Reply With Quote
if you want to live by that "concept" then that's fine. if not, then practice safe sex. you can teach kids not to have sex until marriage all you want, but i don't think that's going to stop most.
Another thing we haven't even discussed is the mental and emotional impact having sex too early has on kids. But that's another thread entirely!
if you want to live by that "concept" then that's fine. if not, then practice safe sex. you can teach kids not to have sex until marriage all you want, but i don't think that's going to stop most.
The culture in the African American community has done a great job of popularizing being uneducated. As a whole people who speak proper english in the black community are treated as sell outs, or as trying to be white.
BTW, I'll swallow my views on America being a positive effect for the world and not a damaging one.
I guess the liberated the SouthWest from Mexican opression?
I never brought the entire world into this, although thats a debateable positiohn as well
You're not swallowing.
That "concept" is more like a reality. Most kids live and die by their parents approval (unless they have crappy parents). If parents express that they believe teenage sex is wrong, kids will listen. The problem is, parents have given up on their kids.
I laughed when I read that. I know very few people who live and die by their parents' approval. I may have lived in fear of my parents when I was at home, but that never really stopped me from doing anything they didn't approve of. And I had good parents by comparison to many - my parents were there at home all the time, I had a very strong Christian upbringing, etc. All you can really do is let your kids know how you feel, try to give them a good moral foundation on which to base their judgment so they're more likely to be safe, and hope for the best.
Hope for the best... sounds almost like giving up. You know, there are those things called rules, and they are enforceable... but I suppose that "concept" is also too old-fashioned or outdated for most people now.
I'm not saying that kids whose parents care don't have a leg up on avoiding destructive behaviors. But more than strict moral adherence there's responsibility - and if you can teach a child that, then the other desirable behaviors kind of fall into place. I'm not saying to give up, and there should be rules and those rules should be enforced whenever possible, but you can't always know what kids are doing - you can't have your eye on them all the time - they're going to do stuff that you might never find out about, until maybe it's too late. Isn't it better to give them the facts on safety and responsibility just in case?
You do make a good point, especially on the responsibility issue. That's also what my parents stressed. Mom sat me down one day and said, "I'll only say this once. If you ever come home pregnant, you are outta here. If you're old enough to engage in such adult behavior, then you had also better be old enough to have a job and a place to live." It was her way of telling me not to have sex, of course! And it worked. No kids until well into my marriage. So, even if abstinence was never mentioned by name, the message came through loud and clear. You have an excellent argument, but I guess I am just hopeless! It just seems like giving them all the info on safe sex is like saying, we know you're going to do this no matter what we say, so here's how.
The thing is, when there is such a high level of sex in our society, it is absolutely impossible to reach every child with abstinence education. It has a positive effect, and I think teaching children the benefits of abstinence is important. However, safe sex education is just as important for those who are not going to be reached by abstinence, and for those who are reached by it. They are going to have sex at some point, and it's important to know the facts.
And that is the problem I have with the entire debate, for reasons I have already delineated in this thread.
It's possible to reach every child who attends school.
i don't think he actually meant reach in terms of having access to a child.. i think he meant the message actually sinking into the students mind...
Reducing the Risk, a program for high school students in urban and rural areas in California, used behavior theory-based activities to reduce unprotected intercourse, either by helping teens avoid sex or use protection. Ninth and 10th graders attended 15 sessions as part of their regular health education classes and participated in role playing and experimental activities to build skills and self-efficacy. As a result, a greater proportion of students who were abstinent before the program successfully remained abstinent, and unprotected intercourse was significantly reduced for those students who became sexually active.(11)
http://www.caps.ucsf.edu/sexedtext.html
Diseases like HPV (the virus that causes cervical cancer) and herpes are spread by skin contact, despite condom use. There really is no such thing as "protected" sex.
Oral sex lessons to cut rates of teenage pregnancy
Mark Townsend
Sunday May 9, 2004
The Observer
Encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex could prove the most effective way of curbing teenage pregnancy rates, a government study has found.
Pupils under 16 who were taught to consider other forms of 'intimacy' such as oral sex were significantly less likely to engage in full intercourse, it was revealed.
Britain's teenage pregnancy rate is the highest in Europe. In 2002 there were 39,286 teen pregnancies recorded. The government has spent more than £60 million to tackle the problem but so far failed to halt the rise.
A sex education course developed by Exeter University trains teachers to talk to teenagers about 'stopping points' before full sex.
Now an unpublished government-backed report reveals that a trial of the course has been a success. Schoolchildren, particularly girls, who received such training developed a 'more mature' response to sex.
The US is now considering this as well. Don't know about you, but I'm not too keen on some teacher telling my daughter to experiment with blowjobs to avoid intercourse.
Nevermind, I better not touch this, even with a ten foot pole. Jekka censored me, and rightfully so.
HPV isn't really one of the STDs normally discussed either, which scares me because it's becoming so incredibly widespread. Men can give it to women without knowing they carry it because they don't exhibit symptoms, and don't get tested frequently enough. Also, a lot of women don't get yearly PAP smears like they should, and sometimes that's because women don't know they need to be getting yearly checkups as soon as they are sexually active, which is often before they reach the recommended age of 18. Cervical cancer, from the firsthand stories I've been told, is awful to deal with, especially if you don't get it diagnosed soon.
And the real thing about HPV is, you can give it to someone even if you aren't having an outbreak. That's not common knowledge either.
Cervical cancer is 99% curable, IF, like you said Jekka, it is detected early.
IDRA is a federally funded and supported not for profit agency and will do anything to keep their doors open and their liberal views at the forefront.
Any agency will skew the numbers to show the plight of schools to keep their funding.
this is nuts! those crazy brits! gonna be a lot of lucky brits! hahaha
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
