Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dave G on July 23, 2009 at 9:32am

True, although they also want all of those babies to be born to properly married people who will then bring up those kids in their faith.

Abstinence is an effective method of birth control, as it is hard (but not impossible) to get pregnant without having sex. However, abstinence-only education is an utter failure if the goal is fewer teen pregnancies, less STD transmission, and a better educated population. A comprehensive sex education, which includes a review of all birth control methods, dispelling common misconceptions about sex and pregnancy, and information on STDs and the transmission thereof, is by far the best method to meet those goals.

However, the pro-abstinence-only people do not have those goals in mind. Their only goal is religious purity, a goal that has always been at odds with education.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on July 23, 2009 at 10:37pm

Ah so true. I just got into a debate with my mom about this; I think I won, too... which is, like, monumental because she lives in so much denial.

She is absolutely against abortion, but also absolutely against birth control for people who are not married. I had to really corner her about this issue. She hates the attitude or idea that "kids are going to have sex if they want to"; she thinks that if they're raised right, they won't have sex before marriage. I had to use the example of my own cousin, who was raised just as conservatively as anyone could be, and she still did it! Not only that, I pointed out, but I had to brow-beat her into using condoms. She kept saying (in all shame and repentance) that they wouldn't do it again, and she was too embarrassed to get the condoms at all. Not only that, but she didn't want the condoms around to make it EASIER to have sex when they were trying not to. I was like "Dude. You're GOING to have sex again! You need to wear condoms so you at least don't get pregnant! That'll be much worse than JUST having sex!"

I had to go on to point out all the dysfunction of our SUPPOSEDLY Christian home in order to get her to acknowledge that you cannot control kids. If abortion is sooo heinous a crime, then we should at least be willing to allow idiot kids (who clearly should NOT be parents) to have access to birth control. They actually end up pregnant because of their shame and lack of education! So, what are we more concerned about; the morality of our children, or the alleged murder of unborn babies? According to them, we should be more concerned about the babies... so prevent the atrocity before it happens! RIght?

They don't seem to reason this stuff out much; they don't seem to care about the well-being of anyone, the unborn included. All they care about is morality, however contradictory the terms are. But, I think she got it this time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on July 23, 2009 at 10:49pm

Comprehensive sex education in Europe is partially credited with lower abortion rates even though abortion is broadly legal. I'd tell the religious to pick one.

Of course, there are those who trust to God's will. The inane argument that if God wills it, you'll have kids. If not, then that is your birth control. Of course, most folks who say that in regards to pregnancies would never use that argument in other medical situations like, say....diabetes...or cardiac arrest...or broken bones...you get the idea. Intervention there isn't debated in the least.

Greg Fish has a good post regarding porn and religion that that discusses religious attitudes and aversions to the normal, natural, and healthy activity of sex.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by D'Holbach on July 26, 2009 at 1:45pm

Well-said, Dave.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Colin G. Wood on July 23, 2009 at 9:25pm

Coming from a Christan school from kindergarden to 5th grade, I never knew any anatomy of a women until high school. My parents didn't really have a talk for this. My parents didnt want me to have a girlfriend until I was much older, out of high school. Which I think emotionally stunted me. Im sure if I would have stayed with it it would have been abstanese for religious reasons.

In public school it was just use a condom which I suppose is ok but I think a lot of the schools arnt teaching enough about safe/sex and sex ed. It seems to be such a taboo, especially in a small area where 99.99% of the people are some form of Christan(I am that .001).

I do think that is verrrry hard to implement, there is to much temptation in the media and in life in general. Once the hormones kick in.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on July 23, 2009 at 10:48pm

Yeah, so hard it could be compared to resisting the voice change that happens to little boys in puberty. You could alter your voice to sound higher, but... it's not natural and, therefore, extremely difficult.

And hey, I feel stunted for the same reasons. I was planning on waiting until I was married, until I realized I may end up a 30 year old virgin. That was more terrifying to me than God's disapproval at the point lol...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeremy Roney on July 26, 2009 at 5:49am

Abstinence has got to be the WORST idea anyone has ever come up with in any sex ed program. It fails for so very many reasons. In all honesty pushing our children to "wait till marriage" is a terrible idea. Very few will actually take this terrible advice, and those that actually do generally end up committing to spending their lives with someone they haven't really had a "real" relationship with yet.

You really have to wonder why sex is so taboo in our culture. What is it about sex that makes it such a terrible thing to do, even though everyone does it and almost everyone was produced as a result of it? My guess is that it stems from children being born to single mothers in an age before effective means of birth control. This was bad for everyone, and religion stepped in to say it was immoral. If that is true, what does that mean for our society today?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on July 26, 2009 at 9:36am

Israelite tribal fathers also engaged in sexual hospitality of their daughters to house guests. When guests were in their home, they offered their own daughters sexually to them.

No shit? That explains Lot offering his daughters to the mob like no big deal.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnny on August 21, 2009 at 2:28pm

Christian influence carried sexual repression to new levels. Christ's teachings encouraged celibacy, and the early catholic church built on and expanded it. Additionally, some Jews had villainized woman's sexual lure; and christianity morphed and propagated that concept (and muslims did it even more). Our society today is still restricted by the religiously motivated, ever-shifting, taboos.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on August 21, 2009 at 2:38pm

Hmmm...

It's interesting to me that some religious men BLAME women for being enticing. Do we blame the cookie for smelling good and luring us with it's gooey chocolateness? In fact, if we recount the story of Adam and Eve, no one blames the TREE for tempting anyone. I think this concept makes me about the most resentful... how can someone be held accountable for the way they were born? This all boils down to being held accountable for being born "sinful", or at a moral disadvantage.

God is an asshole and uses people as his scapegoat.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnny on August 21, 2009 at 2:47pm

It became just another 'reason' for so many religious groups to support misogyny.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on August 21, 2009 at 2:53pm

Quit enticing me with your agreeable viewpoints.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page