Abstinence only programs Yay or nay?

[Chaos]

Hmm. I only have one question;

Since when did the American public decide sex was "bad"? We have all of these preventative measures and "Just Say No" type campaigns, but what happened to the good ol' fashioned sit-down? What happened to the "The little man doesn't go out in the rain without a coat on" analogy? The birds and the bees? Sex, aside from being fun, is also a productive way of advancing the human race. [Duh.] When have we decided it's the most deplorable act known to all sentient thought?

Abstinence, as far as I have seen, only leads to sex-craved and near-psychotically horny kids. However, if the local corner store has a spot for Mr. Trojan or Good-Buddy Lifestyles, and young teens use common sense, I think we'd have less problems as far as unplanned pregnancies. Plus if we introduce the blasphemous sin early in life and show it as an act of love and not wanton smut it loses part of the appeal of actually being 'wrong,' especially since us daring teens just do things out of spite.

Really though, the world has gone to Hell. They're trying to pass laws that make lowrider jeans illegal for sh**'s sake. What in the bluehell is wrong with people? Sex = good. Good =/= common sense. Unwanted child = idiot who didn't know to pull out.

*sighs*

[SunfallE]

[quote name='Morpheus']Seriously, 99.9% of people taught to be abstinent will not be abstinent.[/quote]

While I don't know how accurate this percentage is, I agree with it. At least for the population here in Utah. Not only is there no sex education, but the main religion here preachs that abstinence is the only way to go, and other than to say don't have sex till you are married, no other revelant information is given. And I do mean nothing. The subject is so highly frowned upon that many people here refuse to discuss it. If you get pregnant, as some of my friends have, then you are shunned by nearly 90% of the people you know.

The only reason I think having a program teaching abstinence in school would help is that at least the kids would get some information on why abstinence is a good thing instead of the usual. Don't have sex until you are married, with no further information, which to most teens is useless as it doesn't help them make informed choices.

[Brasil]

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet]Okay, I can see where you're going with this. It's like the abstinence programs that are in effect in 1/3 of the schools in the US. They work just fine for the students who are intelligent enough (like us) to just say no. But for the ones who are just plain curious or just plain dumb there need to be different methods. That's where my idea comes in. It's for the plain dumb ones, the curious ones should get an exstensive course in the pros and cons of protection.

I do realize that there's more likelyhood of the whole extreme babysitting idea going on in reality tv then in a school. But schools (atleast the one I went to) do have parenting classes. If a school district has a high teenage pregnancy rate then more evasive teachings, perhaps helping out a family with a newborn should be implimented. More than just a baby think it over that wakes up and cries until you stick a key in it and simply teaching abstinence.

Honestly, that's all I can think of for right now. In 6 minutes if my daughter's still crying I have to go take care of her and hope she'll take her bottle with the medicine in it.[/color][/quote]
Let me get this straight. You're suggesting that in an effort to help the [i]dumb[/i] teenagers understand what kind of physical, emotional, and economic strain it is to raise a child...those teens will help a family take care of a newborn?

The dumb teenager (or reckless teenager) is already going to be experiencing that (the newborn stress), so how is that going to be a [i]deterrent[/i], CHW? The "damage" has already been done. The teenager is "dumb" or "reckless" because [i]they already have a newborn of their own[/i]. You haven't thought this one through, have you?

Regarding the curious teenager...what help could a novice possibly be in helping care for a newborn? What would suggest they would be worthwhile assistance to begin with?

One of the incidental benefits of such a program would be to alleviate the new parents' stress, basically--but how is it a help when they may very well be doing [i]more[/i] of the work because the "curious teenager" doesn't know what in the hell they're doing, or even enough to do things competently?

It's like medical transcription.

For example, for argument's sake, I'm a part-timer who works 20 hours per week, but puts in extra time when needed, and covers vacation, etc. When the team is in a bind, I jump in and help clear out the backlog (the backlog is the radiology dictations we still need to complete).

But say I'm having trouble with a big chunk of those dictations, and I continually need to turn to my coworkers to help me.

I'm not exactly learning how to do it myself, am I? And I'm not exactly helping my coworkers, either, because I'm ending up being more of a burden on them than the backlog ever was.

Are you getting what I'm saying here?

The backlog is the newborn. My coworkers are the new parents. I'm the curious teen.

Your idea doesn't work when the teen very well may suck at it, and inadvertently force the parents to do most of the work.

Furthermore, in order to effectively give the teen a taste, so to speak, of what new parenting is, that teen would have to stay with the newborn essentially [i]all the time[/i], because you've said it yourself that the [i]NIGHTS[/i] are really when you get tested--and I sincerely [i]doubt[/i] that most "new parents" are going to be so eager to have a [i]complete stranger[/i] staying in their home--living with them, really--taking care of their child...getting up in the middle of the night with them to soothe the infant.

Again, do you see why your idea is unfeasible? Anybody could see the massive logistic flaws there. I say it again: your idea is a bad idea.

[quote][color=darkviolet]I do realize that there's more likelyhood of the whole extreme babysitting idea going on in reality tv then in a school. But schools (atleast the one I went to) do have parenting classes.[/color][/quote]
Hold on here. There's a [i]huge, huge, [b]HUGE[/b][/i] difference between what you're suggesting here and the parenting classes in school, so to mention those classes as some type of support for your idea is asinine at best, and here's why.

You're suggesting something straight out of Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/[insert absurd day-time talk show here].

The parenting classes are anything but that.

The bad talk show reality TV build those bits for ratings, CHW. Parenting classes build their structure and "curriculum" to help people.

There's a key difference there you need to understand. Shock value like Springer doesn't help people--and that's exactly what your idea is going for; shock value...and scaring people is not what we should be doing, at least not to the extent that your idea would produce.

[quote][color=darkviolet]Do you have any other ideas other than solely teaching abstinence and other conventional ideas? Despite our no duh differences I think you're a rather intelligent person. (I hope)[/color][/QUOTE]
Firstly, your idea isn't "conventional" in the least, so I just want to make that perfectly clear.

Secondly, no, I don't have any other ideas other than teaching abstinence and responsibility--and frankly, if "other ideas" include things like what we see on Jerry Springer, then I'm perfectly content with abstinence and responsibility.

Thirdly, I think there's an even bigger issue here than simple Sex-Ed, sexual dynamics, etc. That issue [i]is[/i] age.

One of my cousins recently got married at 21. His wife is 19, I think, maybe 20. Their daughter was born about a month ago, if that. To put it bluntly, their marriage means jack**** in relation to making anything any easier for them, because 20 is just too young to be having children.

Some parents begin raising a family when they're in their early 20s, yes, and some are successful, but we're talking about many who haven't even gotten their Bachelor's degree yet, so finding a job that will allow them to support their family while at the same time, not sucking up every waking minute they have is [i]incredibly[/i] difficult. My cousin is a perfect example. Every time I see him, he looks more and more exhausted, and everyone knows the precise reason why.

That reason is until you're in your mid-to-late 20s, abstinence really is the best option. Nothing is guaranteed when using birth control/condoms/etc, and at that point in most teens' lives (14-20), even a 0.01% chance is a risk not worth taking.

Yes, this may be my opinion and nobody else's, but from pure logic and common sense...sex before you can even support [i]yourself[/i] effectively is a bad idea (or at least dangerous enough to warrant abstaining until you're able to).

I'm not religious in the least; I abhor the Jerry Falwells and I have wanted to slap Bill O'Reilly on more than one occasion, but while I don't agree with the majority of their [i]reasons[/i] for their stance, I agree with the fundamental idea that there [b][i]is[/i][/b] a "too soon" for sex.

[JT Darkfire]

[quote name='Siren'] I'm not religious in the least; I abhor the Jerry Falwells and I have wanted to slap Bill O'Reilly on more than one occasion, but while I don't agree with the majority of their reasons for their stance, I agree with the fundamental idea that there is a "too soon" for sex. [/quote]

There, now that I have your attention...

I've got to agree with both of you, but because of your constant bickering back and forth, neither of you is really listening to the valid points that the other has made made, so I'll try to put it into plain english for you: CHW, while your plan would have merrit if it was possible to implement, it's not. Who in their right mind would turn their children into a lesson plan for a local high school? Where would you find all of these "subjects?" I know I wouldn't want some high school half-wit handling my children. Let's face it, most teens just aren't ready to be good parents,and tossing them into a situation like this just isn't a good idea.

Siren: You just don't seem to realize that while abstinence should be the preferred method, there will always be a stupid schmuck who chooses not to abstain and, the result: a child. I have family that made that stupid mistake, and I am still a teenager, so I know about the stupidity of my peers. I have two very close friends who didn't know about possible contraceptives, and because of it one of them is seventeen years old with a two year old daughter, and the other is fifteen with a newborn to take care of. Obviously, the lack of information of alternatives to abstinence was a problem, wasn't it? Kids are going to have sex no matter what you put in the curiculum, and there will always be teen pregnancies. If they are having sex anyway, then at least teach safer methods of having sex.

Honestly, the two of you need to grow up. This topic had so much potential to be good, but your little feud has taken up the whole post, and I think I can safely say that I'm not the only one who's sick and tired of your constant insults. A smear campaign just isn't necessary here, folks. Just make your point and move on.

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='JT Darkfire']Honestly, the two of you need to grow up. This topic had so much potential to be good, but your little feud has taken up the whole post, and I think I can safely say that I'm not the only one who's sick and tired of your constant insults. A smear campaign just isn't necessary here, folks. Just make your point and move on.[/quote] :rolleyes: Gee, I wonder where else this has happened.....

Chibihorsewoman isn't the one that's making the insults. Siren is. He has this problem with incorporating snide remarks and sarcasm into every single post of his. He's even gone so far as to call me a "Narccistic, self absorbed, fascist, propagandist". He never shows respect to other members if he disagrees with them, which in turn makes the other member want to reply back.[/COLOR]

[Brasil]

[quote name='JT Darkfire']Siren: You just don't seem to realize that while abstinence should be the preferred method, there will always be a stupid schmuck who chooses not to abstain and, the result: a child.[/quote] *refers you to the portion about his cousin, and various points throughout his prevoius posts*

I don't realize there will always be schmucks? I do, and that's why I'm saying what I'm saying, and why I've been saying what I've been saying.

[quote]I have family that made that stupid mistake, and I am still a teenager, so I know about the stupidity of my peers. I have two very close friends who didn't know about possible contraceptives, and because of it one of them is seventeen years old with a two year old daughter, and the other is fifteen with a newborn to take care of. Obviously, the lack of information of alternatives to abstinence was a problem, wasn't it? Kids are going to have sex no matter what you put in the curiculum, and there will always be teen pregnancies. If they are having sex anyway, then at least teach safer methods of having sex.[/quote] Teen gets pregnant because they didn't use protection or contraceptives, because they didn't know about it, fair enough.

But I find that "lack of information" angle incredibly hard to believe, not to bust on you or your friends, but when you can simply walk into your neighborhood Rite-Aid. When a simple Google search (even 5 or 6 years ago) would return a whole wealth of information on the subject?

While some Abstinence-only classes may not be giving a totally comprehensive experience, it's not as if Abstinence-only classes are the only potential sources, so I don't really view "lack of information" as a sound argument. What Abstinence-only classes may lack, anyone can find on sites such as [url="http://www.sexuality.org"]www.sexuality.org[/url], and that's the most obvious example I can think of.

And frankly, who doesn't know what condoms are in this day and age (or where to get them)? Or birth control pills? Seriously. lol

[quote]Honestly, the two of you need to grow up. This topic had so much potential to be good, but your little feud has taken up the whole post, and I think I can safely say that I'm not the only one who's sick and tired of your constant insults. A smear campaign just isn't necessary here, folks. Just make your point and move on.[/QUOTE] What potential? lol What constant insults? What smear campaign? I can say with utmost confidence that you're overreacting here, and considerably exaggerating what is being said in this thread. So, while I appreciate the effort, it ultimately falls on deaf ears, because there's no smear campaign coming from my end, and I'm pretty sure that's not the case for CHW, either. If calling an idea stupid, dumb, bad, etc., is a smear campaign to you, then no offense, but you need to get out more. lol

[quote=Chabichou][color=#004a6f]:rolleyes: Gee, I wonder where else this has happened.....

Chibihorsewoman isn't the one that's making the insults. Siren is. He has this problem with incorporating snide remarks and sarcasm into every single post of his. He's even gone so far as to call me a "Narccistic, self absorbed, fascist, propagandist". He never shows respect to other members if he disagrees with them, which in turn makes the other member want to reply back.[/color][/quote]
Chabi, [i]please[/i]. Blow it out your rear end and/or grow a pair, for crying out loud. The only reason you get so offended by what I say is because you're hypersensitive about [i]everything[/i]. Don't deny it, either. You know it just as well as I do. You [b][i]LOVE[/i][/b] playing the victim.

[James]

[color=#737373]I don't think we need to turn this into a running analysis of people's debates. Let's just stick to the topic.

I think that JT Darkfire summarized it well. On the one hand, one shouldn't dismiss abstinence and the fact that obviously, it's the best way to avoid getting pregnant or getting STDs or whatever. By the same token, it's outright dangerous not to arm people with the relevant knowledge about contraceptives and so on, because there are kids who will make the choice [i]regardless[/i]. So I think that what JT Darkfire suggests is a mixed approach, where abstinence is emphasized but where the other relevant information is provided, so that kids are armed with a kind of "back up" knowledge. The kids who go out there with no knowledge about contraception and stuff are the ones who are obviously most likely to get into trouble if they have sex.

As per usual, a one-sided solution won't work. It's like with politics. The left isn't always correct, nor is the right. What's usually needed is a balanced approach; a combination of the two philosophies. It reflects the complexity of all life, I think. [/color]