Abstinance Only Education And Relation To Teen Pregnancy In Us

[stevil]

I know Catholics are taught that abstinance only is the only way to go, but here is a report, seemingly objective using data across the USA states.
[url="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0024658;jsessionid=7E5D4CFA54B7D9BD98BC2432D43AD046"]http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0024658;jsessionid=7E5D4CFA54B7D9BD98BC2432D43AD046[/url]

[Ice_nine]

short answer: we need a whole cultural shift for abstinence only education to be effective. The hypersexualization of the West along with the banalization of sexuality has become so deeply embedded that telling kids at school not to have sex is not gonna cut it.

Sometimes people will ask "well I know you don't want kids having sex, but if they DO don't you want them to be as safe as possible?" And my answer to that is I don't want people being objectified whether they consent to being used or not. It's unhealthy for the individual and society. I also don't think throwing a condom on = safe sex. In fact now they're calling it "safer sex" because they concede a condom can't even protect you from everything physically, much less psychologically/emotionally.

To me the question is like asking "well we know you don't want people driving drunk, but if they DO wouldn't you rather them wear a seatbelt?" I get where you're coming from stevil but I think you have such an opposing viewpoint that I don't know how much fruitful discussion can happen here.

Typically Catholics advocate self-control, which is laughed at in an instant-gratification society.

[CatherineM]

Often times where abstinence is taught, it is done so by forcing the teachers to do so, and they do a carpy job. When a teacher told my son that they had to teach it eventhough it doesn't work, I figured that it wasn't going to be real helpful.

[Jesus_lol]

Well as soon as it starts working, let us know.

[Norseman82]

It's ironic that this topic is coming up in the season that marks the only time in history where abstinence failed.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1322698971' post='2342933']
It's ironic that this topic is coming up in the season that marks the only time in history where abstinence failed.
[/quote]

Abstinence never fails. But teaching it sure seems to fail pretty hard.


which is probably why, in machine shops they put guards over things instead of just saying, dont put your hand near there.

[arfink]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1322699128' post='2342934']

Abstinence never fails. But teaching it sure seems to fail pretty hard.


which is probably why, in machine shops they put guards over things instead of just saying, dont put your hand near there.
[/quote]

Guards eh? I think I get it. This is what chaperons are for. You know, those pesky old-people-things that would follow young Victorian women to social events to prevent hanky panky. That would be a great thing to re-introduce to society.

[arfink]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1322698919' post='2342932']
Well as soon as it starts working, let us know.
[/quote]

Oh yeah, and one other thing I'd like to point out- the double standard of abstinence and the drinking age. OK, so lets get this straight- we'll teach kids to use condoms and do whatever they want as long as it's "safe," but we're going to positively forbid them to drink any alcohol until they are 21. And yet many of the same people who complain about abstinence education are most certainly not complaining about forcing kids to not drink.

So perhaps we might consider a compromise for the public square: sex is OK, but you can't actually buy any condoms until you're 18/21/45/whatever, and you'll get busted/fined if you provide them to minors. That way all parties involved will be disgruntled and unhappy. Huzzah for compromise!

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='arfink' timestamp='1322701172' post='2342943']

Oh yeah, and one other thing I'd like to point out- the double standard of abstinence and the drinking age. OK, so lets get this straight- we'll teach kids to use condoms and do whatever they want as long as it's "safe," but we're going to positively forbid them to drink any alcohol until they are 21. And yet many of the same people who complain about abstinence education are most certainly not complaining about forcing kids to not drink.

So perhaps we might consider a compromise for the public square: sex is OK, but you can't actually buy any condoms until you're 18/21/45/whatever, and you'll get busted/fined if you provide them to minors. That way all parties involved will be disgruntled and unhappy. Huzzah for compromise!
[/quote]
What if someone objects morally and philosophically to a government mandated drinking age?

[ardillacid]

I don't understand why it is the government's job to teach kids about sex, and not the parents'.

[arfink]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1322701665' post='2342945']
What if someone objects morally and philosophically to a government mandated drinking age?
[/quote]

Then they should also object to the enforcement of any kind of teaching program concerning sex-ed, one way or another. If not, then we have a very valuable armor-chink exposed.

Also, chaperons. Get thee some.

Edited December 1, 2011 by arfink

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='ardillacid' timestamp='1322702115' post='2342946']
I don't understand why it is the government's job to teach kids about sex, and not the parents'.
[/quote]


have you met a lot of parents lately? some of them i wonder if they even know how babies are made.

[dominicansoul]

it worked for all my nephews and nieces, who are outstanding devout Catholic, mature young men and women...



the thing is, they come from very devoted parents who love them tremendously...to the point of sacrificing for them...like I've said before, satan started attacking the family unit a looooooong time ago... we are seeing teh fall out of a contraceptive society... parent don't love the children they create... so, they figure the government is there to teach them everything...

like ice_nine said, millions of hearts will have to change before we see this plan work... but of course, the Church has to do a great deal of catechesis in order to save those millions, and we've been in a rut for the last 40 years in that department...

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='arfink' timestamp='1322702212' post='2342949']

Then they should also object to the enforcement of any kind of teaching program concerning sex-ed, one way or another. If not, then we have a very valuable armor-chink exposed.
[/quote]
Indeed.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1322702518' post='2342954']


have you met a lot of parents lately? some of them i wonder if they even know how babies are made.
[/quote]
So logically all kids should have to go through it because some parents are derelict in their duties.

[Basilisa Marie]

I actually don't agree with abstinence-only education. By abstinence-only, I'm talking about not saying anything about birth control or anything other than "don't have sex." I was raised in a strong Catholic/Lutheran home and went to public school. I think there are definitely ways in which to have a more comprehensive sex education course and still teach kids proper sexual morality.

My parents (mostly my mom) made sure to have "the talk" with me before we covered the subject in school, and then once we started talking about the biology of human reproduction in school, she took me to lots of good chastity and Catholic ethics talks by people like Jason Evert. When I got older and health class started talking about birth control, my youth minister always made sure that there were chastity and sexual morality speakers brought in at the same time of year. The message in high school sex ed was "These are the different kinds of birth control. This is how they work. This is how effective they are. This is why if you want to be sure you won't get pregnant or an STD, you should practice abstinence." The focus was always that abstinence is the only way you can be actually sure that you won't get a disease or pregnant, but sent that message while informing us about different methods of birth control.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I think teaching high school students facts about different kinds of birth control isn't a bad thing, and can even be an effective argument [i]for [/i]abstinence, especially when coupled with parents who are involved in their kids' lives and make sure their kids get lots of theology of the body at the same time. Sex ed in schools should be one part of how parents teach their kids about sex.

I [i]don't [/i] think that "comprehensive" sex education that glorifies masturbation, promotes birth control in lieu of abstinence and desensitizes kids to the seriousness and sanctity of sex is good at all. That kind of sex education is terrible. But I do think there are ways to teach older kids about the realities of birth control that ultimately point them toward a Catholic understanding of the beauty of theology of the body and the like.

Edited December 1, 2011 by Basilisa Marie

[dominicansoul]

in my highschool, planned parenthood swept in every year to teach contraception only....


abstinence was not in their vocabulary

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1322698919' post='2342932']
Well as soon as it starts working, let us know.
[/quote]

It hasn't achieved its goal no. And maybe comprehensive sex ed has achieved ITS goal, however as much as I hate HPV and klamidya (mean girls nod) I don't think that eliminating those diseases should be done at the expense of the soul. That's the real secular/religious clash I think. While there are good arguments to abstain from sex emotionally and psychologically, and even many physical reasons as well, these arguments don't really make sense without a spiritual dimension.

Relegating the responsibility to state run schools is not the answer either way.

[BigJon16]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1322702518' post='2342954']


have you met a lot of parents lately? some of them i wonder if they even know how babies are made.
[/quote]


What does that have to with the validity of the teaching of abstinence?

[BigJon16]

[quote name='arfink' timestamp='1322700461' post='2342940']

Guards eh? I think I get it. This is what chaperons are for. You know, those pesky old-people-things that would follow young Victorian women to social events to prevent hanky panky. That would be a great thing to re-introduce to society.
[/quote]


Or just a Dad with a shotgun. Who knows how to use it.