US lawmakers are investigating whether to cut government funding for health education programmes that promote sexual abstinence until marriage.
The move follows a report earlier this year from America's leading health agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which revealed one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease.
Opponents of abstinence education say the approach ignores the fact that teenagers are sexually active and fails to give them accurate medical information or advice on safer sex.
"We get sex-ed classes in school and that should be where teens get the right information - but that isn't happening," says 15-year-old Mildred, from Arizona, who volunteers as a peer educator with the pro-choice organisation Planned Parenthood.
"They don't touch on subjects like sexuality, STDs (sexually transmitted diseases), birth control - it's not allowed because of abstinence-only education. It leaves you on a cliff-hanger - and a lot of teenagers become sexually active in their middle school years."
"Teens are curious and they want to experiment and if they know what's out there and they have the correct information, they're going to know how to protect themselves and prevent an unwanted pregnancy and an STD," adds Maryland high school student Melissa.
"Putting up a wall and saying 'don't have sex' makes them more curious and wanting to know what it is. But if you tell them the straight facts they're going to know how to protect themselves. It's about taking care of yourself."
Teen pregnancy
Planned Parenthood estimates that two thirds of teenagers will have experienced sexual intercourse by the time they leave school.
And with some 750,000 teenage pregnancies a year, America has one of the highest teen birth rates in the developed world.
"This national programme which has wasted $1.5bn (£750m) of tax money is a failure and our teens are paying the price," says Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood.
If we can learn to control the most basic of drives - the sex drive - for good, then we can control drugs, gangs, alcohol and abusive anger
Roger Norman
'Wonderful Days' abstinence programme
"We've been wasting money on programmes that don't work and we're seeing the consequences every single day."
State governments receive federal money they must match to fund abstinence programmes.
At least 17 states have opted out of the system and others have suspended funding while Congress investigates whether such programmes work.
Critics say there is no evidence that they delay sexual activity and teenagers who have taken a vow of virginity are less likely to use protection if they break their promise.
Religious right
Roger Norman, a Texas lawyer, describes himself as being part of the religious right.
He runs an organization called Wonderful Days which does not receive government funding but teaches abstinence as part of the health curriculum in some local schools.
"I am convinced that abstinence is the only way for kids," he says. "You begin by teaching the consequences of bad behaviour and the benefits of proper behaviour and you do that in a way that a child can grasp.
"Self control leads to a happy, joyful life. If we can learn to control the most basic of drives - the sex drive - for good, then we can control drugs, gangs, alcohol and abusive anger."
His lessons promote marriage and virginity - for both partners - as an ideal.
A lot of the young people I know who go around have experiences with lots of different people are just preparing themselves for not knowing how to be committed to somebody
Ashley, 18
They emphasise disease as a consequence of sex before marriage.
Some of his former students say that sexual abstinence is sensible and beneficial.
Eighteen-year-old Ashley says she believes teenagers who experiment with sex are laying the foundations for troubled relationships later in life.
"At some point everybody ends up getting married. Everybody wants commitment at some point and nobody likes to be cheated on.
"But a lot of the young people I know who go around have experiences with lots of different people are just preparing themselves for not knowing how to be committed to somebody.
"Once you get into the practice of doing whatever you want, it's hard to change when you're older."
Sixteen-year-old Josh says he relies on friends to help him stay abstinent.
"I have a lot of close friends and we pretty much agree on the same thing so we keep each other in line most of the time. Yes, it's difficult, but my friends are there and I'm there for them, and it gets easier if you have friends who agree with you."
"I'm pretty confident I can keep my abstinence vows," says 15-year-old Kirsten. "It was pretty hard reaching that decision, because living in this world today, it's almost expected of you to 'do it.' But with my religious upbringing and convictions and commonsense, it's really not that hard."
"Secondary virgins"
Teenagers who do have sex before marriage are given another chance by becoming "secondary virgins".
"Of course, if you view virginity as number one, and you've slept with someone, of course it's going to be different and you can never go back - but that doesn't mean there's no tomorrow," explains Ashley.
"Every day is a new decision and abstinence is not one you make once. You're going to have to make this decision over and over again. So if you fail once, you get back up and you try again."
The row over abstinence education is part of a much wider debate in the US about "family values".
Many conservatives are concerned that "American values" are being eroded.
But their opponents believe that the conservatives have an overly influential political voice, particularly within the current Bush administration.
For liberals, the campaign to roll back the abstinence programmes is part of a broader struggle against what they regard as reactionary elements in the US government.
Pro-abstinence campaigners say it is unfair to blame abstinence programmes for America's teenage health crisis.
Valerie Huber, chief executive of the National Abstinence Education Association, says only one in four schools teaches abstinence - the vast majority use comprehensive sex education.
That, she says is the real reason for the rise in STDs and teenage pregnancies.
"We would argue that abstinence education is not an ideological approach. We know that in the area of teen sexual activity, abstinence is the optimal approach.
"Compare this with healthful eating. We know that obesity is rising in America. That doesn't mean though that we minimise the optimal health message."
"We still stress good eating habits, we still stress exercise, knowing that, unfortunately, many Americans are not going to listen."
What a pile of crap...secondary Virgins??? You are born a virgin, have sex...NO MORE A VIRGIN........end of.....Jee whizzz these guys make it up as they go along lol...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7368219.stm
Has US abstinence policy failed?
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
We were just discussing this same article in my other forum. I would not want my kids to associate sex with the words "consequences" and "improper behavior" and the phrase "when you fail, you get back up and try again." I think that's a load of hogwash. I see this as adults failing to accept a natural reality and bemoaning the kids' "precious innocence." Gack. Everyone has to grow up and sex is part of the deal eventually. Do we need 17 year olds getting married so they can pork? I don't think so. Expecting someone to wait for a marriage that may never even happen is asking too much. Teach all of sex ed's options or teach none but stop lying to the kids and laying guilt on them.
-
suzy_creamcheese
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:15 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
it was destined to fail.
I dont even see the point of it
I dont even see the point of it
Has US abstinence policy failed?
People on the religious right seem to be perpetually frustrated by the foolish design decisions of God. Why on Earth did he schedule the sex drive to kick in around adolescence if people aren't allowed to have sex? What kind of moron designs a system like that? 
What I mean, is that this policy really pays a bad compliment to the thing that's supposed to be worshiped. You don't have a national policy against pouring salt in the eyes, because it just doesn't feel good.
It's bad science, and bad theology.
What I mean, is that this policy really pays a bad compliment to the thing that's supposed to be worshiped. You don't have a national policy against pouring salt in the eyes, because it just doesn't feel good.
It's bad science, and bad theology.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Barak Obama wrote:
look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
...
look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
...
Has US abstinence policy failed?
The last three women I dated said they were abstaining sex. Guess I am too 'til I find one who ain't.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Accountable;849416 wrote: Quote:
Originally Posted by Barak Obama
look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
...
Oh wow, that's disgusting. "Punished" with a baby, what kind of bs is that? "Make a mistake?" Goes to sex being wrong again. I will not buy into that. But punished with a baby....I have said before no child should ever be anyone's "consequence." Shame on you, Obama.
Originally Posted by Barak Obama
look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.
...
Oh wow, that's disgusting. "Punished" with a baby, what kind of bs is that? "Make a mistake?" Goes to sex being wrong again. I will not buy into that. But punished with a baby....I have said before no child should ever be anyone's "consequence." Shame on you, Obama.
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Jester;849813 wrote: Dang interesting article first off...
At least they presented both sides...
My take on this is of course bound up in my religious views but it really has a lot to do with common sense.
Total abstinence of sex until married of course will elliminate all possibilties of STD's, and the 'possible consequnces' of intercourse, such as preganancy. Aside from a moral perspective, thats just common sense. Teaching that principle to kids is going to reduce the spread of teen pregnancy and STD's and the more wide spread the phenomonon is the greater the success in reducing the two.
Sex itself is not 'wrong', sex is wonderful, and natural and normal. But sex outside of a single committed marriage relationship is wrong, and a sin. (theres my moral religious side of this argument).
My opinion is that you cant teach both of these issues at the same time, either teach abstinence exclusively as a country standard, (like math or english or intercolligent soccer) and eliniminate STD's and Teen Pregnancies) or teach protection, birth control, immunization, pshycological counseling, put programs in place for teen pregnancys so they can finish high school and pay for abortion if those fail to deal with the aftermath of the potential consequnces of promiscuous teenagers.
Or we can keep teaching both and abort (murder) over 1 million potential US citizens per year (750,000) of which are potentially teen pregnancies.
We are so insistant on the rights of a teen to do what they feel is right, or what is 'natural' that we introduce them to severe consequences when most of them arent mature enough to handle it. Heck, I was married and 24 years old and a Sgt in the US Army when I became a father and I wasn't mature enough for it!
In some ways Jester nobody is mature enough to have a baby. Until we do, we are selfish self centered individuals. A child is a way too mature us. Having a child is what taught me to be more giving, loving and obviously less self centered. I had my first when I was 21 and had been married for 15 months. Had to throw that in to show that there were no shotguns at my wedding.:wah:
At least they presented both sides...
My take on this is of course bound up in my religious views but it really has a lot to do with common sense.
Total abstinence of sex until married of course will elliminate all possibilties of STD's, and the 'possible consequnces' of intercourse, such as preganancy. Aside from a moral perspective, thats just common sense. Teaching that principle to kids is going to reduce the spread of teen pregnancy and STD's and the more wide spread the phenomonon is the greater the success in reducing the two.
Sex itself is not 'wrong', sex is wonderful, and natural and normal. But sex outside of a single committed marriage relationship is wrong, and a sin. (theres my moral religious side of this argument).
My opinion is that you cant teach both of these issues at the same time, either teach abstinence exclusively as a country standard, (like math or english or intercolligent soccer) and eliniminate STD's and Teen Pregnancies) or teach protection, birth control, immunization, pshycological counseling, put programs in place for teen pregnancys so they can finish high school and pay for abortion if those fail to deal with the aftermath of the potential consequnces of promiscuous teenagers.
Or we can keep teaching both and abort (murder) over 1 million potential US citizens per year (750,000) of which are potentially teen pregnancies.
We are so insistant on the rights of a teen to do what they feel is right, or what is 'natural' that we introduce them to severe consequences when most of them arent mature enough to handle it. Heck, I was married and 24 years old and a Sgt in the US Army when I became a father and I wasn't mature enough for it!
In some ways Jester nobody is mature enough to have a baby. Until we do, we are selfish self centered individuals. A child is a way too mature us. Having a child is what taught me to be more giving, loving and obviously less self centered. I had my first when I was 21 and had been married for 15 months. Had to throw that in to show that there were no shotguns at my wedding.:wah:
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Jester;849856 wrote: You know it! I hear ya.
It changed me, my first was a son, and I thought there was no way I could intensify my idea of protection over someone esle other than my wife, then he was born, then I had a daughter born and my idea of protection for her jumped a hundred fold.
Children are amazing.
Amen brother!!!
It changed me, my first was a son, and I thought there was no way I could intensify my idea of protection over someone esle other than my wife, then he was born, then I had a daughter born and my idea of protection for her jumped a hundred fold.
Children are amazing.
Amen brother!!!
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Teaching strictly abstinence does not and has not worked. All you have to do is go outside and look around at the babies having babies. This is a different world than it use to be. Come on now....get real....SEX CAN KILL YOU NOW.
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
Don't get me wrong, she was raised with fear of God and fear of Mom....but I wanted her information to be accurate. I taught her to think for herself and to make decisions you must have the right information. It's a fact of life....when you fall in love, and it doesn't matter how young you are, you are going to want more.....more time together....more intimacy....more commitment....etc.
Get a grip....my grandmother's generation married in their early teens and had babies as soon as they got pregnant. It is not a new phenonmenon. Waiting to have children until you are established is the new way. Yes, it works better but it is still the new way of doing things.
I taught my girls because i did not want them to end up an unwed mother as a result of rape....violent or statutory. You see, now no one believes that a girl can be seduced by an adult (10+ years older) anymore. The courts treat teenage girls as if they are as experienced and responsible for making a choice.....so parents darn well better teach their kids the facts of life.....and hopefully teach the boys to keep it in their pants too. Guys are just as responsible for a pregnancy as the girl is.
I think they should teach the kids ALL about sex and give them each a box of condoms too. No, it isn't giving them permission to have sex. It is trusting your child to do the right thing but if they make a poor choice they are informed and prepared.....which is better than not being so.
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
Don't get me wrong, she was raised with fear of God and fear of Mom....but I wanted her information to be accurate. I taught her to think for herself and to make decisions you must have the right information. It's a fact of life....when you fall in love, and it doesn't matter how young you are, you are going to want more.....more time together....more intimacy....more commitment....etc.
Get a grip....my grandmother's generation married in their early teens and had babies as soon as they got pregnant. It is not a new phenonmenon. Waiting to have children until you are established is the new way. Yes, it works better but it is still the new way of doing things.
I taught my girls because i did not want them to end up an unwed mother as a result of rape....violent or statutory. You see, now no one believes that a girl can be seduced by an adult (10+ years older) anymore. The courts treat teenage girls as if they are as experienced and responsible for making a choice.....so parents darn well better teach their kids the facts of life.....and hopefully teach the boys to keep it in their pants too. Guys are just as responsible for a pregnancy as the girl is.
I think they should teach the kids ALL about sex and give them each a box of condoms too. No, it isn't giving them permission to have sex. It is trusting your child to do the right thing but if they make a poor choice they are informed and prepared.....which is better than not being so.
Has US abstinence policy failed?
sofemme;855997 wrote: Teaching strictly abstinence does not and has not worked. All you have to do is go outside and look around at the babies having babies. This is a different world than it use to be. Come on now....get real....SEX CAN KILL YOU NOW.
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
Don't get me wrong, she was raised with fear of God and fear of Mom....but I wanted her information to be accurate. I taught her to think for herself and to make decisions you must have the right information. It's a fact of life....when you fall in love, and it doesn't matter how young you are, you are going to want more.....more time together....more intimacy....more commitment....etc.
Get a grip....my grandmother's generation married in their early teens and had babies as soon as they got pregnant. It is not a new phenonmenon. Waiting to have children until you are established is the new way. Yes, it works better but it is still the new way of doing things.
I taught my girls because i did not want them to end up an unwed mother as a result of rape....violent or statutory. You see, now no one believes that a girl can be seduced by an adult (10+ years older) anymore. The courts treat teenage girls as if they are as experienced and responsible for making a choice.....so parents darn well better teach their kids the facts of life.....and hopefully teach the boys to keep it in their pants too. Guys are just as responsible for a pregnancy as the girl is.
I think they should teach the kids ALL about sex and give them each a box of condoms too. No, it isn't giving them permission to have sex. It is trusting your child to do the right thing but if they make a poor choice they are informed and prepared.....which is better than not being so.
well said
It used to be about teaching your kids the facts of life and now I feel that isnt the hurdle its getting the message across about aids, hpv, std's etc...
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
Don't get me wrong, she was raised with fear of God and fear of Mom....but I wanted her information to be accurate. I taught her to think for herself and to make decisions you must have the right information. It's a fact of life....when you fall in love, and it doesn't matter how young you are, you are going to want more.....more time together....more intimacy....more commitment....etc.
Get a grip....my grandmother's generation married in their early teens and had babies as soon as they got pregnant. It is not a new phenonmenon. Waiting to have children until you are established is the new way. Yes, it works better but it is still the new way of doing things.
I taught my girls because i did not want them to end up an unwed mother as a result of rape....violent or statutory. You see, now no one believes that a girl can be seduced by an adult (10+ years older) anymore. The courts treat teenage girls as if they are as experienced and responsible for making a choice.....so parents darn well better teach their kids the facts of life.....and hopefully teach the boys to keep it in their pants too. Guys are just as responsible for a pregnancy as the girl is.
I think they should teach the kids ALL about sex and give them each a box of condoms too. No, it isn't giving them permission to have sex. It is trusting your child to do the right thing but if they make a poor choice they are informed and prepared.....which is better than not being so.
well said
It used to be about teaching your kids the facts of life and now I feel that isnt the hurdle its getting the message across about aids, hpv, std's etc...
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
sofemme;855997 wrote: [...]
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
[...]
The parent should teach these things. That is the parents' job. I don't think the schools should get into this beyond biology. Anything beyond that starts encroaching on moral issues, which must be the jurisdiction of the family.
Teaching young people to abstain is well and good. I taught my daughters that they should wait and not let anyone in their pants......but I also talked about STDs, AIDS, pregnancy, the pill, condoms, and all the methods that don't work. I had to. It was the most responsible thing to do. They needed and deserved to be fully informed and aware of what's what.
[...]
The parent should teach these things. That is the parents' job. I don't think the schools should get into this beyond biology. Anything beyond that starts encroaching on moral issues, which must be the jurisdiction of the family.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Accountable;856090 wrote: The parent should teach these things. That is the parents' job. I don't think the schools should get into this beyond biology. Anything beyond that starts encroaching on moral issues, which must be the jurisdiction of the family.
Fair enough Acc, but what if the parents don't teach their kids? That's not rhetorical, I'm really asking. It happens even in these times. I truly think sex and pregnancy and std's can be talked about without dragging morality into it. All that needs be done is stick to the facts. I agree with you that it is a parent's job but if they fail to do it, somebody's going to pay for it.
I just want people to be informed.
Fair enough Acc, but what if the parents don't teach their kids? That's not rhetorical, I'm really asking. It happens even in these times. I truly think sex and pregnancy and std's can be talked about without dragging morality into it. All that needs be done is stick to the facts. I agree with you that it is a parent's job but if they fail to do it, somebody's going to pay for it.
I just want people to be informed.
Has US abstinence policy failed?
You right ACC, I always wondered how id fair on explaining the sex and puberty thing with my daughters, my husband is very straight talking whilst I can take a half hour blubbering on about nothing. He gives the correct amount of info in a straight way so much so that they got it first time and the question wasnt raised again as they simply understood. I was horrified that he told her about scrotems and seeds etc but he was right. She is 10 now and the other month she came home with a letter to say they were having a puberty lesson/video next week. I decided to ask her if she wanted to chat about what they might say beforehand or wait till she had the school talk then we chatted over it. She chose to share the moment with her school friends. When she got home, she was so mature over it, she enjoyed telling me about may happen to her body and why, I elaborated on some points but mainly she got it. Im unsure at what age we chat about the ins and outs and the problems she will face as she gets older but Im 100% certain that she knows we can talk about anything to each other.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Chezzie, I think most parents think their kid feels they can talk about anything with them, but in reality who wants to talk about, say, oral sex, with their mom and dad? Not I. Thank God for books. My mom did her bit and I would have died before asking my father anything. Fortunately I was an avid reader and there was no censorship in my house. Parents teach their kids the "ins and out" as was said, but they don't explain what kids really want to know. I remember my own mom telling somebody when I was a teenager that she and I could talk about anything. Um, no. :-3 Later we could as two adults, but as a kid, no.
Has US abstinence policy failed?
RedGlitter;856107 wrote: Chezzie, I think most parents think their kid feels they can talk about anything with them, but in reality who wants to talk about, say, oral sex, with their mom and dad? Not I. Thank God for books. My mom did her bit and I would have died before asking my father anything. Fortunately I was an avid reader and there was no censorship in my house. Parents teach their kids the "ins and out" as was said, but they don't explain what kids really want to know. I remember my own mom telling somebody when I was a teenager that she and I could talk about anything. Um, no. :-3 Later we could as two adults, but as a kid, no.
I agree RG, I was the same with my mum and still now the talk of sex when not in jest has me cringing. I just hope she can at least come to me and say she doesnt undestand etc...I will go to the library to see if theirs a suitable book. Peers are great for telling the deed but not the harsh facts lol....I dont relish the years ahead of trying to get all this across, hey i'll probably end up getting re-educated myself lol
I agree RG, I was the same with my mum and still now the talk of sex when not in jest has me cringing. I just hope she can at least come to me and say she doesnt undestand etc...I will go to the library to see if theirs a suitable book. Peers are great for telling the deed but not the harsh facts lol....I dont relish the years ahead of trying to get all this across, hey i'll probably end up getting re-educated myself lol
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
RedGlitter;856096 wrote: Fair enough Acc, but what if the parents don't teach their kids? That's not rhetorical, I'm really asking. It happens even in these times. I truly think sex and pregnancy and std's can be talked about without dragging morality into it. All that needs be done is stick to the facts. I agree with you that it is a parent's job but if they fail to do it, somebody's going to pay for it.
I just want people to be informed.
Sex, pregnance, and std's are all biological functions. Abstinence and proper use of a condom are not.
I just want people to be informed.
Sex, pregnance, and std's are all biological functions. Abstinence and proper use of a condom are not.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Chezzie;856113 wrote: I agree RG, I was the same with my mum and still now the talk of sex when not in jest has me cringing. I just hope she can at least come to me and say she doesnt undestand etc...I will go to the library to see if theirs a suitable book. Peers are great for telling the deed but not the harsh facts lol....I dont relish the years ahead of trying to get all this across, hey i'll probably end up getting re-educated myself lol
That's what pets are for, Chezzie. They help teach lots of life lessons such as birth, life & death, sex, responsibility, ... lots of stuff. Any conversation about the pets can include the difference between animals and people.
That's what pets are for, Chezzie. They help teach lots of life lessons such as birth, life & death, sex, responsibility, ... lots of stuff. Any conversation about the pets can include the difference between animals and people.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Accountable;856126 wrote: Sex, pregnance, and std's are all biological functions. Abstinence and proper use of a condom are not.
Acc, I see this a bit differently. I don't see abstinence as a morals only thing, neither the condoms.
I see it as mechanics: "If you want to make sure you don't get pregnant then don't have sex." Easy peasy, no moral judgement involved. "If you're going to have sex, and you don't want to get pregnant, use a condom. Here's how you put one on."
Acc, I see this a bit differently. I don't see abstinence as a morals only thing, neither the condoms.
I see it as mechanics: "If you want to make sure you don't get pregnant then don't have sex." Easy peasy, no moral judgement involved. "If you're going to have sex, and you don't want to get pregnant, use a condom. Here's how you put one on."
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
RedGlitter;856136 wrote: Acc, I see this a bit differently. I don't see abstinence as a morals only thing, neither the condoms.
I see it as mechanics: "If you want to make sure you don't get pregnant then don't have sex." Easy peasy, no moral judgement involved. "If you're going to have sex, and you don't want to get pregnant, use a condom. Here's how you put one on."
But see, it doesn't matter what your morals are except to you. We need to understand that it is a moral issue for some. I don't get why 'abstinence' is even an issue, since teenagers are best known for not doing stuff (cleaning their room, doing their homework, etc etc etc), but for schools to take on the responsibility of teaching birth control gives parents an excuse to avoid it. Don't blame me, blame the school system. She wouldn't be pregnant if they'd taught her right.
I see it as mechanics: "If you want to make sure you don't get pregnant then don't have sex." Easy peasy, no moral judgement involved. "If you're going to have sex, and you don't want to get pregnant, use a condom. Here's how you put one on."
But see, it doesn't matter what your morals are except to you. We need to understand that it is a moral issue for some. I don't get why 'abstinence' is even an issue, since teenagers are best known for not doing stuff (cleaning their room, doing their homework, etc etc etc), but for schools to take on the responsibility of teaching birth control gives parents an excuse to avoid it. Don't blame me, blame the school system. She wouldn't be pregnant if they'd taught her right.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
Accountable;856141 wrote: But see, it doesn't matter what your morals are except to you. We need to understand that it is a moral issue for some. I don't get why 'abstinence' is even an issue, since teenagers are best known for not doing stuff (cleaning their room, doing their homework, etc etc etc), but for schools to take on the responsibility of teaching birth control gives parents an excuse to avoid it. Don't blame me, blame the school system. She wouldn't be pregnant if they'd taught her right.
I understand your point, but I ask is it better then to not inform the kid whose parents failed him or her, and just to have an "accident" happen? What should we do?
I understand your point, but I ask is it better then to not inform the kid whose parents failed him or her, and just to have an "accident" happen? What should we do?
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Has US abstinence policy failed?
RedGlitter;856161 wrote: I understand your point, but I ask is it better then to not inform the kid whose parents failed him or her, and just to have an "accident" happen? What should we do?
Nothing! We should do Nothing!
Nothing! We should do Nothing!