The thread talks about abstinence, and Christianity stresses sexual purity. With that in mind, what's so notable in Hegamboa's comments that prompted you to remark as if he's said something out of order?
Advantage 1: the middle east
a) Papal Celibacy leads to happiness
Vatican Times '04
b) Happiness is key to peace
Reuters '03
c) Only peace can solve for WMD in the Middle East
Straits Times' 04
d) Next War in Middle East goes nuclear= global conflict
NYT '06
Again, for half of you all who missed it... choosing instead to veer off with bouton's_ regular rant.
1) I pointed out the fact that the survey was an incomplete assessment. That drawing the conclusion that abstinence philosophies be avoided or that they don't work from the data collected by this study would be uncorroborated.
There is no "A-ha", or an "I told you so" argument in which to gloat about here. The framework of the study did not encompass this conclusion.
2) Furthermore, I want to know where I mentioned or implied that federal programs should intill Christian tenets??? FWD was only being facetious... and BAAAM boutouns_ went off like a broken record.
In fact, I stated quite the opposite.... I wrote that morals should be taught and instilled at the home and not at schools.
3) So CBF and everyone else who just had to drop their 2 cents worth, by throwing a jab at me. You all need to learn how to
. READING is something I totally endorse as a legitimate scholastic subject.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 04-14-2007 at 10:11 AM.
Abstinence does not work, they should force all kids under 21 to get abortion and all kids under 16 caught having sex, their parents should go to jail for 6 months.
Absitenece in today's world is extremely hard. What % of people are virgins when they marry? Probably less thern the % of people who remain faithfull all their life (and that is a ing low %)
[QUOTE=boutons_]"Besides abstinence is tied to a spiritual conviction that one is obeying GOD's will."
off, Bible-thumper.
Sexual abstinence can be taught for reasons without introducing God. Avoiding pregnancy and STD are the most immediately scary reasons, much more immediate than God's . As with criminals, dissuasion doesn't work for horny, curious kids.
The Repugs also mixed sexual abstinence into their African anti-AIDs campaign, preferring that non-abstaining Africans die of AIDS rather than be encouraged to use condoms in their inevitable sex.
Ideology sucks, Repug/neo- ideology murders.[Quote]
I disagree. Religious convictions are more powerful then fear of catching vd or fear of pregnancy.
People are marrying much later in life. At least in western cultures.
Are telling me that telling kids not to do it doesn't work? REALLY?
Believe it or not, abstinence is not pretty popular among teens. Well it isn't very popular among the human race either.Are telling me that telling kids not to do it doesn't work? REALLY?
You suggest that the data would somehow point to a different conclusion if it included homeschooled students. In statistical terms, this premise is what we would call RE ED, since you seem to think a very tiny proportion of the population will change the conclusions based on the observations of the overwhelming majority.
LMFAO @ abstinence classes. Teens are going to have sex if they want to, might as well not even bother.
It's simple. You , pick up a STD or a kid, and deal with the consequences. Better yet, you have one idiot do that and maybe the rest of their friends at least think about what they themselves are doing. Sure, the practice of abstinence is the best bet to avoid any problems and it'd be great if most kids didn't engage in something when they are wholly unprepared for the responsibility. I'm not sure why this ends up being someone else's responsibility. But that's a recurring theme today: I ed up and it's your fault. So either we have the government telling people not to or else enabling teenagers ing. How about the government stay the out and let kids and their parents handle the responsibility?
It's all good and idealistic in nature, but one of the biggest problems in today's society is that some parents and most teens aren't equipped to handle much responsibility to begin with.
Does that necesarily mean that the government should step in and solve this escalating problem??? No, but I guess some of that depends on the views of society which allows its citizens to shape its laws. Popular vote wins. Popular programs win. And yet that doesn't mean that the programs will be effective - as is the case with this problem.
Besides - and not to generalize - but it seems as though each successive generation has become less responsible, and more dependent -- in a sense more spoiled. The "leaving it up to them" option will produce more problems for this generation than it did for the last.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 04-21-2007 at 02:41 PM.
Federal Abstinence Programs fail because their focus is entirely based on stressing the avoidance of STDs and unplanned pregnancies... but humans will be humans and it is extremely difficult to curb the human sex drive on these premises alone.
Besides, your observation is not as pronounced as you seem to indicate because the applicability of federal abstinence programs to homeschoolers is... ummmm..... quite irrelevant. Don't let that little fact escape the argument.
If for example the Federal Government surveyed 50 million students and found that the success rate for their abstinence programs was 1%. That dismal figure doesn't allow anyone to conclude that abstinence programs fail. The data doesn't say that. It suggests federal abstinence programs are failing. Again, 'federal' is the key word.
If on the other hand, 50% of all home-schoolers managed to remain abstinent that would suggest that the parents were doing something right, something better, that their 'programs' (i.e. approach) was better. The fact that their population pool were 80 times smaller than the public school pool would not negate that argument. You seem to think it does... whatever.
And don't fool yourself into thinking that 'safe-sex' is an entirely risk free alternative to abstinence. If I designed the reliability of the refinery's safety systems, or any other critical quality control measure to match the reliability of a condom I would be fired. Those values are unacceptable... not to mention the fact that condoms have minimal effectiveness against disease - a parameter not even factored into the mix.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 04-21-2007 at 02:40 PM.
So, if good advice is going to be ignored by the majority, don't give it at all?
Better yet, give good advice on safe sex since they are going to do it anyways.
All of them? Link?
WTF? You seriously think most kids aren't going to have premarital sex?
What decade are you living in?
Great, another poster that puts words in my mouth.
Since you're apparently going to carry both side of the conversation I'll drop out and let you knock yerself out.
"extremely difficult to curb the human sex drive on these premises alone"
So what premises are easier, more effective?
You want the government to premise its abstinence program on morality? ethics? whose morality and ethics? You want government to get into the morality business?
The sex-abstinence is destined, is turning out to be as effective as the war on drugs and crime. People want to , people want to do drugs, people want to commit crimes. Ethics, morality, disease, medical consequences, death penalty be damned.
Democracy and civilization "work" because people freely make them work, not because they are coerced by a government.
Given that, there is so social program that is going to solve the problem. Government absolutely cannot take the role of child-rearing. It is impossible.
It will not change until some calamity befalls the country, such that prospective parents are forced to assume responsibility in order to survive.
And sometimes, it doesn't happen even then and the society just goes into irreversible decline.
Have a nice day.
Did I even suggest that they change the basis of their programs? I simply pointed out why federal abstinence programs are failing.
And if I noted that successful abstinence programs are morally driven and spiritually empowered, its because you seem to think that there is no merit to that approach. Such programs are not based on fear... they are based on the rewards of stewardship and on the premise that one's chas y is a sacred gift to their future spouse.
That morally relativistic democracy you're describing sounds more and more like anarchy... whatever... if that's what society wants.
If you read the thread more closely you will see that I've implied this much already.
Calamities involving our youth? No.
Calamities such as the Columbine shootings? The Arkansas school shootings? The recent Virginia Tech shooting spree?
The lack of responsibility of today's parent's is creating monsters - socially dysfuntional teens - at alarming rates...
But like you've said, unless parents wish to do anything about it. The government is in no position to help.
To brighter days ahead....
No, I mean like a world war or economic collapse.
Wow, way to take Pheno's comments waaaaaay too far and out of context.
God forbid, he mentions God.
Sheesh, calm down.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
