Abstinence Only sex "education" - Page 3

[TiredX2]

Originally Posted by Linda on the move 

So rather than teaching kids to use condemns, how to put them on, etc., they present the kids with statistics showing how ineffective they are. 

It drove me batty. It was all I could do to not say, "well, grown ups have sex all the time. Really, you guys wouldn't believe often Daddy and I have sex. And yet most adults end up with 2 or 3 kids, because although BC isn't prefect, when used correctly (as if your life depends on it), it words pretty darn well. Most people, after realizing how much work kids are, get really serious about BC, using 2 or more methods at a time, because the bottom line is -- sex feels really good, so people use BC carefully so they can have sex and not have more children."

Not debatinting or contradicting what you have said, just wanted to point out that the abstinance only sex education actually use completely *WRONG* statistics.  They act like the chances of getting pregnant on any form of birth control are calculated per *incedence* (of sexual intercourse) and that they chances are additive.  So, for example, with birth control if the failure rate is 7% (meaning 7% of people using the method for a *year* become pregnant) they say that each time you have sex it would be a 7% chance.  So, basically, with that birth control method they will say you have a 100% chance of becomming pregnant if you use it for about 15 times.  When they estimate 33% failure rate with condoms, it's basically "guaranteed" that you'll be pregnant (in their messed up math way of thinking) if you have sex three times.  I think it's criminal, not only is it innacurate, it comes back to bite a lot of people when they actually want to be getting pregnant!

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by TiredX2 
 I think it's criminal, not only is it innacurate, it comes back to bite a lot of people when they actually want to be getting pregnant!

I agree that it is completely horrid. And it is the norm national wide. The poster who said that one should go to school board meetings doesn't understand the scope of the problem.

After having a child a go through the program, I better understand why it is that both our teen birth rate and our abortion rates are so, so high. We, as a nation, are teaching teens to not use BC. It is criminal.

And I've talked to some parents who seemed like normal people to me but were completely unable to discuss sex with their kids. I'm reasonably sure that most teens in the US don't have access to real information about BC from any adult in their life.

The whole thing was a good experience for our family, in a twisted round about way, because I had GREAT conversations with my kids and added more reading material to our home library. My kids are very well informed, and honestly, they are a little better informed after the program than before. The program scared me. It really hit me that what I don't tell them, no one else will.

[Adaline'sMama]

Originally Posted by Linda on the move 

. The program scared me. It really hit me that what I don't tell them, no one else will.

This is so true, and what is so, so , sad is that there a tons of parents that wont talk to their kids about BC or safe sex, because they see it as encouraging or promoting their teen to have sex (my own mother is included in this. She actually told me once that she wasnt putting my sister (16) on BC because she thought it would just make her think she was condoning it. She also said that getting pregnant isnt the worst thing that could happen, maybe it would slow her down a little. - refering to my sister's partying habits.

I think that sex ed is very important and SHOULD be taught in public school. If a religious fanatic doesnt want their child to know how to correctly put on a condom, use BC, or any other things that are taught in positive sex ed courses, maybe THEY should send THEIR child to private school, not the other way around. I think kids have the right to know what is happening to their bodies and what they are capable or (be that sex, creating life, using birth control, ect.). Its very sad to me that there are tons of kids out there who dont know how their own bodies work.

[Ldavis24]

I don't things are going to change for the better anytime soon though. 

Maybe up here in the Northeast where we are all just liberal elitists (hehe) some changes could be made but I'm thinking of down in the bible belt and basically the whole Southeast, there is just ZERO chance of most of those folks (in general not everyone) even being willing to listen to someone gently suggest that maybe just maybe their methods aren't working so well. That is by far the area with the highest number of teen pregnancies/births and I do believe (I have to check my source) the area with the lowest level of comprehensive sex ed. Maybe down there people see it as a coincidence but from where I am sitting the problem is pretty damn obvious.

Religion just plays such a huge huge role in the whole purity/no sex before marriage so we won't teach you about it anyway thing...

Another thing is, I imagine a lot of the parents who are NEVER talking to their kid about sex (and the actual science of getting pregnant etc) don't have much of a clue about it themselves. I'm serious, if no one ever taught the parents about it how are the parents supposed to teach their own kids about it...Hence schools should be there to help but that isn't happening so we have a situation where something like 1 out 4 girls is getting pregnant before graduating high school...Yay America

[crunchy_mommy]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

I think that sex ed is very important and SHOULD be taught in public school. If a religious fanatic doesnt want their child to know how to correctly put on a condom, use BC, or any other things that are taught in positive sex ed courses, maybe THEY should send THEIR child to private school, not the other way around..

This makes no sense and I find it highly offensive.

First of all, the term 'religious fanatic' (especially how you used it here) seems quite derogatory.

Second, many of us that are opposed to birth control believe it is IMMORAL. It's not just that sex before marriage is wrong and we don't want to 'condone' it by distributing condoms -- it's that the condoms themselves (and other forms of birth control) are immoral. It's similar to having a public school class on finances that teaches kids how to steal food properly -- sure, it may prevent them from not starving if they are impoverished, but it would just be WRONG to teach that in a public school, you know? (At least I assume most would agree with that...)

Obviously, kids need to know what's going on with their bodies. And obviously, many parents (whether or not they believe in birth control) largely fail at the task of teaching their kids basic facts about sex & sexual development. So I do understand the conundrum that school are in -- they feel that SOMEONE needs to take responsibility for this aspect of education. While I don't expect public schools to promote any one religious view, I do expect them to avoid promoting something that many people feel is immoral -- whether it's birth control or stealing or whatever. There are abstinence-only programs that don't promote moral/religious views and have high efficacy. There are ways to present information on the body & sexuality that don't take any moral stance. I have my opinions and scientific support for them but I know that there aren't many options that will make EVERYONE happy, and just the fact that I'm religious will discredit my views in many of your minds, which is a frustrating judgement to be on this end of.

(I have no intention of sending DS to a public school anyway, but this is a larger issue than just what MY kid learns...)

[Ldavis24]

Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy 

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

I think that sex ed is very important and SHOULD be taught in public school. If a religious fanatic doesnt want their child to know how to correctly put on a condom, use BC, or any other things that are taught in positive sex ed courses, maybe THEY should send THEIR child to private school, not the other way around..

This makes no sense and I find it highly offensive.

First of all, the term 'religious fanatic' (especially how you used it here) seems quite derogatory.

Second, many of us that are opposed to birth control believe it is IMMORAL. It's not just that sex before marriage is wrong and we don't want to 'condone' it by distributing condoms -- it's that the condoms themselves (and other forms of birth control) are immoral. It's similar to having a public school class on finances that teaches kids how to steal food properly -- sure, it may prevent them from not starving if they are impoverished, but it would just be WRONG to teach that in a public school, you know? (At least I assume most would agree with that...)

Obviously, kids need to know what's going on with their bodies. And obviously, many parents (whether or not they believe in birth control) largely fail at the task of teaching their kids basic facts about sex & sexual development. So I do understand the conundrum that school are in -- they feel that SOMEONE needs to take responsibility for this aspect of education. While I don't expect public schools to promote any one religious view, I do expect them to avoid promoting something that many people feel is immoral -- whether it's birth control or stealing or whatever. There are abstinence-only programs that don't promote moral/religious views and have high efficacy. There are ways to present information on the body & sexuality that don't take any moral stance. I have my opinions and scientific support for them but I know that there aren't many options that will make EVERYONE happy, and just the fact that I'm religious will discredit my views in many of your minds, which is a frustrating judgement to be on this end of.

(I have no intention of sending DS to a public school anyway, but this is a larger issue than just what MY kid learns...)

you compared using any BC to stealing and that is where you lost me.

Yes people think any bc can be immoral. I haven't ever met someone who thought that for anything besides a religious reason.

I don't want someone else's dislike of BC because they equate it to stealing food to interfere with kids knowing how and when to use it. That is still religion taking over and dictating and a lot of people aren't religious, I find that so irritating being one of the non religious, it is just assumed I am Christian in this country.

Your personal belief that BC is immoral should not be allowed to dictate what every other person learns about it! Most kids need to learn about it in school because they aren't getting it at home and if someone has a moral problem with that it is much easier to pull 1 kid out of class than just not teach something really important. Pull your kid but don't screw over the rest of the kids because of your own personal beliefs.

 

[crunchy_mommy]

Honestly, I find this so offensive that I won't even bother with a real response. I shouldn't have even contributed to this thread, I don't have the time or energy to be caught up in a futile discussion. Carry on...

[RLoth]

 I don't know, showing condoms and doing "demonstrations" for young children is like giving a toddler a pistol and telling him not to shoot himself with it. They're going to get curious. I didn't grow up in a Christian atmosphere at home and the older I get, the more so I wish I did. There is nothing wrong with talking to your kids about abstinence and teaching the importance of waiting until marriage.  Sex use to be something special shared between ONE man and ONE woman, not let me try out my new girlfriend/boyfriend to see if they're good in bed.

Maybe that's why most "civilized" nations have ridiculously high divorce rates, because they marry for all the wrong reasons. We've become so superficial and in the process, destroyed the image of the woman, destroyed the home, and destroyed the family. The Christian principles teach love and respect and that the family should be protected, especially the woman and that she shouldn't be walking around showing her cleavage, and her butt cheeks to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. What's wrong with that?! This should be common logic folks.. Maybe If people would just stop hating on God and see the real message behind what the Bible says maybe they would learn something. There are reasons why God told his people to abstain from sex until marriage and it's not just because they we're going to burn in hell. Hello, VD anyone?  STDs are worse now than they ever were and that's just one reason. I'm sure others will add to this and there are plenty of reasons why we should encourage our children not to have sex until marriage. Plus, turning of the television, and hollywood trash. 

[Adaline'sMama]

My quotes arent working, sorry.
Crunchymama  "This makes no sense and I find it highly offensive.
First of all, the term 'religious fanatic' (especially how you used it here) seems quite derogatory.
Second, many of us that are opposed to birth control believe it is IMMORAL. It's not just that sex before marriage is wrong and we don't want to 'condone' it by distributing condoms -- it's that the condoms themselves (and other forms of birth control) are immoral. It's similar to having a public school class on finances that teaches kids how to steal food properly -- sure, it may prevent them from not starving if they are impoverished, but it would just be WRONG to teach that in a public school, you know? (At least I assume most would agree with that...)"






I have to say that ITA agree with LDavis24 in that I have NEVER met anyone who wasn't religious that found bc to be immoral. I'm sorry that you are offended by my terminology, but a "fanatic" is described on dictionary.com as "a person who has an uncritical zeal for a cause or belief."So Im sorry if it came off as derogatory, but I do think that sometimes religious people who are so passionate about what kids are/arent allowed to learn are a bit fanatic. I think critical thinking would lead most religious folk to realize that in the areas where abstinence only programs are taught the teen pregnancy rate is through the roof and it may be time to reconsider their idea of deciding what is "moral" or "immoral" for all of the OBVIOUSLY sexually active teenagers that go to school there. (there is seriously a daycare at our local high school. Some kids who go there are brothers and sisters meaning that their mama (or daddy) has more than one kid and they are still in high school...is that "moral?").


I guess my point is that that it shouldn't be assumed that the public is religious (or finds bc immoral), therefore I feel that ALL options regarding sexual education should be explored. Do I think schools should give out birth control or condoms? Sure, it'd be great! But, I totally understand why a lot of parents would have a problem with that and I wouldnt rally against them for it. But we aren't talking about that, we aren't talking AT ALL about the schools "promoting" bc. We are talking about education. Its my opinion that you can think something is immoral and be 100% opposed to it, but I don't see how you wouldn't want your child to know about it. I am 100% opposed to my child jumping off a building, but does that mean I'm never going to tell her that their are steps that lead to the roof? Some of these kids are only a year or two away from moving out of their parents house and living on their own. At some point, parents have to trust their kids to be able to make decisions. When can you be sure enough that you have raised them to agree with you about what you think is immoral that you can send them into the world to learn about whatever the public teaches them?

The concept that bc options shouldn't be taught in school is something I'm really confused about because I would think that if you are religious and raising your child to be as well, you should have enough faith in the teachings of your religion not to worry about the school telling your child that birth control exist and how to properly dispense it to themselves.

[Ldavis24]

Originally Posted by RLoth 

 I don't know, showing condoms and doing "demonstrations" for young children is like giving a toddler a pistol and telling him not to shoot himself with it. They're going to get curious. I didn't grow up in a Christian atmosphere at home and the older I get, the more so I wish I did. There is nothing wrong with talking to your kids about abstinence and teaching the importance of waiting until marriage.  Sex use to be something special shared between ONE man and ONE woman, not let me try out my new girlfriend/boyfriend to see if they're good in bed.

Maybe that's why most "civilized" nations have ridiculously high divorce rates, because they marry for all the wrong reasons. We've become so superficial and in the process, destroyed the image of the woman, destroyed the home, and destroyed the family. The Christian principles teach love and respect and that the family should be protected, especially the woman and that she shouldn't be walking around showing her cleavage, and her butt cheeks to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. What's wrong with that?! This should be common logic folks.. Maybe If people would just stop hating on God and see the real message behind what the Bible says maybe they would learn something. There are reasons why God told his people to abstain from sex until marriage and it's not just because they we're going to burn in hell. Hello, VD anyone?  STDs are worse now than they ever were and that's just one reason. I'm sure others will add to this and there are plenty of reasons why we should encourage our children not to have sex until marriage. Plus, turning of the television, and hollywood trash. 

Hmm talk about offensive! Why can't we all just believe in the Judeo-Christian God...everything would surely be better then

If I hadn't grown a thick skin regarding the fact that my mother is a lesbian I would take issue with so much you have written but hey it just "typical" Christian values....This is pretty much why I am an atheist....That and according to your "god" my mother is going to hell in a hand basket for living her life as the person she is...That is a huge other conversation though. 

Oh and FYI, they are not in schools showing YOUNG children how to put a condom on a banana, that is stupid.

There are NOT plenty of reasons to avoid sex until marriage. In fact the only ones are generally religious, why do Christians have the hardest time acknowledging this?

[Ldavis24]

Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy 

Honestly, I find this so offensive that I won't even bother with a real response. I shouldn't have even contributed to this thread, I don't have the time or energy to be caught up in a futile discussion. Carry on...

you're offended at me? I hope not, I'm just kinda shocked you compared BC to stealing...a lot of folks might find that pretty offensive but you don't see them throwing their hands up in disgust unable to talk...The discussion is NOT futile, you just don't like it.

[ChristaN]

Originally Posted by Linda on the move 

They didn't really teach them about sex. they taught them that if they had sex, they would get pregnant ( because birth control doesn't work). Having a baby would ruin their lives, and then they would die of aids.

So every one should wait for marriage.

That took 4 weeks.

We opted dd12 out of a part of the 7th grade sex ed curriculum last year that looked basically like that and that was taught by a local right to life group.  It was an odd combo of stuff ranging from pictures of genetalia with STDs and talk of anal sex and how it, too, isn't safe sex and then the Christian pro life group.  Despite my signing something for dd to miss the pro-life bunch, she still got a spiel from a teen mom about how having sex will ruin your life.  Scare tactics actually don't work either but no one at our local district seems to have looked that up. 

Since I have a Masters degree in Health Education/Public Health, I'm pretty well informed on what does and doesn't work.  I did a paper in grad school on teen pregnancy and found that kids who had been through abstinence only education were no less likely to have sex but were less likely to use birth control when they did b/c they had either been convinced it didn't work or scared into thinking that it would cause their bodies irreparable harm.  Some of the abstinence only programs I looked at discussed your uterus being perforated by IUDs (how many teens use IUDS for bc?!).  Overall, the teens who had done abstinence only programs had higher rates of teen pregnancy.
 

[Ldavis24]

Originally Posted by ChristaN 

We opted dd12 out of a part of the 7th grade sex ed curriculum last year that looked basically like that and that was taught by a local right to life group.  It was an odd combo of stuff ranging from pictures of genetalia with STDs and talk of anal sex and how it, too, isn't safe sex and then the Christian pro life group.  Despite my signing something for dd to miss the pro-life bunch, she still got a spiel from a teen mom about how having sex will ruin your life.  Scare tactics actually don't work either but no one at our local district seems to have looked that up. 

Since I have a Masters degree in Health Education/Public Health, I'm pretty well informed on what does and doesn't work.  I did a paper in grad school on teen pregnancy and found that kids who had been through abstinence only education were no less likely to have sex but were less likely to use birth control when they did b/c they had either been convinced it didn't work or scared into thinking that it would cause their bodies irreparable harm.  Some of the abstinence only programs I looked at discussed your uterus being perforated by IUDs (how many teens use IUDS for bc?!).  Overall, the teens who had done abstinence only programs had higher rates of teen pregnancy.
 

I'm just curious, not that you would really know, but how the heck did a right to life group get access to a public school of middle school aged kids? Did they volunteer to do it or something. That alone just blows my mind.

[MamaofLiam]

Originally Posted by RLoth 

 I don't know, showing condoms and doing "demonstrations" for young children is like giving a toddler a pistol and telling him not to shoot himself with it. They're going to get curious. I didn't grow up in a Christian atmosphere at home and the older I get, the more so I wish I did. There is nothing wrong with talking to your kids about abstinence and teaching the importance of waiting until marriage.  Sex use to be something special shared between ONE man and ONE woman, not let me try out my new girlfriend/boyfriend to see if they're good in bed.

Maybe that's why most "civilized" nations have ridiculously high divorce rates, because they marry for all the wrong reasons. We've become so superficial and in the process, destroyed the image of the woman, destroyed the home, and destroyed the family. The Christian principles teach love and respect and that the family should be protected, especially the woman and that she shouldn't be walking around showing her cleavage, and her butt cheeks to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. What's wrong with that?! This should be common logic folks.. Maybe If people would just stop hating on God and see the real message behind what the Bible says maybe they would learn something. There are reasons why God told his people to abstain from sex until marriage and it's not just because they we're going to burn in hell. Hello, VD anyone?  STDs are worse now than they ever were and that's just one reason. I'm sure others will add to this and there are plenty of reasons why we should encourage our children not to have sex until marriage. Plus, turning of the television, and hollywood trash. 

There is a lot of other stuff in this post that I don't agree with, but what does what a female wears have to do with sex education and this discussion? What is the "common logic" you're referring to? 

[crunchy_mommy]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

I have to say that ITA agree with LDavis24 in that I have NEVER met anyone who wasn't religious that found bc to be immoral. I'm sorry that you are offended by my terminology, but a "fanatic" is described on dictionary.com as "a person who has an uncritical zeal for a cause or belief."

The 'uncritical' part is what I find offensive. It makes it sound like those of us who hold these beliefs just do so 'because our religion tells us to', that we don't think about it or question it, that we blindly follow our religion's teachings, that we are basically brainwashed or something. I think very critically about my faith -- what's the point in believing something if you don't understand it, even question it? What's the point in just accepting everything you've ever been taught without even thinking critically about it? I am deeply religious and have a very strong faith and strict moral compass, but I certainly would not consider myself a 'fanatic' in the way you used it. It's the same way those that vax are often seen as blindly following medical authority (when in fact, I know lots of people who vax (I don't) who did a ton of research & critical thinking on the matter).

I have no idea whether any people who are not religious feel like bc is immoral because it's not really a common topic of discussion. I do know I have friends who are not remotely religious but do not use birth control -- I can't attest to their reasoning, I suspect it's a mixture of avoiding something 'artificial' and likely other factors... But I feel like the last few responses have implied that because I am religious, my beliefs about bc are invalid, unimportant, or irrelevant. I can and DO think for myself, so it's just insulting to hear...

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

The concept that bc options shouldn't be taught in school is something I'm really confused about because I would think that if you are religious and raising your child to be as well, you should have enough faith in the teachings of your religion not to worry about the school telling your child that birth control exist and how to properly dispense it to themselves.

I agree. I also think if I raise my kids well, they will hopefully avoid drugs, excessive drinking, smoking, etc. But I still don't want someone to teach them how to snort coke or light a cigarette or how to obtain substances illegally... There's no reason to tell my child that, there's no reason to 'test' or tempt him unnecessarily, there's no reason to lead him to believe that these choices are normal, moral, and acceptable because 'everyone else is doing it'....

[ChristaN]

I'm honestly not sure.  The entire curriculum seemed inappropriate for my dd IMHO.
 

The Education Coordinator's bio on their webpage says that: 
"___ is one of the Teen Advisor and Life Choices Education Coordinators. As a leader of the TA Program - high school group, she leads monthly meetings on topics ranging from purity to relationships and love.  She also serves as an Education Presenter in the [local] and [other local] school districts..." 

I have to imagine that this is volunteer work, but I have issues with who they are allowing to volunteer and what they are allowing these volunteers to say to our kids especially when research indicates that it is detrimental in terms of pregnancy rates.

Originally Posted by Ldavis24 

I'm just curious, not that you would really know, but how the heck did a right to life group get access to a public school of middle school aged kids? Did they volunteer to do it or something. That alone just blows my mind.

Edited by ChristaN - 4/25/11 at 1:29pm

[Adaline'sMama]

Originally Posted by RLoth 

 I don't know, showing condoms and doing "demonstrations" for young children is like giving a toddler a pistol and telling him not to shoot himself with it. They're going to get curious. I didn't grow up in a Christian atmosphere at home and the older I get, the more so I wish I did. There is nothing wrong with talking to your kids about abstinence and teaching the importance of waiting until marriage.  Sex use to be something special shared between ONE man and ONE woman, not let me try out my new girlfriend/boyfriend to see if they're good in bed.

Maybe that's why most "civilized" nations have ridiculously high divorce rates, because they marry for all the wrong reasons. We've become so superficial and in the process, destroyed the image of the woman, destroyed the home, and destroyed the family. The Christian principles teach love and respect and that the family should be protected, especially the woman and that she shouldn't be walking around showing her cleavage, and her butt cheeks to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. What's wrong with that?! This should be common logic folks.. Maybe If people would just stop hating on God and see the real message behind what the Bible says maybe they would learn something. There are reasons why God told his people to abstain from sex until marriage and it's not just because they we're going to burn in hell. Hello, VD anyone?  STDs are worse now than they ever were and that's just one reason. I'm sure others will add to this and there are plenty of reasons why we should encourage our children not to have sex until marriage. Plus, turning of the television, and hollywood trash. 

I know you are new around here, but comments like this arent going to get you very far. In case you havent noticed, this is a pretty woman's breast friendly place :) I show my cleavage everywhere I go. Makes it a whole lot easier to pop my boob out the top and nurse my kiddo.
 

[RLoth]

I have a question. If birth control is so good, why are STDs and teen pregnancy rates so high?  Kids are so stupid nowadays they don't even use condoms or any kind of birth control.  If parents really think showing their kids all this stuff is going to improve the quality of their life, they seriously need to get their heads out of the sand. How about we start teaching our kids some morals and principles and stop letting them watch the boob tube. But then again mommy and daddy have no morals so let's just let big daddy government do it, and complain about the end results.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by RLoth 

 I don't know, showing condoms and doing "demonstrations" for young children is like giving a toddler a pistol and telling him not to shoot himself with it. 

Where is that happening? It's not even happening in any high school that I know of, much less with "young children." They can't even tell the teens where to get BC, much less teach them how to use it.

Your comments don't even make any sense to me.

The sex miseducation that my child got at public school was abstinence only and lacked any reference to religion, but a traditional catholic would have loved it. It went along with traditional church teachings even though it didn't mention god.

[crunchy_mommy]

Originally Posted by Ldavis24 

you're offended at me? I hope not, I'm just kinda shocked you compared BC to stealing...a lot of folks might find that pretty offensive but you don't see them throwing their hands up in disgust unable to talk...The discussion is NOT futile, you just don't like it.

Maybe it's the way the words come across in writing -- maybe if we were having this discussion in real life, I wouldn't be offended. I just sense that you (and some others on here) have already made up your minds anyway, have already discounted what I say simply on the grounds that I am religious... It's just a frustrating discussion to have. I don't normally 'throw my hands up in disgust' and just walk away, it's just the way you stated it that I found difficult to even read. I used to have my religion in my siggy (like some others do) and I removed it because on MDC, I feel like my statements totally lose value when someone knows my religion... and right here just seems like more evidence of that. If I told you I had these views about BC, but instead said I'm an atheist, I feel like my words would get a totally different reaction. It's the judgement that's insulting to me.