CNN.com article- Bristol Palin: Abstinence for all teens 'not realistic'

[DCSaints_fan]

It's no stretch at all. Look at our physiology. As a mammal, our natural reproductive years begin at about age 13 and end (for

women) at around age 50.

Your body is pre-programmed to be ready for sexual activity and child bearing before you can legally drive a car.

So yes, abstinence is an unnatural state.

Being able to control it doesn't change that. it just means you're human and you can control it, and the fact is the majority of teens don't end up with babies or STDs, so plenty do either abstain or do it sxafely. (I think plenty who claim they aren't abstaining probably are.)

Fact is as civilized humans we control a lot of natural urges. Sex is just one of them.

~Bang

Perhaps statistically speaking you're right, but that doesn't mean we should just write off our kids off as a bunch of animals with no self control. In high school I remember having urges to kick the crap out of certain dip****s as well, what with all the testosterone running through my body, and me being fairly big and strong. That doesn't mean we shouldn't say that fighting is just boys being boys.

[Bang]

Perhaps statistically speaking you're right, but that doesn't mean we should just write off our kids off as a bunch of animals with no self control. In high school I remember having urges to kick the crap out of certain dip****s as well, what with all the testosterone running through my body, and me being fairly big and strong. That doesn't mean we shouldn't say that fighting is just boys being boys.

I never once said write your kids off as animals. But technically speaking, we're simply mammals. Pretending their bodies are not going through what we all have gone through, pretending that these urges are not as strong as they are, pretending that all we have to do is tell them not to have sex just results in more of the same. The simple fact is that we tell them one thing and their bodies are SCREAMING the opposite all day, every day. It takes more than just telling them to say "no", and hoping they will. If it was that simple, teenage pregnancy wouldn't exist. Drug abuse wouldn't exist. Neither would alcoholism. But we know it's not that simple.

You may have withheld your urges, but you're in the vast minority.

Anyone else here manage to willingly retain their virginity throughout high school? I will be willing to bet 20 bucks that the majority who answer got laid in high school. And I'd bet another 20 that says that they actively tried to get laid as often as they could. (especially guys... and they can be quite persuasive. If they weren't, there wouldn't be half the babies born to teen mothers.)

Let's face it. We've been pretending about sex education for a long time. Is anything any different? Are teenage girls not getting knocked up anymore? Has all of this talk about abstinence really solved anything?

Nah. But I bet it made some righteous parents feel good about themselves. Governor Palin is a perfect example. Politics aside, I doubt you'll find many people who believe in their convictions more strongly, and it wasn't enough to keep her own daughter from making a different decision when Mom wasn't around.

~Bang

[DCSaints_fan]

You may have withheld your urges, but you're in the vast minority.

Anyone else here manage to retain their willingly virginity throughout high school? I will be willing to bet 20 bucks that the majority who answer got laid in high school. And I'd bet another 20 that says that they actively tried to get laid as often as they could. (especially guys... and they can be quite persuasive. If they weren't, there wouldn't be half the babies born to teen mothers.)

There was really only strongly interested in two girls, but I never really told either of them, because I thought i wasn't good enough. Of course I wanted to bang the entire cheerleading squad, most of the field hockey team, etc., but that was something different. I never went to parties where there were girls around, either.

[Bang]

There was really only strongly interested in two girls, but I never really told either of them, because I thought i wasn't good enough. Of course I wanted to bang the entire cheerleading squad, most of the field hockey team, etc., but that was something different. I never went to parties where there were girls around, either.

Well, don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking you at all. It's quite commendable that you've managed to do the right things in your life. I'm just saying most other teenagers aren't nearly so strong.

~Bang

[DCSaints_fan]

Well, don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking you at all. It's quite commendable that you've managed to do the right things in your life. I'm just saying most other teenagers aren't nearly so strong.

~Bang

Yeah, I hear ya'. I'm not sure if my experience is typical or not, but I have to wonder if a girl came to me directly, what would have happened. I'm not quite sure if I would have been so noble. I'm not sure if that happens to most guys or not.

[Special K]

Yeah but they can practice abstinence and still get STD's from oral and anal sex.

Hmmmm....they weren't really abstaining there, were they?

[twa]

Teenagers can make the distinction between information and endorsement. I have yet know of any pregnant teen (past or present) who can say, "I was going to completely abstain but sex ed taught me how to use a condom, so I figured what the hell..."

Again, glad to hear abstinence was taught and endorsed along with birth control/disease protection.

How many have said ...But I used a condom(it broke) or but I was on the pill(but I might have missed a few).

I don't expect abstinence ,nor birth control to work for all,but abstinence certainly gets my endorsement along with responsible use of condoms and birth control if you are sexually active.

Quote mjah

I had sex ed in 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th grades

So did you learn anything you put to good use?...seriously

In the end only ONE is 100% effective if applied,I will continue to endorse what worked best for me and mine.

[Larry]

Oh, I'm a big fan of abstinence.

After all, it hasn't made me weird, or anything.

[twa]

Oh, I'm a big fan of abstinence.

After all, it hasn't made me weird, or anything.

Happily I'm no longer a practitioner, not that it has helped the weird part.

[mjah]

How many have said ...But I used a condom(it broke) or but I was on the pill(but I might have missed a few).

Probably far fewer than those who said, "I wish I knew more about birth control before I messed up."

So did you learn anything you put to good use?...seriously

Sure. I'm not so sure there's any part of it that I didn't put to good use. Our school system decided we'd have something like 4 years of sex ed. That was fine by me.

[Larry]

How many have said ...But I used a condom(it broke) or but I was on the pill(but I might have missed a few).

Probably far fewer than those who said, "I wish I knew more about birth control before I messed up."

Or, a different way of looking at it . . .

How many have said "Gee, I wish I didn't know how to put on a condom".

(Although, I will confess that I don't.)

[stevenaa]

Probably far fewer than those who said, "I wish I knew more about birth control before I messed up."

I suspect there are few pregnant teenagers that can say the didn't know enough about birth control in this day and age. If you think the majority of pregnant teenagers are coming from hyper religious families that refuse to discuss birth control, you are deluding yourself. Heck, I got no sex ed at home and I knew about birth control and how to properly use it. Teenagers get pregnant because they are irresponsible. While they should be taught about methods of birth control, it should be given with a good dose of abstinence education. Maybe abstinence won't work for most, but for the ones it does, they are guarenteed not to get pregnant or an STD.

[Larry]

While they should be taught about methods of birth control, it should be given with a good dose of abstinence education. Maybe abstinence won't work for most, but for the ones it does, they are guarenteed not to get pregnant or an STD.

Catch is, nobody's trying to suppress information about abstinence. (Despite the efforts of posters in this thread to claim so.) One side is trying to suppress information about contraception.

[DaveMason]

So...is there really anybody out there who endorses literally ONLY abstinence, without providing ANY education about any other method of birth control? Or is this one of those "straw men" that I keep hearing about on the internet?

[mjah]

So...is there really anybody out there who endorses literally ONLY abstinence, without providing ANY education about any other method of birth control? Or is this one of those "straw men" that I keep hearing about on the internet?

I think you might have just invented that straw man yourself...!

The "abstinence-only" sex ed that I keep hearing about mentions failure rates of contraception and gives some information about different methods, but doesn't give the full picture of how contraception is used. It deliberately withholds key information from kids about various contraceptives, thereby failing to paint the full picture of reproductive health.

It advocates abstinence as the best way to go, which I think is probably just fine with every reasonably sensible parent in the entire country regardless of religion or political affiliation. But it gives partial information about contraceptives -- and then falsely claims to have given kids a fully responsible accounting of what sex is about.

That's the "straw man" I'm familiar with. The one you mention, in which NO information is given about contraceptives, sounds like the totally useless "sex ed" I got in church -- consisting only of "Don't do it, and be proud that you aren't doing it!" Oooooooooookay.

[DaveMason]

I think you might have just invented that straw man yourself...!

Why I never!

]The "abstinence-only" sex ed that I keep hearing about mentions failure rates of contraception and gives some information about different methods, but doesn't give the full picture of how contraception is used. It deliberately withholds key information from kids about various contraceptives, thereby failing to paint the full picture of reproductive health.

Ok, then. Pretend that this is what I asked. Are there really people who advocate NOT giving the full picture of reproductive health? The very idea just seems silly to me...so silly that it sounds like it could be some kind of straw-guy. But then, I've never sat through any sex ed programs aside from the one that I had in high school. (Which, as I recall, was pretty thorough...although the teachers seemed to have a noticeable pro-abstinence stance.)

[Larry]

Ok, then. Pretend that this is what I asked. Are there really people who advocate NOT giving the full picture of reproductive health? The very idea just seems silly to me...so silly that it sounds like it could be some kind of straw-guy.

Have you read the thread?

twa's real proud of a post he made, (post #22) with quote and a link to a group that prepares abstinence-only course curricula.

He quoted the portion from their FAQ: (I'm paraphrasing)

Q: Do you mention contraceptives?

A: Yes, we mention contraceptives. We discuss their failure rate. We do not provide any information on how to obtain them, or on how to properly use them. This is done in compliance with federal regulations.

[kuraitengai]

So, does this finally nail the coffin shut as far as abstinence only sex education goes? I'm not saying that Bristol Palin should be considered an expert on anything, but there's a hell of a lot of first hand experience behind what she's saying;)...

i cant stand people and their 'abstinence only' crap. there was this guy i used to go to church with and he was always bragging and talking about how he was an abstinence only teacher for the public school system. and i never called him out on it cuz frankly i couldnt stand him, but i was like 'way to alienate everyone else'. what good are you doing for the people who ignore you and have sex anyway? so they are going to go and get pregnant cuz you are too stupid to realize that not everyone shares your belief system.

[twa]

Nice paraphrasing Larry:silly:

but,It says they do not demonstrate use.

Sure are a number of posters against a program focused on the only 100% effective method to prevent pregnancy and disease....wonder why?

Is abstinence religion or something?

You would think kids never got any other info or sex ed classes in their life

[TheGoodBits]

I don't understand what's so wrong about showing kids how to use it if they choose to.

[mjah]

Sure are a number of posters against a program focused on the only 100% effective method to prevent pregnancy and disease....wonder why?

I hope you aren't missing the point by that wide a margin.

This idea that giving a full course in sex ed is somehow incompatible with promoting abstinence? Yeah, that's a false dilemma.

A sex ed program which withholds key information about sexual health from its students isn't a full course in sex ed, period. Proper use of birth control is a key aspect of sexual health. Omitting it is a big mistake, damaging the sexual health of all kids in such a class due to the narrowminded ideology of a few.

Ironically, the question of whether such a partial sex ed class would focus only on abstinence is actually a separate issue. The primary issue is the knowledge that would be omitted (edging out the second issue of what editorializing would be included!).

And as has already been pointed out in this thread several times, it is entirely possible to give a full, responsible class in sex ed that still focuses on abstinence as the only 100% reliable way to avoid pregnancy and STDs.

The bottom line is that some people want to impose their uptight personal morality upon the availability of full sex education to all students in our publicly funded, secular school system. The tyranny of the moral minority. No thanks.

It's simply wrong to deny responsible sexual health education to all students based upon the fears of a minority of parents. Those parents always have the option to opt out of sending their kids to secular sex ed. It's supremely selfish to expect everyone else to limit their kids' publicly funded educations just because some parents apparently can't be bothered to check the "No" box on the sex ed permission slip. They don't get to impose their minority opinions upon my kid's reproductive health. Sorry, but they don't.

You would think kids never got any other info or sex ed classes in their life

The goal of responsible sex ed isn't to say "F it, someone else will handle the difficult parts. We'll just skip that chapter." The goal is to teach everything that's important.

By the way, I don't see advocates for so-called "abstinence-only" sex ed saying it's okay to demonstrate contraceptive usage beyond grade X. They seem to be saying it should all be "abstinence-only." So what are these other sex ed classes you're talking about? Should the full course in sex ed only be given to people who have graduated from public school? I'm having a hard time seeing what you could possibly be advocating here.

[Larry]

Nice paraphrasing Larry:silly:

but,It says they do not demonstrate use.

Which I guess is your way of saying "nice, but accurate"?

Sure are a number of posters against a program focused on the only 100% effective method to prevent pregnancy and disease....

No there aren't.

Just like there weren't the last time you tried that line.

There are several people opposed to a program focused on withholding information.

I may have missed it, but I think that every single poster in this thread has endorsed abstinence. What many of them object to is "condom ignorance".

You would think kids never got any other info or sex ed classes in their life

You would think that some people want for that "other info" to be kids only source of info.

[twa]

I hope you aren't missing the point by that wide a margin.

The bottom line is that some people want to impose their uptight personal morality upon the availability of full sex education to all students in our publicly funded, secular school system. The tyranny of the moral minority. No thanks.

Thats what I thought;)

Would you object to abstinence only classes along with a separate class focused on contraception and protection?

[mjah]

Thats what I thought;)

Curiously, though, you were suggesting something completely different in your posts. Disconnect between your thoughts and your fingers, I guess.

Would you object to abstinence only classes along with a separate class focused on contraception and protection?

Why would you separate them? That makes no sense.

First, you're suggesting that students receive a partial sex ed class for reasons that only a small number of parents even want in the first place -- only to make teachers come around again and bat clean-up on a second pass that requires a completely different attitude and approach to the topic. That's not responsible education. It's wasteful and pointless.

Second, your suggestion would split the knowledge and statistics of contraceptives into two totally different classes. It would be fragmented and unnecessarily difficult for teachers and for any students taking both classes (i.e., most of them). The last thing any responsible educator wants to do is to make sex ed any MORE awkward.

Third, the parts of sex ed that some people find objectionable are probably two or three days' worth of material per year. Not an entirely separate class. So splitting them up into two distinct classes isn't practical.

The way to do it would be to implement a full sex ed curriculum, coupled with a permission slip so objecting parents can opt their kids out of "How to responsibly use protection when 80+% of you have sex before the end of high school despite our diligent efforts to advise you against it" day. I would have absolutely no objection to that.

There's no need for the majority to fragment and convolute their state-funded education just to appease the preferences of a minority. As with any other class in public schools, the full information is the default, subject to parental permission -- and students may opt out for parent- and system-approved reasons.

[twa]

Curiously, though, you were suggesting something completely different in your posts. Disconnect between your thoughts and your fingers, I guess.

Certainly possible since they run at different speeds:D

What did you think I was suggesting?

Only abstinence classes?...I would not be in favor of that

I do not see a problem with separate classes focused on different approaches though.

The current model is certainly not real effective.