Teenagers Choose Fornication Over Purity
At first glance, the notion given by the article title Teenage Birth Rate Rises for First Time Since ’91 may appear to give credible voice to those which oppose abstinence-only classes, claiming this is proof as to their failure to work. It is obvious with the rate of teenagers giving birth being greater than zero that there are indeed those which are not practicing abstinence-only, but that in and of itself does not prove that the rise in teenage birth rates is due to the abstinence-only classes themselves nor that they are failing to work. In seeing the rise of teenagers giving birth, it must also mean (if blame is to be placed upon abstinence-only classes) the non abstinence-only classes are failing to persuade the teenagers also, for aren’t contraceptives 99% guaranteed against pregnancy?
This is why I have to agree with researcher Robert Rector. “Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation, said that blaming abstinence-only programs was “stupid.” Mr. Rector said that most young women who became pregnant were highly educated about contraceptives but wanted to have babies.” Oh, you mean teenage birth rates are up because the teenagers want to have sex and want to have babies? Well, that makes sense. So, let’s blame those guys that don’t want our teenagers to have sex and have babies before they mature and marry – it’s a woman’s choice remember.
It also appears that it is not only our teenagers wanting to enjoy premarital sex (aka the sin of fornication), for “Unmarried childbearing reached a record high in 2006, according to the disease control centers, with unmarried mothers now accounting for 38.5 percent of all births. Births among teenagers and unmarried women tend to lead to poor outcomes for their children.” I guess abstinence-only classes are the reason unmarried women are having sex and getting pregnant also, huh?
So what was their answer to the “I will have sex with no contraceptive” will? “Helping to prevent these pregnancies was the reason advocates pushed for the wide availability of the morning-after pill known as Plan B.” So as a choice, if you don’t want them to be taught abstinence-only is the best way, and they will not adhere to you teaching them about contraceptives, you simple offer them the slaying of the child which develops at conception. This way they may feel they have been able to enjoy sin for a season without having to ever feel the repercussions of their actions to engage in fornication.
The rise in teenage birth rates is not the fault of abstinence-only classes, but the moral decline in our nation’s heart toward the sanctity of marriage, the purity of life, and a denial of sin and accountability to a Almighty Holy God.
This is why I have to agree with researcher Robert Rector. “Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation, said that blaming abstinence-only programs was “stupid.” Mr. Rector said that most young women who became pregnant were highly educated about contraceptives but wanted to have babies.” Oh, you mean teenage birth rates are up because the teenagers want to have sex and want to have babies? Well, that makes sense. So, let’s blame those guys that don’t want our teenagers to have sex and have babies before they mature and marry – it’s a woman’s choice remember.
It also appears that it is not only our teenagers wanting to enjoy premarital sex (aka the sin of fornication), for “Unmarried childbearing reached a record high in 2006, according to the disease control centers, with unmarried mothers now accounting for 38.5 percent of all births. Births among teenagers and unmarried women tend to lead to poor outcomes for their children.” I guess abstinence-only classes are the reason unmarried women are having sex and getting pregnant also, huh?
So what was their answer to the “I will have sex with no contraceptive” will? “Helping to prevent these pregnancies was the reason advocates pushed for the wide availability of the morning-after pill known as Plan B.” So as a choice, if you don’t want them to be taught abstinence-only is the best way, and they will not adhere to you teaching them about contraceptives, you simple offer them the slaying of the child which develops at conception. This way they may feel they have been able to enjoy sin for a season without having to ever feel the repercussions of their actions to engage in fornication.
The rise in teenage birth rates is not the fault of abstinence-only classes, but the moral decline in our nation’s heart toward the sanctity of marriage, the purity of life, and a denial of sin and accountability to a Almighty Holy God.
21 comments:
No wonder, look at all the evil impure media children are subjected to!
I just read an article saying that a Spider-Man comic book is coming out where this "hero" makes a deal with the devil to destroy his marriage!
It is outrageous that they sell things like this to our children that teach them marriage is wrong and devil worship is okay.
[edited for profanity, as per policy]
Truth Time:
Abstinence-only programs don't work.
The reason is pretty simple: People will have sex when they want to have sex. All those virginity rings and stupid gimmicks don't work.
Providing alternatives to abstinence is the best solution, and statistics do back it up.
Oh,by the way.......the more religious the state the more teenage pregnancies. Apparently its the religion morons who xxxx up the show. Don't believe me, check it up.
Beast
"Providing alternatives to abstinence is the best solution"
The alternative to abstinence is exactly why there is a rise in teenage pregnancy. Go figure.
Tim
The only thing that will keep kids from having sex is supervision. A return to the old days of courtship under the supervision of parents is the only way to fix this.
Also, pull them out of the public and private schools (they are not nearly as good as we think they are, even when they are halfway decent).
Ooh, everyone will say that too hard, I've got to work and so does my husband. Well, lots of people do it on less. Get rid of cable, get rid of the extra car, and all the other junk and then you'll find you have plenty enough to educate and feed your children.
Go figure.
The rise of pregnancies in teenagers occurs in countries, or in the case of the US, the states that frown upon secular sex education and the proliferation of condoms and contraception.
Sometimes I really wish that scientists can invent some kind of time machine. That way, we can transport morons the likes of you into some fundie crusader era where you can be at peace with your war loving compatriots.
Spare us your bible-inspired values. This is the 21st century, not Stone Age fantasy. We don't put disobedient children to death anymore.
Beast
Beast,
The facts seem to conclude that teenagers are not using contraceptives either, so apparently they are not adhering to that which you believe should be taught, which further must mean non abstinence-only programs are failing.
"We don't put disobedient children to death anymore."
You're right, we put them in jail or coffins when they have gone too far their own way, because we as parents fail to discipline them correctly with love and proper truth. It is ashame, and each generation is at fault for not teaching the next generation the truth behind sin and forgiveness of it only found in the Savior Jesus Christ.
Tim
Tim:
Do you want the real official figures? I will post them on my blog for you to review.
That will go a long way in debunking your "secular sex education doesn't work" crap.
Beast
I find it ridiculous that you should even consider bronze age beliefs to solve a modern day problem..... so loving Jebus will solve the world's woes?
Before you speak, Tim, think. You need a good dose of it.
Beast
For all the nonsense about a decline in morals, do note that civilization in general has alleviated itself from the mere concept of morals.
We no longer condone slavery (which the bible does), women's status and welfare has drastically improved (no longer compared with mules and goods, which the bible does), removed apartheid from secular laws, eradicated small pox, improved social and medical systems, etc, etc, etc.
People who say our morals have declined are simply blinded to the reality of things. If you want to go back to the "good ole days", try living in the caves instead. Religious morons complain about science, secular humanism and all the great movements and renaissance institutions that have provided you with optimal luxury and reasonable opulence, without understanding the fact that we are becoming better as a society than the good ole days.
Beast
"so loving Jebus will solve the world's woes?"
Exactly. Christ summed up the law in two commandments. Love God and love neighbor as self. If every person were to perfectly love God (by word and deed) and love their neighbor as self (by word and deed), what woes would there be?
"do note that civilization in general has alleviated itself from the mere concept of morals."
Indeed, we have alleviated ourselves from the mere concept of morals, and thus have fallen short of that which is holy and right.
Tim
"If every person were to perfectly love God (by word and deed) and love their neighbor as self (by word and deed), what woes would there be?"
This is the type of utopian fantasy which I so often get from Christians: Get everyone to follow the same wavelength, and all will be at peace.
Wake up, Tim. This is the real world. People don't all share the same gay loving Jebus fantasy as you.
The same can be said:" If everyone was an atheist, there would be no gods to dispute, and what woes will there be?"
Like what I wrote in my father santa post, you christians live in a fairy tale world of your own. Its time to wake up and smell the damn coffee.
Beast
If being holy and right means I have to dash a child's brains, or raise hell and fire to convert the masses, then I'd rather forget about they holey pants thing and get on with what really matters: Making this world a better place to live in.
Beast
Beast,
You write, “If everyone was an atheist, there would be no gods to dispute, and what woes will there be?"
It may be possible that “there would be no gods to dispute,” but with atheism there are no absolutes, especially with morality; therefore, woes would soon return (if ever removed) with the division of whose rules should be followed, with the authority changing with “survival of the fittest.”
As for as your claim of “If being holy and right means I have to dash a child's brains, or raise hell and fire to convert the masses,” there would be no need of such “If every person were to perfectly love God (by word and deed) and love their neighbor as self (by word and deed).”
The failure in both your atheistic world and the Christian “utopian fantasy” (as you call it) is a common thing: total depravity.
The only remedy: Repentance of sin, and faith in the Savior Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins.
Tim
Tim:
1. Absolute morality doesn't work, because it is based on unchanging, unyielding principles laid down in a time by people who obviously do not live in a technologically driven age.
2. No sane atheist will tell you that the "survival of the fittest" is a moral quote: It is a term used to describe biological evolution, and cannot be used as a standard bearer for modern ethics.
3. If everyone was to follow the word of God, there'd be no biology and no science: Evolution will be false, living things will be deemed unchangeable, and so no vaccines will be invented. There will be more people dying from all sorts of diseases, because everyone will be tuned to a similar religious wave. Priests will take over the roles of doctors, so instead of dispensing medication, exorcism will be the norm.
Do you seriously want to live in a "christian driven" world? I think not.
3.As history has proven more than once, when religion takes root into social consciousness, total depravity results: Mass killings of Jews caused by two millennia of Jewish hatred due in no part to their alleged involvement in killing Jebus, mass religious wars between Islam and christianity over centuries, the destruction of the roman empire wrought forth by the damaging effects of christianity, and so on.
If Jebus is the remedy, then I think you need to see a psychiatrist.
P.S: Good luck to your editor. Given your standard of English, I am surprised he has not died of a heart attack.
Beast
Beast,
You can't use history as an example as to what life would be like if - as I said - “If every person were to perfectly love God (by word and deed) and love their neighbor as self (by word and deed)” for it is total depravity which has led to every corrupt act (sin) of man ever committed throughout history.
And your point [3] starting with "If everyone was to follow the word of God, there'd be no biology and no science" is based on nothing, for that would mean there has never been a Christian which has taken part in biology, science, vaccines, and being doctors.
Tim
P.S. My editor is a lady. :)
The problem with this "love thy neighbour" verse has more to do with Jews loving the other Jews, not the Gentiles, if you do read scholarly comments.
There were Christians involved in biology,in particular the former head of the human genome project. But these Christians are not like you, Tim. They believe in Evolution, Darwinism, and the works.
When you talk about a utopian Christian world, I presume you take that (or at least i am under the impression) these Christians will be attuned to the Creationist, fundamentalist Christian view, like yourself.
Beast
I can't use history as an example?
History is a mirror, a reflection of our past transgressions, achievements, disasters, i.e the good and the bad.
There is a reason why history is thought and studied. To learn from our past mistakes, and to carry on the traditions that work.
Only ignorant fools will say that history is not relevant. If you want to make that statement, then perhaps you might want to throw the bible of yours away (Which I strongly recommend).
Beast
Beast,
"When you talk about a utopian Christian world, I presume you take that (or at least i am under the impression) these Christians will be attuned to the Creationist, fundamentalist Christian view, like yourself."
I mean a Biblical view, by whatever names you wish to call it.
You are using the sinful natures of Christians (Jew or Gentile) of the past to try and justify your oppositon to my thoughts that “If every person were to perfectly love God (by word and deed) and love their neighbor as self (by word and deed)” it would be the end of woes.
That fact is that throughout history man has not perfectly loved God (by word and deed) nor loved their neighbor as self (by word and deed), so to claim that history proves that if man had such perfection of love toward God, and the mindset of Christ concerning His very Word, that it would not be the end of woes is ungrounded.
Again, the reason we have woes is because of our depravity, and our depravity has been brought forth by our sin, which came forth from turning away from a perfect love of God (by word and deed).
I don't deny history, I simply see it as it is - a history of depravity and sin against God and against our neighbor.
Tim
"That fact is that throughout history man has not perfectly loved God (by word and deed) nor loved their neighbor as self (by word and deed), so to claim that history proves that if man had such perfection of love toward God, and the mindset of Christ concerning His very Word, that it would not be the end of woes is ungrounded."
If no man has "perfectly loved God", then you must state the criterion of this state of perfection: Do you, like Abraham, wish to put your son to the sword if Gawd asks you to, simply as a sign of loyalty and devotion? Or, like the terrorist, blows up civilians which you deem infidels to show your perfect love for God?
If your definition of "perfection" is unattainable in the past, what makes you so sure you, or anyone else can attain it? If not, why talk about such nonsensical devotion to a nonexistent, imaginary deity? Totally absurd argument, in my view.
Your continual use of "total depravity" baffles me to no end. I don't see civilization as a "depravity" of sorts: If depravity is defined by swanky hotels and sleazy bars, and "decent" is defined by shepherds tending and herding sheep, I prefer depravity.
Again, your use of extremely theatrical words baffles me.
Like I said earlier on, if your God's ego is running so thin, he should perhaps step out and clarify it himself. Having lowly education buffoons speaking on his behalf is not a sign of omnipotence, but impotence.
Beast
Check out Sarah Palin's 17 yr old pregnant daughter. Or Britney Spear's church going 15 yr old teenage sister who got pregnant with a guy who was in church.
I guess some morons just don't practice what they preach, do they?
Beast
The Truth doesn't change whether those that speak it or heart it obey it, but neither does their actions justify or excuse those whom reject it as Truth.
Tim
Post a Comment