Another Blight on the Abstinence Only Agenda
This morning, Faith Lab published a compelling query concerning the fact that abstinence-only requirements may actually push young people into marriage before they're ready, simply because they feel less guilty about divorce than they do sex outside of marriage.
In a society like ours, with over 50% of couples disappearing into the realm of divorce, this seems rather irresponsible. The fact that abstinence only education has been proven to have even more detrimental effects than providing educational and contraceptive tools to cope with sex among consenting adult individuals (and the teens who continue having sex despite all efforts to prevent them from doing so), is only magnified by the fact that such attitudes may force individuals into a financial, spiritual and emotional arrangement that they are simply unprepared for.
Yes, you can argue that if you're not prepared to take on the responsibilities associated with marriage, then you may be unprepared to take on those of having sexual relations. Idealism, however, has proven a poor indicator of what actually takes place. People are having sex, will continue having sex, and the religious institutions standing on principle alone in their campaign for abstinence actually relegate their congregations into the margins where no real discourse can take place.
Trapped by their hormonal and social urges, young people may decide incorrectly to get married rather than to have safe sex. This seems a shameful waste of hearts and resources, both on a familial and personal level. Safe sex between two consenting adults, after all, is premised on a choice between two individuals. Marriage, on the other hand, tends to involve entire families, communities and a larger number of lives on the periphery, which will be adversely affected in the long run by ruined vows.
Given that the reality is far from the ideal, isn't it time to just say no to the notion of abstinence only agendas and embrace, instead, that we are a sinful and sexual lot, we humans; and that we will continue having sexual relations with or without the guilt imposed upon us by our religious leanings? Perhaps we should talk, instead, about how to go about these sexual exchanges in the most self-preserving and mutually respectful manner rather than suggest that the majority of us are capable of abstinence at all.
Follow Danielle Cavallucci on Twitter: www.twitter.com/cavallucci
Reproductive Justice: A Crisis of Deception: Crisis Pregnancy Centers, A Special Report
A government report found that not only do abstinence-only education programs fail to delay the onset of sexual activity, its students are more likely to think condoms don't help prevent STI's.
Reproductive Justice: What if Congress Says "Know" to Abstinence-Only Funding
After thirteen years and more than a billion dollars, the budget axe is raised over abstinence-until-marriage programs.
Tracy Jarrett: When "Abstinence" Is Overrated
Statistics are screaming that telling youth to simply not have sex is neither constructive nor realistic.
Reproductive Justice: Abstinence Education DisObeyed
The strongest player in the political poker games surrounding sex education is David R. Obey, House Appropriations Committee Chair.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Cavallucci wrote, "Trapped by their hormonal and social urges, young people may decide incorrectly to get married rather than to have safe sex."
__________
I assume the writer is referring to prevention of pregnancy, disease, emotional fallout (particularly among teens), when mentioning "safe sex". Statistics prove there is not a single contraceptive on the market that is 100% safe (many factors involved). So the statement "safe sex" in itself needs to be rephrased "safer sex".
Safer meaning "Reduced risk of disease, pregnancy, etc., etc."
The only 100% reliable contraception for teens is 100 proof abstinence. Surprised?? Teen marriage, due to pregnancy, is a result of not practicing 100% abstinence. So teens who channel their hormones, thoughts, relationship practices, to productive areas other than sex will not have to face making a marriage decision due to pregnancy.
And people who never go outside will never get rained on. But the reality of modern teens includes sex - I and most everyone I knew had sex as teens despite cultural strictures. Rather than wishing for a sexless teen Utopia, we need to work with the real world.
This is what the philosophy of 'Abstinence Only' gets us.
1) Increase in abortions
http://www
2) Increase in sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV-AIDS
http://www
3) Disinformation concerning contraception
This is from new research;
"The authors suggest that the recent decline in teen contraceptive use since 2003 could be the result of faltering HIV prevention efforts among youth, or of more than a decade of abstinence
http://www
A religious self-righteous attitude translates into real world consequences for these teens and I suggest you forsake your own fantasies and truly guide our young people in the ways of realistically protecting themselves and their partners.
On the bright side, at least this misguided, totally non reality-based advice and lifestyle isn't followed by the majority of Americans. Let's hope it stays in the margins.
Most teenagers figure out that sex is pretty fun, that their bodies are theirs to play with, and many believe that no one or any institution should mandate otherwise. But some religious institutions seem to be so stuck to the medieval mindset of SIN, that if it feels good is must be WRONG, they forget that we are all sexual beings. Yes, we can control those urges to a point, but teenagers, with generally low self control, need more than hearing they shouldn‘t have sex, or that sex before marriage is immoral. Abstinence pledges and purity rings - which DON'T WORk - are dangerous because they frame those very real impulses, those strong feelings, into the immoral category, and sets up a freefall of disillusionment when the kids realizes they’re failing to uphold that naïve promise they gave. What we need to educate kids with is the framework of what a healthy relationship IS, and that includes a sexual one.
Children of faith have always looked for loopholes around the No Sex mantra. Teens that perform oral sex or anal sex still consider themselves "virgins". What's to say that the sanctity of marriage can't fall before the desire to have sex?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
