Abstinence Programs for adults?

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]OKay I heard this on one of the morning shows this morning and nearly died laughing. As if teaching soley abstinence to pre-teens and teens wasn't enough now the Bush administration has the bright idea to teach twenty- twenty-nine year olds how to just say no. (Hopefully while in a drunken stupor) The reasoning behind this? Well the rate of unwed mothers between the ages of twenty- twenty-four is just too damn high. Don't believe me? Read this:
[URL=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061030/ap_on_go_ot/abstinence_twentysomethings]No really I wasn't joking[/URL]

or this:

[URL=http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-30-abstinence-message_x.htm]Abstinence being taught to adults?[/URL]

I think this is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Who ever decided that adults need to be taught how to say now is really... well I guess it's just something I should expect from the Bush Administration.

So, does anyone else want to read and reply? I'm dying to hear what other people think.[/color][/font]

[DeadSeraphim]

[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Ha. I think this is less "too many young mums", and more "promoting conservative Christian values like no sex till marriage". What this campaign fails to realise, however, is if someone is going to be abstinent till marriage (or whenever), they'll have decided by the time they're in their twenties. You can't really convince them otherwise.[/font][/color][/size]

[Veritas]

[size=1][color=dimgray]So if we have 24 to 29 year olds just saying no, when are they supposed to have kids? Now I realise raising a child out of wedlock is no easy task, hell I'm a product of it, but this honesly will it solve anything. By the time you are 24 you should be able to say no if you want to, you're an adult, I think you'd know what sex is, and if you want it. And also at that age I'm sure you would be able to realize the consiquences of sex, whether or not you are still a virgin. [/color][/size]
[size=1][color=dimgray][/color][/size]
[size=1][color=dimgray]Yeah it would be cool if everyone could have kids while married and stay that way, but life likes to throw curve balls. Raising a child is hard to do when you're single but it isn't impossible, and personally I'm grateful I was raised by a single mom, I think it's given me a respect for women alot of guys lack.[/color][/size]

[vegeta rocker]

That is more ridiculous than Bush trying to complete a speech without making up a few words.

Because letting religion get a stronghold on government and state programs is a great idea.

Look at the Middle East, everything works great for them and religion drives almost everything.

LUDACRIS.

[only1specialed]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact]MWAHahaha man people just cant stop being funny. If it didn?t work when they were in high school or middle school what the hell makes them think its gonna work when they?re freaking older. DeadSeraphim I almost always agree with everything you say and you always make me laugh, but I don?t think they?re trying to promote the whole Christian stuff. I think you might be looking a little to deep into it. Although the whole not have sex is stupid they should have some other program for free condoms or promote safe sex rather than no sex.

(I have a weird feeling this is gonna be another bush bashing thread?. that?s just me though :animeswea )[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DarkRed][QUOTE=only1specialed][COLOR=DarkOrange][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact] DeadSeraphim I almost always agree with everything you say and you always make me laugh, but I don?t think they?re trying to promote the whole Christian stuff. I think you might be looking a little to deep into it. Although the whole not have sex is stupid they should have some other program for free condoms or promote safe sex rather than no sex.

(I have a weird feeling this is gonna be another bush bashing thread?. that?s just me though :animeswea )[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/QUOTE]Ah but it is driven by those who have Christian values. And Bush is well known for sucking up to them. One would think that promoting things like safe sex would work, but here in Utah the government literally turned down millions in federal aid to schools because they refused to offer sex education in the High Schools. Some do, but quite a few do not. Besides as it says here in the article:
[SIZE=1][INDENT]The new federal guidelines note that the highest rates of out-of-wedlock births occur among women in their 20s, not among teens.[/INDENT][/SIZE]It?s obvious that their biggest complaint is that women who are not married are having children. And honestly, since when was marriage required to have a kid? That?s called [I]Christian Values[/I] as usually religion is the one that frowns on people having sex or kids outside of marriage.

Still don?t think it?s driven by Christian Values? What about this part of the article?
[SIZE=1]
[INDENT]"If the goal is to reduce unintended pregnancies, there is something called birth control," Wagoner said. "And the government should be promoting it."[/INDENT][/SIZE]I?d like to know the same thing, if they just want to prevent babies why promote the idea of just saying no? They would get better results promoting the use of condoms and birth control. But instead they are going on the tangent of just say no.

At this point, I?m beyond being surprised by the stupid things the government wants to spend money on.
[/COLOR]

[DeadSeraphim]

[QUOTE=only1specialed][COLOR=DarkOrange][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact]MWAHahaha man people just cant stop being funny. If it didn?t work when they were in high school or middle school what the hell makes them think its gonna work when they?re freaking older. DeadSeraphim I almost always agree with everything you say and you always make me laugh, but I don?t think they?re trying to promote the whole Christian stuff. I think you might be looking a little to deep into it. Although the whole not have sex is stupid they should have some other program for free condoms or promote safe sex rather than no sex.

(I have a weird feeling this is gonna be another bush bashing thread?. that?s just me though :animeswea )[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/QUOTE]
[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]Abstinence until marriage is a distinctly Christian phenomenon in the US, and the links (if you read them) back this up pretty conclusively. It's all about getting people married before they ****, I doubt they care much at all about the plight of single parents.[/font][/color][/size]

[only1specialed]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact]Alright Alright. You guys caught me i got bored reading that article. hehe But i still think its stupid regardless and your right. Why dont they promote birth control and other crap like that? Seriously if they didnt listen as kids i dont know what makes them think they can change their mind now that there adults.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]After I read the article I sent the link to two of my friends who are twenty-five like me and female. One of them lives in Canada the other lives in New York like I do. Both of them agreed with me that this has got to be one of the dumbest things ever created.

I can't believe it's actually being considered. Shouldn't adults be allowed to make our own decisions about when we're going to have sex? The age groups listed for this program are perfectly capable of holding down jobs and going to college along with raising a child. I know this for a fact because I'm a single mom and my best friend was (technically still is because she's only engaged) and we both manage to take care of our kids (with a little help from family and the baby sitter) go to our jobs and contemplate going back to college. It's not that hard. Twenty somethings are quite capable of making rational dicisions, we don't need a right wing Christian extremist government telling us what to do.

I have some far better ideas of what to do with the fifty million in funding to go to this assinine idea:

Donate it to the victims of Katrina, Rita and that arnson related wild fire in California- They could certainly use it more

Use it to fund the welfare system in states across the US. As a person who relies on this program (Even though I work dammit!) I know that they need some more people, preferably ones with better costumer service skills.

Give it to me (Well yeah it's a long shot, but I wouldn't turn that money down.)

Fund some after school programs in cities with a high [b][u]Teenage[/u][/b] pregancy rate so that they have something to do after school besides eachother.

Really the possibilities are endless. You don't need to teach twenty somethings how to say no, you really just need to teach them how to use protection.[/color][/font]

[Semjaza]

Personally, I don't care what people generally do on their own time. I do kind of think it's ridiculous that government funding is going towards things like this at far higher rates than any other family planning over the last few years. It's all pretty moral and religiously skewed.

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=DarkOrchid]Maybe I should just copy and paste what indifference said as I agree. This whole thing is nothing more than a bunch of religious people trying to force their moral values on others. Why else would they be concerned about someone in that age group having sex or kids?

And honestly, it?s really none of their business. If they want to have sex and kids without being married, it?s their choice to make. At this point they are old enough to make that decision.
[/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[QUOTE=Aaryanna][COLOR=DarkOrchid]And honestly, it?s really none of their business.
[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson]One of the neat things about America's government is that most of the things it rants, raves and spends copious amounts of money on are none of it's business.

"And the Lord said 'Thou shalt shusheth', and the masses did and look! It was good."[/color]

[DeadSeraphim]

[QUOTE=DeathKnight][color=crimson]One of the neat things about America's government is that most of the things it rants, raves and spends copious amounts of money on are none of it's business.

"And the Lord said 'Thou shalt shusheth', and the masses did and look! It was good."[/color][/QUOTE]
[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It must be great for the conservative types to know the government has their back in hating and discouraging things they've never encountered or will encounter, but despise regardless. Like those damn homosekshuals, and thems unmarried mothers!!!!

Seriously though, don't get me wrong - Australia's current government is pretty conservative as well, and has made some silly liberty-impinging decisions over its (lengthy) tenure. The Bush administration just seems to take it to strange extremes I'd never expect a developed Western country to take, though. It's almost tragic, watching it from afar. Almost.[/font][/color][/size]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DarkRed][quote name='DeadSeraphim][size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]The Bush administration just seems to take it to strange extremes I'd never expect a developed Western country to take, though. It's almost tragic, watching it from afar. Almost.[/font][/color'][/size][/quote]It's the watching it up close that's really sickening. The attitude of it's alright to waste the taxpayers money on issues that aren't their concern is equally as sickening. A how dare those people have sex and kids outside of marriage! They shouldn't be having sex at all!

So instead of offering education on safe sex and using preventative measures they want them to not be sexually active at all. And I don't know about others, but being one of those women in that age group, I've never been one for a totally chaste relationship, especially when it's fairly easy to protect against getting pregnant.

Though they are forgetting that some of those un-wed mothers as they put it, want kids without being married. And as Aaryanna already mentioned, they are old enough to make that decision. Just as I am old enough to decide if I want to be sexually active or not. [/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

Personally I think people are getting a little uptight about this, sure coming from OB's resident Catholic this may sound slightly hollow, but this is simply an education program designed to give people another perspective on sex. I mean some of the responses really sound as if President Bush is just using this as a stepping stone before banning outright people's ability to have children outside of a Christian form of wedlock. Sure the money could be better spent on other programs, but there are dozens of other programs the American government, and [B]all[/B] governments spend money on that could be better spent elsewhere.

As for when and where people have sex, that's their own decision, they want to wait till their married, that's fine, they don't, that's their business. But if we look at this from a strictly religious and politically neutral point of view, most children born to a family with two parents generally are better off financially that those who grow up in single parent families. My own mother was raised by her mother alone, and I know I've had it better than she had because I've had two working parents. I'm not saying marriage is the key, just that two heads or in this case paycheques are better that one. [/SIZE]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DarkRed][quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Personally I think people are getting a little uptight about this, sure coming from OB's resident Catholic this may sound slightly hollow, but this is simply an education program designed to give people another perspective on sex. [/SIZE][/quote]The reason some of us sound a bit uptight is there isn't other education on preventing pregnancy. Here in Utah, the schools only teach the kids to not have sex. A few places do offer a more education, but not very many as it?s frowned upon to tell kids or young adults to use condoms or birth control. If this idea of the Bush administration was an addition to a program where they explained safe sex, using preventive measures and then the benefits of abstinence, then I wouldn't be bothered. But where I live many of the schools and centers do not offer any form or education other than not having sex. Which in my opinion makes things worse as the kids and young adults aren?t very familiar with all of the options, only the one of never having sex.

And if you think that?s bad some of the pharmacies and stores put condoms behind the counter so you have to ask for it instead of being able to get it and purchase it using one of the self-service check outs. So they make it harder for people who are self conscious about making such purchases. So some of us see this as another attempt by the government to try and tell people what to do instead of really giving them informed choices. [/COLOR]

[The13thMan]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I'm glad to see president Bush is attacking the important problems in our nation. You know, the war in Iraq, North Korea, Iran, pollution, global warming, and of course abstinence among 21-29 year olds!

...something doesn't feel right.

Oh snap! I know what it is! It's president Bush!

LOLZ!

<_< I'm going to go weep for humanity now.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DarkRed']The reason some of us sound a bit uptight is there isn't other education on preventing pregnancy. Here in Utah, the schools only teach the kids to not have sex. A few places do offer a more education, but not very many as it?s frowned upon to tell kids or young adults to use condoms or birth control. If this idea of the Bush administration was an addition to a program where they explained safe sex, using preventive measures and then the benefits of abstinence, then I wouldn't be bothered. But where I live many of the schools and centers do not offer any form or education other than not having sex. Which in my opinion makes things worse as the kids and young adults aren?t very familiar with all of the options, only the one of never having sex.[/COLOR][/quote]

[SIZE=1]While I can sympathise with you situation indifference, I have to admit I've always felt that it's better to teach abstinence first and then later discuss safe-sex methods, but maybe I'm just really old-fashioned that way, or just really Catholic, take your pick. I guess I've never seen condoms as being any better an alternative to abstinence though I agree people do need to be able to make that choice for themselves as to which they prefer.[/SIZE]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DarkRed']And if you think that?s bad some of the pharmacies and stores put condoms behind the counter so you have to ask for it instead of being able to get it and purchase it using one of the self-service check outs. So they make it harder for people who are self conscious about making such purchases. So some of us see this as another attempt by the government to try and tell people what to do instead of really giving them informed choices. [/COLOR][/quote]

[SIZE=1]What's wrong with having to ask for them ? Seriously just because you might be a bit embarrassed to ask for a pack of condoms does not mean the government are trying to prevent you buying them. My local pharmacy keeps them behind the counter, but in plain view and it's done to keep them out of children's hands.[/SIZE]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DarkRed][quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1]While I can sympathise with you situation indifference, I have to admit I've always felt that it's better to teach abstinence first and then later discuss safe-sex methods, but maybe I'm just really old-fashioned that way, or just really Catholic, take your pick. I guess I've never seen condoms as being any better an alternative to abstinence though I agree people do need to be able to make that choice for themselves as to which they prefer.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]I really have no problem with teaching one method first. It?s the only teaching one method that bothers me as it comes across as an attempt to force Christian moral values on others. I can see where you are coming from and perhaps it is different where you live, but they don?t teach other methods here, and that in my opinion is stupid. Teenagers and young adults need all the options so that they can decide for themselves which method is the best. [QUOTE=Gavin][SIZE=1']What's wrong with having to ask for them ? Seriously just because you might be a bit embarrassed to ask for a pack of condoms does not mean the government are trying to prevent you buying them. My local pharmacy keeps them behind the counter, but in plain view and it's done to keep them out of children's hands.[/SIZE][/quote]You misunderstood me. I myself am not embarrassed, but in the course of my job I work with women who are seeking alternatives and I often get asked where they can get them without having to ask for them. ;)

Also, and it?s my fault for not explaining this upfront. Many of the stores that do keep them where you have to ask, didn?t use to. It?s something that?s been changed within the past year. Though I suppose that could be due to theft issues and not an intention to embarrass others. I guess I?m just too use to there being an ulterior motive when aspects of this type of subject are discussed where I live. [/COLOR]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DarkRed']And if you think that?s bad some of the pharmacies and stores put condoms behind the counter so you have to ask for it instead of being able to get it and purchase it using one of the self-service check outs. So they make it harder for people who are self conscious about making such purchases. So some of us see this as another attempt by the government to try and tell people what to do instead of really giving them informed choices. [/COLOR][/quote]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]You're telliong me. One of the local supermarkets *cough* Tops *cough* up here in New York (Which is actually a rather liberal state) has their condoms locked up next to the pharmacy counter so some one has to know your personal life when you're getting protection.

Now me, I have no problem if I had to go buy condoms and someone wanted to be nosey I'd be like 'Yeah, I'm having SEX! What are you doing tonight?' But that's me and I'm extroverted. I can imagine that someone who is more Puritanical than I am or not as blunt would be emberassed.

I dodged a bullet with my graduation year (Class of '99!) I was in school during the Clinton administration and damn straight we learned about sex. We learned about protection, we learned about STDs, we learned that you should wait until you're ready. We were thankfully not told just say no. I think that this current administration does a terrible job of teaching kids about sex. I think everyone is hoping that someone else will tell their kids about sex so they don't have to do the job themselves.

Did you know that the government in the US pulls funding for schools that teach anything besides condom failure and abstinence? Or that the Bush administration has authorized pharmasists to refuse to sell birth control pills if it's against their moral beliefs? Or that in 2004 North Dakota over turned Roe Vs Wade and right to life demonstrators shoot OBGYNs because they suspect that they perform abortions?

And now I have gone off topic. Excuse me while I find something else to do.[/color][/font]

[TheShinje]

[QUOTE=ChibiHorsewoman][color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]You're telliong me. One of the local supermarkets *cough* Tops *cough* up here in New York (Which is actually a rather liberal state) has their condoms locked up next to the pharmacy counter so some one has to know your personal life when you're getting protection.
[/font][/color][/QUOTE][color=crimson] Oh, come now. They're going to know you're buying condoms when you check out with them anyway. ;)

I don't see a problem with this abstinence program. Think aside the Christian element if it makes you a little uncomfortable and look at the practicality.... A Committed, nuclear family will always be an ideal environment in which to bring kids into the world. If it's ideal, why not promote it?

Sure, safe sex and proper condom use should be promoted because not everyone is going to agree to the idea of holding off sex until marriage, but that does not make abstenince programs the devil in a prada shirt.

After all, there is still a choice to praticipate in them, or not, isn't there?[/color]

[Gavin]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DarkRed']I really have no problem with teaching one method first. It?s the only teaching one method that bothers me as it comes across as an attempt to force Christian moral values on others. I can see where you are coming from and perhaps it is different where you live, but they don?t teach other methods here, and that in my opinion is stupid. Teenagers and young adults need all the options so that they can decide for themselves which method is the best. You misunderstood me. I myself am not embarrassed, but in the course of my job I work with women who are seeking alternatives and I often get asked where they can get them without having to ask for them. ;)[/COLOR][/quote]

[SIZE=1]You're telling me, the only sex education we ever got in school was the very clinical explanations in biology, and at that stage I'd already had the birds and the bees talk with my parents. Thankfully even before then I was aware of the more graphic details so in-depth explanations were not necessary. I'm not promoting one over the other, I think people need to make their own choices, and to do so I agree they need to be given all the facts, including the one eluding a lot of people I know, that condoms are not invincible.[/SIZE]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DarkRed']Also, and it?s my fault for not explaining this upfront. Many of the stores that do keep them where you have to ask, didn?t use to. It?s something that?s been changed within the past year. Though I suppose that could be due to theft issues and not an intention to embarrass others. I guess I?m just too used to there being an ulterior motive when aspects of this type of subject are discussed where I live. [/COLOR][/quote]

[SIZE=1]Ah OK, I thought you'd meant that they had always been like that. It's probably theft, as I can't imagine it's too hard (no pun intended) to steal a pack of condoms if they're just stacked up like everything else. [/SIZE]

[James]

[quote]Sure, safe sex and proper condom use should be promoted because not everyone is going to agree to the idea of holding off sex until marriage, but that does not make abstenince programs the devil in a prada shirt.
[/quote]

[font=arial]I think the problem is that some people equate abstinence programs with abstinence [i]only[/i] programs.

Obviously these programs don't work simply because you're always going to have people who want to have sex before marriage. So while it's fine to say "just don't do it", parents and educators also have a responsibility to arm people with the appropriate knowledge in case they [i]do[/i] do it. This has nothing to do with endorsing sex at a young age, it simply recognises the idea of limiting any damage that may come from it.

I would say that a lot of teen pregnancies occur when teenagers are simply ill-informed about contraceptive measures and so on - regardless of abstinence programs.

So, I think everyone would agree that in a sex education course, the teachers should probably say "obviously the best way to avoid any problems is simply to wait before you have sex". That should then be followed by "if you do have sex, however, here's what you need to know in order to limit the chance of an STD or pregnancy".

As with most things in life, it's about balance.
[/font]

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=DarkOrchid][QUOTE=James][font=arial]So, I think everyone would agree that in a sex education course, the teachers should probably say "obviously the best way to avoid any problems is simply to wait before you have sex". That should then be followed by "if you do have sex, however, here's what you need to know in order to limit the chance of an STD or pregnancy".

As with most things in life, it's about balance.
[/font][/QUOTE]That?s exactly it! ^_^ The thing that gets people so annoyed is just like indifference mentioned, they want to teach don?t have sex and nothing else, they don?t want to teach them about how to prevent pregnancy or about condoms or about how as Gavin mentioned they can fail. They want the kids/young adults to simply never have sex unless they are married and they think that by only teaching the abstinence part it will work.

But it doesn?t as people are going to have sex anyway and by not arming them with the correct information they are potentially exposing them to all sorts of problems. [quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']You're telling me, the only sex education we ever got in school was the very clinical explanations in biology, and at that stage I'd already had the birds and the bees talk with my parents. Thankfully even before then I was aware of the more graphic details so in-depth explanations were not necessary. I'm not promoting one over the other, I think people need to make their own choices, and to do so I agree they need to be given all the facts, including the one eluding a lot of people I know, that condoms are not invincible.[/SIZE][/quote]I?m glad your parents took the time to explain things to you. Believe it or not there are plenty of parents around here who simply won?t discuss it at all. I have friends who when they try to ask their parents they tell them that all they need to know is to never have sex. o_O Honestly, one of my friends who is thirteen thought that a simple kiss with a guy on the mouth could get her pregnant, until I explained it wouldn?t. But her parents wouldn?t explain anything to her at all!

I?m sure it?s not that extreme in other places, but the attitude I run into around here is you don?t discuss it, you don?t do things with boys and therefore, you are prepared. But it leaves you wondering just what in the world sex really is. I know because I hunted down the information in the library and then confronted my mom with it. She was terribly embarrassed but at that point she discussed it with me.

So I really think abstinence programs are a good idea, so long as they are part of a whole package that teaches you what to do if you do decide to have sex after all. Whether or not your married shouldn?t even matter. They need to be educated so that they are prepared. [/COLOR]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=Shinje][color=crimson] Oh, come now. They're going to know you're buying condoms when you check out with them anyway. ;)

[/color][/QUOTE]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]Well there is always the chance you're going to fill them with water and throw them off an over pass. Not that I've ever done something like that. But there is that chance.

I think we need to elect another sexually active Democrat to office so we can go back to learning about the DO'S and don'ts of sex instead of just the don'ts.[/color][/font]