Abstinence

[MJ421]

Firstly if people abstain they won’t need abortions! If we have proper education about drugs and people don’t take drugs them then we don’t need needles for drugs, clean or otherwise and we don’t have people’s lives wrecked by drugs. The most effective way to stop AIDS through sex is ABC with the emphasis on ‘A’. Also $5 apparently can be spent on needles and condoms.

We're dealing with people who think that raping a virgin will cure you of AIDS. In this country, we have millions of abortions per year, and millions of needle useing druggies. How do expect them to get it right, when in 30 years, we've only gotten worse, and we are far more better off than they are.

Now maybe in Lala land, every African has a PhD, and drives a Beemer and know how not to contract AIDS, but on planet earth, we're still dealing with people who think that raping a virgin will cure AIDS.

People call these things "band-aids". Well, what do you use when you cut yourself? These problems take generations to solve. Do you just let that cut stay open and fester until your body heals it, or do you put on a band-aid to make it heal faster a better?

I completely agree that providing clean needles to drug users doesn't sound right, but do you want to stop AIDS, or pretend that by denying druggies clean needles, they'll suddenly stop using dope?

 

[christalee4]

If I recall correctly, I believe you mentioned the married being the larger portion that are infected with HIV/AIDS.

In regards to a discussion of transmission rates amongst Africans.

Now, it appears that the focus mentioned above is on educating children and stating that the parents are the key moral and religious base. What you were stating earlier sounds as if there is no base. What I read in you post doesn't seem to be making sense from assertion to remedy.

I believe that parents should be the key moral and religious base, yes. That's common sense. In real life, some parents don't discuss these issues with their teens. I also feel that public schools should also be allowed to teach sexual education to teens, in terms of promoting abstinence, responsibility and condom use. And if parents object to that education, then they can opt their children out, as is the case for most public schools.

Huh? Thank God for medicine to counteract the effects of gluttony, slothfulness, polluting our body and the earth of which we are stewards?
Am I reading that right?
Wouldn't it be just as correct to do as we are supposed to do in those areas?

Yes, I agree that we are supposed to do right in the first place by not being slothful or polluting the earth. But does that mean that we are sinning by trying to educate people about these weaknesses and also working to make breakthroughs to prevent them at the same time? Isn't that God's work in action, through us? Look at the wonderful capacity for intelligence that God has granted us to show mercy, righteousness, forgiveness and compassion by helping to eradicate these medical and environmental problems.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Thanks for all the posts so far.



To Electric Skeptic, Firstly if people abstain they won’t need abortions!

Certainly true. However, they won't abstain. They certainly won't just because somebody tells them they should. This has been proven again and again - abstinence only education does not work as a method of preventing the transmission of STDs.

If we have proper education about drugs and people don’t take drugs them then we don’t need needles for drugs, clean or otherwise and we don’t have people’s lives wrecked by drugs.

Again, certainly true. However, again, people don't stop taking drugs just because someone tells them to do so. If they did, there wouldn't be a drug problem anywhere. So the choice is clear - either keep saying "Just say no!" and ignore the fact that a significant number don't, or deal with that significant number.

The most effective way to stop AIDS through sex is ABC with the emphasis on ‘A’.

No, the MOST effective way to stop AIDS would be to eradicate every human being on the planet. Of course, that's not a realistic solution - and neither is relying on people to be abstinent. As much as you wish they were, people won't stop having sex. So the most effective way - given the realities - is to teach them how to minimise the danger, by condom use, etc.

Also $5 apparently can be spent on needles and condoms.

No, none of the money can be spent on needles.

So what? If they reduce AIDS who cares, the danger is having people who want sex and drugs and blaming people who wont give them more than $5 for needles and condoms to feed their habits.

That's the point. They won't reduce AIDS. Telling people "Don't do this and then you won't catch AIDS" doesn't work. Again, if it did, there wouldn't be an AIDS problem anywhere in the western world.

Furthermore in societies where condoms and clean needles are widely available, not all use them!

Why?

A variety of reasons. One of them is that in SOME societies where condoms are available, sex education is such that people aren't taught about their correct use, but are taught lies about them.

Do you want AIDS reduced or do you only want it reduced without affecting people sex and drug habits, I suggest the latter is less effective and more expensive.

I want it reduced. I am not unrealistic enough to believe that it will be reduced by preaching to people. THAT method is the less effective and more expensive one, and THAT method is what the US is trying to do in Africa.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

In regards to a discussion of transmission rates amongst Africans.

I believe that parents should be the key moral and religious base, yes. That's common sense. In real life, some parents don't discuss these issues with their teens. I also feel that public schools should also be allowed to teach sexual education to teens, in terms of promoting abstinence, responsibility and condom use. And if parents object to that education, then they can opt their children out, as is the case for most public schools.

It's statements like the bold one that are priceless.
Does the mindest of the group that wishes to push condoms in the faces of children REALLY think that there is no other choice? That an opposing view doesn't have representation and can be steamrolled?
If so, it will be a quick wakeup.

Yes, I agree that we are supposed to do right in the first place by not being slothful or polluting the earth. But does that mean that we are sinning by trying to educate people about these weaknesses and also working to make breakthroughs to prevent them at the same time? Isn't that God's work in action, through us? Look at the wonderful capacity for intelligence that God has granted us to show mercy, righteousness, forgiveness and compassion by helping to eradicate these medical and environmental problems.

I suppose that is what some people imagine... God is about love and condoms.

 

[christalee4]

It's statements like the bold one that are priceless.
Does the mindest of the group that wishes to push condoms in the faces of children REALLY think that there is no other choice? That an opposing view doesn't have representation and can be steamrolled?
If so, it will be a quick wakeup.

I suppose that is what some people imagine... God is about love and condoms.

Please understand that there is a pretty sufficient home schooling system in this country that takes care of parents who object to public sexual education, and in general public education period.

In reality, children are not being force fed condom education in public schools. Even in our worst fantasies, that young adults are being taught the rankest of sexual education, is actually not happening in public schools. Young adults in this country continue to be vastly ignorant about pretty much everything in terms of sexual experience, sexual disease transmission, and other matters other than condoms.

Perhaps condoms will be an anomaly in the future. In the meantime, let God be defined as a loving benign force within ourselves who may allow condoms, but who also teaches Jesus' principles of love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and looking towards the future.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Please understand that there is a pretty sufficient home schooling system in this country that takes care of parents who object to public sexual education, and in general public education period.

I believe the option for those that prefer condom practice for kids can use that option instead of using shared government for teaching immorality. They can also elect to pay extra, do a Google or take their children to the local latex specialist i.e. Planned Parenthood, etc.

In reality, children are not being force fed condom education in public schools. Even in our worst fantasies, that young adults are being taught the rankest of sexual education, is actually not happening in public schools. Young adults in this country continue to be vastly ignorant about pretty much everything in terms of sexual experience, sexual disease transmission, and other matters other than condoms.

Perhaps condoms will be an anomaly in the future. In the meantime, let God be defined as a loving benign force within ourselves who may allow condoms, but who also teaches Jesus' principles of love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and looking towards the future.

The last part is all well and good, but I find it no surprise that there was a major component missing from your list.

Luke 24:47
and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Children should be educated, on a compulsory basis, on all aspects of sexual safety. While that certainly includes the fact that abstinence is the best method, it also includes instruction on birth control (including condoms) and the fact that abortion is legal and what services exist in that regard. Parents should NOT be able to opt their children out of this instruction. One of the government's jobs is to protect children from parents who would - however unwittingly - harm them, and in this day when so many teens are sexually active and either falling pregnant or contracting STDs, to not fully educate them in safe sex practices is, certainly, harmful to them.

 

[ebia]

I believe the option for those that prefer condom practice for kids can use that option instead of using shared government for teaching immorality.

Do you really not get the difference between "go out and have lots of sex" and "if you must have sex, this is how to minimize the risk"?.

 

[Cerberus~]

I believe the option for those that prefer condom practice for kids can use that option instead of using shared government for teaching immorality. They can also elect to pay extra, do a Google or take their children to the local latex specialist i.e. Planned Parenthood, etc.

You're completely missing the point. This isn't about morality, this is about health and kids getting life saving infomation. There are no moral lessons taught in sex-ed, only medical ones, unlike abstinence only education. You can't tell me they don't have a religious, moral agenda.

 

[christalee4]

I believe the option for those that prefer condom practice for kids can use that option instead of using shared government for teaching immorality. They can also elect to pay extra, do a Google or take their children to the local latex specialist i.e. Planned Parenthood, etc.

CC: in reality, most parents don't even adhere to talking about sex with their kids, let along talking about condoms. I think that you imagine in your fevered vision that liberal Christian parents send their children to a secularist cult in which all worship the God of Health, Science and Latex. Taking reality further, it has been shown that a combination of education, morality AND provision of condoms for those who may fail in their efforts to be chaste, is the best way to prevent mortal sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS. If you personally believe that AIDS/HIV is God's way of punishing sin, and that teenagers and adults need to take personal responsibility for that, then God help your own children and loved ones in that regard. I guess you can only pray that it does not happen.

Cameron - the other issue that struck me in terms of educating a child about potential AIDS transmission is this: what happens when children are born with HIV and AIDS, and who live healthy lives without detection? It does happen. http://www.thebody.com/bp/thriving.html

You mentioned that remaining a virgin before marriage and pledging is enough. But I believe it is not, especially if one does not completely know the history of the birth parents and the intended's background.

Some parents have given birth to children who have HIV and it's important that anyone who does not know the blood work history of their partner be tested for HIV and AIDS. HIV can last for years and be hidden. Like I said before, educate your children and encourage testing before marriage and potential child birth. It's well worth the expense.

God bless.
The last part is all well and good, but I find it no surprise that there was a major component missing from your list.

Luke 24:47
and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.[/QUOTE]

 

[ChristianCenturion]

You're completely missing the point.

There is a difference between seeing a view and adopting it. Apparently, it is the "other view" that is being missed.

This isn't about morality, this is about health and kids getting life saving infomation. There are no moral lessons taught in sex-ed, only medical ones, unlike abstinence only education. You can't tell me they don't have a religious, moral agenda.

The position I'm in isn't that hard to understand. Not many are going to object over telling kids that they should abstain, but many will object when kids are encouraged to use condoms. It's a contradicting message on a sensitive subject and if people can't agree on what should be taught generally; guess what, the contested stuff shouldn't get pushed. You can't tell me that an extra-curricular form can't be taught somewhere else for those that wish to encourage statutory rape conditions. I can teach my children the proper way that will include information on condoms and their use. Some lame excuse about "other parents" doesn't mean that shared government just represents one side or that I must allow an ignorant and a morality absent method to be propagated on my shared dime and my children's shared time.

 

[ebia]

The position I'm in isn't that hard to understand. Not many are going to object over telling kids that they should abstain, but many will object when kids are encouraged to use condoms.

If that's all they are going to be taught, yes I would object. IMO, it's worse than useless.

It's a contradicting message on a sensitive subject and if people can't agree on what should be taught generally; guess what, the contested stuff shouldn't get pushed.

Most of the curriculum is contested by somebody. Should we not bother teaching the kids anything at all.

You can't tell me that an extra-curricular form can't be taught somewhere else for those that wish to encourage statutory rape conditions.

This is a straw man, since no-one is suggesting encouraging kids to have sex.

I can teach my children the proper way that will include information on condoms and their use. Some lame excuse about "other parents" doesn't mean that shared government just represents one side or that I must allow an ignorant and a morality absent method to be propagated on my shared dime and my children's shared time.

This makes no sense whatsoever. If I'm prepared to teach my kids maths, does that mean that the school shouldn't bother to teach maths to anyone?

 

[Cerberus~]

The position I'm in isn't that hard to understand. Not many are going to object over telling kids that they should abstain, but many will object when kids are encouraged to use condoms.

Students are only encouraged to use condoms if they choose not to abstain, and wish to prevent pregancy or disease. Otherwise, feel free not to use condoms.

It's a contradicting message on a sensitive subject and if people can't agree on what should be taught generally; guess what, the contested stuff shouldn't get pushed.

You think AO isn't contested?

You can't tell me that an extra-curricular form can't be taught somewhere else for those that wish to encourage statutory rape conditions.

Again, this is life saving information that is appropriate and vital for all people past puberty to know. This is information they will use all their lives, unless they are Catholic, which is still good because then they can actually learn what things like the MAP actually do. And hey, they can teach that natural family planning hoopla when they teach them about condoms. I don't care, it's all good to know.

I can teach my children the proper way that will include information on condoms and their use.

But you next statement doesn't negate the fact that parents don't or won't. Hell, lot of kids don't even have parents to ask. There are still kids that think that jumping up and down after sex is a good BC method. And with AIDS, and the dozens of STDs that have no cure out there, and a sexually open and free society, like it or not, that makes it a health issue, and the pregnancy factor makes it a social and biological issue.

This is essentially another biology class wityh a dash of science.

Far those who want to take offence to facts, well they get into that .10% of the population with the people who think the Holocaust never happened.

Some lame excuse about "other parents" doesn't mean that shared government just represents one side

The federal government denies crucial federal funding to already underfunded public schools if they dare deviant from their AO guidebooks.

or that I must allow an ignorant

...

You advocate ignoring important medical infomation to the part of our society that needs it the most, and we're ignorant?

All we ask is that all the information and facts be provided to teens. We just want to know them to truth. You seem content to provide essentially no education other then don't have sex before you're married, no BC is 100% effective, and what every STD in the world does to the gentalia of both sexes from 17 different angles with and 10X close-up.

and a morality absent method to be propagated on my shared dime and my children's shared time.

It's biology with a mix of science. It isn't intended and shouldn't convey a moral message of any sort. It should provide the facts. No more, no less.

And hey, I don't like the government ruining people's lives just because they smoke pot on my dime, but I don't get to choose where my tax dollars go. It sucks, but people are too stupid to change things.

 

[morningstar2651]

Ahh, yes. Abstinence only education.

It would have been nice if sex education had educated me about sex. I had to educate myself.

What do you think happens when you tell a room filled with rebellious teens with raging hormones "Don't have sex!"? The girl that won the Empower (the abstinence-only education program from school) scholarship back at my high school was pregnant and pretty far along. $424,908 in funds were spent on that program that year, and the winner of their scholarship was pregnant.

Condoms have a very high success rate when used properly. How many teens that are having sex know how to use them properly?

Sex doesn't magically spread disease. Someone has to have HIV to spread HIV.

 

[Helo]

The girl that won the Empower (the abstinence-only education program from school) scholarship back at my high school was pregnant and pretty far along. $424,908 in funds were spent on that program that year, and the winner of their scholarship was pregnant.

Boy when you arent looking irony can just BLINDSIDE you

 

[morningstar2651]

Here is some more irony for you.

I went through abstinence-only education.

Now I'm a sex magician.

 

[Helo]

Here is some more irony for you.

I went through abstinence-only education.

Now I'm a sex magician.

Too funny

We had an abstinance group come talk to our school, fat lot of good it did. The people who were actually paying attention were laughing and shouting at them to leave

 

[morningstar2651]

I remember a woman that came to the school sophomore year at the beginning of the year (When it's blisteringly hot and humid) to give a speech on modesty. She showed up over-dressed, almost every inch of skin covered, she pretty much called the girls at the school a bunch of naked harlots because they're lightly dressed! Afterwords, a friend of mine from Thespian Society talked with her after the speech and she refused to shake his hand because she said she "doesn't know where it has been."

She wasn't invited back for another speech.

 

[Helo]

I remember a woman that came to the school sophomore year at the beginning of the year (When it's blisteringly hot and humid) to give a speech on modesty. She showed up over-dressed, almost every inch of skin covered, she pretty much called the girls at the school a bunch of naked harlots because they're lightly dressed! Afterwords, a friend of mine from Thespian Society talked with her after the speech and she refused to shake his hand because she said she "doesn't know where it has been."

She wasn't invited back for another speech.

Now theres a woman who I can virtually guarantee you keeps a month's supply of Valium in her medicine cabinet at home

 

[morningstar2651]

I told my kids that if they waited till they got married then they didn't have to worry about getting AIDS.

Sorry, kids. Marriage is not an HIV vaccine.