I Am Grounded For Life For Having Sex

[tigeress]

O.K. I'm an old foggie. My kid is now 21. I knew he began to have sex at the age of 17. At the time I knew I couldn't force my beliefs down his throat. Instead I took the approach of giving him information. Not just about sex, std's and birth control. But about the emotional side to sex as well. I know sex is different for men than women. But a young man also needs to be aware of and sensitive to the young woman's needs. Sex is more than just a physical act. Even though I wish he had waited I'm glad I took this approach. He is still with this girl and has been for 5 years. So I know this was more than just for kicks. It amazes me to see how committed he is to her. And if he has any questions about anything he still comes home to me to talk about it. I'd rather it be from me than some moron know-it-all that don't know diddly squat.

[tigeress]

Ultimately the descision is theirs not ours. Sometimes it's hard to accept what our children do but we need to give them as much information as possible and hope they make the right choice

[HoldOn]

Those are contradictory teachings.

 

It is not contradictory to teach that one is better than the other.

 

Abstinence can't be taught in schools.

 

I think that sex ed should stay completely in the home, personally. But if you are going to teach how to put a condom on a cucumber, why can't you talk about abstinence too??? Their heads won't fall off.

 

we need to give them as much information as possible and hope they make the right choice

 

Yeah, my dad gave me a full color book with pictures of various STDs! That had an effect.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

It is not contradictory to teach that one is better than the other.

Yes it is. You can't teach abstinence and contraception, because once you teach contraception you're giving up on the abstinence.

But if you are going to teach how to put a condom on a cucumber, why can't you talk about abstinence too??? Their heads won't fall off.

Right, but we're discussing effectiveness, not prevention of head removal. Tax dolllars fund public school programs, and they should be funding ineffective programs.

[HoldOn]

I must disagree, teaching your two options for sex is not contradictary. They are TWO OPTIONS.

1.) Don't have sex. (0% chance of getting pregnant and not getting an STD)

2.) Have sex with protection (10-20% chance of getting pregnant or getting an STD or both, plus a good chance of emotional distress.)

 

Tax dolllars fund public school programs, and they should be funding ineffective programs.

 

I am assuming you mean "should not be funding..." That's just ridculous. Abstinence works 100% of the time. To call it ineffective is just silly. It worked for me and all my siblings and most of my friends. Of course, many teenagers are going to have sex, I am not arguing with that. I am just saying they should receive support for abstinence.

 

Please. If you are going to teach about sex, abstinence should be part of the program. There is no reason not to include it. You think it's ineffective? Well, I KNOW that condoms are ineffective. Let's just include both!

[lydiamarie]

he's not calling abstinence ineffective, he's saying that abstinence education is ineffective-and i agree. although i think that abstinence should be mentioned as option. i highly doubt that there is any sex education program that doesn't mention the benefits of abstinence.

[HoldOn]

I guess we are just arguing about which should be stressed more. Not too much of a conflict, I think.

 

I understood what he was saying. "Teenagers are going to have sex no matter what you say." I disagree. With guidance, teenagers can make better decisions.

 

Just a little poll: Did any of you guys have sex ed in school? If so, what did it entail?

 

I didn't have any sex education in school. (Yet surprisingly, I didn't get knocked up!)

[lydiamarie]

i think he's saying (and at least this is what i'm arguing) that SOME teenagers are going to have sex, no matter what, so abstinence only education does our children a disservice.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

I must disagree, teaching your two options for sex is not contradictary. They are TWO OPTIONS.

Right, but when one of the options is a contradiction of the other option, you're teaching contradictory options.

I am assuming you mean "should not be funding..."

I did, thanks.

That's just ridculous. Abstinence works 100% of the time. To call it ineffective is just silly.

Of course it works 100% of the time, but the statistics are out there--abstinence education is ineffective.

 

Plus, you can't teach abstinence. It's sort of a logical conclusion marked by the absence of sex. The only way it's taught is abstinence-only programs, which, as we've mentioned, do the child a disservice.

Please. If you are going to teach about sex, abstinence should be part of the program. There is no reason not to include it. You think it's ineffective? Well, I KNOW that condoms are ineffective. Let's just include both!

As I said, by the time the schools get to them their minds are already made up. Why negate one teaching with another contradictory teaching?

 

All I know is that if a school's algebra scores were in the dumps, they'd find a new way to teach algebra. Why should this be any different?

[HoldOn]

OK, they are not a contradiction.

 

For example, if you wanted to prevent sunburn you could either 1.) stay inside or 2.) use sunscreen if you do go outside. It's true that you can't follow both, but you can choose either/or.

 

I don't understand why they can't teach abstinence as the best option and then move on to teach about birth control? Why are you so against this? It doesn't dilute YOUR message. It just gives another option.

 

I totally agree that some teenagers are going to have sex anyway. But, don't you think that there are some teenagers who could decide NOT to have sex because of the risks they learn about in class.

 

(Technically, I don't think schools should be teaching sex ed at all. But if they do, it should include and highlight abstinence.)

 

All I know is that if a school's algebra scores were in the dumps, they'd find a new way to teach algebra. Why should this be any different?

 

Because alegbra is math. It's a school subject needed to learn engineering, math, statistics, etc... Sex is a personal, private, moral and family matter. See, we can't even agree on how it should be taught and what should be taught about sex. But algebra is straight forward.

 

You go ahead and give your kid condoms and the use of your bedroom! I'll encourage them not to have sex at all.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

OK, they are not a contradiction.

 

For example, if you wanted to prevent sunburn you could either 1.) stay inside or 2.) use sunscreen if you do go outside. It's true that you can't follow both, but you can choose either/or.

Thanks. You made my point for me. Teaching people that their options are "Use sunscreen" and "Avoid sun" is contradictory teachings. One teaching implies that the sun is unsafe, even with sunscreen (which is true), the other negates the first teaching in favor of preventative and less effective measures.

 

I don't understand why they can't teach abstinence as the best option and then move on to teach about birth control? Why are you so against this? It doesn't dilute YOUR message. It just gives another option.

It DOES negate the teaching of abstinence to teach children about contraception. Abstinence doesnt' exist as a sexual option, it exists as an absence of sex. If you move on to teach how to have sex somewhat safely, you're negating the teaching of abstaining.

But, don't you think that there are some teenagers who could decide NOT to have sex because of the risks they learn about in class.

No. As I've mentioned before, abstinence education, if anything, would either

a) Reinforce beliefs they've had long before Sex ed started

b) Give the kids something to snicker about and say, "Yeah right" during

 

Because alegbra is math. It's a school subject needed to learn engineering, math, statistics, etc... Sex is a personal, private, moral and family matter. See, we can't even agree on how it should be taught and what should be taught about sex. But algebra is straight forward.

Algebra is not straightforward, there are many different ways of teaching it. I've had good teachers and bad teachers, good curriculums and lousy ones. Some teachers favor repition. Some favor pretending there's real-world applications that you run into every day. Some teach the proccesses without the focus on solutions at all. Some teach to standardized tests effectively relaying little information at all.

 

Similarly, sex is not straightforward. It's arguable in today's society whether it's a moral matter--but if it is, what right do schools have to teach kids about sex at all?

[dyermaker]

(Emphasis added by me)

 

With millions of dollars in sex-education programs at stake, it is not surprising that the groups that have previously dominated the arena have taken action to block the growing movement to abstinence-only education. Such organizations, including the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SEICUS), Planned Parenthood, and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL), have been prime supporters of "safe-sex" programs for youth, which entail guidance on the use of condoms and other means of contraception while giving a condescending nod to abstinence. Clearly, the caveat that says "and if you do engage in sex, this is how you should do it" substantially weakens an admonition against early non-marital sexual activity.

Not only do such programs, by their very nature, minimize the abstinence component of sex education, but many of these programs also implicitly encourage sexual activity among the youths they teach.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1533.cfm

 

This is the excerpt of the type of education you're talking about, which is abstinence as first priority and condoms as a second:

In recent years, parental support for real abstinence education has grown. Because of this, many traditional safe-sex programs now take to calling themselves "abstinence plus" or "abstinence-based" education. In reality, there is little abstinence training in "abstinence-based" education. Instead, these programs are thinly disguised efforts to promote condom use. The actual content of most "abstinence plus" curricula would be alarming to most parents. For example, such programs typically have condom use exercises in which middle school students practice unrolling condoms on cucumbers or dildoes

 

Even the Heritage foundation recognizes that the type of education you're proposing is contradictory, and that's as far right as I'm willing to go.

[HoldOn]

As, I said before, we could go back and forth with articles all day long. It doesn't prove anything. I know I posted that article... but I soon realized that we could go back and forth with studies and articles all day.

 

Listen, in algebra there are facts and forumlas. There are right and wrong answers. Everybody agrees on this. In sex ed, everyone disagrees on what is right or wrong. Some don't want their kids taught at all. If you can't see the difference between sex and math, I can't help you.

 

One teaching implies that the sun is unsafe, even with sunscreen (which is true), the other negates the first teaching in favor of preventative and less effective measures.

It does not negate the message that the sun is unsafe, it confirms it. Sex (and the sun) are risky. That is the message either way you choose to protect yourself (either through avoidance or protection).

 

quote:

But, don't you think that there are some teenagers who could decide NOT to have sex because of the risks they learn about in class.

 

No. As I've mentioned before, abstinence education, if anything, would either

a) Reinforce beliefs they've had long before Sex ed started

b) Give the kids something to snicker about and say, "Yeah right" during

 

Wow, you sure see the world in black and white. Not even one kid somewhere, some day, might possibly be wondering about sex, whether they should do it or not, and then they learn about all the risks and decide not to do it... I'm sure it happens every day.

 

 

Hey, just wondering what kind of sex ed you had at school??

 

Another poster said you were young, how old are you?

[HoldOn]

i think he's saying (and at least this is what i'm arguing) that SOME teenagers are going to have sex, no matter what, so abstinence only education does our children a disservice

 

I don't understand how INCLUDING abstinence in a sex ed program does a disservice. Please explain...?

[HoldOn]

Posting again...

 

I don't quite follow your logic. Why do you think that students CANNOT learn abstinence, but they CAN learn to use condoms. Why is one possible and the other totally IMPOSSIBLE? Aren't kids just "going to do what they want anyway."?

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

As, I said before, we could go back and forth with articles all day long. It doesn't prove anything. I know I posted that article... but I soon realized that we could go back and forth with studies and articles all day.

My assertion is that "abstinence-plus" is contradictory and inneffective. The purpose of the article was to point out that even the HERITAGE foundation concedes that point.

If you can't see the difference between sex and math, I can't help you.

Fallacy: Extending the analogy.

 

The comparison is that there are different methods to teach the same practices. If those methods are ineffective, they should be remedied. My point was that if the sexual health of our youth was tied to sexual education as much as standardized test scores were tied to algebra skills--that's EXACTLY what would occur.

It does not negate the message that the sun is unsafe, it confirms it.

It negates the message that the sun should be avoided.

Hey, just wondering what kind of sex ed you had at school??

I received sexual education from a public school in the fifth grade. I received sexual education from the seventh grade at a Catholic school. The first was "abstinence plus", the type of education you're advocating despite it's proven ineffectiveness, and the second was an idealistic lecture on all the fun things we can do when we're married. I've learned more about sex from my own sholarship than from a classroom, as has every other kid in the world.

Another poster said you were young, how old are you?

I'm fifteen.

I don't understand how INCLUDING abstinence in a sex ed program does a disservice. Please explain...?

Because you can't teach children not to have sex, and then teach them how to do it safely if they do. The second teaching minimizes the first.

Why do you think that students CANNOT learn abstinence, but they CAN learn to use condoms. Why is one possible and the other totally IMPOSSIBLE? Aren't kids just "going to do what they want anyway."?

Because the foundations for the choice of abstinence are made long before any school teaches sexual education. Kids will always "do what they want", but what it is they "want" isn't learned at school.

 

The dichotomy is clear. If you're going to teach abstinence, you don't teach them how to contradict that teaching. If you're going to teach them how to have sex safely, abstinence presents itself as an absence of those practices, not an option--it's too minimized by the "safety net" of contraceptive education.

[HoldOn]

OK, I give up. Just teach abstinence then.

 

Kids will always "do what they want", but what it is they "want" isn't learned at school. .

 

 

Actually, you are right, there shouldn't be sex ed at school. Parents should teach it at home.

[HoldOn]

So, dyer, what is your position for yourself. Are you waiting? and why or why not?

[engravefeelthevoid]

if you re grounded how com you re using the internet!!!!

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

So, dyer, what is your position for yourself. Are you waiting? and why or why not?

Not that this is relevant, but I'm going to wait until I'm married.

[HoldOn]

Dude, I am just wondering. See, people give their personal experiences on their website to help share their positions...

 

Glad you're waiting. Why have you decided to do that?

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by HoldOn

Why have you decided to do that?

I have too much going for me to risk having to start a family before I'm emotionally and financially ready.

[HoldOn]

Smart kid. Who gave you that idea? Your parents? Catholic school?

[dyermaker]

I suppose some of it's religious, not neccessarily that I fear the wrath of God if I don't comply, but that I'd rather do things the way I feel I'm supposed to in order to feel connected with that community. Suprisingly, my parents have never demanded abstinence from me.

[HoldOn]

Well, most parents don't come right out and say it, but you just know what is expected of you.

 

I bet your parents would make some "demands" if they caught you having sex in their house.