Shock News: Abstinence-Only Education Doesn't Work

[Lemur]

Here's a counter question, name one experience that leaves a negative mark that you'd like to repeat, or would recomend to another. Actually, name two.

1. Amateur boxing
2. Mountaineering

[Kadagar_AV]

1. Amateur boxing
2. Mountaineering

SKIING!!!!!!!

dont let this de-rail the thread though :(

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

1. Amateur boxing
2. Mountaineering

Overall negative?

If you go to church to get a moral base, you have to agree on everything the church has done the last couple of hundred years or so...

And if you agree on that, I rate you at the same level as... Hmmm... I cant come up with an example.

Suffice to say, I would rate your moral lower than the lowest.

Please, not even our Bishops over here can agree. If you took an interest in the ructins of the Anglican Church you'd know that.

[Kadagar_AV]

Please, not even our Bishops over here can agree. If you took an interest in the ructins of the Anglican Church you'd know that.

Oh, my bad.

I did not know a true christian faith was more of a "pick and choose".

If even bishops cant propelrly explain the doings of the church, how could you expect a modern person to do so?



Lemur, Honestly I do not mean to insult. I am very serious about this!

However, if you do believe in the christian "god", you also have to acknoweledge the history of this god, no?

Or do you believe religion is like a CD album of "best of the last 2000 years", with all your favourite tracks?


ON TOPIC: Is there anyone in here who actually advocates abstinence as something good? If so, state the arguments :)

*I know some people have, however, I would like the arguments to have some sort of scientifical and logical claim, not just "if you never have sex you will never get a STD"*

EDIT: Ok, above is both scientifical and logical. I am, however, looking for something you can adapt in the real world. Basicly, the "world" where people want to have sex.

[Beskar]

I believe they used to stone people for sex before marriage, bring that back?

[Kadagar_AV]

I believe they used to stone people for sex before marriage, bring that back?

The "church" removed that as even they realised it wasnt realistic.

*side note: why would you marry someone before you know you are sexually compatible or not???*

[Beskar]

*side note: why would you marry someone before you know you are sexually compatible or not???*

Sexually compatibility isn't in my top ten things I look for in some one. Sex is sex, it is pretty hard not to be sexually compatible with some one unless they they are on the fringe.

I believe sex is healthy and good for you, period.

I just thought of some amusing statisitics to show this, perhaps Lemur can find it as he is very good at getting sources like these (thats a compliment), but I think you will find, that the prevalence of Abstinence-Only Education increased in-line with Obesity. :shock:

To counter the trend, teach kids to have safe sex and good fun, so they get more exercise, leading to lower obesity rates.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Oh, my bad.

I did not know a true christian faith was more of a "pick and choose".

If even bishops cant propelrly explain the doings of the church, how could you expect a modern person to do so?

Erm, the Bishops are "modern" people, mine has Grandchildren. One of my good friends is the daughter of a priest (and no, she is not the steriotypical "wild child" either).

Lemur, Honestly I do not mean to insult. I am very serious about this!

However, if you do believe in the christian "god", you also have to acknoweledge the history of this god, no?

Or do you believe religion is like a CD album of "best of the last 2000 years", with all your favourite tracks?

The history of worship of God. It's not the history of God, or his doings, because it isn't right. The Bible is a collection of different books grouped together by Augustine and Jerome around 400 AD. It isn't direct from God.

To assume our ancestors were better than us is as bad as assuming we are better than them.

ON TOPIC: Is there anyone in here who actually advocates abstinence as something good? If so, state the arguments :)

Sure I do. I don't have sex because I don't need to. Sure it'd be fun, but I can wait until I find someone I like, rather than just a girl with nice breasts.

[Banquo's Ghost]

ON TOPIC: Is there anyone in here who actually advocates abstinence as something good? If so, state the arguments :)

*I know some people have, however, I would like the arguments to have some sort of scientifical and logical claim, not just "if you never have sex you will never get a STD"*

EDIT: Ok, above is both scientifical and logical. I am, however, looking for something you can adapt in the real world. Basicly, the "world" where people want to have sex.

Your last sentence betrays your bias. You are assuming a world that mirrors your own desires.

People have divergent needs and desires. Many people "want" sex, but care little for the relationship that usually underpins the act. Some of these may feel that this is an unfulfilling desire and thus choose to abstain as a way of respecting others.

Many relationships experience periods of abstention for all sorts of reasons. One's wife, for example, may have had a difficult childbirth, or prolonged post-natal depression, and having sex may not be the best option at the time. I know a couple who have had a sexless marriage for over twenty years. They love each other very devotedly, but neither has a high sex drive (you may be surprised to note that this applies to many people) and the arrangement suits them very well. There is much more to a good relationship than sex.

Abstinence is a perfectly sensible proposition within a comprehensive sex education programme. You cannot discount the advantages so easily, as your edit showed; it is safe. However, just as with any other strategy, there are downsides - not least, it is not at all easy to maintain for most people. Therefore, other options should be taught. But so should abstinence.

There are enormous societal pressures, particularly on young girls, to conform to the expectations of young men. Sex is a very good thing, but it also carries risks. The modern world sexualises women to an appalling degree, and aims much of this at very young girls. Many face huge pressures to give in to the demands of boyfriends.

HoreTore at least, is a feminist and would recognise that young women need to be able to choose in all aspects of their lives, and when to have sex is perhaps the most important of these choices given the consequences to the woman. Knowing that they can choose to abstain, and why this is also a good thing - until they are ready and in control is an important part of empowering young girls. Teaching young men that this is a valid choice, no matter how horny they feel, and that they should respect a girl who makes the choice (and respect a man who takes the same choice for his own reasons) is also important.

Respect for women is not a big part of your stories here, so I don't expect you to grasp the last paragraph, but there are other moralities than yours, trust me.

[HoreTore]

HoreTore at least, is a feminist

Indeed I am!

Contrary to popular belief, feminism isn't about having women live a particular way. Feminism is about people being able to choose whatever life they want. That people are free to live a reactionary life if they so please, as long as they choose that life for themselves, and that they did have other options for their lives.

This also applies to the sexual arena. Peoples needs and urges are different, there is no doubt about that. Some people want lots of sex, some people want less. Some people are perfectly fine with one night stands, others want to keep it within a relationship. That's all good, they should all feel free to choose what they want for themselves. Peoples boundaries are different, and we need to respect those boundaries. Having sex without really wanting it is dreadful, it will cause all kinds of problems.

However, I do not believe that we should teach abstinence. I do not believe that less sex among teenagers is a goal at all, I believe sex is healthy and good for you, period. I believe we should teach the positives. And, we should teach people about respect for other peoples boundaries. The two go hand in hand IMO, sex is only good when it's done with respect for each other. Nobody should force, and nobody should feel forced.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Indeed I am!

Contrary to popular belief, feminism isn't about having women live a particular way. Feminism is about people being able to choose whatever life they want. That people are free to live a reactionary life if they so please, as long as they choose that life for themselves, and that they did have other options for their lives.

This also applies to the sexual arena. Peoples needs and urges are different, there is no doubt about that. Some people want lots of sex, some people want less. Some people are perfectly fine with one night stands, others want to keep it within a relationship. That's all good, they should all feel free to choose what they want for themselves. Peoples boundaries are different, and we need to respect those boundaries. Having sex without really wanting it is dreadful, it will cause all kinds of problems.

However, I do not believe that we should teach abstinence. I do not believe that less sex among teenagers is a goal at all, I believe sex is healthy and good for you, period. I believe we should teach the positives. And, we should teach people about respect for other peoples boundaries. The two go hand in hand IMO, sex is only good when it's done with respect for each other. Nobody should force, and nobody should feel forced.

I think your second and third paragraphs contradict each other fundamentally. Teens should be taught about abstinence, because it is a perfectly good thing. They should not be taught it is the only option.

What they definately should be taught is caution because for a lot of people sex is a big thing at least the first time.

[Lemur]

Overall negative?

You didn't ask about "overall" negative, just things that had a negative "mark" which I would advocate. Boxing hurts. It leaves both physical and mental marks. Worth it, though.

High-altitude mountaineering hurts worse. (Every time I get above 14,000 feet, I ask myself how I could have possibly forgotten how much it sucks. Then I finish the climb and forget all about the hurt, and just remember the good stuff. Probably a lot like childbirth in that way.)

Or do you believe religion is like a CD album of "best of the last 2000 years", with all your favourite tracks?

Kadgar, it's not my job to explain why there might be options besides "greatest hits" religion and mindless orthodoxy. Topic for another thread, methinks.

[jabarto]

welp

http://washingtonindependent.com/614...ence-education

[Strike For The South]

Abstinence only=Teen pregnancy and the Herp.

Now should we be teaching girls how to put condoms on with there mouths? No, but a sensible sex-ed program is what we need. Teaching about the risks and consequences of sex but also teaching that sex is a wonderful natrual part of life.

FWIW my public schools in Texas taught pretty comprhensive sex-ed. Then again I lived in South Texas and we're just a bunch of dumb Mexicans and even dumber German catholics. It's the baptists in the North who got it right.

(I am a baptist I just hate how they stick there noes down at mah catholic peeps.)