Teenage pregnancies almost halved thanks to sex ed

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,106.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
While true, how long will they practice abstinence?

According to the research, they'll wait longer to have sex if they've had comprehensive sex ed. So if people really want to promote abstinence, the best way to do it is to support sex ed. But as usual, some people are their own worst enemy because reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hetta
Upvote 0

PreachersWife2004

by his wounds we are healed
Supporter
May 15, 2007
38,590
4,179
50
Land O' 10,000 Lakes
✟84,030.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
While true, how long will they practice abstinence? That is the problem I have with the claim that abstinence is 100% effective. It is while it is practiced, but how long will they be able to keep their hormones under control? That 100% only applies to those that are practicing it, but for the teen population as a whole, they can't keep practicing it for long. In fact, the minute they stop practicing it they get dropped from the statistic to keep that 100%, when in reality it is more like 40% can keep with practicing abstinence. The rest need to have something to fall back on to lower the chance of pregnancy.

Actually, a fairly good number of teens DO keep their hormones in check, so what does that say about those that don't?

According to the research, they'll wait longer to have sex if they've had comprehensive sex ed. So if people really want to promote abstinence, the best way to do it is to support sex ed. But as usual, some people are their own worst enemy because reasons.

Who is advocating not supporting sex ed? I believe in it, but I believe the emphasis is on the wrong thing. I believe that abstinence should be HIGHLY emphasized, and then the mental and emotional issues that arise from teen sex should be addressed LONG before bringing up "okay, since you're gonna do it anyway..."

Someone brought up the Christian standpoint here, and I'll just say this: The idea that we should hand out condoms and birth control to teens because they're gonna do it anyway is like us telling a bank robber "you really shouldn't do that, but in case you still do, here's some tips to help you do it safely". Premarital sex (let alone teen sex) is wrong for Christians. We don't (or shouldn't be, anyway) tell our kids how to go about and sin in a less dangerous way.
 
Upvote 0

Oafman

Try telling that to these bog brained murphys
Dec 19, 2012
7,106
4,063
Malice
✟28,559.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Labour
  • Like
Reactions: Hetta
Upvote 0

Paulos23

Never tell me the odds!
Mar 23, 2005
8,168
4,434
Washington State
✟309,170.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Actually, a fairly good number of teens DO keep their hormones in check, so what does that say about those that don't?

Lots of things, it doesn't mean they are bad. People have and use sex for lots of reasons, and I have know many women who had to use sex to survive a variety of bad social and economic situations when they where younger. I have know women that had sex to hold on to their man because that is what they where taught they should do by their parents.

I could go on, but there is no one way to look at sex and I will not judge teenagers that have had it.

Who is advocating not supporting sex ed? I believe in it, but I believe the emphasis is on the wrong thing. I believe that abstinence should be HIGHLY emphasized, and then the mental and emotional issues that arise from teen sex should be addressed LONG before bringing up "okay, since you're gonna do it anyway..."

The numbers given during my sex ed class it was strongly supported. It is just that everything else you need to know a lot to make it work successfully. So you can't just focus on abstinence and just causally mention the rest. You have to show how to use them, the risks, and the odds, etc.

And yes, the emotional issues need to be brought up, but most schools will not so they are not stepping on the students culture and values they should be getting from their parents.

Someone brought up the Christian standpoint here, and I'll just say this: The idea that we should hand out condoms and birth control to teens because they're gonna do it anyway is like us telling a bank robber "you really shouldn't do that, but in case you still do, here's some tips to help you do it safely". Premarital sex (let alone teen sex) is wrong for Christians. We don't (or shouldn't be, anyway) tell our kids how to go about and sin in a less dangerous way.

No one is saying we should be just handing them out, we should be handing them out with education and guidance.

Teens will have sex, the question is do you want to help or ignore the ones that do have sex.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Julie.S
Upvote 0

Tiny Bible

All Lives Matter. Pray BLM Learn That.
Jan 3, 2016
1,182
559
whyaskthat
✟19,244.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
I said no such thing.

ETA Bolded so you can't miss that you did say it.
Post #23:
OK. Then to answer your question no I do not think an acorn is an oak tree just like I do not think a fetus is a person. I fail to see what that has to do with the only options being animal, vegetable, or mineral?

Is English a second language for you?
^_^ I guess bi-lingual people are an issue for you? Oh, that's an attempt at insult. No, doesn't work that way. You said it. Trying to insult those , and failing, that point it out just makes it worse for you.
 
Upvote 0

Tiny Bible

All Lives Matter. Pray BLM Learn That.
Jan 3, 2016
1,182
559
whyaskthat
✟19,244.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
How is this related to teenage pregnancy btw??
Very simply. When someone makes this statement as to their personal belief about babies:Post 23 Belk:
OK. Then to answer your question no I do not think an acorn is an oak tree just like I do not think a fetus is a person. I fail to see what that has to do with the only options being animal, vegetable, or mineral?
Which I highlight in red so as to let it stand out, then the question is, what does that individual think they were when they were in their own mothers womb? When their belief now as a full grown person is that babies are not persons.

Perhaps it is a matter of being unaware of the definition of person. A condition that is easily corrected if the one who states a baby is not a person cares to take the time to look up the definition of person.
 
Upvote 0

Tiny Bible

All Lives Matter. Pray BLM Learn That.
Jan 3, 2016
1,182
559
whyaskthat
✟19,244.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Abstinence. Absolutely positively 100% effective!*



* some conditions and exclusions may apply.
Not in the real world they don't. See, this is how it works.

Women and Girls do not get pregnant if they do not allow a man or boy to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] inside them.
Sex Ed 101. Guarantees 100% effective. No sex no pregnancy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Julie.S
Upvote 0

Paulos23

Never tell me the odds!
Mar 23, 2005
8,168
4,434
Washington State
✟309,170.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not in the real world they don't. See, this is how it works.

Women and Girls do not get pregnant if they do not allow a man or boy to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] inside them.
Sex Ed 101. Guarantees 100% effective. No sex no pregnancy.

Up to the point they don't, then what? If they don't know about contraceptives then they don't have a way to reduce the chance of pregnancy.

Wanting them not to have sex is all well and good, but the real world shows that lots of them do want to have sex, for all sorts of reasons. It is unrealistic to ignore those that do have sex because they don't match your ideal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hetta
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,106.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Actually, a fairly good number of teens DO keep their hormones in check, so what does that say about those that don't?

From the research that I've seen, it shows that it is likely they've had comprehensive sex ed. What do you think it says?

Who is advocating not supporting sex ed? I believe in it, but I believe the emphasis is on the wrong thing. I believe that abstinence should be HIGHLY emphasized, and then the mental and emotional issues that arise from teen sex should be addressed LONG before bringing up "okay, since you're gonna do it anyway..."

That's nice you feel that way. Do you have any evidence that your approach will be superior to current comprehensive sex ed programs?

Someone brought up the Christian standpoint here, and I'll just say this: The idea that we should hand out condoms and birth control to teens because they're gonna do it anyway is like us telling a bank robber "you really shouldn't do that, but in case you still do, here's some tips to help you do it safely".Premarital sex (let alone teen sex) is wrong for Christians. We don't (or shouldn't be, anyway) tell our kids how to go about and sin in a less dangerous way.
Again, it is nice you feel this way. But please don't let your feelings ruin provably effective sex education for everyone else's kids.
 
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,106.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Up to the point they don't, then what? If they don't know about contraceptives then they don't have a way to reduce the chance of pregnancy.

Wanting them not to have sex is all well and good, but the real world shows that lots of them do want to have sex, for all sorts of reasons. It is unrealistic to ignore those that do have sex because they don't match your ideal.

It is also counterproductive to ignore the research which shows that comprehensive sex ed is correlated with teens waiting to have sex. But it looks like that's not an ideologically acceptable fact, so here we are.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,996
Seattle
✟895,313.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
In the context of the conversation and based on the OP rape has no bearing at all. Just accept it and move on. Doing otherwise is being childish to be honest.
I don't wanna! You can't make me! You're not the boss of me! :p
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,996
Seattle
✟895,313.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
That did not happen until the Boomer generation. It's not an inherent homo sapiens deficiency to take three decades to mature.

No. I would say it is a by product of our modern culture. In biblical times 14 -16 was considered adult.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,996
Seattle
✟895,313.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
^_^ I guess bi-lingual people are an issue for you? Oh, that's an attempt at insult. No, doesn't work that way. You said it. Trying to insult those , and failing, that point it out just makes it worse for you.

I didn't say it, hence my questioning your understanding. It is not an insult to be ignorant of a language, especially English since it is so difficult. However, if English is your first language then it would explain a lot of the difficulty you seem to have interacting with others on this board.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No. I would say it is a by product of our modern culture. In biblical times 14 -16 was considered adult.

Well, my grandmother was married at 15, then proceeded to teach each of her children (and later, me) to read before we started school.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,996
Seattle
✟895,313.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Well, my grandmother was married at 15, then proceeded to teach each of her children (and later, me) to read before we started school.

But that was not really the norm at that timeframe. Or if it was only in certain areas.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Both, when you think about it but I was referring to the marrying at 15.

That was in 1920, and I suspect it wasn't that uncommon. My grandfather was 23 at the time and still living on his father's ranch (it was kind of a Ponderosa situation).
 
Upvote 0

Hetta

I'll find my way home
Jun 21, 2012
16,925
4,875
the here and now
✟64,923.00
Country
France
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
The problem with abstinence preaching from a Christian viewpoint is that Christ never intended Christians to be abstinent for 10 to 20 years after sexual maturity. Abstinence--especially for that long--was not an early Christian practice or intention. Rather, Paul said pretty clearly, "It's better to marry than to burn [with passion]."

Western Christians are caught in a false dilemma doctrine. The reason Western Christians preach one to two decades of abstinence is for one reason: Money. "Get your degree first, get a good job first, get financially stable first." Of course, none of that is actually biblical. Scripture says: "It's better to marry than to burn [with passion]." Scripture also says, "The love of money is the root of all evil."

So the dilemma is false because scripture is actually pretty clear which way Christians ought to be leaning--toward early marriage.

But of course, early marriages without a firm economic foundation usually lead to marital problems....
....and that's always been the case. What Western Christians really don't want to do is allow their children to marry early and then--like early Christian parents did--continue to provide support as an extended family.

And of course, we've taught our children the Western cult of individuality so that nobody wants to work to the mutual benefit of everyone in an extended family.

Demanding ten to twenty years of abstinence is unbiblical, but it's the workaround that Western Christians have brought upon themselves.
I'm doubting that "ten to twenty years of abstinence." Assuming most teens become aware of their sexuality around age 13, why would they wait until 33 to marry?

When people suggest that teen pregnancies or sex before marriage is a new concept, I know they can have not read any history, particularly social history. A couple of hundred years ago, it was quite the norm for young women to be pregnant at the altar. In many cultures, the families of the man wanted to be sure that the bride to be was able to conceive, because the concern was on producing male heirs to continue the family, and the business. This was absolutely commonplace in farming communities.

To suggest that a love of money is at the root of preferring to have a degree/career first is extremism. How do young people support themselves without an income? The reference to "extended family" makes me assume that you think that young adults could marry prior to becoming financially independent and live with parents. Where does that end? And how do those parents afford to pay for an extra adult - who might soon produce another mouth to feed - and not take away from the remaining children of that family? That would be utterly unfair. That's not about "loving" money, it's about simple economics.

As a parent of adults myself, one of them married, I have to say that there are limits to the financial support that parents can give their adult kids. IMO, they should not expect to marry until they can afford to marry. If they choose not to wait to have sex, that is their choice - as adults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oafman
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm doubting that "ten to twenty years of abstinence." Assuming most teens become aware of their sexuality around age 13, why would they wait until 33 to marry?

You missed the "ten," right? That would be 23. And I know too many 30-year-olds still waiting to get married, particularly black women.

When people suggest that teen pregnancies or sex before marriage is a new concept, I know they can have not read any history, particularly social history. A couple of hundred years ago, it was quite the norm for young women to be pregnant at the altar. In many cultures, the families of the man wanted to be sure that the bride to be was able to conceive, because the concern was on producing male heirs to continue the family, and the business. This was absolutely commonplace in farming communities.

I would suggest that in those "many cultures" the marriage was signed and sealed with the only dealbreaker being the bride's inability to conceive. That's not different from cultures in which the bride had to be guaranteed a virgin: "Married unless the goods are damaged." That is not at all the same thing as casual sex before marriage.

To suggest that a love of money is at the root of preferring to have a degree/career first is extremism. How do young people support themselves without an income? The reference to "extended family" makes me assume that you think that young adults could marry prior to becoming financially independent and live with parents. Where does that end?

With the aged parents living with their children and being cared for by their grandchildren. Social Security isn't going to last forever even in the US.

And how do those parents afford to pay for an extra adult - who might soon produce another mouth to feed - and not take away from the remaining children of that family? That would be utterly unfair. That's not about "loving" money, it's about simple economics.

The extra adult(s) do what they're able to do--just as all in the Body of Christ should be doing.

This isn't anything new in the world. The current state of the West is what's new--and by no means tested by time. It's only been like this for a generation and a half, and is already showing signs of collapse.

But you missed my point. My point was that modern Western Christian parents who expect young people not to have sex are placing a demand of extended abstinence on them that the early Church did not.
 
Upvote 0