2007-01-01 05:33:40 · 16 answers · asked by Sean 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Is it a realistic option considering today's youth?
2007-01-01 05:37:34 · update #1
It helps increase abortion rates, no doubt. Abstinence is the dream of many parents. But, expecting abstinence is just not realistic for a large percentage of teenagers, no matter how well they were raised. There will always be a number of teens who get pregnant because being a teenager, in itself, is a study in hormonal changes, confusion, and often, lack of self-control. While many teenagers today have gone the route of abstinence, like forming abstinence clubs in school, there are teenagers who will try to remain celibate and fail. Refusing to acknowledge this reality, mostly because of the "MY kid would never do that, she was raised properly and goes to church" mentality, leads to teenage pregnancy every day in this country. And teenage pregnancy leads to abortion for a good number of these kids. Why not educate them properly about everything from abstinence to protecting themselves from pregnancy and STDs? If parents are so sure about their kids not giving in, why the fear about giving them the whole picture? Do they think that knowledge about protection is going to change their minds? The theory that this is just condoning it shouldn't hold any weight if the parents are secure in how their child was raised. Why aren't they concerned about the rest of the children who AREN'T raised to practice abstinence? Don't they count? Don't they deserve information about the means to protect themselves or do they just deserve what happens to them because they had the bad luck to have bad parents. Reality is not even a small part of abstinence only sex education.
2007-01-01 05:53:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Stats are mixed. What happens is that some of these programs give misleading info about methods of contraception. They tell kids that condoms don't work. Well if you don't use them right, or use them every time, yeah, they don't work. Same with the pill or any other kind of contraception.
Then these kids have sex but don't use a birth control method because they have been told it doesn't work so sooner or later they get pregnant.
Whether they will have an abortion, a shotgun marriage, raise the child as a single mother, or give up the baby isn't known.
Never use Vaseline with a condom. Use a water-based lube like K-y or Astroglide. Try to tell as many young people as you can.
2007-01-01 05:45:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally, I think so. I mean, teaching abstinence (nonreligious, but practical) is one thing, but to make it the ONLY type of sex-ed. Man, considering your username and that episode in Family Guy when this issue was shown, this is very ironic. While I cannot confirm that abstinence-only sex-ed causes increased teen pregnancy rates and STD infections, I can say that it leaves young teenagers confused an/or uninformed. I mean, you have to teach safe sex. It is a necessary function in relationships, particularly marriage. And this bill could negatively impact a generation of Utah students by leaving them uninformed about sex and relationships. If teens want to have sex, then let them have the right to do so. And if they want to encourage abstinence, I would advice them to keep away from the moral stuff and go ethical. Tell them how premarital sex can give them higher chances of becoming poor. Even a liberal like me can realize that abstinence education has its benefits. I say do them both; let the teens decide which is more practical for them.
2016-03-14 00:17:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
From some cursory research I've done, it looks as though abstinence only programs had little affect on teenage attitudes towards sex or towards their intentions to abstain until marraige.
Extrapolating this information out, it would follow that these programs have little affect on abortion rates.
But you also have to remember that abstinence programs are only aimed at teenagers, which obviously are a small percentageof the abortions being performed.
2007-01-01 05:40:24 · answer #4 · answered by harrisnish 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Last time I checked, abstinance was the only way to make sure you don't get pregnant, and only pregnant girls get abortions.
As for if the abstinance policy is realistic, if liberals keep trying to get girls to be as sexually active as possible, telling them they can have all the sex they want and not face negative consequences the chances are good that a lot of young girls will choose to put themselves at risk and later find out that they would have been better off to listen to Bush instead of the people who hate Bush for standing up for morality.
I believe abortion is murder, and know that many of the girls and women who get abortions will end up also having AIDS. If they don't care about their own unborn babies, they have no real love of themselves, and their resulting immorality will eventually destroy them.
2007-01-01 05:50:45 · answer #5 · answered by jesuscuresislam 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The Bush administrations approach to sex has been a disaster... it has been repeatedly demonstrated that open and honest sex education (including discussion of birth control, particularly condoms) reduces pregnancy rates amongst teens.
For some reason, total honesty about sex, rather than negative campaigns against sexual relations, actually reduces the likelihood of teens having intercourse.
In other words, the more they know, the less they do...
Don't know why... but its been proven in far to many studies to question...
-dh
2007-01-01 05:46:38 · answer #6 · answered by delicateharmony 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The National-Union believes that sex education can decrease abortion rates if educators know about all the negative effects of the procedure to alert students concerning death. Otherwise, it will increase abortions due to ignorance, http://www.voteprimous.com
2007-01-01 05:37:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion rates went down every year of the Clinton administration. They have gone up, since Bush has been in office.
You decide.
2007-01-01 10:19:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abstinence only sex ed is dangerous. Safe sex is safe, abstinence is a false hope
2007-01-01 05:43:48 · answer #9 · answered by healthyleeroy 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No we should supply them with condoms, birth control pills, a place to do it, booze to get the chick drunk, maybe some weed to smoke after. In Illinois they teach sex ed around 5th grade. Makes them ten. they also have biology that teaches about reproduction. They can go to the school nurse, the health dept, or planned parenthood and get free condoms. The girls can also buy birth contro pills through planned parenthood at discount prices. Who is going to teach them personal responsibilty, and that in life actions have reactions?
2007-01-01 05:45:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋