Teen sex increased after abstinence program

good. point. Let’s tell kids to smoke. maybe that way they won’t.

Exactly I can see it now:

Dad: Okay Junior, here’s a pack of camels, a half once of Northern Lights, a fifth of Old Crow, and Rosanne Barr. I want you drunk, stoned, and screwed before midnight.

Junior: Dad, you never let me do anything fun…and that lady is scaring me…

:D

.-=gp=-.

I have kids, but I can remember when I first started having sex (I was 15 or 16). You definitely can’t just tell them not to have sex.

I think you’ve got to tell them all about it, how it works, how dangerous it is to have unprotected sex these days (I didn’t have that worry as much), and how bad it is to get pregnant. And you’ve got to tell them about heartache also. I think you need to suggest for them not to do it, but if they do it, then they need to be careful, which is why they need to be educated (IMO).

Mr Soul

perhaps not :)

I think it is wrong to say that you can’t tell kids not to have sex. I agree that you should tell them that if they are going to have sex, then they should protect themselves. I just feel that kids do not understand the emotional implications to a promiscuous lifestyle, especially to becoming sexually active at an early age. But that is an argument I can’t prove to anyone. Either you know what I’m talking about or you don’t. Whatever.

Seems pretty simple to me Mike.
Tell kids they shouldn’t do something (abstenance program) and naturally they will what to do it more.
It also works with cigarettes, pot, and booze, go figure, where’s the study on that program Toker?
Oh yeah, and skatebaords, anywhere you see a “do not ride sign” your bound to see someone, as Rob Halford used to say "Breakin’ the Law, Breakin’ the LLLLAAAAAAWWWWW!

Keep shinin’ and as usual, interesting reading on the crapper once again, Mike, I will now whipe and flush.


jerm

I think it is wrong to say that you *can't* tell kids not to have sex.
It's not necessarily wrong to tell them that. However, the whole point of the study is to find out whether that approach worked or not. It's a tricky thing because you don't want to encourage them to have sex but if you're too strong with the negatives then it backfires?!?! The problem is our biology is telling us to have sex at 16. How do you stop that?

I think the best thing they can encourage is safe sex, since the sex itself is a given, unless she’s frumpy, or he’s a nerd, fat, goofy lookin’ ect, or an extreem religious backround.

Sex, has often been portrayed as an evil thing, when in some cases, it’s just a biological instinct.
We have pherimones ( I hope I spelled that right) and things excreting from our bodies, and it’s no more evil to react to another humans natural aluring properties, than to say, the smell of popcorn.
Religion has played a major role in condeming sex, and if you let it, will even make you feel bad about having sex with your own wife! tee hee…
As far as the Biblical text I’ve read, God/Jesus would rather we all were like him, and refrain from such activities. But knowing that is impossible for a biological creature, allows us to take a wife and do as we will.
If two teenagers we’re married in His eyes it’s all good. However in modern society the same situation would be considered wrong perhaps even illegal in some states. It’s just another case of where a law started from a Biblical moral standpoint, and then got twisted and now is no longer in line with the original text.
So mabey we should be teaching kids to have better self esteem, so they won’t give in to peir presure in alot of situations.
I’m probably going to tell my daughter she can have sex with anyone she want when she grows up, as long as she is married to them. I don’t think it’s fair just to stigmatize sex for our young and make them feel that the naturl urges and instincs they we’re born with are wrong, and somehow evil.
I want my daughter to be able to enjoy her first time with someone she loves and is married to, not be sneaking around behind my back because she feels she has to, and felling guilty the whole time, thus tainting the experience for the rest of her natural life.
I know my aproach seems odd, and anyone else with a daughter might say,“How can you even say that”.
But I remember growing up, in a Christian household. I was even allowed to watch Dolly Parton on TV. I grew up thinking my curiosity and desires where wrong and somehoe evil.
It wasn’t till I was in my late 20’s that I could even enjoy sex, thanks to all that programming (thanks MOM!)
So I’m gonna try to not make the same mistakes with my children…wish me luck guys…


and as always keep shinin’


jerm

But do you tell your kids it’s ok to have a cigarette, but only AFTER sex?ROFLMAO

You can’t stop what your kids do, all the studies, all the workshops, all the trying to make children into cattle doesn’t work. Simple human nature, you can’t change it. Wake up people!

:D

Well, I wasn’t having sex at 15 or 16, but that wasn’t necessarily my choice.

As I say - show me a chick who’ll look at me twice, and I’ll show you one who didn’t get a proper look first time round.

btw, I was wrong. It was a different (similar) california report that was debated. But there is still evidence I have read in responce to that report that would argue against the findings in this report…

Again, it is all a matter of which scholarship you believe…

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm615.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/em872.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/cda0304.cfm (this is similar to the 1st one)

Now, yes, I know you are going to say these are all from the same place. I’m giving links to the places the stuff I read linked to as their primary sources. But if you look at what they sighted, and read through the trails, you will see that several independent studies say that abstinence programs work. If the one in texas isn’t providing good results, then perhaps it is a flaw in the individual program, not the concept as a whole.

fish

The best Abstinence program I have seen is the one they do in some high schools. They pair up the kids and give them a surrogate baby. Usually a doll or stuffed animal. As their “parentage” progresses, the teachers introduce problems such as the baby is sick or the hubby is laid off of work etc…

Gives the kids a little dose of reality and seems to make them stop and think a little.

TG

Again, it is all a matter of which scholarship you believe...
No it's NOT. It's a matter of who is doing good science, going through peer review, etc., etc. I've seen alot of stuff passed off as science that is not science. Your statement is exactly the kind of way the right-wing wants us to think, i.e., it's a matter of who to believe but IT IS NOT!

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Heritage Foudation a right-wing organization? It sure looks like that from their web site.

Mr Soul