You know there are things out there that condoms can not prevent you from getting. I mean getting pregnant is not always the worst thing that can happen.
2007-09-08 05:30:21 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I am a health care professional
condoms only protect from gonorrhea
nothing else
2007-09-08 07:36:06 · answer #1 · answered by magnetic_azimuth 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Condoms have the same chance of preventing STDs as they do preventing pregnancy: almost 100% when properly used.
Abstinence should definitely be stressed in any sex ed instruction. It is the only 100% effective method of avoiding STDs and pregnancy. But it shouldn't be the only preventative method discussed. The fact is that virgins are now in the minority come high school graduation, and almost all students have had the abstinence lecture. They just aren't listening. Many students are going to have sex no matter how hard you drill the abstinence lecture into them, so shouldn't we also arm them with information on how to at least have safer sex?
incidentally, I find it interesting that you ask people to lay aside religious convictions on this issue but then ask about sex before marriage. The tabboo against premarital sex is almost entirely religious! Remember that marriage doesn't prevent STDs either unless both partners are virgins...which is a rare scenario in today's society.
2007-09-08 07:39:21 · answer #2 · answered by Nightwind 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That's just it -- without comprehensive sex ed, kids might not know that condoms do not prevent the spread of herpes. The school district with the highest rate of STD's in the country is in Lubbock Texas, where they have a strict abstinence-only education.
Further, even if you're abstinent until marriage, you still need the sex info THEN.
Every comprehensive sex ed class in the US teaches that abstinence pretty much always works. Except for STD's, like herpes, that can actually spread without having sex at all (up, that's true -- a virgin can contract genital herpes!)
2007-09-08 05:35:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
You make an excellent point.
Not only the STD's, but there are emotional and exploitative reasons not to engage in sexual relations too soon.
Mixing religion into the issue clouds it and makes it into a laughingstock, when this is a serious concern that has nothing to do with God, angels, hell, or Jesus, given that these icons are not even known to more than half the people on earth.
2007-09-08 06:14:58 · answer #4 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Masturbation itself isn't a sin even little infants masturbate. it extremely is the lustful recommendations in someone's recommendations it extremely is a sin. while a individual masturbates are they thinking with reference to the buddies spouse? it extremely is not the easily act it extremely is the recommendations. The act of masturbation isn't stated interior the Bible, yet lust is. the 2d section a pair of fable is a competent ingredient. that could desire to be between God and the guy i assume on whether that's a sin or not. It then could additionally positioned into recommendations does the fable bride extremely characterize a actual individual. Who knows I have not have been given any answer for you on that one actual won't be a sin.
2016-10-18 08:08:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Like some other posters said, I don't know that *teaching* abstinence accomplishes much, but you're right about *being* abstinent. What I think this proves is that the 'rules' God sets out for us in His word aren't arbitrary. They are always for our protection and to lead us into more abundant life (I mean, your life is probably happier if you don't have Herpes than if you do, right?)
It's like telling your three year old not to play in the street. He may think you're limiting his freedoms by setting down this rule, but will he really be more free if he gets hit by a car whilst playing in the street?
2007-09-08 05:36:11 · answer #6 · answered by KL 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Teaching our kids to be ingorant of the dangers isn't the answer. Educating them on each disease then letting them decide for themselves whether or not they want to risk health for a few minutes of fun. Put it this way... If you put a candy bar in front of a cild and simply tell them its bad for them, what do you think will REALLY happen? You have to explain to them what effects it will have from tooth loss to being over weight and early death from being unhealthy. Same with teenagers. With hormones raging do you honestly think they will be thinking of what mom and dad say? Did you at that age? Education is the only way to get control of this issue. Ultimatly its the individuals descision... do your best to protect them by letting them see the horror behind it.
2007-09-08 05:48:44 · answer #7 · answered by ashley h 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Very true but in all honesty I don't think its ever likely to happen. I did a 'relationships' [aka sex] talk to some 11year olds not that long ago in the UK and over half of them knew more than I did!!
2007-09-08 05:35:35 · answer #8 · answered by alex s 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
not everyone believes in marriage and you are very naive to think abstinence only education works - in fact studies show it doesn't
the church has been preaching it since the year it was invented and few have paid heed.
You have to decide whats important to you, the health and well being of young people or being on the moral high ground.
2007-09-08 05:55:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
teaching abstinence is nice, but Nature sometimes doesn't understand the word. So at least give the kids proper sex education...just in case.
2007-09-08 05:47:19 · answer #10 · answered by robert43041 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋