Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of you are probably aware of the Abstinence Movement that has gained momentum nationwide and in Texas notably. Bush expanded the program promoting no sex till marriage in 2006.
How do you think proponents of this program (and way of life) will vote in this election? I personally think it is a pretty good idea, a way to avoid early career-threatening pregnancies leading to short marriages. After about age 30 the idea doesn't really apply anymore IMO though.
Wouldn't Palin have to be considered a deal-breaker for this large genre of voters?
When I was in school there was a plethora of abstinence scare campaigns that went through every year from 5th grade up through high school. And a lot of the students were scared and really thought about the realities of the consequences of sex --- for about two or three weeks. After that the hormonal teenagers were up to regular business of trying to get laid.
Many of the girls that started out having sex in their teens were also on various forms of birth control - namely the pill or condoms. From 7th grade all through high school kids were getting it on. and out of a graduating class of about 100, two girls - TWO- had babies by graduation. one was 17 the other was 19 (held hack in 4th grade). I don't know where they are now, or what they are doing or how they turned out but the fact of the matter was there were quite a few kids having sex and the responsible ones never had any kids until after high school.
Abstinence may have its merit - I do think it is a good idea to let kids know the brutal realities of sex, namely STD's and having babies. But abstinence runs on a platform of vilifying sex and simultaneously making it out to be some honorary deed between married people. I'm sure that any married person here can say that the sex they have now isn't all that much different than the sex they had before. Married or not people have sex because they want to, because it feels good; married or not the same drive is there.
Sex isn't some demonic plague of immorality the needs to be banished from everyone that isn't married. We don't need to teach that it's bad .... it's natural. That's how each and every one of us got here and we can all be pretty sure that when the parents were making us it wasn't out of their unmeasurable love for each other - it's because dad saw mom bent over in the dish washer and had one hell of a dirty thought the same way they did in high school when it was called getting laid.
This caused me great distress when I was a teenager, because I honestly thought that I would never be able to have sex because I was going to be with another woman and we couldn't get married. I wasn't worried about sex personally, but I was afraid I was going to meet someone who wanted to have sex at some point and I would have to say no again and again because we couldn't get married legally, and I would disappoint the person and she would leave me. That was my primary reason for wanting same-sex marriage legalized then, so that I could feel it was acceptable to have sex. I'm actually not kidding about this.
Just one reason why the whole idea of abstinence-only sex ed. is just crap.
Abstinence only education is moral education towards persons who want to push the envelope. They need to be taught about contraception for their own safety. It's about as smart as teaching drivers ed and saying "We aren't going to teach kids to wear seat belts because we know they will make good decisions and drive safely." And I find it laughable that Texas is such a proponent of abstinence education when everybody knows football players and cheerleaders get away with a lot of things and have their own set of rules.
These are not statistics we are talking about here. These are our flesh-and-blood children who have to face life for themselves. It is the duty of every parent to teach their children everything they need to know in order to face it and succeed. There is no substitute for knowledge.
Education. Don't leave home without it.
Especially if you might have a chance of becoming an unplanned parent.
These are not statistics we are talking about here. These are our flesh-and-blood children who have to face life for themselves. It is the duty of every parent to teach their children everything they need to know in order to face it and succeed. There is no substitute for knowledge.
Education. Don't leave home without it.
Especially if you might have a chance of becoming an unplanned parent.
Very true. Hopefully Obama's administration will lower the emphasis on abstinence, and certainly dump "abstinence only" as we know it doesn't work. It has a small place within an overall educational effort.
Abstinence should be a part of sex education, not all of it. Anybody who believes abstinence-only actually works, is simply out of touch. Just ask Sarah Palin. She knows it first hand.
cold turkey does not work well, statistically people fall off the wagon often. esp with teens.
religious shame has proven ineffective to overcome sex urges. sex drive can be controlled more effectively thru excercise and diet and limited sexual behavior.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
