How do we Reduce Abortions?

[PsychMJC]

1- Access to complete and thorough sexual health education taught by professionals
2- Honest discussion about sex between parents and their children
3- Readily available birth control and sexual health devices (birth control pills, condoms, dental dams, etc)

Or we could start doing mandatory yearly birth control in the form of a shot given to females every year from puberty until they get married and/or can show that they can and will be responsible for a child.

 

[ebia]

How is that? I thought number of days in a country's school year was roughly correlated to their relative rank in education quality, with other variables having an effect as well.

Correlation is not causation, as they say.

Students (and teachers) are worn out by the end of a term. Countries with successful long school years are countries that are successful directly and indirectly for cultural and other reasons. Sometimes with significant down-sides to that success. (E.g. countries with very high pressure put on kids to succeed have good academic outcomes but high suicide rates.)

Finland has the best education in the Western World with a school year not much different than yours and mine. Expensive private schools here tend to have shorter school years than state schools - and they know what they are doing.

Long school years are promoted in western countries not for academic reasons but because they provide free child-care.

 

[ebia]

Strict, devout parents tend to have mixed results from what I've seen.

They either have very obedient compliant children or they have very rebellious children.

And God bless them. They've tried to do their best, but it's very difficult raising teenagers nowadays.

It always has been and always will be. Teenagers will always be impulsive and make poor choices sometimes - that's where they are at developmentally.

 

[green wolverine]

I can't tell whether I was being told something I said was off topic for a thread or what, so I will just move it here.

The ethical question is this -- do we not owe it to ourselves to take active steps to prevent the scourge of abortions in this nation? I have some ideas as to why it happens, and I was sharing them. I think they are important things to realize.

The big problem with abortion, frankly, comes well before the abortion. Abortion levels in this country are a direct result of sexual immorality and poverty combined. People behave in a reprobate manner

The problem isn't going to be solved until peoples' hearts are changed by the Holy Spirit regenerating them and them coming to saving faith in Christ. When they come to love righteousness and hate what God calls sinful, then and only then will things change.

 

[Allahuakbar]

The problem isn't going to be solved until peoples' hearts are changed by the Holy Spirit regenerating them and them coming to saving faith in Christ. When they come to love righteousness and hate what God calls sinful, then and only then will things change.

Unfortunately this has proven unsuccessful.

 

[Joachim]

2- Honest discussion about sex between parents and their children

No, that's what schools for. I learned it there without a word from any parent(my uncle though, had advice regarding women), I'll be happy if my kids have the same experience. I'm sorry, but there is no way that I can talk to children about sex

3- Readily available birth control and sexual health devices (birth control pills, condoms, dental dams, etc)

Ok, thats a good idea, but you do realize that the last one is not a birth control device right?

Or we could start doing mandatory yearly birth control in the form of a shot given to females every year from puberty until they get married and/or can show that they can and will be responsible for a child.

Unacceptable. A number of religions (including mine) teach that birth control is wrong, and the state forcing them to receive a birth control shot would be an infringement of their free exercise rights plus really, really totalitarian.....however, I would agree with the idea of forcing unmarried welfare recipients on birth control, so I can see the utility of the idea.

 

[ebia]

No, that's what schools for. I learned it there without a word from any parent(my uncle though, had advice regarding women), I'll be happy if my kids have the same experience. I'm sorry, but there is no way that I can talk to children about sex

As one of the speakers said at a conference on educating boys, the last person teenage boys want to talk to about sex is dad, because talking to dad about sex involves thinking about who dad has sex with.

Unacceptable. A number of religions (including mine) teach that birth control is wrong, and the state forcing them to receive a birth control shot would be an infringement of their free exercise rights plus really, really totalitarian.....however, I would agree with the idea of forcing unmarried welfare recipients on birth control, so I can see the utility of the idea.

Eh? How is it ok for unmarried poor people but unethical for everyone else?

 

[Joachim]

Eh? How is it ok for unmarried poor people but unethical for everyone else?

Each kid they have is an additional amount of money into a welfare check that is paid to them so they can sit at home. If they are going to receive money from the state fine, but, we should not be encouraging them to have more kids just for a bigger check.

 

[katautumn]

The ethical question is this -- do we not owe it to ourselves to take active steps to prevent the scourge of abortions in this nation?

I think we owe it to women and families to empower these women to keep them from ever needing an abortion, but giving them the safety and privacy to have one if the situation arose. We do not owe it to ourselves to "prevent abortion" because, quite frankly, if we're not in that woman's shoes it's none of our business.

I have some ideas as to why it happens,

Christian persecution?

The big problem with abortion, frankly, comes well before the abortion. Abortion levels in this country are a direct result of sexual immorality and poverty combined.

Well, you got the poverty part right. Another problem is the abomination we call our healthcare system in America. We're the only Westernized country that doesn't mandate maternity leave for mothers. We're the only Westernized country that not only makes it difficult for women to obtain birth control, but makes it nearly impossible to have a child on her own as well.

People behave in a reprobate manner, and then on top of that, when confronted with the responsibility of raising a child, many blanch at the lifestyle they will be forced to live should they have a child, especially if they had no father for the child worth speaking of.

I refuse to view sex as "evil". Furthermore, you reduce the decision to terminate a pregnancy to nothing more than the woman "not wanting to give up her life". It's not that simple. Children are expensive. Pregnancy, pre-natal care, labor, birth, recovery - very expensive, especially if the woman is uninsured. The woman will surely have to work. How will she pay for her child to be cared for while she's at work? Did you know in many homes in which both parents work full-time, one parent's entire month's wages go to childcare alone? The average cost of full-time childcare in the United States is close to $15,000 per year. And that's just for infants. A pre-kindergarten learning facility that provides early childhood care can run far more expensive than full-time infant care. In some states the percentage of income needed for full-time childcare is over 40%.

People argue that Christians should not push their morality, but it is the morality that works.

It's also a pretty unrealistic standard, considering the majority of women who get pregnant out of wedlock and have abortions are Christian. How many illicit affairs happen within churches? How many people have sex before marriage? How many Christians find themselves faced with unplanned pregnancy? If it was something as simple as, "hey, do things this way and all of our problems will disappear", then how come it's not working within the very churches trying to impose this brand of morality on outsiders?

It's one thing to speak of the legitimate worthiness of mercy and love. It is quite another to just encourage people to behave irresponsibly and then give them an easy out that teaches that life itself is of little worth in comparison to what basically amounts to greed.

Abortion is never an "easy way out". There is a sense of guilt and shame and a stigma that surrounds the decision to have an abortion.

Our children should be taught how important parenthood is,

And what of children who grow up and do not want to be a parent? I don't feel we should be raising children to believe parenthood is the ultimate goal that holds everything together. That's how you end up with teenage girls trying to get impregnated to keep their boyfriends.

not to look at sex as a game or mere entertainment, and that the taking of a human life, no matter how inconsequential, is a very very serious matter.

You're right - life and sex are a very serious matter. Ideally people would wait to have sex until they are fully prepared to handle the tremendous amount of responsibility that comes along with it. There are only two problems - 1: sex is fun and there's no way you could enforce such a sense of morality on everyone with great success and 2: things still happen even when all precautions have been taken.

A casual attitude toward taking human life, even in the earliest stages, breeds contempt for responsibility.

So I take it you will teach your children to be opponents of war and capital punishment as well?

 

[ebia]

Each kid they have is an additional amount of money into a welfare check that is paid to them so they can sit at home. If they are going to receive money from the state fine, but, we should not be encouraging them to have more kids just for a bigger check.

That doesn't answer the question. How is it ethical to impose such a draconian measure on one group who have done nothing wrong and not another?

 

[green wolverine]

Yes, why doesn't your god swoop in and make everything better?

I'm just stating a Biblical truth that things don't and won't change unless or until people come to faith in Christ and hate evil. I have no delusion that anything can successfully done in the meantime.......

 

[OdwinOddball]

No, that's what schools for. I learned it there without a word from any parent(my uncle though, had advice regarding women), I'll be happy if my kids have the same experience. I'm sorry, but there is no way that I can talk to children about sex

Then to be quite frank, you have no business having children.

A parent needs to talk to their children about all aspects of life, even topics they are not comfortable with. Parents like yourself who are too scared to talk to their kids about sex are only contributing to the problem.

Grow up and do your job.

 

[PsychMJC]

edit

 

[PsychMJC]

edit

 

[Mercy Medical]

I do agree that the problem with abortion is not abortion itself, but the general sexual irresponsibility a lot of individuals in this country lack and I do agree that those types of morals should be taught at a young age and encouraged...I do not think the typical "abstinence only education" stance of conservative Christians and the right wing should be the solution.

While teaching abstinence would seem like the most logical decision to prevent abortion (obviously abstinence is the only fool proof way of not getting pregnant) it is not a realistic option whatsoever. Not everyone in this country adhere's the Christian standards and I would not expect nor would I want everyone in this country to do so. I believe the proper way to limit the number of abortions (at least those in unwed mothers, unplanned pregnancies in teens, etc) would be to teach a comprehensive sex education course that mainly focused on safe sex practices, but also threw in a bit of abstinence with it. That way you would be giving teenagers a wide variety of options in regards to their sexuality and how they would like to proceed with it. I do, however, feel as though it is not the school's responsibility to teach "morality" and that it should be the parent's responsibility to teach the morality behind sexuality, not the school's.

Also, I think we as a society would have significantly less issues with sexuality irresponsibility, unplanned pregnancies, etc if parents took the time to have serious discussion with their children about sex. If they stopped treating the topic in such a taboo manner and were actually capable of sitting down with their kids and having an adult conversation on the issue, some of the issues with sex in our society might fade away.

 

[katautumn]

The problem isn't going to be solved until peoples' hearts are changed by the Holy Spirit regenerating them and them coming to saving faith in Christ. When they come to love righteousness and hate what God calls sinful, then and only then will things change.

But whose interpretation of the Scriptures must we, universally, adhere to? Not all Christians hate homosexuality, for example. Some Christians find dancing or drinking the occasional beer to be evil. Who will be setting the standard and what translation of the Bible will we use? Which denomination's doctrinal beliefs will we look to for guidance?

 

[Corey]

I can't tell whether I was being told something I said was off topic for a thread or what, so I will just move it here.

The ethical question is this -- do we not owe it to ourselves to take active steps to prevent the scourge of abortions in this nation? I have some ideas as to why it happens, and I was sharing them. I think they are important things to realize.

Yes...we do.

The big problem with abortion, frankly, comes well before the abortion.

For the most part, yes.

Abortion levels in this country are a direct result of sexual immorality and poverty combined.

And...no. There is no such thing as sexual immorality.

People argue that Christians should not push their morality, but it is the morality that works.

Really? It does? Funny how sooooo many super-duper Christians like Newt Gingrinch, Ted Haggard, David Vitter, Larry Craig, et alia have so much trouble following Christian (TM) morality.

It's one thing to speak of the legitimate worthiness of mercy and love. It is quite another to just encourage people to behave irresponsibly and then give them an easy out that teaches that life itself is of little worth in comparison to what basically amounts to greed.

Indeed...and it'd be super-useful if you told us what those encouragements are (I have an idea of what I think you mean, but I'm not going to put words in your mouth).

Our children should be taught how important parenthood is, not to look at sex as a game or mere entertainment, and that the taking of a human life, no matter how inconsequential, is a very very serious matter. A casual attitude toward taking human life, even in the earliest stages, breeds contempt for responsibility.

What's wrong with sex being entertainment? After all, there's only a couple days every cycle when pregnancy is even possible and with modern medicine not even that much. Clearly, the issues today are safety or emotional health.

THe best ways to reduce the number of abortions and teenage pregnancies is comprehensive sex education that covers everything (yes, including abstinence) as well as open and honest discussions about sexuality between children and their support network (i.e., parents). Other posters have probably already mentioned this...

 

[Joachim]

I do agree that the problem with abortion is not abortion itself, but the general sexual irresponsibility a lot of individuals in this country lack and I do agree that those types of morals should be taught at a young age and encouraged...I do not think the typical "abstinence only education" stance of conservative Christians and the right wing should be the solution.

While teaching abstinence would seem like the most logical decision to prevent abortion (obviously abstinence is the only fool proof way of not getting pregnant) it is not a realistic option whatsoever. Not everyone in this country adhere's the Christian standards and I would not expect nor would I want everyone in this country to do so. I believe the proper way to limit the number of abortions (at least those in unwed mothers, unplanned pregnancies in teens, etc) would be to teach a comprehensive sex education course that mainly focused on safe sex practices, but also threw in a bit of abstinence with it. That way you would be giving teenagers a wide variety of options in regards to their sexuality and how they would like to proceed with it. I do, however, feel as though it is not the school's responsibility to teach "morality" and that it should be the parent's responsibility to teach the morality behind sexuality, not the school's.

Also, I think we as a society would have significantly less issues with sexuality irresponsibility, unplanned pregnancies, etc if parents took the time to have serious discussion with their children about sex. If they stopped treating the topic in such a taboo manner and were actually capable of sitting down with their kids and having an adult conversation on the issue, some of the issues with sex in our society might fade away.

Why should the parents do it when the parents are paying thousands a dollar a year to schools to teach their kids these things? I learned sex ed in religion class and human biology. Why should I do any different for my kids than was done for me?

 

[Mercy Medical]

Why should the parents do it when the parents are paying thousands a dollar a year to schools to teach their kids these things? I learned sex ed in religion class and human biology. Why should I do any different for my kids than was done for me?

Because that is the job of a PARENT. I'm sorry, but in my opinion a large problem with society is that parents are expecting other organizations to teach their kids things. It's not the school's responsibility to teach them sexual morality. It is the school's responsibility to at least provide them with general information in regards to safe sex practices. In my opinion, it's the school's responsibility to provide them an unbiased opinion...give these kids the facts and give them opinions. Past that is the parent's responsibility to sort of push them towards one path that they would prefer.

If you're sending your child to a private school, that is a different situation entirely, but as far as public school's go, my previous statement still stands.

In my opinion, it means significantly more to have parents teach their kids these things then schools and teachers. They obviously have a completely different connection to their kids then their teachers do. To me, it would mean more to have parents teaching their children morality then it would to have the school did it. Plus, by discussing sex with your children it breaks down a wall where your children will hopefully feel comfortable enough to discuss these matters with you openly instead of feeling weird or awkward about it.

I mean, isn't that the responsibility of a parent? To attempt to instill their own values into their child? Obviously everyone in this country puts value in different things.

 

[Joachim]

What part of sexual health devices didn't you understand? Let me know and I'll see if I can help explain it to you. While it wasn't EXACTLY on par with the topic, I DID say sexual health devices didn't I? Perhaps instead of trying to act superior you could have asked why I would include that.. If you had, you would have found out that along with BIRTH CONTROL, it would go a long way toward general HEALTH if we made safe sex options available. You do know that safe sex means more than "No babies" right? Score one for your sex education..

Because schools that are running on state money only have an interest in teaching about devices regularly related to birth control, such as condoms and the pill. A dental dam is a device that is not used in sexual intercourse, but rather in other practices that some people consider sexual, but that Clinton said was not sex. I'm sorry, but knowing why they use a dental dam, the state has absolutely no business instructing teenagers on the use of one.

Well.. that was a joke. But your reply is interesting.

Why is it interesting? They are on the state payroll. They are on the state payroll because they have kids and no jobs. A few years ago, it would have been because they did not want jobs (admittedly, the situation is different now). Considering that, the state has every right to dictate to them what they are going to do if they are going to receive that money.