Abstinence Only In Florida Not Working

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1914248' date='Jul 8 2009, 02:44 PM']NFP and condoms are not based on the same premise, however NFP and contraceptive pills are based on the same scientific premise. During the time a woman would normally be fertile, the pill releases hormones to prevent that portion of her cycle from working; NFP allows her cycle to proceed normally and the couple abstains during that time.[/quote]
Slight correction, but the pill releases hormones throughout the woman's cycle (except for the last week of the pack, which causes a withdrawal bleed), and not just during the fertile phase. With the pill, the woman either receives a constant, uniform dose of hormones, or differing amounts according to the week. Either way, it's not how our bodies are meant to work.

[bonkers]

[quote name='picchick' post='1914224' date='Jul 8 2009, 06:31 AM']*sigh*
True but there is no "openess to life" when your attitude is: I am wearing this condom to prevent pregnancy. There is no "openess to life" when there is a piece of slippery rubber between you and your partner.

In NFP there is none of that therefore it is truly open to life.[/quote]

*sigh*
It's the same attitude with NFP. You're attitude is: I am timing sex so she doesn't get preagnant and we don't have to live with burden of having unwanted children we can't financially support. It's not really open to life at all is it?

[quote]Sounds like many teenagers I know.

If you are older than a kid, then how can you not see the mess that pre-marital sex has caused many teenagers short and long term?[/quote]

Pre-marital is fine so long you are aware of the risks and take the right precautions to protect yourself and your partner.

[Sirklawd]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914216' date='Jul 8 2009, 03:17 AM']I don't think couples have to be in "true love" to be allowed to have sex. They may not be emotionally mature enough to comprehend fully what love is, but sex is not solely for only those who have found their soul mate. Anyone can have sex with anyone, so long it is consentual, legal and doesn't harm anyone. Whether your choice is to have sex or express your love in other ways that is a personal choice.[/quote]

If you divorce love from sex what remains is nothing more than a mutual good-feeling handshake, and I would say this hurts people more than you can ever imagine. Whether anyone would like to admit it or not, sex is two people giving their bodies to one another. You are saying, here is my body, I give it to you.

What type of person do you have to be to be able to do that without requiring the love of the other? Either your body (and soul) means absolutely everything to someone, or its just a means to a quick, cheap, temporary thrill. Instead of seeing the other person as a distinct, unique individual, you reduce them to a body. Sexual attraction through physical beauty becomes the only worthy trait in a person.

And isnt this exactly what women are taught from the day they are born? Want to be respected? Be sexually attractive. Want to be popular? Be sexual attractive. Want to get by in the world? Be sexually attractive. WANT LOVE? Be sexually attractive and give yourself to guys without any strings attached.

Meanwhile guys are taught the exact opposite. Women are there for you. EXPECT women to be attractive. EXPECT women to be available to you. Dont commit, go from woman to woman. And whatever you do, the baby isnt yours, its her choice so make sure she chooses an abortion. You dont want the responsibility!

Sex with love is about treating people with the utmost respect and dignity and trust. That's why the longest time necessary is taken before sex to make sure that true love is there. Furthermore, sex has consequences, and when that true love is there neither would want to leave the other to take on those consequences alone. This is why both talk about these things and decide to commit to each other to be responsible for those consequences. And since those consequences are life-long, the commitment they make is life long too. Sex with love is always the better option. It retains people's dignity and freedom, and it builds solid families which are the life blood of society.

This mainstream promiscuity mentality does not help anyone. It devours people, brainwashes everyone into thinking women are masturbatory tools, emasculates men, fuels abortion, spreads STDs, and completely obliterates families.

[bonkers]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1914248' date='Jul 8 2009, 09:44 AM']Then if you are in a dating relationship, you should have no qualms with practicing NFP, right?[/quote]

It would depend on the availability and cost of such a thing. I don't see this method promoted much outside the Catholic Church, but condoms and other forms of contraception would seem more convenient, reliable and affordable.

[quote]NFP and condoms are not based on the same premise, however NFP and contraceptive pills are based on the same scientific premise. During the time a woman would normally be fertile, the pill releases hormones to prevent that portion of her cycle from working; NFP allows her cycle to proceed normally and the couple abstains during that time.

The difference is that NFP requires couples to think about the possibility of having children, to grow in discipline during periods of abstinence (pardon the pun), and on the spiritual side, there is also an orientation towards prayer and more conscious communion with God as a couple. None of these benefits are available to a couple using condoms or the pill because they require no change in behavior. NFP requires a change in behavior.[/quote]

Change in behaviour? So what? Growing in communion with god and discipline seem like faux benefits to me. Most of us who've been outside of relationships have gone through periods without sex and survived. It's not a big deal. I would rather be having sex than not, but I'm not so impulsive so as to have sex with anyone. Any couple can go a couple of days of the month without having sex, the question is why should they? I think this is where NFP claims the moral high ground, the supposed superiority of those couples who resist the tempations for intimacy as opposed to those "slaves to the flesh".

[bonkers]

[quote name='Sirklawd' post='1914268' date='Jul 8 2009, 09:27 AM']What type of person do you have to be to be able to do that without requiring the love of the other? Either your body (and soul) means absolutely everything to someone, or its just a means to a quick, cheap, temporary thrill. Instead of seeing the other person as a distinct, unique individual, you reduce them to a body. Sexual attraction through physical beauty becomes the only worthy trait in a person.[/quote]

I think this is an extremely bleak and pessimistic outlook. Most *couples* don't perceive their partners as pure instruments of pleasure and sex as a means of "cheap, quick, temporal thrill". This is a rather extreme and spiteful perspective. Who are you to judge others peoples sex lives anyway? Not all guys having premarital sex see their girlfriends as a cheap sl*t and for those who do it's not like the their going to give much thought to abstinence.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914280' date='Jul 8 2009, 11:46 AM']Change in behaviour? So what? Growing in communion with god and discipline seem like faux benefits to me. Most of us who've been outside of relationships have gone through periods without sex and survived. It's not a big deal. I would rather be having sex than not, but I'm not so impulsive so as to have sex with anyone. Any couple can go a couple of days of the month without having sex, the question is why should they? I think this is where NFP claims the moral high ground, the supposed superiority of those couples who resist the tempations for intimacy as opposed to those "slaves to the flesh".[/quote]

You're right, it isn't that big a deal. The benefit comes from making the conscious choice for a few days to seek other forms of intimacy, to express your love in other ways; the result is a deeper relationship with even more meaningful and powerful intimacy. It's basically another form of fasting, only instead of food, it's sex. Healthy fasting is not just becoming a vegeterian during Lent, but intentionally incorporates times of prayer and giving in union with whatever is sacrificed. True sacrifice is joyfully and freely given without restraint or repression.

Also, there are many ways in which people can be slaves of the flesh, such as Puritanism. A couple could practice NFP, but if they are merely repressing their desires during times of abstience rather than finding another healthy outlet, they are also slaves to the flesh. I see what you're getting at: that most couples are able to express genuine love and sacrifice for each other. What we (and the Church) are saying is we might as well use a method of family planning that encourages love and sacrifice within marriage instead of a method that encourages selfishness and requires little, if any, sacrifice. If the intention is family planning, why not use the one method that not only achieves the biological end of avoiding conception for a time, but also promotes love within the family?

See, the sacrificial side of marriage is necessary to grow in love, because we know who we love by how much we sacrifice for them.

Edited July 8, 2009 by LouisvilleFan

[Sirklawd]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914304' date='Jul 8 2009, 10:25 AM']I think this is an extremely bleak and pessimistic outlook. Most *couples* don't perceive their partners as pure instruments of pleasure and sex as a means of "cheap, quick, temporal thrill". This is a rather extreme and spiteful perspective. Who are you to judge others peoples sex lives anyway? Not all guys having premarital sex see their girlfriends as a cheap sl*t and for those who do it's not like the their going to give much thought to abstinence.[/quote]

If you arn't giving yourself wholly to the other person, you are giving yourself only partially. Why would you do that? Furthermore, would you do that if you knew the other person is giving 100%. What does that say about your feelings for the other person. Deep down, a person knows when love is being returned 100%.

How do you explain to the person you are having sex with that you only love them for more than just [i]right now[/i]? That the beauty you see in them is deeper than the happiness you are getting right now [i]right now[/i]? Commitment says these things. Standing up in front of God and 200 of your closest friends and declaring your love and commitment for the other person says these things. Heck the real reason we invite all our closest friends to the wedding is so we can have witnesses to the vows. So that when times get tough we can have a community of people around us to help us keep the vows we made.

And just to be clear, i dont me you -YOU, im speaking generally.

Instead of encouraging true love and faithfulness, our world makes it easier and easier to treat each other as disposable. The fallout of this is tremendous. 40 million babies are just one part of it.

[Norseman82]

The only reason that "abstinence only" is not "working" is that people are not abstaining! (duh!)

People need to be reminded that there is only one case that we know of where abstinence failed, and we all get a day off in December as a result.

Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, heartless as it may sound, maybe we should just let the chips fall where they will and let people suffer the consequences of their actions and let their ruined lives be held up as a public example of what happens when they don't listen and do what they are supposed to do. Fear sometimes is a motivator for obstinate people or those whose maturity or development level require it and if it needs to be used, then so be it. Maybe the younger people will see what happens when you don't listen and will say to themselves, "wow, I had better not engage in that behavior, otherwise my life will be ruined as well".

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1914338' date='Jul 8 2009, 05:13 PM']The only reason that "abstinence only" is not "working" is that people are not abstaining! (duh!)

People need to be reminded that there is only one case that we know of where abstinence failed, and we all get a day off in December as a result.

Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, heartless as it may sound, maybe we should just let the chips fall where they will and let people suffer the consequences of their actions and let their ruined lives be held up as a public example of what happens when they don't listen and do what they are supposed to do. Fear sometimes is a motivator for obstinate people or those whose maturity or development level require it and if it needs to be used, then so be it. Maybe the younger people will see what happens when you don't listen and will say to themselves, "wow, I had better not engage in that behavior, otherwise my life will be ruined as well".[/quote]
I definitely think better education is needed instead of just letting the "chips fall where they will". If the programmes being run are anything like what I had (in KY), then the students are being woefully misinformed or underinformed of their own bodies. And while fear can go a long way, I'd say that most of us, when teenagers, had the idea that it could never happen to us, that we were somehow immune to any lasting dangers or consequences. Oh, and I also think the focus shouldn't just be "don't have sex", but "treat them with respect", as otherwise I think it's very easy for the people to see how far they can go without having sex, and then one day cross the line after building up to it. I don't know how the abstinence only programmes are run, but it would be good, IMHO, if they included more about the science & biology and also about respect and not just "don't do it".

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1914361' date='Jul 8 2009, 12:46 PM']I definitely think better education is needed instead of just letting the "chips fall where they will". If the programmes being run are anything like what I had (in KY), then the students are being woefully misinformed or underinformed of their own bodies. And while fear can go a long way, I'd say that most of us, when teenagers, had the idea that it could never happen to us, that we were somehow immune to any lasting dangers or consequences. Oh, and I also think the focus shouldn't just be "don't have sex", but "treat them with respect", as otherwise I think it's very easy for the people to see how far they can go without having sex, and then one day cross the line after building up to it. I don't know how the abstinence only programmes are run, but it would be good, IMHO, if they included more about the science & biology and also about respect and not just "don't do it".[/quote]

Education only works if people listen to it. Otherwise, they are just going to have to face the consequences. That may be the only thing that shakes up this society.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Norseman82

[CatherineM]

"so long as it doesn't harm anyone"

Bonkers-you should sit down with a 40 year old woman who has had so many sexual partners over the years that she can't even remember the number, and ask her if she feels harmed in any way. Or perhaps ask her if she wishes she'd taken a different path.

[picchick]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914267' date='Jul 8 2009, 10:25 AM']*sigh*
It's the same attitude with NFP. You're attitude is: I am timing sex so she doesn't get preagnant and we don't have to live with burden of having unwanted children we can't financially support. It's not really open to life at all is it?[/quote]
It is we are timing sex so the woman doesn't get pregnant. It is a joint decision. And you would be incorrect by saying "burden of having unwanted children". It is not the way we look at it. Maybe that is why you are having trouble seeing NFP as different than a condom. Having a child is not a negative in NFP. That is why it is NFP. It does not separate the two purposes of sex: love and procreation. It recognizes the two and lets by gones be by gones. If we have a kid than TA DA we have a kid. Woot. Condoms do not allow that.


[quote]Pre-marital is fine so long you are aware of the risks and take the right precautions to protect yourself and your partner.[/quote]
Again, you are not taking into consideration the developmental stage of teenagers. We are not talking about teaching 20 year old college students here. We are talking about middle school and high school students. The risks are too abstract for most teenagers.

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914280' date='Jul 8 2009, 10:46 AM']Change in behaviour? So what? Growing in communion with god and discipline seem like faux benefits to me.[/quote]
I see it as more as growing closer to my partner/spouse/whatever than God. I thnk you need to see this from a non relgious point of view. Again, you do not have to believe in God to practice NFP. It is communication between partners and growing in a deeper love that really can't be achieved with sex.

[quote]Most of us who've been outside of relationships have gone through periods without sex and survived. It's not a big deal. I would rather be having sex than not, but I'm not so impulsive so as to have sex with anyone. Any couple can go a couple of days of the month without having sex, the question is why should they? I think this is where NFP claims the moral high ground, the supposed superiority of those couples who resist the tempations for intimacy as opposed to those "slaves to the flesh".[/quote]
I don't look down on others nor do I think I am superior to anyone else. I just know that abstinence is the way to go while you are not married.

Alright try this analogy. You say you are older than I kid so I take it you can drive. Have you ever driven at night when there are no lights anywhere? And you have your brights on. Well a car is coming at you their brights on. You can't see the road and you can't see anything around you and it pretty much burns your retinas. The same goes with premarital sex except your retinas don't burn. I don't know that for a fact considering I never had sex but I am sure that people on here can tell me it does not. Premarital sex does blinds you emotionally. Whether you like it or not, sex is an emotional act as well as a physical act. A part of you goes with the person you had sex with. So, it blinds you to what true love really is and if this person is the right person for you to be with.

[bonkers]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1914433' date='Jul 8 2009, 02:22 PM']"so long as it doesn't harm anyone"

Bonkers-you should sit down with a 40 year old woman who has had so many sexual partners over the years that she can't even remember the number, and ask her if she feels harmed in any way. Or perhaps ask her if she wishes she'd taken a different path.[/quote]

People have to take responsibility for their actions. I don't think we should ban premarital sex on the off chance some people might feel regret for their actions later on in life. Some people also regret not being more sexually active in their youth and rue all the opportunities missed. There is a stigma against promiscuous women so if she chooses to be promiscuous that is potentially harmful to her self esteem, but then again there are some women who never regret so it's all relative.

[havok579257]

I never agree with Bonkers, but he is right in that contraceptives and NFP are the same basic principle. NFP is a contraceptive and is used to avoid having children, same as artificial contraceptives. The best relation is the withdrawl method. Its the same thing. Its we are going to try and avoid getting pregnant but if we get pregnant, so be it. Both are exactly the same. For anyone who claims a difference, they are just looking through rose colored glasses. The only difference is one is artificial and one is not, although thr withdrawl method is not artificial, so that's exactly the same.

NFP is a contraceptive and any contraceptive is against God's will as far as I know. If we trust in God, we will be fine. God never throws more at you than you can handle and the same goes for kids. If God knows you can only deal with 4 kids, your only getting 4 kids. Using NFP is going against trusting God the same way artifical contraceptives are. You want to control how many kids you have. That is something that should only be decided by God. Using contraceptives go against his will, plain and simple.

[havok579257]

[quote name='bonkers' post='1914851' date='Jul 8 2009, 08:43 PM']People have to take responsibility for their actions. I don't think we should ban premarital sex on the off chance some people might feel regret for their actions later on in life. Some people also regret not being more sexually active in their youth and rue all the opportunities missed. There is a stigma against promiscuous women so if she chooses to be promiscuous that is potentially harmful to her self esteem, but then again there are some women who never regret so it's all relative.[/quote]


i agree people should take responsibility for their actions and if they get pregnant, not use the easy way out with an abortion, they should be forced to deal with the child. As long as we have abortions being legal, people can have sex without responsibility and that;s wrong. if you are going to have sex, same as when you buy a gun, you should take full responsibility for everything that happens after that moment, not be able to use a cop-out.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1914411' date='Jul 8 2009, 07:26 PM']Education only works if people listen to it. Otherwise, they are just going to have to face the consequences. That may be the only thing that shakes up this society.[/quote]
Obviously the students can choose to disregard the education, but they still deserve to have the right info in order to make an informed decision.

[quote name='havok579257' post='1915038' date='Jul 9 2009, 04:34 AM']NFP is a contraceptive and any contraceptive is against God's will as far as I know. If we trust in God, we will be fine. God never throws more at you than you can handle and the same goes for kids. If God knows you can only deal with 4 kids, your only getting 4 kids. Using NFP is going against trusting God the same way artifical contraceptives are. You want to control how many kids you have. That is something that should only be decided by God. Using contraceptives go against his will, plain and simple.[/quote]
God also gave us rational brains. One could apply the providentialism of which you speak to finances or medicine as well, declaring that God will make it work if He wants and we therefore shouldn't do anything.

NFP, used correctly, merely identifies a woman's fertile times through various signs. A couple certainly can use that knowledge incorrectly, just as someone could abuse financial or medical knowledge as well. Ideally, though, the couple should be praying about whether they should use the knowledge of their fertility to postpone conceiving for the time being (for a just reason), or use that knowledge to try to conceive, or to ignore it completely and let whatever happens, happen. I personally am glad I've been charting since my son was born just so I would know when my fertility returns, so that I didn't/don't become frustrated since I can see what my cycle is doing.

[Sirklawd]

Saying NFP is the same as contraception is stupid. Women arnt firtile all the time, we didnt make women like that, God did. Never the less, when it comes to relationships (and God for those who care) intention is everything. You are making a terrible mistake if your intent is to [i]use[/i] your partner, even if your partner lets you - whether the woman is fertile or not.

Also, dont forget that NFP is also used for people who WANT to have kids.

And no one is saying we should outlaw pre-marital sex. We're saying its 1000 times healthier, for individuals and society if marital sex was encouraged over premartial sex and "everything goes" promiscuity where no one is getting hurt.... at all, i swear *hands over the ears* lalalalala.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='havok579257' post='1915038' date='Jul 9 2009, 12:34 AM']I never agree with Bonkers, but he is right in that contraceptives and NFP are the same basic principle. NFP is a contraceptive and is used to avoid having children, same as artificial contraceptives. The best relation is the withdrawl method. Its the same thing. Its we are going to try and avoid getting pregnant but if we get pregnant, so be it. Both are exactly the same. For anyone who claims a difference, they are just looking through rose colored glasses. The only difference is one is artificial and one is not, although thr withdrawl method is not artificial, so that's exactly the same.

NFP is a contraceptive and any contraceptive is against God's will as far as I know. If we trust in God, we will be fine. God never throws more at you than you can handle and the same goes for kids. If God knows you can only deal with 4 kids, your only getting 4 kids. Using NFP is going against trusting God the same way artifical contraceptives are. You want to control how many kids you have. That is something that should only be decided by God. Using contraceptives go against his will, plain and simple.[/quote]

This is a fine thesis, but you have one important and faulty assumption: NFP has many purposes beyond simply preventing a pregnancy. NFP also helps couples plan [i]for[/i] a pregnancy. NFP helps couples grow more in love with each other. NFP helps wives, along with their husbands, understand their bodies and can even help diagnose issues with fertility. NFP works [i]with[/i] the body's natural functionality, rather than working [i]against[/i] it. Most noticeably, NFP requires a change in behavior that artificial contraceptives do not.

Yes, NFP can be used with the contraceptive mentality, but the method does not lend itself to being used as a contraceptive because the couple must abstain during fertile periods.

Artificials contraceptives are a tool used for one purpose: preventing pregnancy. A couple cannot use the pill or condoms to know when they are most likely to become pregnant when they do want a child. They do not help women understand their bodies better. They do nothing to promote the exchange of love and communication within marriage. They do nothing to diagnose medical problems that might prevent pregnancy (if anything, the pill only worsens fertility).

The burden of proof is on you... how is NFP just like any form of artificial contraception, especially keeping in mind that the purpose for using NFP is not even the same as the purpose for using contraceptives?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1915645' date='Jul 9 2009, 11:25 AM']This is a fine thesis, but you have one important and faulty assumption: NFP has many purposes beyond simply preventing a pregnancy. NFP also helps couples plan [i]for[/i] a pregnancy. NFP helps couples grow more in love with each other. NFP helps wives, along with their husbands, understand their bodies and can even help diagnose issues with fertility. NFP works [i]with[/i] the body's natural functionality, rather than working [i]against[/i] it. Most noticeably, NFP requires a change in behavior that artificial contraceptives do not.

Yes, NFP can be used with the contraceptive mentality, but the method does not lend itself to being used as a contraceptive because the couple must abstain during fertile periods.

Artificials contraceptives are a tool used for one purpose: preventing pregnancy. A couple cannot use the pill or condoms to know when they are most likely to become pregnant when they do want a child. They do not help women understand their bodies better. They do nothing to promote the exchange of love and communication within marriage. They do nothing to diagnose medical problems that might prevent pregnancy (if anything, the pill only worsens fertility).

The burden of proof is on you... how is NFP just like any form of artificial contraception, especially keeping in mind that the purpose for using NFP is not even the same as the purpose for using contraceptives?[/quote]

It's not just a way of more early diagnoses of fertility issues, but many female health issues which are often important to catch early. When we really listen to our bodies, we become healtier and wholer.

[picchick]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1915720' date='Jul 9 2009, 01:22 PM']It's not just a way of more early diagnoses of fertility issues, but many female health issues which are often important to catch early. When we really listen to our bodies, we become healtier and wholer.[/quote]



Do you know how many times my body said, "Get off your butt and go excerise!"? Sometimes ignoring is fun.