Abstinence only vs Sex Education

The place to go for debate on politics, religion, sex, and other tasty topics!
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Angelique »

Northstar, since when is a condom used correctly 100% of the time? That's why I said that the failure rate is up to 15% "in the field," which means the real world, rather than in perfect conditions where people always use them correctly.

Even so, when it comes to a fatal illness such as AIDS, I do think 1-3% is far too big a risk for what more and more people regard as mere recreation. Yes, life is dangerous. But AIDS is a particularly miserable way to go that, in most cases, can be prevented by simply choosing abstinence.

Oh, and I'm sure if a kid wants badly enough to drive against the flow of traffic, there's not much I can do to stop that. That doesn't mean we should teach kids how to "safely" violate traffic regulations.

Also, I think there is a false dichotomy here. It's not that all people who support abstinence education favor keeping people ignorant. Rather, I personally believe that teaching kids they have no control over whether or not sex "happens," and perpetuating a false sense of security in those who use condoms is also dangerous, perpetuating a different kind of ignorance.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
CurlyyHairGirl
Swashbuckler
Swashbuckler
Posts: 1503
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 4:52 pm
Location: San Jose State University

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by CurlyyHairGirl »

As a teen and a high school student, I just wanted to put a few words in.
We started our "health" classes in 7th grade learning all about the reproductive system, how it works, sex, contraceptives, and abstinance. In highscool we were required two years of health, general (which teaches both abstinance and sex ed) and another (Child & family &health, Single living & health) both including sex ed and abstinance.
They cover both here which I think is,,,a good idea.

Like some said, we're gonna have sex if we want, no matter what, but it's good to know our options.

We had a long discussion about this in my psychology class a few months back, whether kids should be taught about not having sex till a certain age or marriage, or about using protection. Hearing from a bunch of hormonal teens, like myself, that they would rather know all their options and there consequences of their choices, should be taken less lightly just because we act stupid. Sure, there are the guys who laugh and make the crude jokes, but truth be told, though we may act like we don't give a flying rats ass (and I'm sure some don't) alot of us do listen...now using that knowledge is a whole 'nother subject. But the message does get through to us.

I think a balance of both subjects is the best way to go. If we were to be taugh just about abstinance...thats not helping anyone...that'll just screw us up more because we won't understand the importance of protection once we're married or reach a legal age, or if we decide to have sex at any time.

All I'm saying is that it's nice to know both sides of the coin.

Oh, and just as a side note, 3 students out of a class of 34 students, have had/been given the sex talk with a parent or guardian, I myself was not one of them...:shakeno
It sad how most of the stuff we learn is from our peers, school, or mass media.


Well that's all I have to say, I just wanted to throw my opinion and POV out there. Thank you.;)

[Edited on 3/21/06 by CurlyyHairGirl]
one name: Bruce Campbell
fourpawsonthefloor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:49 pm
Title: Executive Administrator

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by fourpawsonthefloor »

Originally posted by Angelique
Northstar, since when is a condom used correctly 100% of the time? That's why I said that the failure rate is up to 15% "in the field," which means the real world, rather than in perfect conditions where people always use them correctly.

Even so, when it comes to a fatal illness such as AIDS, I do think 1-3% is far too big a risk for what more and more people regard as mere recreation. Yes, life is dangerous. But AIDS is a particularly miserable way to go that, in most cases, can be prevented by simply choosing abstinence.


Also, I think there is a false dichotomy here. It's not that all people who support abstinence education favor keeping people ignorant. Rather, I personally believe that teaching kids they have no control over whether or not sex "happens," and perpetuating a false sense of security in those who use condoms is also dangerous, perpetuating a different kind of ignorance.
Not to get all nitpicky here - but even if a condom failed 10% of the time, not all of those failures are going to be with people that have AIDS or another STD - and even then a one time romp in the sack isn't enough to guarentee that they'll actually get it. Heck - there are people that have been having unprotected sex with people with AIDS ect dozens of times that still don't end up sick (though yes, all it takes is ONE time). Not a loaded gun that I'd be pointing to my temple, but still - that does lower the chances of getting AIDS from explosive condom failure to a statistically minute number. Hooded man, in all your percentaging glory, I am sure that you can find some fricking statistic to back me up - or at least a combonation of statistical numbers that can be number crunched. My mind has gone on a math revolt.

I don't think that sex education programs advocate sex - they quite blatently teach kids that they should really ultimately be keeping it in their pants...heck I know that my sex ed was always based on that. The point is to have a contigency plan. The same goes for everyone here - we aren't saying "teens - frisk and frolic and have wild bonobos sex"...quite the opposite actually. The only safe sex is mastrubation. And to me - that they can fly at...just don't chafe your skin off, OK guys?

But kids still need to be armed with the knowledge to keep them safer, because it ultimately will not be your choice when, and who with, they choose to do the horizontal tango for the first (or 50th) time.

That's all I am saying...we need to keep our kids safe through education...hope that I am making sense...Paws
Image
I'm actually quite pleasant until I'm awake.
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Bamfette »

Also, I think there is a false dichotomy here. It's not that all people who support abstinence education favor keeping people ignorant. Rather, I personally believe that teaching kids they have no control over whether or not sex "happens," and perpetuating a false sense of security in those who use condoms is also dangerous, perpetuating a different kind of ignorance.
Then what the hell is the problem? People who want sex ed as opposed to abstinence programs aren't for teaching kids to throw caution to the wind and start fucking like rabbits. They advise caution, they did when i was in school, anyway. They tell you that you shouldn't do it, but tell you how to do it safely if you should happen to do it for one reason or another. We're not for kids having sex and lots of it, but we think it's safer, all things considred, if they know the facts, because abstinence programs are NOT SUCCESSFUL in stopping teens from having sex. So if they're gonna do it anyway, they may as well do it safely. no, codoms are not 100% protecton, but it's as good as we have, and the sex ed classes aren't telling kids that they're absolutely invulnerable from pregnancy or disease if they use them, just SAFER.
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Angelique »

But that's still exactly like saying, "Don't drive against traffic, but if you choose to do so, here's how to minimize the risks...."
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Originally posted by Angelique
But that's still exactly like saying, "Don't drive against traffic, but if you choose to do so, here's how to minimize the risks...."
Can you drop the whole driving thing? The metaphors are getting tiresome and they make no sense..

Driving against traffic is AGAINST THE LAW. That's why we tell people not to do it. And you know what? Some people still do it to get a thrill. What do you know, same as sex! However, the difference is that if you drive against traffic, you're gonna get a ticket or arrested. If Molly Sue takes Bobby Ray home on their lunch break for a quickie, there's no legal reprecussions.

STOP USING STUPID METAPHORS THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE!

And to be frank? For teens today, the traffic is heading toward sex. Teenagers are human beings in the process of sexual development...instinctually, sex would happen here. So, basically, kids who are not having sex are the ones driving against traffic

And do us all a favor. This debate is getting very heated, and honestly Ange, its because you are being presented with real FACTS, STATISTICS, and ARTICLES that back up our points. We have enough respect for you and for our arguments to not just willy nilly throw a number out and expect people to take us seriously. I don't think it's too much to ask you to do the same thing. Saying something like "Well, the rate is raised to 15% because of blah blah-" doesn't help us, because all we see is "Ange is making up numbers." Do us AND yourself a favor and back yourself up. I don't know how many different times and arguments you have been asked to do this, but it's definately been more than once.
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Bamfette »

Originally posted by Angelique
But that's still exactly like saying, "Don't drive against traffic, but if you choose to do so, here's how to minimize the risks...."
you used that argument already. we didn't buy it then, we wont buy it now.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand. Abstinence only programs don't have a 100% success rate, and from the looks of things, they never will. The world isn't perfect, and we shouldn't expect it to be. So why shouldn't we have a backup plan? I don't see the logic of 'well they have a X% failure rate' to mean we shouldn't use them at all? Before you turn my abstinence only isn't 100% comment around, we're not arguing against the idea that no sex is the safest route, ultimately. But it has a HUGE 'if factor' in that it's only safe if it's followed through with. Which it often isn't. And when a teen that's been taught ONLY abstinence decides to have sex for whatever reason, they're not equipped with the tools to deal witht he situation in a safe way. We're being realistic in that we don't expect every teen that's told not to have sex until they're 18 to listen, and while we may strongly advise they wait, at least we have a backup plan, (and they may choose to ignore that too, yeah, but it's still something) where abstinence only just leaves them floundering. And when they turn 18, if they haven't had sex already, many are not interested in waiting for marriage. And i see absolutley no problem with this. As long as they know the risks (thanks to sex ed) and are prepared to deal with them.

And you know, there are defensive driving courses out there, that teach you how to deal with messy situations. They don't advise that you intentionally drive against the flow of traffic, just like we're not advocating teens be having promiscuous sex, but they do teach you what to do should you manage to find yourself on the wrong side of the road for whatever reason. I think they're a good idea.

[Edited on 21/3/06 by Bamfette]
HoodedMan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2335
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:39 pm
Title: Lord Sarcasmo von Snarkypants

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by HoodedMan »

Originally posted by Angelique
Northstar, since when is a condom used correctly 100% of the time? That's why I said that the failure rate is up to 15% "in the field," which means the real world, rather than in perfect conditions where people always use them correctly.
Back it up. Back it up, back it up, back it up. And for Christ's sake, how do you manage to miss my point so completely?

There are user failures and there are method failures. Method failures are when there's a defect. Do you have any idea how unusual method failures are? And how much smaller a chance that that failure will cause anything at all?

Your hamster has fallen off its wheel; your record's stuck in the same groove. You can't argue by repeating yourself louder and louder. I speak English.
Originally posted by Angelique
Even so, when it comes to a fatal illness such as AIDS, I do think 1-3% is far too big a risk for what more and more people regard as mere recreation.
No. No, it's not, actually. Not compared to the percentage of people who have not been taught how to use birth control because their teachers thought their willpower could stand up to their hormones. Fat chance.
Originally posted by Angelique
Yes, life is dangerous. But AIDS is a particularly miserable way to go that, in most cases, can be prevented by simply choosing abstinence.
Sure it can. But you know what? Abstinence does not work. You're supposedly 40 years old; you may not remember what it was like when you were an adolescent with raging hormones.
Originally posted by Angelique
Oh, and I'm sure if a kid wants badly enough to drive against the flow of traffic, there's not much I can do to stop that. That doesn't mean we should teach kids how to "safely" violate traffic regulations.
Stop. Stop, stop, stop. Your analogy is false. Wrong. Incorrect. I've pointed this out; STOP USING IT!
Originally posted by Angelique
Also, I think there is a false dichotomy here. It's not that all people who support abstinence education favor keeping people ignorant. Rather, I personally believe that teaching kids they have no control over whether or not sex "happens," and perpetuating a false sense of security in those who use condoms is also dangerous, perpetuating a different kind of ignorance.
Sex ed programs don't give kids a false sense of security. The message is, "You shouldn't have sex, but if you do, at least know how not to ruin your life." Which I think would be your message, if it wasn't clouded by lies and false analogies.

And no response to any other fact except those you can nitpick? I'm disappointed; I thought you might actually want to learn.
ACHTUNG! Alles touristen und non-technischen looken peepers! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Anyway, you know what I was thinking of when I was driving today? When did it become solely the responsibility of schools/programs to teach abstinence/sex ed? Wouldn't this whole thing be resolved far easier if parents took a more active role in their child's sexual development and shared THEIR values, rather than expecting outside sources to? Then, parents who want to encourage abstinence can, and parents who want to encourage education can...doesn't that make sense?

I'm not saying that it should be the parent alone who is responsible to teach their kid. But, as far as I've seen parents CAN elect to not have their children participate in the sex ed programs (it was like that at my school). So, why not those parents who simply cannot allow their child to learn about safe sex just elect they don't take the class and be a frikken parent for a second and teach them?
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Angelique »

Northstar, it is not a false analogy. Teen sex is like anything else stupid, like driving against the flow of traffic or shooting heroin. Rather than teach kids how to be stupid "safely," we teach and encourage them to make smart, responsible decisions.

I'm 32, not 40. And even so, I do remember what it was like being a teenager. Much like I tend to be now, I was very much resentful of being pigeonholed just because of my age. I was told by the sex-ed available in the '90's, well, not in so many words, that abstinence was too much to expect from a hormone-driven teenager. (And that's exactly what "abstinence is best, but because we don't expect you to listen to us and exercize any discipline, here's how to use a condom" told me.) So I held off because I had a chip on my shoulder. Not everyone is as spiteful in the face of such low expectations, however. Many kids have a knack for living up or down to whatever society expects of them. And it's because of that that I think it's important to raise the bar a bit.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
BAMFCentral
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 4:05 pm
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by BAMFCentral »

Abstinence is the best way to reduce the spread of STDs and pregnancy.

(Yes I know you can get pregnant or std even if you are abstinent, Rape or dirty needle can lead to respectively.. but we are talking should abstinence be taught)

While it is the best way, it is not the way that everyone will use. As at our school we were taught Abstinence, but they knew that people were having sex. So additionaly, proper safe sex methods were taught. Probably the best class was the one were They talked about condom usage and size. There was a lot of posturing (is that right spelling?) by the guys that condoms don't fit or that it kills the feeling. Funniest thing I have heard.

Teaching abstinence as part of a safe sex practice is a good thing. But there is a definate necessity for teaching safe sex methods for those actually engaging in sex. But outside of teaching them, its really up to the indivdual to actively practice one of the 2 methods.
Image
chicory
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:50 pm

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by chicory »

Nacht - NOooooo! That doesn't make sense! Maybe I just don't trust parents enough to give their children responsible information. Or maybe I just believe that kids are people in their own right and deserve to have all the information. If parents want to keep their kids ignorant of evolution because they believe literally in Genesis and don't want their children exposed to alternative ideas - they're doing their children a great disservice and the country would be doing itself harm by allowing it's citizen's to be uneducated. That's a scary future to me (even if other people think eliminating the theory of evolution entirely is the best thing that could happen)

Lady Erin > That whole tricked, betrayed feeling and being more naive than most of your classmates - I can totally commiserate with that. If it wasn't for what passed for sex ed in 4th, 5th, 8th, and 9th grade I don't think I would have known anything. Just because in my house sex didn't exist and babies came from hospitals and so many things my classmates talked about just went over my head. For instance, I had no idea what a condom was in fifth grade even though everyone else had heard the word before and even less an idea of what something like that could possibly be for.

So if it wasn't for sex ed in high school (which was only a half year health class that reproductive science was only a small part of) what state was your program in CurlyyHairGirl? And they definitely didn't push abstinance or any value system let alone have abstinance pledges. Actually, there was one student who kept trying to argue that sex was healthy and natural for teens with the teacher, and I remember thinking, 'shut up Chris, he already agrees with you, so you're not convincing him of anything.' I think they had a talk after class. (The same kid also asked how gay sex could possibly work - and the teacher took him aside for that too - instead of educating the whole class).

But, if that had been left up to my parents, who weren't forthcoming about anything, considering all the misinformation my peers had, things would have been much more frightening and worrisome than they already were.

Has anyone seen this book? I saw it in the bookstore last year in the children's section. And found in my library. Sadly, maybe I just didn't pay enough attention in Health, but it was very informative. Why couldn't I have seen something like this when I was a little kid?

Angelique> I hate arguing with people! But this is a subject I feel strongly about. Sex for teens isn't any more risky than it is for anyone else. And driving with traffic is a more accurate analogy, because that's dangerous enough. (Driving against traffic is just suicide - you're guaranteed an accident).

The ideal situation for all drivers to be in is licensed (married); utilizing seatbelt, airbags, (condoms, pill, other); and having completed a good driver's ed course (sex ed). Abstinance only is like telling kids never to drive - but the temptation still exists and not everyone is going to stay off the road. Those who do take the chance won't know enough to wear a seatbelt or ask about safety features and are far more likely to get hurt.

I think the only compassionate and realistic system is to prepare those kids. Otherwise you're just setting them up to be hurt. And it's almost like saying they deserve to be hurt because they're not adhering to one particular value system that not everyone buys into. Besides, even the kids who wait to drive until they can get a license legally will benefit from having had a driver's ed class.

BAMF>That's funny about the posturing. But that's another reason to have good health classes. Because, you can get rid of some of those myths that kids might otherwise believe and that would lead to riskier behavior.

[Edited on 21/3/06 by chicory]
For those who believe, no explanation is neccessary. For those who do not, no explanation is possible. ~Gino Dalpiaz
The Drastic Spastic
Swashbuckler
Swashbuckler
Posts: 1846
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 3:01 am
Location: ROK

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by The Drastic Spastic »

Originally posted by Angelique
Many kids have a knack for living up or down to whatever society expects of them. And it's because of that that I think it's important to raise the bar a bit.
I don't want those kids who are living down to expectations from family, friends, etc reproducing. And if a bloody two hour sex ed class can influence the expectations a kid feels more than the positive influences of family, friends, etc I don't want those kids reproducing either. We have to teach them to use condoms. The fate of the world depends on it.
Und die Sonne spricht zu mir
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Originally posted by chicory
Nacht - NOooooo! That doesn't make sense! Maybe I just don't trust parents enough to give their children responsible information. Or maybe I just believe that kids are people in their own right and deserve to have all the information. If parents want to keep their kids ignorant of evolution because they believe literally in Genesis and don't want their children exposed to alternative ideas - they're doing their children a great disservice and the country would be doing itself harm by allowing it's citizen's to be uneducated. That's a scary future to me (even if other people think eliminating the theory of evolution entirely is the best thing that could happen)
Well, my point mainly is rather than having a bunch of parents who don't want safe sex method taught to their kids fighting to get safe sex education banished from schools, how about they take the time to pass their values onto their kids alone, rather than force them onto everyone elses. Yeah, it's still perpetuating ignorance, but at least it's not forcing ignorance on other peoples children....

If there's a demographic (and apparently, there is) that prefers ignorance to education, then they should build their own frikken schools. Stop trying to make the rest of us as stupid as you...
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
LadyErin
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:05 am
Location: Limbo
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by LadyErin »

Ange...anyone....

What happens to the kid who gets married at 17, or 18, or 19? And they still know nothing of birth control because they weren't taught it?

What happens to the teen who gets date raped and doesn't know about the morning after pill because she wasn't taught it?

What happens to the kid whose parent has told her time and time again (and ment it!) that if she ever comes home preggers that they will kill her/kick her out/beat the holy crap out of her - yet gets pregant because of a mistake* in her jugdement, because she didn't know about anything to prevent?

Face it - some kids (like me, like my sister) are Going. To. Have. Sex. not because they lack self control, but because they want to. Because they love their partner, because they see nothing morally wrong with it. But mostly because they want to. Some, like my sister, will have people who won't jugde them (like me) and others, (like myself) won't. Guess which group is more likely to use protection (Note: PROTECTION! Not fool-proof, everyone agrees on that***) and suffer less psychologic problems for it?

Three guesses. C'on. Guess.

Right! The ones who has someone say to them "I don't agree with what you are going to do/are doing, I think you need to know about this, this, and this. But I respect you as human being who has the right to make his/her own choices. So, let me explain what you need to know. Here is all the reasons why you should wait.*** However, I understand that you may choiose not to, and if so, here is what you do to protect yourself."

The ones most likely to have problems, of a phsycial (illness, pregantcy) and psychologic (depression, guilt/shame, sometimes leading to depression, and sexual dysfuction later in life) nature are those that were made to feel guilty by being told they were being less than others/was a bad kid/are weak or morally corrupt/etc.

Which program is more likely to use what method?

And one last thing - Look at the damn divorce rate! You think most adults have only had one partner in their lives? What about people who have been married three, four, five, seven times? It ain't just happening in Hollywood, people are being serially monogamious - committed to one person for a short (more or less) period of time and then finding a new one. So 'waiting until mariage' isn't a sure bet either. Other people don't want get married (or can't) and while they may be in committed relationships for long periods of time, most will still have more than one partner.

Now I'm not saying tell the kid "Hey! You should wait** but since you are too whatever reason to do so, herre is the other plan." No, what you tell them is, "Yes, waiting for a committed relastionship between adults is best, and safest, however for vaious reasons, they may choose not to. If so, great, you are proud of them. If not, that is still their choice and you won't be any less proud. And even if they are in a committed relationship, they still may not what to have children right away. So, here is what you need to know, to more safely handle both situtations. knowlegade here And yes, while knowlegade here helps to prevent STD's/Pregantcy they are not foolproof. Nothing is, so they are safer sex methods. Abstience and solo mastrubation are the only truely safe sex methods."

Now - that was the short version of the sex ed class I got at 16.

That works, ja?

------------------------------

*Mistake - we are all entitled to make them. We all do at some point. Lessons are learned and we grow and move one.
** Since you like the car-thing so much: Seltbelts, air bags, crumble zones, roll bars and cages, carseats, booster seats, bullet proofed car, bullet proof glass, anti-lock breaks, turning signals, etc - Even with the safest car in the world - being in a car, drving, can still cause your death.
*** Wait til you are adult, out og high school, out of university, married, many reasons to wait
-----------------------------
Editted for spelling mistakes and to add my second bullet.

[Edited on 21-3-2006 by LadyErin]

Never sad I was a spelling champ...

[Edited on 21-3-2006 by LadyErin]
http://lady_erin.livejournal.com
:magneto
What do you mean, you "don't believe in homosexuality?" It's not like the Easter Bunny, your belief isn't necessary. ~~Lea DeLaria
Want to IM me? U2U me for the screenname.
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Angelique »

Well, in society, it is necessary for people to utilize some form of automotive transportation. However, sex really isn't a necessity- at least not for people too young and/or insecure to handle possible long-term committments and consequences like, say, a baby.

Also, I don't know about you, but in addition to the risks of crisis pregnancy or disease, even much more substantial is the risk of simply being used. Who wants our kids to be accustomed to being used as human blow-up dolls? Who wants our kids to cope by treating sex as something no more important than a game of Trivial Pursuit? The way our society regards sex these days, that's pretty much guaranteed.

And I think what's missing in too many "abstinence is best, but here's a condom" approach is the message that the best thing for kids who are already having sex to do is not to use a condom, but to- yes, it is possible- to stop having sex.

So my analogy still stands.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
HoodedMan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2335
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:39 pm
Title: Lord Sarcasmo von Snarkypants

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by HoodedMan »

Originally posted by Angelique
The way our society regards sex these days, that's pretty much guaranteed.
I beg your pardon? How dare you.
Originally posted by Angelique
Northstar, it is not a false analogy. Teen sex is like anything else stupid, like driving against the flow of traffic or shooting heroin. Rather than teach kids how to be stupid "safely," we teach and encourage them to make smart, responsible decisions.
OK, you can NOT use opinions in this adult discussion. Teenage sex, in my opinion, is NOT stupid, and you can not use the opinion that it is in your argument, just as I didn't in my argument.
Originally posted by Angelique
So I held off because I had a chip on my shoulder.
omg, really?!1!one!

OK, you know what? I am not going to argue anymore with a supposed forty-year-old who's debating like an eight-year-old sticking her fingers in her ears and going, "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I'M GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER UNTIL YOU BREAK DOWN AND SAY I'M RIGHT," or a New Yorker that repeats himself LOUDER to someone who can't speak English.

This is the real world, and you're fantasizing, "But what IF? What IF I was right?"

So you all, have fun and deal with her. Try to fix her auto fetish. Her participation, I think, has ruined this thread and I see no sense in taking any further part in it.

-Northstar
ACHTUNG! Alles touristen und non-technischen looken peepers! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.
LadyErin
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:05 am
Location: Limbo
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by LadyErin »

Originally posted by Angelique
Well, in society, it is necessary for people to utilize some form of automotive transportation. However, sex really isn't a necessity- at least not for people too young and/or insecure to handle possible long-term committments and consequences like, say, a baby.
Read my post please.
Also, I don't know about you, but in addition to the risks of crisis pregnancy or disease, even much more substantial is the risk of simply being used. Who wants our kids to be accustomed to being used as human blow-up dolls? Who wants our kids to cope by treating sex as something no more important than a game of Trivial Pursuit? The way our society regards sex these days, that's pretty much guaranteed.
I'm with Northstar. How dare you.
And I think what's missing in too many "abstinence is best, but here's a condom" approach is the message that the best thing for kids who are already having sex to do is not to use a condom, but to- yes, it is possible- to stop having sex.
Reread my post. Read it again. Once more. Keep reading it until you understand it.
So my analogy still stands.
See my second bullet. And yes, your analogy stands, but it is a bad one. One can live without a car, life will go on. We can always walk/uses horses or mules/ride a bicycle. I'ld like to see like continue without sex. IVF costs too much.
http://lady_erin.livejournal.com
:magneto
What do you mean, you "don't believe in homosexuality?" It's not like the Easter Bunny, your belief isn't necessary. ~~Lea DeLaria
Want to IM me? U2U me for the screenname.
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by Angelique »

That's all right. You don't have to. Because I am 32 years old and I never read anywhere that my opinion was unwelcome. I can use my opinion it is stupid- and I can back it up with the fact that NO source whatsoever says it's the smartest, most responsible course of action.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
LadyErin
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:05 am
Location: Limbo
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by LadyErin »

Originally posted by Angelique
That's all right. You don't have to. Because I am 32 years old and I never read anywhere that my opinion was unwelcome. I can use my opinion it is stupid- and I can back it up with the fact that NO source whatsoever says it's the smartest, most responsible course of action.
However in this type of debate, using an opinion when others are using facts makes you look infantile, more so when you completely ignore the facts given.
http://lady_erin.livejournal.com
:magneto
What do you mean, you "don't believe in homosexuality?" It's not like the Easter Bunny, your belief isn't necessary. ~~Lea DeLaria
Want to IM me? U2U me for the screenname.
fourpawsonthefloor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:49 pm
Title: Executive Administrator

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by fourpawsonthefloor »

You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION!

Really - come on here - you want to try and encourage sexual safety and gratification in the same line...its masturbation. Yes, you can't play tonsil hockey with a three dimentional genital stimulator, but you can do a whole more lot of things...

With the plentiful assortment of all shapes, sizes, textures and colors out there on the market nowadays, one shouldn't be stuck for inspiration. Hell - I just happened to glance over, and by the looks of it, my cat is having a great old time with just a big fuzzy wool blanket (someone remind me to wash it later, OK?)

So - if anything - we should be teaching our kids how to choke their chickens and stand up proud and tall while they are doing it - because they are fulfilling a natural and normal urge, rather than mothballing it with guilt and ill self worth, and they are still 100% safe.

Plus I have yet to hear of any dildo that insisted on driving into oncoming traffic. Self love all the way baby!!

Paws
Image
I'm actually quite pleasant until I'm awake.
User avatar
NachtcGleiskette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 6:45 am
Title: The Ragin' Cajun
Location: NY

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by NachtcGleiskette »

Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION!

Really - come on here - you want to try and encourage sexual safety and gratification in the same line...its masturbation. Yes, you can't play tonsil hockey with a three dimentional genital stimulator, but you can do a whole more lot of things...

With the plentiful assortment of all shapes, sizes, textures and colors out there on the market nowadays, one shouldn't be stuck for inspiration. Hell - I just happened to glance over, and by the looks of it, my cat is having a great old time with just a big fuzzy wool blanket (someone remind me to wash it later, OK?)

So - if anything - we should be teaching our kids how to choke their chickens and stand up proud and tall while they are doing it - because they are fulfilling a natural and normal urge, rather than mothballing it with guilt and ill self worth, and they are still 100% safe.

Plus I have yet to hear of any dildo that insisted on driving into oncoming traffic. Self love all the way baby!!

Paws
PREACH ON SISTER CHRISTIAN!

though, my rabbit once told me to drive in the HOV lane. I got pulled over and insisted that my rabbit, as a reproduction of a piece of human anatomy (and IMHO better than many originals I've experienced), is a second passenger. I'm taking it to the supreme court baby!
"If you live your life to please everyone else, you will continue to feel frustrated and powerless. This is because what others want may not be good for you. You are not being mean when you say NO to unreasonable demands or when you express your ideas, feelings, and opinions, even if they differ from those of others.â€
LadyErin
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:05 am
Location: Limbo
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by LadyErin »

Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION
Paws,

It only counts in solo mastrubation. Going at it with your girlfriend or boyfriend doesn't. ;)

I remember that coming up from my high school class.
http://lady_erin.livejournal.com
:magneto
What do you mean, you "don't believe in homosexuality?" It's not like the Easter Bunny, your belief isn't necessary. ~~Lea DeLaria
Want to IM me? U2U me for the screenname.
fourpawsonthefloor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:49 pm
Title: Executive Administrator

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by fourpawsonthefloor »

Originally posted by LadyErin
Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION
Paws,

It only counts in solo mastrubation. Going at it with your girlfriend or boyfriend doesn't. ;)

I remember that coming up from my high school class.
Well - ya - actually flying solo was what I was referring to, though I understand where you are coming from. :D

Well...semi solo at least...I've seen some crazy light up and talking contraptions to add some crazy vairiation, and there is always the life sized "realistic" ladies that the guys can get...

Point is, I was meaning that you would be the sole thing involved that happened to have a pulse. (ohh...well...I could be wrong there too - there are shocking things in those stores....)

Spread the word!!!! :LOL

Paws
Image
I'm actually quite pleasant until I'm awake.
BAMFCentral
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 4:05 pm
Contact:

Abstinence only vs Sex Education

Post by BAMFCentral »

Originally posted by fourpawsonthefloor
You know, I think you are all overlooking the glaringly obvious (and I've mentioned it before in this thread) "only" safe sex. MASTRUBATION!
Not to be picky, but you are talking about safe in terms of no stds or anything.

Not so much physical damage that can incur from inproper (vigorous use).



An improper stroke can sink your boat.
Image
Post Reply