Mr. Thunk's Forum For Spirituality and Sociology

[chrisfan]

kmc said:

I guess I just don't see why abstinence is anymore responsible than getting pregnant, not being ready for a child, and having an abortion. Both are exercises in responsibility. It's not a matter of "it's not fair" or anything of the sort. It's making a mistake, realizing it, and doing something to rectify it.

If you are not ready for parenthood, and you know that sex can result in parenthood, why engage in sex to begin with? That sounds about as responsible to me as sitting down at the blackjack table, gambling $1000 that you know you can't afford, and being shocked when you lose the money.

There are varying degrees of responsibility and morality. It sounds absurd to me to attempt to make having an abortion equally as reponsible as not having sex to begin with.

[phil]

Parental consent ... ??

Sure ! That will work !!

Have you ever heard of abusive or dysfonctional families ??

Nice way to make matters worse ... !!


And last time I looked, the U.S. education system
was not very opened to sex classes but I may be wrong ...

[chrisfan]

phil said:

Parental consent ... ??

Sure ! That will work !!

Have you ever heard of abusive or dysfonctional families ??

Nice way to make matters worse ... !!


And last time I looked, the U.S. education system
was not very opened to sex classes but I may be wrong ...

I cannot think of a school system I am aware of that does not include sex education classes Phil. Not sure what exactly you're coming up with that one for.

Abortion is a medical procedure. A hospital cannot remove a minor's tonsils without parental consent. The cannot perform heart surgery without parental consent. So why elevate abortion to a different level of medical procedures?

[Galactus]

chrisfan said:

You asked if I think there should be a process established to determine the moral responsibility before one could have an abortion - no? So that deals with the legality.

So you are suggesting moral responiblility should be established? How would that work?

[chrisfan]

ded said:

chrisfan said:

You asked if I think there should be a process established to determine the moral responsibility before one could have an abortion - no? So that deals with the legality.

So you are suggesting moral responiblility should be established? How would that work?

By individuals choosing to do the right and moral thing. You don't legislate morality.

[phil]

I cannot think of a school system I am aware of
that does not include sex education classes Phil.

In 1981 Congress passed, and President Reagan signed into law, the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA). Through AFLA, the federal government for the first time invested on a small scale in local programs designed to prevent teenage pregnancy by encouraging "chastity and self-discipline" among teenagers. AFLA helped usher in 20 years of debate at the federal, state and local level over whether sexuality education should exclusively promote abstinence or should take a more comprehensive approach.

In the late 1990s, federal investment in this area increased significantly after Congress, as part of the 1996 welfare reform law, created a federal-state program funded at $440 million over five years to support local sexuality education programs that condemn all sex outside of marriage—for people of any age—and prohibit any positive discussion of contraception. Four years later, conservative lawmakers secured an additional victory when Congress approved a third abstinence-only education program funded at $50 million over two years through a set-aside in the maternal and child health block grant.

Yet this major increase in federal funding occurred despite evidence that shows that more comprehensive sexuality education, rather than abstinence-only education, helps teenagers to delay sexual activity. It also occurred without clear pictures of either local sexuality education policies or the content of classroom instruction. Several studies published within the past year fill in these gaps, highlighting a significant disparity between the inclinations of policymakers and the needs and desires of both students and parents (see box). This research also suggests that there is a large gap between what teachers believe should be taught regarding sexuality education and what is actually taught in the classroom.



www.guttmacher.org/pubs/ib_2-01.html

[phil]

Children ... Today we will talk about sex education...

DON'T DO IT !!

...


Now open your math book to page 69 ...

[phil]

Scandinavian nations were sex education classes are taken seriously
and where birth control methods are widely available
show the lowest abortion and STD rates among school and young adult populations...

[Galactus]

chrisfan said:

ded said:

So you are suggesting moral responiblility should be established? How would that work?

By individuals choosing to do the right and moral thing. You don't legislate morality.

So then it has nothing to do with the leagality of abortion.

[chrisfan]

phil said:

I cannot think of a school system I am aware of
that does not include sex education classes Phil.

In 1981 Congress passed, and President Reagan signed into law, the Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA). Through AFLA, the federal government for the first time invested on a small scale in local programs designed to prevent teenage pregnancy by encouraging "chastity and self-discipline" among teenagers. AFLA helped usher in 20 years of debate at the federal, state and local level over whether sexuality education should exclusively promote abstinence or should take a more comprehensive approach.

In the late 1990s, federal investment in this area increased significantly after Congress, as part of the 1996 welfare reform law, created a federal-state program funded at $440 million over five years to support local sexuality education programs that condemn all sex outside of marriage—for people of any age—and prohibit any positive discussion of contraception. Four years later, conservative lawmakers secured an additional victory when Congress approved a third abstinence-only education program funded at $50 million over two years through a set-aside in the maternal and child health block grant.

Yet this major increase in federal funding occurred despite evidence that shows that more comprehensive sexuality education, rather than abstinence-only education, helps teenagers to delay sexual activity. It also occurred without clear pictures of either local sexuality education policies or the content of classroom instruction. Several studies published within the past year fill in these gaps, highlighting a significant disparity between the inclinations of policymakers and the needs and desires of both students and parents (see box). This research also suggests that there is a large gap between what teachers believe should be taught regarding sexuality education and what is actually taught in the classroom.



www.guttmacher.org/pubs/ib_2-01.html

Abstinence educaton does not eliminate the "When a man and woman love each other very much ... sperm ... egg ... birth" class. It just means you refer to the man and woman as husband and wife rather than a man and a woman.

[Mary]

The problem with abstinence education is very simple: it doesn't work. Ever. Every single time an abstinence education program has been studied, the same thing has been found: the vast vast vast majority of students in the program (usually between 85% and 95%) end up having sex before they get married. Moreover, students in abstinence education programs who have sex before they get married are less likely to use ANY form of birth control, and also less likely to go for STD testing, than control groups. A recent study from Columbia and Yale not only followed teenagers who had abstinence education, but specifically limited it to teenagers who explicitly chosen to pledge to remain virgins until they got married - should be an even more select group than those who happen to get abstinence education - and the results were that 88% of the virgin-pledges had sex before they got married. They tended to have sex a bit later than others who had made no such pledge, so there might be some effect in delaying sexual activity.... but at the same time, yet again, they were much less likely to use any form of protection and much less likely to get STD testing.

If it's irresponsible to have sex even with a condom because condoms aren't 100% reliable, then it's surely the height of irresponsibility to encourage a form of sex education which has an 88% failiure rate! If it worked, abstinence education would indeed be the best possible guardian against unwanted pregnancies and STDs - although I would question it for other reasons (e.g., puritanism, but never mind that). But given it's catastrophic failure rates, abstinence education instead increases the likelihood of unwanted pregnancies and STDs. How many more studies have to confirm this before we admit that people are going to keep having sex before they get married no matter what?? I'm not saying abstinence is impossible on an individual level. Some people abstain (these people also tend to get married very young - the longer it takes you to find your partner, the less likely you will be to remain chaste). But as a serious public policy suggestion, it strikes me as disastrous, if not insane, to support something which has never once failed to increase the likelihood of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies.

M

[Mary]

chrisfan said:

Abstinence educaton does not eliminate the "When a man and woman love each other very much ... sperm ... egg ... birth" class. It just means you refer to the man and woman as husband and wife rather than a man and a woman.

But it does eliminate serious education in contraception techniques. That's the problem. People who support abstinence education claim that teaching kids about contraception implicitly encourages them to have sex. It's not that kids who receive abstinence education think babies come from the stork - it's that they often don't have any idea how to have sex responsibly.

And let's also remember the converse of your statement: in sex education classes which aren't abstinence-focused, you also don't eliminate the discussion of abstinence. All sex education classes present abstinence as one option, and all sex education classes teach that abstinence is the single best and most reliable guardian against unwanted pregnancies and STDs. They simply go on to the "but if you choose to have sex, you should do so responsibly...." part of the class aferwards, which abstinence education dispenses with.

BTW neither my previous post was not directed at you, chrisfan - I don't think you're encouraging abstinence education or opposed to sex education. (though correct me if you are!)

M

[phil]

If I had waited to be married to have sex ...

I'd still be a virgin ... A 52 Y/O VIRGIN !!

[Ampage]

Wow dude - when you miss a point you REALLY miss a point.

[phil]

I remember a discussion about Sex Ed. here (or on the old RS.Com Boards)
where some people were saying that Sex Ed. was a parent's responsability (which it is !)
and that the Public School system had no right teaching kids about sex ... !

Every time I try talking to Eldest Son about sex
he gives me some dark dirty looks ... !

At least in his high school classes,
he can't run to his room covering his ears
singing LALALALALALALA ! !