What is so wrong with comprehensive sex education that strongly encourages abstinence since it is the only 100% effective way to avoid pregnancy and STDs but still teaches kids how to use birth control properly so that if they do end up having sex they will be able to do so with some amount of intelligence on the issue and use a condom?
When you teach comprehensive sex ed in school as they are today, you are in effect giving these kids a green light. You can't say to a teen..."don't have sex, but if you do, take this (holding up a form of BC) with you." You're contradicting yourself and the kids know it.
They take that as permission. Go back in time and remember what it was like when you were a kid. Did you ever say to your parents..."but you said?"......when in fact you, as the child, were twisting their words around on them? That's what kids do. Give an inch they take a....what?
I had my son tell me that I gave him permission to run away. Did I? Well I guess I did in a roundabout way. He threatened to run away and I said...."go ahead" thinking he was just pulling my leg. He knew better. He knew what I meant. But he used my words against me because he wanted to go to a place I had forbidden him to go.
And this is so clear when you look at the evidence. I raised three teens all at the same time. I worked in a HS for years riding the bus with them frequently during X-Country season. I was very involved with teens thru programs at church. One thing that was very very very (can I say that enough?) evident to me was that teens who were taught that BC should be used in the event you may have sex outside of marriage were way more active at a much younger age than those parents who were teaching abstinence. For the most part kids want their parents approval and acceptance.
Those parents who were teaching abstinence were very clear and expected that sex was to be delayed until either they were of age or married. We told our kids, no piercings, no sex and no motorcyles. That was expected.
Now, obviously, this is not 100% as we've seen in Palin's daughter. Sometimes these children don't follow the household rules and break them. It happens. When they do, they get burned and pay the consequences whether they abort or keep their baby or end up with an STD.
Now, even though we teach our kids abstinence, they'd have to have their head under a rock NOT to know about BC. They all do. My son chose not to obey our "house rules" and went right to the pharmacy. He knew right where to find what he needed. Still taught abstinence. But he made a decision that went against what we taught him. It was his choice, and eventually he did pay the price. But I'll bet he'll teach his own son abstinence after learning what he's had to go thru.
It's the kids who get abstinence only education that i'd worry about catching STDs.
you think so? I don't. The kids more apt to get STD's are those like the girls on the pill who think they're safe. They're the ones you have to worry about....or the boys who think the girl is ok because she's on the pill. I knew one boy who was giving the girls VD all over the school. The girls, with permission from their parents, were on BC. One girl put up a sign on the girl's mirror warning other girls not to have sex with this one boy. Now if the girl was taught abstinence and obeyed her parents (like many I do know) this wouldn't be an issue.
Teaching BC doesn't encourage kids to have sex any more than teaching abstinence does.
I strongly disagree with this with some of the reasons listed above.
you can't, for a minute, assume that I disagree with you and that I am presenting my opinions to you. No, instead you have to assume that I'm playing and purposely disagreeing with you just because it's fun. I fundamentally disagree with probably 95% of what you say -- and yet you assume that this can't be true, I must just be playing. Wouldn't that bug you?
Shades, it's not WHAT you say....it's HOW you say it. There are others on JU that don't agree with me but I consider them friends. I take a very strong stance on certain issues that I can't budge from because I use scripture as my foundation and that just never changes. We have lively discussions, sometimes heated but it never turns nasty and hateful.
I do believe you are purposefully disagreeing with me because of reasons you haven't disclosed. Yes. I don't care if you disagree with me, that's part of what goes on here. I just want you to be honest with me.
I'm ok with the 95% of the time we don't agree.....but even those I don't agree most of the time I try to let them know when I do agree with them and establish common ground even if it's a small thing. Maybe if you once in a while let me know what the 5% was it wouldn't come across so Devil's Advocate all the time.