home

Abstinence vs. Education

By TChris, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri May 13, 2005 at 11:36:05 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Abstinence-only education doesn't stop kids from having sex, it just stops them from learning how to avoid pregnancy. Abstinence-only is emphasized in Texas, a fact that explains the teen pregnancy rate -- one of the highest in the nation -- in an area of south Texas known as the Valley. Of every 1,000 girls, 37 are pregnant before they turn 17.

The need for more informative education became apparent to four students at Mission High School after six of their classmates became pregant. They decided to do something about it: they made a movie.

Two years later, their 16-minute educational film promoting condom use, named "Toothpaste" after a teen code word for condoms, has been ordered by schools around the country. It also will be shown at film festivals and on the Showtime cable channel, according to the organization that produced the film.

If these kids don't become professional filmmakers, let's hope they run for office. It would be nice to vote for someone who wants to solve problems rather than compound them.

< Detroit Prosecution Unwarranted ... Again | Drug Agent Under Investigation >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Abstinence vs. Education | 22 comments (22 topical)
    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#1)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    I just don't get it. Weren't any of these people ever teenagers? All they think about is sex and when their not thinking about sex they're thinking abiut...You guessed it, sex. religous kid think about religous sex. The problem here is the zeolets are playing god with their own kid lives. There is no escaped or forgiveness from god for kids with aids. These folks sure need al lesson in promoting a Culture of Life for their ownd children.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#2)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    I assume some parents want their children to learn only abstinence, some want their children to learn both abstinence and (just in case) prevention. If that assumption sounds dumb, skip the rest of this post. By teaching only abstinence, schools leave parents the opportunity to teach prevention if they want to, without forcing it on parents who don't want it. Seems like a reasonable compromise. But, if your children don't know about prevention, it's your fault. Either you want them to remain dangerously ignorant, or you won't bother to teach them something you know they need.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    that sounds about right. some folks may even want some moral instruction to go with their condom/banana lessons. my guess is there will be no calls for that here.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#4)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    Ed, Roy Do you think your sense of morals should deny other peoples children a chance to have safe sex if their going to have it. Just because some moron fundie has a hang up over sex does not mean safe sex should be denied to others. Ignorance should not be taught in schools. The children of those who don't think a child should learn how to protect themselves with condoms are at risk for Aids and a form of child abuse. those who don't want thier kids to know how to protect themselves with condoms can Home teach them.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#5)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    Do you think your sense of morals should deny other peoples children a chance to have safe sex if their going to have it.
    Do you think your sense of morals should deny other peoples' right to raise their children as they see fit? (Incidentally, my sense of morals is that the government should butt out of family matters. I'll teach my kids about condoms.)
    Just because some moron fundie has a hang up over sex does not mean safe sex should be denied to others.
    Leaving prevention education out of public schools doesn't deny anybody anything. It just shifts some responsibility from the schools back to the parents.
    Ignorance should not be taught in schools.
    True statement, not relevant. I'm not talking about teaching incorrect or misleading information (I know that happens, I think its a bad thing when it does).
    The children of those who don't think a child should learn how to protect themselves with condoms are at risk for Aids...
    Agreed, but there's risk in every life. Children who are taught prevention are at risk for AIDS too (yes I know it's less). 100% protection would require draconian measures like chastity belts and saltpetre, so even teaching prevention recognizes that some risk is acceptable.
    ..and a form of child abuse
    Horseflop. Not every parenting choice you disagree with is abuse. And it's certainly not an excuse to inject the government into parenting decisions.
    those who don't want thier kids to know how to protect themselves with condoms can Home teach them.
    True. Those who want to teach prevention can home school too. Or we could go with the much simpler solution I mentioned above, and let parents supplement an abstinence-only school education as they see fit.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:02 PM EST
    from page 2 of the Newsday article The contest by Scenarios USA challenged teens in Miami, New York City and the Texas border -- all areas with high rates of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases -- to film their lives. TChris comments Abstinence-only is emphasized in Texas, a fact that explains the teen pregnancy rate -- one of the highest in the nation -- in an area of south Texas known as the Valley. Okay, so what explains the high rates in Miami and New York City?

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#7)
    by krazycory on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    when my son turned 16 i gave him a camaro and a BIG box of condoms. it embarassed the hell out of him but i feel that it was the best thing to do. now he's 18 and isn't a daddy yet!!! and the best thing that happened ith the gift is that i broke the ice and now he feels comfortable talking to me about girls and sex. we should all remember what it was like when we were teenagers

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    Roy, What else qualifies as a "family" matter? And if you think teaching a kid about condoms -- which are medical and scientific in nature -- isn't appropriate, why teach them about human reproduction at all? Teaching kids about fire doesn't make them want to torch everything they see. Teaching them about slavery doesn't make them want to go out and buy some black folks. The adolescent brain is overrun with hormones and needs as much useful info as possible, so those hormones don't ruin a kid's life.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    I remember when I was a teenager. Sex wasn’t the only thing we were into. We used to enjoy the thrill of shoplifting, but my parents never gave me a gun for protection. We used to get into fights with the kids from the opposing school after football games, but still my parents wouldn’t give me a gun. We used to drink alcohol, but my parents wouldn’t give me a fake ID, so I could buy it. We used to smoke cigarettes, which we could buy in those days, but a fake ID would sure help kids, nowadays. I could go on. The point is, kids still do all these things today. We can’t stop them, but neither do we accommodate them. But, when it comes to condoms, we do accommodate them. Studies tell us that the percentage of girls whose first-time sex is non-consensual is on the rise. Some studies have put this number as high as 25%. I hope those studies are wrong. When I was a teenager, we called this rape. But who is the boy that is forcing himself on a young girl? Do you think it is the boy that is practicing abstinence or do you think it is the boy that has been give a condom and has expectations of using it?

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#10)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    Soldier I won't ask if you won't tell about you homosexuality. But I must admit you did have a disfunctional childhood. I can tell you if my daughter were raped I would consider it a crime but I would also be relieved to know the criminal, at least use a condom. This is what the culture of life is all about caring for the life of the victim not some religous superstition about when life begins and abstinance.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#11)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    Here's a novel idea Ed, I'll keep my religion out of school, you keep yours out. Your position is no different that that of your opposition, except that you happen to agree with it. You are the poster child for this type of hypocracy. And as far as "disfunctional" [sic] childhoods go, I'd say any children of yours are well on the way. Do something now man! Before it's too late.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    ED Beckmann, I'm not homosexual, but if I were, I would be highly offended by your comments, because it sounds like you are saying that homosexuals have a dysfunctional childhood. If I am wrong about this, then I hope you will elaborate on your remarks.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    Soldier (and Patrick, I guess), Condoms are for protection against disease and pregnancy and cannot harm another person. Guns and Fake ID's for kids can. Seems an utterly simple, obvious point. And research upon research will show you that infomrmed kids make better choices. For that matter, tell me in what area of life the ignorant and uninformed excel. Human reproduction, the sex drive, are not going away, unless we try to suppress them like puritans. I'm going to say this, tho it'll be unpopular: if you DON'T teach your adolescent children about safe sex and condoms you are really being a negligent parent. Anyone who tells me they alone can teach their child about sex is usually someone who doesn't want to teach anything; they really want to ignore and hope the problem just doesn't come up. It's too discomforting a subject for them.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#14)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    dadler, I didn't hear either of us say keep the children uninformed. I'll teach my children how I feel it is most appropriate and you do the same with yours. Easy enough no?

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    Dadler writes: …if you DON'T teach your adolescent children about safe sex and condoms you are really being a negligent parent. Dadler, if you had added a clause about morality into the above statement, I would agree with you. But, that doesn't mean I can force my beliefs on other parents. I start teaching my children about sex when they are around 12 years old. And I would start younger, if one of them started showing an interest in the opposite sex, before then. But, I also teach them gun safety. Not just because I want them to know how to safely handle guns, but because it is an excellent way to teach responsibility and to prove to them that I trust them. How would you feel about teaching gun safety in school? All the same arguments apply as in the teaching of safe sex. Honestly, I don’t want schools teaching gun safety, either. It would be a failure, just like the sex education classes are now. New York City has one of the “best” sex education curriculums in the country, and it isn’t working. See the article on which this thread is based. I strongly disagree that parents wouldn’t teach their children about sex, if the schools didn’t do it. Every year I hold child abuse classes for the Cub Scouts. We are talking about boys age eight to eleven. For the boy to attend, a parent or guardian also has to attend. We have an 80% to 90% turnout rate. This is in an area that the Left refers to as the “Bible Belt.” And teaching about sex, safe or otherwise, is a heck of a lot easier that teaching an 8 year old about child abuse! Condoms are for protection against disease and pregnancy and cannot harm another person. As I said in an earlier post, I think that the indiscriminate passing out of condoms is part of the reason for the increase in rapes of young girls. And, I consider rape, harm! Patrick, exactly right! I thought the Left wanted to keep government out of the bedroom.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#16)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    Soldier and patrick I'm sorry to say you are poster boys for why we need to have sex education In schools. We should not put our community health in the hands of "Well meaning, mis informed" parents. Look a child who has unprotected sex is a Health threat to the entire community. Aids and VD are creating a health crisis. Your nonsense about leaving it to parents to teaching children about safe sex is sheer nonsense. This is NOT, I repeat NOT a private matter. A child who has unprotected sex with someone puts themselve and their entire community at risk. Wearing a seat belt does not encourage reckless driving. Teaching a kid in school to wear a seat belt is no different than teaching them to wear a condom. No one, should under the guise of "Belief" be able to put other children and the community at risk.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    As I said in an earlier post, I think that the indiscriminate passing out of condoms is part of the reason for the increase in rapes of young girls. And, I consider rape, harm! My gut tells me that the kid who is forcing sex is generally not bothering with the condom. I could be wrong, but would want to see the numbers. This argument doesn't pass the smell test for me.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    condom use during rape It works pretty much the way my gut suggested. Read top of page 6: "the lion's share of acquaintance rape occurs in unprotected first encounters. Men who rape in recklessness, by not finding the time or compassion to discern a partner's consent, rarely find time to use a condom." When you make these arguments, it is helpful if the facts are on your side. They are not, in this instance.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    CA, thanks for the polite and considered response. My argument is not that the rapist is using a condom. My argument is that by giving a teenage boy a condom, we increase his expectation of having sex. And this increases the likelihood, that he will force himself upon his date/girlfriend, if she refuses. Whether or not he uses that condom is irrelevant. I admit, this is just a feeling I have. I’m willing to reconsider my position, if someone has evidence or even a different theory, that explains the increase in acquaintance/date rape. I don’t believe teenage boys are becoming more cruel or unfeeling. Do you? So the problem must come from an attitudinal shift. I believe that the “ indiscriminate passing out of condoms” is part of that shift. I would be interested in your response.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    ED Beckmann writes: Look a child who has unprotected sex is a Health threat to the entire community ED, was your statement true prior to when schools started holding sex education classes? I don’t remember any health problems that compare to those we have today. How do you explain that? Back in the fifties and sixties you could hardly go into any men’s public restroom and not find a condom machine. Among other places, they sold them at the drive-in movie theaters. Who do you think was teaching kids to use condoms back then? My father taught me how to use a condom and he didn’t use a cucumber when he did it. If someone didn’t teach you how to use a condom, that was their problem. Please don’t try to blame it on me or Patrick. For anyone that has been properly taught how to use a condom, the banana/cucumber routine is laughable. How can you expect me to take these classes seriously, when they include such dumb ideas? Of course, schools can’t do it the right way. I think this shows just how flawed this whole idea is. Your nonsense about leaving it to parents to teaching children about safe sex is sheer nonsense. The article on which this thread is based, lists three locations where teen STD’s and pregnancy are major problems. Two teach comprehensive sex education and one teaches abstinence. Your solution is to take the ideas that are failing in the two locations and teach them in the third. Then you suggest that Patrick’s and my ideas are nonsense. On our best day, both of us together, couldn’t top your nonsense.

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    CA, Thanks for the article. I found this statement, on page 15, very intriging: The average sexual behavior of most populations is not sufficient to sustain either an epidemic or an endemic STD infection. For example, if everyone had exactly 7 sexual partners during the course of his or her lifetime (so that the variance in the number of partners was zero) most STDs would cease to exist. I can't say that I agree with the new law they are proposing, but the article was vey interesting. Thanks!

    Re: Abstinence vs. Education (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    Soldier, First of all, in the past, people hid their little secrets in the closet -- those secrets were often girls who became pregnant out of wedlock. Also, VD has been a massive problem since I can't remember when, whether with soldiers or civilians or teens or whomever. A quote comes to mind, "You glorify the past when the future dries up." I remember kids treated so awfully at school, I thank my lucky stars my own kids were born when they were, when child development and other sciences have advanced. Also, you'd think from the maniacal news coverage, that child abductions and killings and the like were worse than ever. Not true. For heaven's sake, you could beat your wife and kids and nothing would be done to you three or four decades ago. And condoms are not a morality item, they are a medical device. I'll repeat, designed to prevent disease and pregnancy. And to say condom information and distribution is responsible for an increase in adolescent rape, well, I'll just say I find that laughably empty. Study after study will show you, kids who are informed make better choices. Kids who are left ignorant don't. And the notion that those informed boys are now turning into rapists because of a piece of rubber, wow, it just blows my mind that you would think that. Very cynical attitude about humanity. Extremely. And I'm the biggest skeptic in the world, but that leaves me in the dust. BTW, my five year-old has already asked me where babies come from, as I would assume yours did at a similar age. Whether you like it or not, human sexuality is as big a part of your kids' psyche as the need to eat, and begins being so from their earliest years. If anything, all the toys of modern society keep kids thinking about OTHER things much more than they would have, say, half a century ago. Back then, what was there to do but think about girls and then go act on it in an uninformed, unprotected manner. I'll take today's morals, thank you. I was taught by my elders that the good ol' days weren't as good as popularly believed.

    Abstinence vs. Education | 22 comments (22 topical)