Can we at least have a degree of socialism in our society?

TrixieJess · September 2015

monkeysip said:

I teach at an all-girls high school, and unfortunately, some girls have actually said they're waiting to have sex until they get their Gardasil vaccine So it might encourage sexual activity for *some* (maybe a small amount). I don't think that's a good reason NOT to get it though, especially since even if my daughter remains abstinent until marriage, that doesn't mean she might not be sexually assaulted, or when she marries, her husband could already have it.

This is why I'm hoping they extend the vaccination to include boys by the time my son is old enough.

monkeysip · September 2015

STARMOON44 said:

kimmiandkoley said:

monkeysip said:

I teach at an all-girls high school, and unfortunately, some girls have actually said they're waiting to have sex until they get their Gardasil vaccine So it might encourage sexual activity for *some* (maybe a small amount). I don't think that's a good reason NOT to get it though, especially since even if my daughter remains abstinent until marriage, that doesn't mean she might not be sexually assaulted, or when she marries, her husband could already have it.

How is that any difference than waiting for a condom to have sex? They're being responsible, they intend to do so and know there is a safer way. I'd take a bet that if Gardasil wasn't available they would have done it by now.
When Gardasil went main stream I was 1 year past the effectiveness age. As someone who spent the last 24 months having rotating colposcopies, I salute these young ladies

I'm not saying its irresponsible in general to have sex after the Gardasil vaccine... what I'm referring to is the false sense of security I think some of these girls have in thinking that the vaccine would provide completely safe sex. And the implication is that without the vaccine, they *may* have chose abstinence (obviously no way to know that for sure). Which, whatever your moral beliefs, is STILL the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy.
Abstinence only prevents 100% of pregnancy and STDs in a fantasy world. The same way the birth control pill and condoms are not 100% effective, in large part because of human error, abstinence has a massive failure rate because it turns our most humans just want to bone. Without the vaccine, they'd be having sex. Just sex with more cancer.

Again, I didn't say we should have abstinence-only education. I have no problem at all with teaching students about all the risks/benefits of all the different methods of contraception and protection from STDs. What I said is that abstinence is the only 100% effective method. Will everyone remain abstinent? Of course not. I'm not living in a fantasy world. But we still need to realize that if we want young people to not get pregnant or get an STD, then abstinence is the only 100% effective way to do that. So we should encourage that to teens. But it's up to them to make their own educated choices.

STARMOON44 · September 2015

monkeysip said:

STARMOON44 said:

monkeysip said:

kimmiandkoley said:

monkeysip said:

I teach at an all-girls high school, and unfortunately, some girls have actually said they're waiting to have sex until they get their Gardasil vaccine So it might encourage sexual activity for *some* (maybe a small amount). I don't think that's a good reason NOT to get it though, especially since even if my daughter remains abstinent until marriage, that doesn't mean she might not be sexually assaulted, or when she marries, her husband could already have it.

How is that any difference than waiting for a condom to have sex? They're being responsible, they intend to do so and know there is a safer way. I'd take a bet that if Gardasil wasn't available they would have done it by now.

When Gardasil went main stream I was 1 year past the effectiveness age. As someone who spent the last 24 months having rotating colposcopies, I salute these young ladies

I'm not saying its irresponsible in general to have sex after the Gardasil vaccine... what I'm referring to is the false sense of security I think some of these girls have in thinking that the vaccine would provide completely safe sex. And the implication is that without the vaccine, they *may* have chose abstinence (obviously no way to know that for sure). Which, whatever your moral beliefs, is STILL the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy.

Abstinence only prevents 100% of pregnancy and STDs in a fantasy world. The same way the birth control pill and condoms are not 100% effective, in large part because of human error, abstinence has a massive failure rate because it turns our most humans just want to bone. Without the vaccine, they'd be having sex. Just sex with more cancer.

Again, I didn't say we should have abstinence-only education. I have no problem at all with teaching students about all the risks/benefits of all the different methods of contraception and protection from STDs. What I said is that abstinence is the only 100% effective method. Will everyone remain abstinent? Of course not. I'm not living in a fantasy world. But we still need to realize that if we want young people to not get pregnant or get an STD, then abstinence is the only 100% effective way to do that. So we should encourage that to teens. But it's up to them to make their own educated choices.

Why should we waste any time encouraging abstinence to teens when we know nearly all of them will fail at it? And then wind up without a plan just having unprotected sex? Teens whose own personal religious beliefs guide them strongly towards abstinence don't need to be taught anything much about it. All the rest of the teens need to learn how to use condoms, where to get them in expensively, the importance of using them every single time they have sex, what STDs they do and don't offer protection on, how they can get hormonal contraception and the pros and cons of different methods, how fertility works, what to do when you partner refuses to get a condom, and where you can go for gyn care without your abusive parents finding out. And, then, like "obviously, you could also just not have sex if you don't want to, that's totally fine" and a really good conversation about consent.

monkeysip · September 2015

Because condoms and birth control fail? And they need to know this? And teens are notorious for not being able to use either very effectively? And because sexual activity also has ties to psychological and social issues for teens?

It's not true that "nearly all of them will fail at it". It's a misconception that "everybody's doing it". Like I said, teach them all their options, but I think it's entirely irresponsible to act like there's no benefit to abstinence over sexual activity. I'm not talking for adults, I'm talking about teens for whom sexual activity can have tremendous consequences.

This isn't just about moral or religious beliefs. Teens need to know that there are PRACTICAL reasons to remain abstinent at least as teens (not necessarily all the way until marriage).

kimmiinthemitten · September 2015

STARMOON44 said:

STARMOON44 said:

kimmiandkoley said:

monkeysip said:

I teach at an all-girls high school, and unfortunately, some girls have actually said they're waiting to have sex until they get their Gardasil vaccine So it might encourage sexual activity for *some* (maybe a small amount). I don't think that's a good reason NOT to get it though, especially since even if my daughter remains abstinent until marriage, that doesn't mean she might not be sexually assaulted, or when she marries, her husband could already have it.

How is that any difference than waiting for a condom to have sex? They're being responsible, they intend to do so and know there is a safer way. I'd take a bet that if Gardasil wasn't available they would have done it by now.
When Gardasil went main stream I was 1 year past the effectiveness age. As someone who spent the last 24 months having rotating colposcopies, I salute these young ladies

I'm not saying its irresponsible in general to have sex after the Gardasil vaccine... what I'm referring to is the false sense of security I think some of these girls have in thinking that the vaccine would provide completely safe sex. And the implication is that without the vaccine, they *may* have chose abstinence (obviously no way to know that for sure). Which, whatever your moral beliefs, is STILL the only way to 100% prevent STDs and pregnancy.
Abstinence only prevents 100% of pregnancy and STDs in a fantasy world. The same way the birth control pill and condoms are not 100% effective, in large part because of human error, abstinence has a massive failure rate because it turns our most humans just want to bone. Without the vaccine, they'd be having sex. Just sex with more cancer.

Again, I didn't say we should have abstinence-only education. I have no problem at all with teaching students about all the risks/benefits of all the different methods of contraception and protection from STDs. What I said is that abstinence is the only 100% effective method. Will everyone remain abstinent? Of course not. I'm not living in a fantasy world. But we still need to realize that if we want young people to not get pregnant or get an STD, then abstinence is the only 100% effective way to do that. So we should encourage that to teens. But it's up to them to make their own educated choices.
Why should we waste any time encouraging abstinence to teens when we know nearly all of them will fail at it? And then wind up without a plan just having unprotected sex? Teens whose own personal religious beliefs guide them strongly towards abstinence don't need to be taught anything much about it. All the rest of the teens need to learn how to use condoms, where to get them in expensively, the importance of using them every single time they have sex, what STDs they do and don't offer protection on, how they can get hormonal contraception and the pros and cons of different methods, how fertility works, what to do when you partner refuses to get a condom, and where you can go for gyn care without your abusive parents finding out. And, then, like "obviously, you could also just not have sex if you don't want to, that's totally fine" and a really good conversation about consent.

My church had a sex ed class for us teens. It went like this: we know the scripture advises us to save ourselves for marriage, but we also know that's not a realistic goal for everyone, so let's talk about it. And that's what we did for 2 days, without our parents, in a teen supportive environment and we were able to ask any question we ever had without judgement from our school environment or anyone else. I learned more technically and thought more about sex and God that weekend than I ever had before. My church provided me with a far better sex education than my school did and it because they were able to put pretenses and agendas aside and structure something just for the 8-10 teens who were going to be there.

huskypuppy14 · September 2015

monkeysip said:

Because condoms and birth control fail? And they need to know this? And teens are notorious for not being able to use either very effectively? And because sexual activity also has ties to psychological and social issues for teens?

It's not true that "nearly all of them will fail at it". It's a misconception that "everybody's doing it". Like I said, teach them all their options, but I think it's entirely irresponsible to act like there's no benefit to abstinence over sexual activity. I'm not talking for adults, I'm talking about teens for whom sexual activity can have tremendous consequences.

This isn't just about moral or religious beliefs. Teens need to know that there are PRACTICAL reasons to remain abstinent at least as teens (not necessarily all the way until marriage).

I think people are trying to say sex ed should not revolve around abstinence. Of course birth control fails and of course they need to know that. So the right thing to do is teach the different methods and how to use them correctly, and then also reiterate that abstinence is the only 100% way to not get pregnant/get an STD. That's how my sex ed class was (almost 20 years ago), and I had sex when I was 15. I think we are saying the same thing though.

I would argue that having sex as a teen does not cause social and psychological issues, but it might be the other way around.

Sex is a biological need, and teenagers may not be mentally ready to handle that even if they are biologically ready. That also needs to be taught. People have a problem with abstinence only sex ed, because it doesn't take into account the biological aspect. Teaching abstinence is not the same as teaching kids not to lie or steal or hurt other people. There is no biological urge for those latter things.Therefore, saying don't have sex kids, doesn't work. But instead say 'it would be best if you waited to have sex, but if you're not here's what you need to know'.

Can we at least have a degree of socialism in our society?

Re: Can we at least have a degree of socialism in our society?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards