The dangers of youth abstinence pledges are becoming clear

[roguenuke]

In one sense, it depends how much a person trivializes having sex. The more trivial, the less reason to be selective


I see NO distinction between a couple that marry and live together, and a couple that don't marry and live together. However, such stats exclude all couples who don't have a marriage license, making the stats deliberately false and distorted.

I'll add that of itself, I see no problem with "teen pregnancy." But, then, I don't believe everyone was born for which the purpose of their life is to serve as a minor clog in the gears of corporations and employers. Then again, I've posted now and then that USA has become one of the most anti-children countries in the world. What possibly worse could happen to a woman than have a child? That will destroy her life. Get an education so you can get a job serving a corporation - that should be the goal of everyone. Don't mess up your corporate employment future by destroying your life with a child. It is the duty of making certain every school girl is taught this.

We killed a practice of having girls in HS carry a bag of flour everywhere for a month to teach them the burdens of having a child. Teaching girls to hate babies? That having a child is nothing but a horrific burden? Oh hell no. We stomped on that big time. Successfully.

First of all, there are more and more students carrying around fake babies (they have some that are programmed and a lot "smarter" than bags of flour). Both girls and boys to teach both about having to care for a child. But they don't work to stop teen pregnancies.

Fake babies won't stop kids from getting pregnant

I know that everything at school now has to be a "project," has to be "experiential" --...

www.houstonchronicle.com

Most people see an issue with teenagers getting pregnant, having babies. We are definitely not talking people in serious relationships here when teens are having sex and making babies.

 

[joko104]

First of all, there are more and more students carrying around fake babies (they have some that are programmed and a lot "smarter" than bags of flour). Both girls and boys to teach both about having to care for a child. But they don't work to stop teen pregnancies.

Fake babies won't stop kids from getting pregnant

I know that everything at school now has to be a "project," has to be "experiential" --...

www.houstonchronicle.com

Most people see an issue with teenagers getting pregnant, having babies. We are definitely not talking people in serious relationships here when teens are having sex and making babies.

How babies are made, how to avoid getting pregnant and the risks and reducing STD risks are academic biology topics. The topic of children and sex needs to end there. However, I would be agreeable to optional government indoctrination classes about sex and relationships IF the parents sign off on it - and without pressure to sign, with the full course materials made available to the parents first.

It is rare, but we have refused to fill out school questionaires and permission statements. For example, for a chemistry class they wanted us to sign we would be financially responsible for any damage our kid did with chemicals. Only an idiot would agree to pay for the school if an idiot teacher gave my kid chemicals to make incendiaries or explosives with.

 

[roguenuke]

How babies are made, how to avoid getting pregnant and the risks and reducing STD risks are academic biology topics. The topic of children and sex needs to end there. However, I would be agreeable to optional government indoctrination classes about sex and relationships IF the parents sign off on it - and without pressure to sign, with the full course materials made available to the parents first.

It is rare, but we have refused to fill out school questionaires and permission statements. For example, for a chemistry class they wanted us to sign we would be financially responsible for any damage our kid did with chemicals. Only an idiot would agree to pay for the school if an idiot teacher gave my kid chemicals to make incendiaries or explosives with.

They are comprehensive sex education topics. But no, the topic of sex does not need to end there. It is important for teenagers to understand that there are ways to reduce the chances of pregnancy and STIs and abstinence is simply not always something everyone can do.

 

[joko104]

They are comprehensive sex education topics. But no, the topic of sex does not need to end there. It is important for teenagers to understand that there are ways to reduce the chances of pregnancy and STIs and abstinence is simply not always something everyone can do.

I disagree that it is appropriate for schools to tell children to ignore their parents and have sex anyway - explaining how it can be safe to do in the teacher's opinion. Sex is NEVER 100% safe - ever. This is NOT the topic for teachers to drill into students. Once again, teaching about pregnancy and STDs is relevant academics. How children should behave in their private lives is not.

 

[roguenuke]

I disagree that it is appropriate for schools to tell children to ignore their parents and have sex anyway - explaining how it can be safe to do in the teacher's opinion. Sex is NEVER 100% safe - ever. This is NOT the topic for teachers to drill into students. Once again, teaching about pregnancy and STDs is relevant academics. How children should behave in their private lives is not.

Schools are not telling kids to have sex. And nowhere was that said. They are saying that if students are even considering having sex, or they may have sex when they are adults, they need to know how to protect themselves from unwanted consequences like STIs and pregnancy.

It is better for kids to be taught these things by someone than no one. Not all parents, many in fact, are willing to teach it.

 

[joko104]

Schools are not telling kids to have sex. And nowhere was that said. They are saying that if students are even considering having sex, or they may have sex when they are adults, they need to know how to protect themselves from unwanted consequences like STIs and pregnancy.

It is better for kids to be taught these things by someone than no one. Not all parents, many in fact, are willing to teach it.

I agree most parents now are horrible. But I do not agree my children are to be treated as one of the herd. Again, teaching about how girls get pregnant, STDs and how to minimize the risks of unwanted pregnancy and STDs are legit academic topics. Going beyond that isn't, unless each student's parent(s) agree. That is the practice here for sex education classes - the student's parent has to agree. Most parents sign anything from school put in front of them about their children, we don't.

 

[roguenuke]

I agree most parents now are horrible. But I do not agree my children are to be treated as one of the herd. Again, teaching about how girls get pregnant, STDs and how to minimize the risks of unwanted pregnancy and STDs are legit academic topics. Going beyond that isn't, unless each student's parent(s) agree. That is the practice here for sex education classes - the student's parent has to agree. Most parents sign anything from school put in front of them about their children, we don't.

It is not just now. This is how its been. My mother was wonderful, but many of my friends and even my cousins had parents who did not want to talk about sex at all with them. I'm 40. So this isn't a new thing. It is an old thing.

 

[COTO]

Many of those problems you mentioned aren't simply in that other corner. Purity pledges don't normally work. They lead to single mothers and secret abortions and STDs because children are "breaking" their pledges in secret, feeling ashamed for doing that, and then do these other things to cover it up or don't know how to establish healthy relationships or they have no clue how to prevent STIs and unwanted pregnancy since they were taught "just don't do it", instead of things that would help them.

I agree there's such a thing as an overly oppressive attitude towards human sexuality, but teaching young people to abstain from sex until marriage isn't part of it.

As for "children 'breaking' their pledges in secret", if this were sufficient reason to abandon abstinence as a good and upright standard, then we also ought to give up social distancing rules during COVID. After all, people might break the rules in secret, and in their moral abandon avoid taking secondary precautions like masking and hand-washing that might mitigate some of the damage.

We ought to give up policing the Internet for child pornography. People might break the rules in secret, and in addition to harming children be unable to get the psychological help they need by being forced underground.

We ought to give up all attempts at regulating firearms. People might break the rules in secret, not only circumventing measures to prevent them from obtaining firearms but also secondary measures such as firearms training, etc. they might tolerate otherwise.

My point being that there is always a case for giving up good standards because some people will fall short of them. Hence we cede ground, we compromise, we look the other way, and we wind up with a society with the disastrous statistics of post #4 and the brand new low of post #6.

 

[roguenuke]

I agree there's such a thing as an overly oppressive attitude towards human sexuality, but teaching young people to abstain from sex until marriage isn't part of it.

As for "children 'breaking' their pledges in secret", if this were sufficient reason to abandon abstinence as a good and upright standard, then we also ought to give up social distancing rules during COVID. After all, people might break the rules in secret, and in their moral abandon avoid taking secondary precautions like masking and hand-washing that might mitigate some of the damage.

We ought to give up policing the Internet for child pornography. People might break the rules in secret, and in addition to harming children be unable to get the psychological help they need by being forced underground.

We ought to give up all attempts at regulating firearms. People might break the rules in secret, not only circumventing measures to prevent them from obtaining firearms but also secondary measures such as firearms training, etc. they might tolerate otherwise.

My point being that there is always a case for giving up good standards because some people will always fall short of a standard. Hence we cede ground, we compromise, we look the other way, and we wind up with a society with the disastrous statistics of post #4 and the brand new low of post #6.

Teaching them that only abstinence works has been proven to cause higher rates of teen and unmarried pregnancies, as well as STIs.

 

[AmNat]

It seems like in the 1960s and into the 70s when it became necessary to be an enlightened person you must resist and tear down every tradition. As it became harder to find more thing about American society to hate and eliminate, the more bizarre and petty it becomes.

This is one of the most succinct statements of the problem with modern American society that I've seen.

 

[grip]

Maybe that's what would happen for how you would parent. Not us.

We have often battled with the school trying to teach our children morality and how they should engage in relationships on so many levels. Declaring that boys are predators and girls are prey. How they should act on a date. How they should act in relationships. How awful it is to have a baby. Why they must get a college degree before marriage - and what marriage is. How to act in marriage. On and on - even interrogating the kids about their lives, relationships, and family life.

My Mrs. carries huge social and political power. School staff and the school board hold their breathe if she shows up. Yes they will change the cafeteria to accommodate vegans and vegetarians. No, they won't require our kid(s) or any kids to write papers on their views on relationships, their personal life or their family life. No, they won't ask children to talk or write about their home life. They will not teach children what marriage should be and shouldn't be. Our campaign to end the harassment of LGBTs was completely successful too - and all we wanted was the school staff to stay completely out of it, which they did.

If you are thinking that is from a rightwing religious perspective you are thinking 100% wrong. Government, treating our child like a cow in an endless herd of cattle for generic social doctrine of this year, isn't going to happen. We are exceptionally traditional and exceptionally counter culture, depending on the topic and circumstance. ALL of that, or any of that about our children, is NONE of the government's business. Not only will the school stay out of our bedroom, they'll stay out of our children's bedrooms - and every other aspect of their private life not related to academics and school activities.

Teaching:"People should not marry until they have completed their education and established their career - and then marriage is between 2 people in a monogamous relationship, regardless of gender." Oh hell no, you're not going to teach our children that and force them to state agreement. They are going to teach and test OUR children ONLY on academic topics. We, the parents, will decision how to try to guide, protect and empower our children. It definitely won't be to be like what they are dictating. We have and teach far more restrictions and vastly more liberties than they do. We'll take care of education on the topic of sex and relationship - by words, discussion, rules and example.

I do understand schools trying to make up for all the failures of lazy-ass don't-give-a-damn parents, which is the REAL problem, not overly involved Christian parents. Regardless, we are hyper helicopter parents and will not tolerate outsiders getting in the middle with their counter demands using the authority of tests and grades to enforce their values on our children. Screw up their own children with the ever-changing local PC and SJW controls, restrictions, rules and requirements of private life behavior.

The gov has no business telling parents how to raise their children within the law. But trying to exert too much control on a teen approaching adulthood rarely turns out well. My parents gave me a basic set of rules and chores, the rest was up to me. And I even resented that little bit of supervision.

 

[Mashmont]

How an Abstinence Pledge in the ’90s Shamed a Generation of Evangelicals (Published 2021)

The Christian “purity” movement promoted a strict view of abstinence before marriage. But two decades later, some followers are grappling with unforeseen aftershocks.

www.nytimes.com

Conservative sexuality has done a wonderful job of masking itself as a "purity" movement, claiming that "saving oneself until marriage" is one of the best things a young person could do. Purity rings, purity balls (dances, not genital ornaments), purity pledges dominate this movement, all with one single goal: If you wait until marriage with someone of the opposite sex to do anything sexual, you are a good person. Otherwise, you are a bad person. Never mind if you are LGBTQ; the "purity" movement leaves you out entirely.

What this movement really is is a propaganda campaign to make conservative parents feel like they're in control of their children's sexuality. It denies youth the right to learn about and explore sexuality in a safe, healthy manner. Consider Western European countries, which have far fewer illusions about teenage sexuality yet have far lower rates of STIs. They don't shame their youth for having desires that are just as normal as the desire to eat.

The good news is that organized religion in the United States is collapsing, and hopefully, taking this toxic "purity" movement down with it.

Failed relationships are a hallmark of the irreligious, as is sex outside of marriage. Coincidence? Nope.

Parents need to parent. You try to shape healthy views for your kids. Views that will serve them well in life, and get them to Heaven in the process. Kids having multiple sexual partners and uncommitted sexual relationships is NOT a healthy circumstance. People who let their kids fend for themselves in these critically important areas like sexuality are abdicating their responsibility.

 

[joko104]

It is not just now. This is how its been. My mother was wonderful, but many of my friends and even my cousins had parents who did not want to talk about sex at all with them. I'm 40. So this isn't a new thing. It is an old thing.

Do you try to control and define teens values and practices on sex, sexuality, identity, romance and practices based upon the absolutely worst parents and students - or the best - or in the middle.

The problems are many once just going past biological facts:
1. As soon as teachers start contradicting parents - saying the parents are wrong - it is entirely reasonable for kids to declare their parents are ignorant and ignore them on everything. So can the parent(s) call the teacher at home on weekends and nights saying "tell my kid what do to about... since you told my kid not to listen to me?"

2. No matter how you figure it, it comes back to teachers or school boards trying impose THEIR morality and values on the kids. For example:
Any school materials teaching about relationships, including how straight relationships/marriage are the same, they always define relationships and marriage as TWO people, ie monogamy. I've never seen otherwise. So, in fact, the school is drilling religion Christian values on the kids. Therefore, even if a couple are married 10 years, life and family perfect, kids doing great, if one of them has a fling they they must destroy the marriage because it is a fact that committed relationships are only 2 people.

"Marriage"/significant other relationships are not per se just 2 people. It may be 3, 4, 5 people. It might be a primary couple and secondary people. It might be ANYTHING. So then the school is teaching kids their parents are immoral, wrong, sinful or whatever.

3. On identity, in fact there ARE differences never told:
Gays tend to have higher income, probably due to less children costs.
Gay men should figure they can not have a large family. Foster cares is not the same as being a parent.
Gay relationships have higher incidence of domestic violence
Gay relationships tend to last a shorter amount of time
Even with "safe sex," gay men are more likely to contract STD because anal sex is the most risky

Children mature mentally, physically and in family conditioning at greatly different rates and of huge intellectual abilities. Some kids are not ready for sex-talk - and such talk can draw them in when they are not ready. Some sex ed becomes quite graphic, explaining anal sex to a 15 year old with the maturity of an 11 year old.

It is also problematical in that is sex presented as not different that kissing or playing video games in significance - just raw animalistic - or should other emotions than lust be involved? If so, what rules of emotions should be taught and to what standards. I remember reading material how boys should act on dates, compared to girls on dates - and I agreed almost none of it. Sort of like some weird leftwing Andy Griffith Mayberry, other than Andy Griffith San Francisco.

It is realistic to have anything but the most simplistic presentations to young teens, likely many just snickering and throwing paper balls at each other when the teacher isn't looking. ADULT talk to young teens in 50 minute group classes is problematic.

I could go on - the law of unintended consequences when a teach tries to be the parent - 50 minutes, 5 days a week, 36 weeks of the year. If they are going to become the parent, then they must be on call 24/7 so the displaced parent can put their kid on the phone with the parent-teacher.

 

[Phys251]

Failed relationships are a hallmark of the irreligious

Parents need to parent. You try to shape healthy views for your kids. Views that will serve them well in life, and get them to Heaven in the process. Kids having multiple sexual partners and uncommitted sexual relationships is NOT a healthy circumstance. People who let their kids fend for themselves in these critically important areas like sexuality are abdicating their responsibility.

The abstinence-only crowd is in denial of human biology. People who teach kids to be responsible with their sexuality while not shaming them for it are going to raise their kids right.

Sex-shaming parents and teachers need to be stopped. They are harming children by setting them up for failure. More STIs, more artificial gender roles,... less consent.

 

[Mashmont]

The abstinence-only crowd is in denial of human biology. People who teach kids to be responsible with their sexuality while not shaming them for it are going to raise their kids right.

Sex-shaming parents and teachers need to be stopped. They are harming children by setting them up for failure. More STIs, more artificial gender roles,... less consent.

Human beings by definition are above the animals. We are called upon to control our base desires. We don't hunt and kill other humans. And we don't fornicate whenever we feel like it. Those things are very destructive for human existence. Intelligent people understand this, and instruct their children accordingly.
Lazy stupid people let their kids fend for themselves.

 

[joko104]

The gov has no business telling parents how to raise their children within the law. But trying to exert too much control on a teen approaching adulthood rarely turns out well. My parents gave me a basic set of rules and chores, the rest was up to me. And I even resented that little bit of supervision.

As our children become adolescents, they will rebel. No other parent makes them do it, everyone else can do it, why can't I? Why do I have to? We maintain control. So far, by early high school they are LOVING the success, the recognition, the greater options, to be winners, the benefits of being the best.

Our job as parents is not to be likeable to our children, not to be their pals, not to insure they have a childhood of doing what they want - just play and have fun. It is that they each to their true unique self is ready at age 18 to live as successful of life as an adult as possible. At the end of summer the senior year they are shoved out of the nest. They had at least 10 years warning this was coming. Fly or hit the ground. Our parental duties are over and their child obligation to yield to our authority has fully ended.

What they think of us isn't what matters. What matters is that they are best prepared - guided and even forced - to live as an independent and if necessary self contained adult. However, I will say the only one to hit that stage - much older than the rest - now in the military as a super star - always a super star at anything - communicates with us multiple times a week, and at least once a month - no prompting and out of the blue - will call to thank us for some skill or knowledge base we forced her to learn - that few parents would have. Any competition for anything she wants, she win's it, she gets the job, she gets the award - because she was FORCED to develop the knowledge, experience, resume and skillsets.

 

[Phys251]

Human beings by definition are above the animals.

Human beings are literally animals. Another basic biology fail by you. Got any more?

 

[Mashmont]

How an Abstinence Pledge in the ’90s Shamed a Generation of Evangelicals (Published 2021)

The Christian “purity” movement promoted a strict view of abstinence before marriage. But two decades later, some followers are grappling with unforeseen aftershocks.

www.nytimes.com

Conservative sexuality has done a wonderful job of masking itself as a "purity" movement, claiming that "saving oneself until marriage" is one of the best things a young person could do. Purity rings, purity balls (dances, not genital ornaments), purity pledges dominate this movement, all with one single goal: If you wait until marriage with someone of the opposite sex to do anything sexual, you are a good person. Otherwise, you are a bad person. Never mind if you are LGBTQ; the "purity" movement leaves you out entirely.

What this movement really is is a propaganda campaign to make conservative parents feel like they're in control of their children's sexuality. It denies youth the right to learn about and explore sexuality in a safe, healthy manner. Consider Western European countries, which have far fewer illusions about teenage sexuality yet have far lower rates of STIs. They don't shame their youth for having desires that are just as normal as the desire to eat.

The good news is that organized religion in the United States is collapsing, and hopefully, taking this toxic "purity" movement down with it.

OPs like this illustrate the poor judgment of the atheist left in general. Across the board. They only have bad ideas. Nothing that is thought through, nothing that works. They lack the truth, and they lack the wisdom to help them find it.

 

[Mashmont]

Human beings are literally animals. Another basic biology fail by you. Got any more?

Humans have a high degree of intelligence, and this separates us from the animals.

 

[phoenix2020]

Emploring teens to be sexually responsible is not a bad thing. But parents and society also need to be realistic about that approach. Asking young folk to completely abstain, as they're going thru puberty with heightened desire, does not seem reasonable. Their sexuality is their own business, not really subject to approval.

Hear, hear! Agreed. Abstinence in the context of being patient is I think a good thing - a society too deeply steeped in instant gratification will suffer for it. But, rooting it in an intellectual or moral structure completely at odds with desire isn‘t particularly healthy either. I appreciate the advocacy for balance in your post.

 

[Phys251]

OPs like this illustrate the poor judgment of the atheist left in general. Across the board. They only have bad ideas. Nothing that is thought through, nothing that works. They lack the truth, and they lack the wisdom to help them find it.

Says the person who feels that we're not even animals. What are we, protists?

Humans have a high degree of intelligence, and this separates us from the animals.

Human beings are animals, just like we learned back in the third grade. No amount of ignorant insistence by you is going to change that basic scientific fact.

 

[CLAX1911]

How an Abstinence Pledge in the ’90s Shamed a Generation of Evangelicals (Published 2021)

The Christian “purity” movement promoted a strict view of abstinence before marriage. But two decades later, some followers are grappling with unforeseen aftershocks.

www.nytimes.com

Conservative sexuality has done a wonderful job of masking itself as a "purity" movement, claiming that "saving oneself until marriage" is one of the best things a young person could do. Purity rings, purity balls (dances, not genital ornaments), purity pledges dominate this movement, all with one single goal: If you wait until marriage with someone of the opposite sex to do anything sexual, you are a good person. Otherwise, you are a bad person. Never mind if you are LGBTQ; the "purity" movement leaves you out entirely.

What this movement really is is a propaganda campaign to make conservative parents feel like they're in control of their children's sexuality. It denies youth the right to learn about and explore sexuality in a safe, healthy manner. Consider Western European countries, which have far fewer illusions about teenage sexuality yet have far lower rates of STIs. They don't shame their youth for having desires that are just as normal as the desire to eat.

The good news is that organized religion in the United States is collapsing, and hopefully, taking this toxic "purity" movement down with it.

Don't ask teens to abstain from sex? Why are people so desperate to get teens to have sex? It's equally as creepy as the purity thing.

 

[joko104]

Failed relationships are a hallmark of the irreligious, as is sex outside of marriage. Coincidence? Nope.

Parents need to parent. You try to shape healthy views for your kids. Views that will serve them well in life, and get them to Heaven in the process. Kids having multiple sexual partners and uncommitted sexual relationships is NOT a healthy circumstance. People who let their kids fend for themselves in these critically important areas like sexuality are abdicating their responsibility.

I'll sidestep the "Heaven" part of that. But I suspect people highly promiscuous in their youth and as a young adult may have a problem maintaining long term relationships - at a real cost to to children.

MANY kids severely harm their future permanently in their youth in many ways. For example, we spend a HUGE amount of time explaining to our children how to deal with police, criminal laws, and how even just a shoplifting conviction, minor drug charge, or public intox/DUI can chase them the rest of their life and permanently close many doors. Once again, there is no such thing as "safe sex" - only "safer sex."

Teach a kid that sex is no big deal as long as "safe" in terms of STD and pregnancy - and the kid lives like that - might have a difficult time putting much significance on sex and fidelity in marriage, particularly if their spouse becomes boring - for which I suspect sex with the same person month after year does.

 

[joko104]

Humans have a high degree of intelligence, and this separates us from the animals.

Humans have a powerful and often controlling inner voice. People talk to themselves - silently or out loud. Do the other great apes do that? Do other animals ponder of morality? Are they artistic? Poetic? Care about aesthetics?

 

[Mashmont]

Says the person who feels that we're not even animals. What are we, protists?



Human beings are animals, just like we learned back in the third grade. No amount of ignorant insistence by you is going to change that basic scientific fact.

Why are you being dishonest about what I said? I said we are above the animals, which we are.