C.H. Spurgeon

Sinners, let me address you with words of life; Jesus wants nothing from you, nothing whatsoever, nothing done, nothing felt; he gives both work and feeling. Ragged, penniless, just as you are, lost, forsaken, desolate, with no good feelings, and no good hopes, still Jesus comes to you, and in these words of pity he addresses you, "Him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out."

Comment Policy: No profanity or blasphemy will be posted. You do not have to agree, but if you would like your comment posted, you will have to adhere to the policy.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Do We Want To Abstain From Abstinence Classes

Abstinence education as defined in Section 510 of Title V of the Social Security Act:

"an educational or motivational program that:

A. Has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
B. Teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
C. Teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
D. Teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
E. Teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
F. Teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents, and society;
G. Teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
H. Teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity."

According to this article this Title V will expire on June 30th of this year unless renewed, and the fear is that “one of the major consequences will be a change in the language required by the government in discussing sexual abstinence with U.S. students.”

There are those that oppose (or should I say believe is a waist of money) abstinence programs. They claim they are not working and do not work. According to the article, “a conference hosted by HHS in Baltimore in March which included 30 positive evaluations of abstinence education programs.”

Also, “A list of nine specific abstinence education studies compiled by NAEA and posted on their website confirm that abstinence education has substantially contributed to the decrease in teen pregnancy, reduces the likelihood that participants will initiate sexual activity, reduces the prevalence of casual sex among sexually experienced students and is effective with at-risk students and inner-city students.”

It is reported, “78 percent of parents think sex education classes in public schools should place more emphasis on promoting abstinence than on condom and other contraceptive use.”

In what percentage do you stand the 22 or 78? Why?


The Alpha said...

Personally, I'm not against teaching abstinence in schools. I'm against teaching abstinence only because I have yet to see conclusive evidence that it actually works.

I try to keep an open mind though so I took a look at some of your resources. After looking at some of their sources, I don't understand how they believe some of the studies they cited validate the efficacy of abstinence education.

The CDC source mentioned, for example, does not mention the break down of children in the test that received no sexual education, abstinence only education, safe-sex education, etc. It simply states the trends, which include increased condom use, over the past few years without showing what actually may have caused the trends.

I don't know why they cited The Journal of Adolescent Health because it doesn't seem to support their position with regards to the level of emphasis placed on condoms and other forms of contraceptives. The article states, "Providing 'abstinence only' or 'abstinence until marriage' messages as a sole option for teenagers is flawed from scientific and medical ethics viewpoints. Efforts to promote abstinence should be based on sound science. Although federal support of abstinence-only programs has grown rapidly since 1996, the evaluations of such programs find little evidence of efficacy in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse. Conversely, efforts to promote abstinence, when offered as part of comprehensive reproductive health promotion programs that provide information about contraceptive options and protection from STIs have successfully delayed initiation of sexual intercourse." I don't see how this supports the conclusion they came to.

sean said...

Can I be against public schools? That would take care of all these questions in one swoop. That way we don't need to even ask the government if we can or can't.

BEAST said...

Sex education programs should emphasize on condom use, than abstinence.

The reason is bloody simple: Most people need sex, and if you don't, good for you.

Trying to teach children not to have sex because of HIV is equivalent to telling people not to eat seafood because of Hp A or some other disease.

A truly comprehensive sex education program should include and promote safe sex and abstinence as viable options.

John Bunyan

To be saved is to be preserved in the faith to the end. 'He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.' (Mt. 24:13) Not that perseverance is an accident in Christianity, or a thing performed by human industry; they that are saved 'are kept by the power of God, through faith unto salvation.' (1 Pet. 1: 3-6) But perseverance is absolutely necessary to the complete saving of the soul…. He that goeth to sea with a purpose to arrive at Spain, cannot arrive there if he be drowned by the way; wherefore perseverance is absolutely necessary to the saving of the soul.