Abstinence

[Ceridwen018]

The following is an article from the Dayton Daily News:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blog...yton/education/entries/2005/11/22/sex_ed.html

Sex ed’s quiet decline

By selliott | Tuesday, November 22, 2005, 08:20 AM

Philadelphia Inquirer science writer and sex columnist (and one of my journalist pals) Faye Flam recently wrote a provocative column about the subtle steps backward in sex education. (Registration required at philly.com)

While groups on the political left have lined up in opposition to the movement toward teaching intelligent design in science class, Flam points out that there has been little outrage about the national movement toward “abstinence only” sex education in schools. Flam answers my question from a couple months ago: What should sex education actually look like in schools?

Flam argues that abstinence only program fail to give kids information they will need and also fails to convince kids that abstinence is the best choice. She say all we have to do is look at what kids are up to sexually (even at school!). And compared to other countries, the statistics show our kids end up with more sex-related trouble in life.

There’s no doubt abstinence works when kids adhere to it. The question is if its realistic to expect abstinence alone to work in the face of stats that say otherwise and if abstinence ONLY gives kids the information they need. Or would a more well-rounded sex ed programs do better?

What is everyone's opinion on this matter? I know, (having spent upwards of 12 years of my life in Catholic Schools), that "abstinence only" is the way to go for most Christians, but is this really realistic? In my experience, kids are going to have sex whether they know how to be safe or not. We are doing are kids a grave disserivce by not giving them the necessary information that they need to protect themselves.

 

[SoyLeche]

Abstinance worked for me, and it's what I'll be teaching my kids.

 

[Aqualung]

of course it's realistic! You just have to have a back bone.

 

[Green Gaia]

Abstinence only programs are not realistic and leave kids and teens ignorant about their own bodies and what could happen to them. Not telling them about sex and how to protect themselves is NOT going to keep them from doing it. It may work for a few, but at all, and all kids need to be educated about sex and pregnancy and disease prevention. Even if they decide not to have sex until they are married or in an adult relationship, it is still useful information for them to know and aware of.

This is why Unitarian Universalists have a program called OWL (Our Whole Lives) which teaches kids and teens about sexual health, behavior and education. It equips participants with accurate, age-appropriate information in six subject areas: human development, relationships, personal skills, sexual behavior, sexual health, and society and culture. Grounded in a holistic view of sexuality, Our Whole Lives provides not only facts about anatomy and human development, but helps participants to clarify their values, build interpersonal skills, and understand the spiritual, emotional, and social aspects of sexuality.

We believe our children will be better equipped to make good decisions regarding sex if they are given all the information instead of just being told, "don't do it."

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

of course it's realistic! You just have to have a back bone.

What about the majority that don't have a backbone as you call it. Nor have any support from family or school, but rely on films and TV for their relationship and sex education.

It's easy to say tough it's their problem.
But it ends up everyones problem and another statistic to show the rest of the world how much everyone cares.

Terry______________________-
Blessed are the merciful, mercy shall be shown unto them.

 

[Ceridwen018]

SoyLeche and Aqualung,

I recognize that there are people out there who subscribe to abstinence, and are very happy doing so. I am happy for you guys that abstinence has worked in your lives.

That said, I also don't think it is wrong for abstinence to be taught. What I do think is wrong, is for it to be the only thing that is taught. For the two of you and your future children, will you teach them about safe sex as well as about abstinence? Statistics say that the majority of kids are going to have sex whether they know how to be safe or not, so don't you think that its best you children have the information they need to protect themselves?

As the article says, children in our country run into many more sexual related problems, (teen pregnancy, STD's, abortion), than the children of other countries who we consider to be our peers. Coincidentally, our sex-ed programs are much less evolved than theirs...

You say I have no backbone, Aqualung--I'm not sure what you mean by that.

 

[michel]

I agree with Maize; to those who can deal with abstinence, good luck. I am sorry, it didn't work for me, but maybe that is because Religion was something that was never discussed at home; it was a 'no-go' topic of conversation


To SoyLeche and Aqualung, in perfect honesty, do you think that if you had not been brought up in a religious 'evironment', can you see yourselves still abstaining ?

Sex is the most natural and recognised driving force in human beings..............

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Abstinence was the only way to go in my household. It was screamed about shouted about, and ultimately did not do a thing for me. I have been sexually active since age 16, and so was my brother. So were all my cousins. So were most of the kids I knew in school. And we grew up right on the buckle of the bible belt, and all went to church.

Look at the areas of the country that have the highest teen pregnancy and teen STD rates. You will find that they two highest areas of concentration are inner cities and the bible belt. Not an accident. The way to keep kids safe is to teach them how not to get pregnant and how not to catch a disease.

If abstinence worked, we wouldn't have anyone getting pregnant before marriage, and we wouldn't have such colorful phrases as "The first baby always comes early". Abstinence is fine to advocate, but expecting that it will be followed is a bit naive. Sex drive is, in a healthy adolescent, just behind the drive to breathe, drink and eat in importance, and it should be that way. That is the nature of any species.

B.

 

[Aqualung]

The question was - Is abstinence realistic. I said it was. I don't say that people (Maize, I'm talking to you) will be completely ignorant of their bodies if they are taught abstinence, and to say that they will be really underestimates people's abilities to learn things on their own. I was tought abstinence, and still practice it, yet I'm reasonably confident that I know what all my parts are for and how to use them correctly. Anatomy and abstinence aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[robtex]

Hey real fast anyone got some stats to annie-up so we can quantify some of this?

 

[Green Gaia]

The question was - Is abstinence realistic. I said it was. I don't say that people (Maize, I'm talking to you) will be completely ignorant of their bodies if they are taught abstinence, and to say that they will be really underestimates people's abilities to learn things on their own. I was tought abstinence, and still practice it, yet I'm reasonably confident that I know what all my parts are for and how to use them correctly. Anatomy and abstinence aren't mutually exclusive.

We are talking about abstinence-only programs where kids are not taught anything past "don't do it because we said so". I have no problem with abstinence being taught as being preferred as long as kids are also educated about their bodies and sex and how to protect themselves should they decide to have sex. Information is not an endorsement.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Hey real fast anyone got some stats to annie-up so we can quantify some of this?

http://www.teenpregnancy.org/america/statisticsDisplay.asp?ID=3&sID=18

for a start. Google the phrase teen pregnancy rate and you will get a bazillion hits. This link is to a graphic which shows state by state rates. South and areas with big inner cities are going to have darker colors, which represents higher rates.

B.

 

[nutshell]

http://www.teenpregnancy.org/america/statisticsDisplay.asp?ID=3&sID=18

for a start. Google the phrase teen pregnancy rate and you will get a bazillion hits. This link is to a graphic which shows state by state rates. South and areas with big inner cities are going to have darker colors, which represents higher rates.

B.

Oh, and look at that. Utah, a state I expect supports abstinece programs, is one of the few white states on the map.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Utah is one I would expect to have low teen pregnancy rates. Not sure who would be surprised by that. LDS kids don't get pregnant at the same rates as other groups.

B.

 

[nutshell]

Utah is one I would expect to have low teen pregnancy rates. Not sure who would be surprised by that. LDS kids don't get pregnant at the same rates as other groups.

B.

And could that possible be because the Church teaches abstinence???

 

[Ceridwen018]

Why don't you worry about explaining all of the red states, nutshell.

It is quite telling, in my mind, that all of the more conservative southern states that would be expected to stress abstinence to their kids above any other sex-ed topic...also have higher teen-pregnancy rates. That suggests higher abortion rates as well. To me, that says abstinence only education is not effective or realistic.

Kids desperately need to be taught how to protect themselves, and until this country can overcome its silly "Victorian age taboo" view of sex, our country will continue to have more teen pregnancies than in Europe.

 

[Sunstone]

If someone is happy being abstinent, that's fine. But what do you do about all the people who are unhappy being abstinent? Do you keep them in the dark about their sexuality? Isn't that barbaric?

 

[Quiddity]

If someone is happy being abstinent, that's fine. But what do you do about all the people who are unhappy being abstinent? Do you keep them in the dark about their sexuality? Isn't that barbaric?

Isn't that a bad message to send?
To be happy you must have sex.

~Victor

 

[michel]

Isn't that a bad message to send?
To be happy you must have sex.

~Victor

I don't see it that way Victor; I see it more in the light of "Well, if you do get into a situation where it is going to take place, be prepared".

Let's be realistic here; sure, abstinence by all until marriage would be perfect, but there's the rub. We are human beings (human animals what is more), and we know how imperfect we are.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Isn't that a bad message to send?
To be happy you must have sex.

Yes, it is. Which is why no one is sending that message, Victor.