Abstinence

[Cabbage_Boii]

Well yes because it starts in kindergarten, cooties is the first phase which eventually leads to sex. You probably meet the partner you are willing to have sex with at school. The family life teachers wedge it into your brain that you need 2 different types of protection and make sure you don't drink to much but they don't drop down on their knees and beg us not to drink or have sex. They know we'll get into them so they just educate you. What better of a place to educate you on the subject than school?

[Orpheus]

Well yes because it starts in kindergarten, cooties is the first phase which eventually leads to sex. You probably meet the partner you are willing to have sex with at school. The family life teachers wedge it into your brain that you need 2 different types of protection and make sure you don't drink to much but they don't drop down on their knees and beg us not to drink or have sex. They know we'll get into them so they just educate you. What better of a place to educate you on the subject than school?

 

 

 

The schools preach the whole "abstinence only" BS more often that not. Only thing the schools should be teaching is the biological concept of things.

[ValidLogic]

There's nothing wrong with Sex Ed. There's something wrong with teaching abstinence.

 

 

 

I won't lie to you guys, I read the first page and this page of this thread. If this has been said before, than I will only add to the side of the debate: there is a difference between teaching abstinence and declaring that it is the only 100 percent sure way of preventing pregnancy and STI's. [sTD's are no longer a valid term. They are now known as Sexually Transmitted Infections, rather than Diseases.]

 

 

 

Saying "ABSTINENCE IS GOD'S WILL" (Which I laugh at because it's usually the underlying tone of it) or simply saying "Abstinence is a good thing" is wrong. This is discouraging sexual intercourse, which is not the way you teach a young adult to act.

 

 

 

On the other hand, stating "If you do not wish to have your wife/girlfriend/lover/daughter* pregnant, do not have sex with them" is valid advice, as that is a very correct way to avoid pregnancy. "If you feel the need to perform sexual intercourse, wear a condom as it is the highest protection percent. Wear Waterbased, Latex, Spermicidal condoms, these are the most protective" is another valid piece of advice.

 

 

 

Feel free to discuss my ideas.

 

 

 

* I do not condone the action prior to the asterisk.

[redhaloguy]

I have nothing against teaching it, but also giving other options not just, Don't have sex! They need more than that of course.

 

 

 

Hell, I mean they could possibly condone masturbating if they really wanted to, it would certainly help in the problem

[wild_goat_14]

* I do not condone the action prior to the asterisk.

 

 

 

Then why the [bleep] would you put something so controversial in your post? Trolling?

[ValidLogic]

* I do not condone the action prior to the asterisk.

 

 

 

Then why the [bleep] would you put something so controversial in your post? Trolling?

 

Uh, slight humor? Chill out.

[walka92]

my school has never taught abstinence :? seriously, so what if some schools do? i bet half the guys at school have learnt more from tv, porn and movies than sex-ed classes, and its impossible to indoctrinate entire schools into thinking sex is bad. quite the opposite. sex is good.

[Wisp]

* I do not condone the action prior to the asterisk.

 

 

 

Then why the [bleep] would you put something so controversial in your post? Trolling?

 

Uh, slight humor? Chill out.

 

Wow, it took me a few re-reads of that thing to find the asterisk, and than figure out what you were saying you didn't approve of. I need to stop skimming when I read.

[JDMBonfire]

Parents should be the ones making their children aware (as mine did), but a further education from schools is fine left open as an option. I personally don't believe that teaching abstinence is the right way. Make everyone aware of what could happen, and what that will do to their futures; make protection readily available and free; let the teens take it from there.

 

 

 

My thoughts exactly.

[abbydog95]

Let teens make there own choice, although parents and possibly schools should teach them about condoms/birthcontrol/STDs so that they are educated on the topic and can play it safe, and not end up with HIV/AIDs that would be very bad!

[metoo1000]

as far as I'm concerned there should be a bowl of free condoms at every nurses office in every high school also they should teach that oral sex cant get you pregnant but does the job. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

plus what does it matter people are going to do what they are going to do its kinda like locker your car doors if someone is really going to steal it there going to break the windows. basically the sex ed or other wise trying to prevent sex is irascibly like the cat door locks in that it only keeps out the idiots that don't know what there doing.

[kill2pleasure]

You'll never stop a hormonal Teenager from holding back urges, also i have noticed that in sex ed kids are usually paying alot of attention and actually passing the section\class with flying colors. Plus alot of kids{not me} seem to giggle if ur teacher say words like penis, vagina, sperm, semen etc...

 

 

 

Its a fun class with alot of useful information, Plus most these sex ed classes teach abstinence. But the teachers , atleast in my area, know that alot of girls n guys at my school love to engage in Sex. its fun, satisfying, and relieves stress n such, also alot of teen feel its the way to express their "Love" for eachother [Me being guilty... :oops:] so it would be foolish to teach only abstinence ... Cause Teens aren't gunna stop... and alot of then dnt have this knowledge of STDs ( STIs) or actual conception..

 

 

 

once a teen has even a taste of how it feels, they are not going to stop. Honestly, they should teach practices like masturbation, (cause thats actually a way to keep 100% free from disease and early parenthood.) or oral sex n for those deviates... Anal sex.. ( kinda risky as it can still reach the vaginal canal for an amateur .

 

 

 

those are my views :D

 

 

 

and yes metoo, they should give out free condoms in nurses offices... Better than having 100 pregnant girl in like 95 uncaring fathers...

[Laura]

Since it was asked earlier...yes, condoms are 98% effective if used correctly, my citation comes from the NHS choices site, so should be pretty reliable - whilst searching I also found that figure in a lot of other places, but the NHS link is probably one most people should feel comfy relying on (NHS is the National Health Service of the UK)

 

 

 

If used correctly, male condoms are 98% effective in preventing pregnancy. Female condoms are thought to be around 95% effective.

 

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Condoms-(male-and-female)/Pages/Introduction.aspx?url=Pages/what-is-it.aspx

A large percentage of men and women do not use condoms correctly. Typical use of condoms puts condoms at 84% effective against pregnancies. 98% is really just the advertised statistic.

 

Citation needed :)

It's in a previous post on this thread, if you really want it.

 

EDIT:http://www.youngwomenshealth.org/malecontraceptives1.html

[Barihawk]

A bowl of condoms isn't going to help young teens with sex.

 

 

 

A very strong lesson to women that they are in control of their bits and that sex is not "the next level" of a relationship, along with a healthy dose of "you have sex because you want to, not because you have to" is sorely needed. As it stands now, young men are forced into the belief that if they are virgins then there is something wrong with them. Young women are led to believe that if they really love their boyfriends, they will submit to them.

 

 

 

This isn't good for relationships. Instead, you have kids doing it like rabbits and lots of unwanted pregnancies and diseases because even with that free bowl of condoms, the stigma of having to go get one is too much for the kids to handle.

 

 

 

We do not need to tell kids not to have sex, nor do we need to just throw contraceptives out there and say "have fun!" What we do need to do is drastically change the way sex is perceived by the youth culture. Kids should not be shy to ask about it but they should also realize what it is so that it does not become a social stigma. You should never "need" to have sex, you should want it and your partner should want to want it equally...with you.

 

 

 

I find it strange that here in "God-fearing, Hellfire-burnin', Abstinence Only" Texas that many CHURCHES here have sexual education seminars for teens. And they are secularly minded. The main goals are to identify ways in which sex is abused in culture, promote body image for both males and females, and to learn to be safe when having sex. Granted this was a Methodist thing (I'm sure Baptists would faint at the notion), but it is a step forward.

 

 

 

Speaking as a Christian, sex described in the Bible is not the "next level" of a relationship, but the ultimate level. Reading through the Song of Solomon (an entire book of the Bible devoted to God's vision of sex), throughout a relationship the man and woman should grow together in their love for one another, learning more about each other, building their relationship as closely as it can go, and then unite and become one in the act of sex (which was designed not only for the "natural instinct of reproduction" but for pleasure between lovers). Of course most people who criticize Christians don't read the Bible, nor do a great deal of Christians for that matter (as evidenced by some hardliner far-right groups out there). Sex is reserved after marriage in the Bible as that is considered a major step in commitment to your partner. Sex in Judeo-Christianity is the "nirvana" of any relationship, and as such requires great effort and sacrifice to fully appreciate.

 

 

 

It's like building a house. Building a relationship on a foundation of trust and openness is like building on rock. Building it on sex, chemical impulses (what many young people call "love" :P), or convenience is like building on sand. It works great for a while but eventually that building is going to topple as more levels are added onto it. For evidence of this, see the divorce rate approaching 50%. Building that building on a strong foundation, however, allows more and more to be built on it. It's good advice not only for Christian relationships, but for many. It's not just a religious thing, it's good advice.

 

 

 

However, that's just me preaching. I've seen firsthand how abstinence-only and "here's some condoms" approaches to sex education have thoroughly and utterly failed. Just analyze the ways school districts in the top 10 highest STD and pregnancy cities in the US handle things. Lubbock, Texas is number one in both regards, I went to college there. Depending on if you go to a public (here's some condoms) or private (if you have sex you will get pregnant and die), the rates for diseases and pregnancies are staggering. Why? Because both programs fail to address the issues of sex properly.

 

 

 

What do we need? Better sex education programs that do more than just throw condoms at kids. They need to emphasize relationships and break down the stigmas that sex is "the cool thing to do" and empower students to take control of their own bodies and not feel obligated to do things just because it's "supposed to happen."

[nickeley102]

Being a training health teacher i can let you guys know that the curriculum (across the globe) is tending towards a biological and a feelings approach where its natural to feel physical attraction and the feelings are hard to deny. Start when you want but just be very aware of the many possible negative outcomes that bad decision making can lead to.

 

 

 

I worked at a holiday programme where a 9 year old would often come to 'class' hungover and having had sex. Consequence education at an early age is the onlky answer.

[Barihawk]

I disagree. One of man's endearing qualities is that we are above the natural instincts of the planet's lesser species. We are sentient and act on our own will, not on patterned traits.

 

 

 

Anyone and everyone should have the choice and ability to decide if they want to have sex, or not. And whatever decision they make, it needs to be on their own terms.

 

 

 

Reducing the STD rate will not happen by saying "this is bad and this is why." We need to reduce the amount of frivolous sex between teenagers (anyone remember the high school sex map?) and do things like make blood testing and physical inspections of the sexual organs mandatory in yearly health checkups (if people have diseases, they need to know about it).

 

 

 

A balance needs to be struck between the right and the left on this issue, along with many others geared towards youth. You can not blame the skyrocketing of STD's and teen pregnancies solely on abstinence education in the last 20 years, because the past twenty years have seen the most progressive attitudes in school towards sex education. However, it's not enough. We've essentially encouraged kids to have sex, but not eliminated the root causes of negative issues regarding sex. In essence, we've taken one step forward and two back.

[unkn0wnwarrior]

as far as I'm concerned there should be a bowl of free condoms at every nurses office in every high school also they should teach that oral sex cant get you pregnant but does the job. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

plus what does it matter people are going to do what they are going to do its kinda like locker your car doors if someone is really going to steal it there going to break the windows. basically the sex ed or other wise trying to prevent sex is irascibly like the cat door locks in that it only keeps out the idiots that don't know what there doing.

 

I watched a documentary on that and a professional thief got into and started 8 of 10 vehicles in 10 minutes, and would have been 9 but he had trouble on one in the middle and eventually gave up on it and went to the next.

 

 

 

But yeah, as long as they know they don't have to have it, and know how to protect themselves and their partners, that is plenty. Just lay out the options and they will choose their own path.

[kill2pleasure]

Speaking as a Christian, sex described in the Bible is not the "next level" of a relationship, but the ultimate level. Reading through the Song of Solomon (an entire book of the Bible devoted to God's vision of sex), throughout a relationship the man and woman should grow together in their love for one another, learning more about each other, building their relationship as closely as it can go, and then unite and become one in the act of sex (which was designed not only for the "natural instinct of reproduction" but for pleasure between lovers). Of course most people who criticize Christians don't read the Bible, nor do a great deal of Christians for that matter (as evidenced by some hardliner far-right groups out there). Sex is reserved after marriage in the Bible as that is considered a major step in commitment to your partner. Sex in Judeo-Christianity is the "nirvana" of any relationship, and as such requires great effort and sacrifice to fully appreciate.

 

 

 

i woudl say you cannot link sex to religion... cause no matter who you are sex is sex, it can be viewed as many different ways n involve feeling or no, but sex is sex,

[Furah]

i woudl say you cannot link sex to religion... cause no matter who you are sex is sex, it can be viewed as many different ways n involve feeling or no, but sex is sex,

 

Yes you can link sex to religion, religion dictates sex (will be using Christian examples), who you can have it with (wife/husband,) when you can have sex (after marriage, not a day before,) where you can have it (bedroom.) I would think you can link sex to religion.

[Shinjula]

Since it was asked earlier...yes, condoms are 98% effective if used correctly, my citation comes from the NHS choices site, so should be pretty reliable - whilst searching I also found that figure in a lot of other places, but the NHS link is probably one most people should feel comfy relying on (NHS is the National Health Service of the UK)

 

 

 

If used correctly, male condoms are 98% effective in preventing pregnancy. Female condoms are thought to be around 95% effective.

 

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Condoms-(male-and-female)/Pages/Introduction.aspx?url=Pages/what-is-it.aspx

A large percentage of men and women do not use condoms correctly. Typical use of condoms puts condoms at 84% effective against pregnancies. 98% is really just the advertised statistic.

 

Citation needed :)

It's in a previous post on this thread, if you really want it.

 

EDIT:http://www.youngwomenshealth.org/malecontraceptives1.html

 

Ok cool thanks for posting it, cos i think youve read it incorrectly.

 

it says

 

 

 

If you use the male condom, but do not use it perfectly, it is 86% effective.

which is not at all the same thing as

Typical use of condoms puts condoms at 86% effective

 

If you use it incorrectly its only 86% effective, but the proportion of people using it correctly will have a large effect on the overall efficacy, and the page give no figures for how many people use condoms correctly.

 

It's tempting to guess that incorrect usage would possibly be quite high, but then its not exactly rocket science to put a condom on, the only things you can do wrong are put it on inside out, nick it with your finger or take it off too soon. So I couldnt guess at how that would affect the figures.

[Stilev]

personally i'd like to know, isn't it a tad hypocritical to preach abstinence if you never had sex? i mean its short of like saying that vegtables are bad, but then once you have them, your like "o there not bad as i thought" correct me if im wrong on that. i really dont give a crap if someone is a virgin or not when i hit college all my friends lost it awhile ago, and i was the only virgin. now that im back home for the summer all my other friends are virgins and im the only one that isn't. so really the whole virgin thing is bad imo is over rated, it will happen when it happens the more you obsess its not ganna happen, once i stopped trying to get laid it met my girlfriend.

 

 

 

all sex ed in high school is pretty much useless imo. all people need to know is "this is a condom, ok bye" yeah there is a bunch of other crap for girls but no one under 25 uses it so its rather pointless, they are more geared to people who already have a family and dont want to have another kid. i mean yeah its good they go over it, but a week long class every year is a little bit over kill for me

[ValidLogic]

You guys and gals are missing a huge point. You're diminishing the class itself (sex ed.) rather than the teachings of Abstinence. I actually listened during Sex Ed., as it helped me as I was in a sexual relationship at the time. Now, I remember things from Sex Ed., and things from my previous relationship. It's the perfect dictation.

 

What you learned from a teacher, whether parents, religion or school [or any combo] + Your personal experience = Better than anything else you guys can say here.

 

 

 

Abstinence isn't wrong to teach though guys and gals. Saying it is against 'god' or something to that nature is wrong, but saying it is the only 100 percent chance to avoid pregnancy and spread of STI's is okay.

[Orpheus]

You guys and gals are missing a huge point. You're diminishing the class itself (sex ed.) rather than the teachings of Abstinence. I actually listened during Sex Ed., as it helped me as I was in a sexual relationship at the time. Now, I remember things from Sex Ed., and things from my previous relationship. It's the perfect dictation.

 

What you learned from a teacher, whether parents, religion or school [or any combo] + Your personal experience = Better than anything else you guys can say here.

 

 

 

Abstinence isn't wrong to teach though guys and gals. Saying it is against 'god' or something to that nature is wrong, but saying it is the only 100 percent chance to avoid pregnancy and spread of STI's is okay.

 

 

 

There is only one problem that I would bring up with your last statement. Rape is a very real, very serious threat, and abstinence is not 100% safe. Albeit it being as close as you're going to get to avoid pregnancy and STI's as possible.

[Giordano]

You guys and gals are missing a huge point. You're diminishing the class itself (sex ed.) rather than the teachings of Abstinence. I actually listened during Sex Ed., as it helped me as I was in a sexual relationship at the time. Now, I remember things from Sex Ed., and things from my previous relationship. It's the perfect dictation.

 

What you learned from a teacher, whether parents, religion or school [or any combo] + Your personal experience = Better than anything else you guys can say here.

 

 

 

Abstinence isn't wrong to teach though guys and gals. Saying it is against 'god' or something to that nature is wrong, but saying it is the only 100 percent chance to avoid pregnancy and spread of STI's is okay.

 

 

 

There is only one problem that I would bring up with your last statement. Rape is a very real, very serious threat, and abstinence is not 100% safe. Albeit it being as close as you're going to get to avoid pregnancy and STI's as possible.

 

Stop being so technical. :wall:

[Furah]

Stop being so technical. :wall:

 

He isn't, labelling abstinence as the 100% way of avoiding STDs and pregnancy isn't helpful.