant, abortion, splitting up families, etc- there can be serious consequences involved which will directly affect families. Such things should be taught in the home. If they are not taught at home, one hardly needs to be taught by a teacher. In an online world, children know far FAR more than their parents would expect anyway. What's really being taught is the morality behind certain actions, their consequences, and so on. These answers belong to parents, not teachers.

    For some reason, children who weren't taught still manage to procreate. If schools do, it should be abstinence only. Otherwise it's the parent's responsibility anyway.

    Cheers.

  • Utahcitizen Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 16, 2012 9:11 p.m.

    Wonderful. It's nice to live in Utah and have a good Governor with common sense.

  • rightascension Provo, UT
    March 16, 2012 9:08 p.m.

    One way or another, our children and teenagers will eventually become sexually active. We hope they will become active in marriage; but still they should learn about available technological options. I have monitored the attitudes of my politically active neighbors for over 35 years: frankly I have often wondered how many of them actually know enough on the subject of sexuality to teach it to their children.

  • md Cache, UT
    March 16, 2012 8:50 p.m.

    Smart move.

  • Henderson Orem, UT
    March 16, 2012 8:48 p.m.

    Finally, some common sense!

    Don't want sex ed in public education? THEN ALLOW YOUR CHILD TO OPT OUT!

    it really is THAT simple.

  • UU32 Bountiful, UT
    March 16, 2012 8:45 p.m.

    Some sanity left in this state.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    March 16, 2012 8:39 p.m.

    Whoo hoo! Thank you Governor Herbert!