Abstinence, contraceptives don't mix
WITNESSING HOPE
Emily Byers
Issue date: 2/15/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
|
It may not make sense, but this is precisely how proponents of comprehensive sex education expect to teach young people to form healthy sexual relationships.
The French House hosted the Spirituality and Choice Discussion Series on Tuesday sponsored by the LSU Women's Center, Spiritual Youth for Reproductive Freedom and VOX: Voices for Planned Parenthood. This session, "Sex Education: Too Much or Not Enough?" explored the compatibility of spirituality and support for comprehensive sex education.
Each of the four speakers on the discussion panel claimed that ideally sex education should portray abstinence until marriage and the use of contraception as equally acceptable alternatives for young people. This approach is often called abstinence-plus or abstinence-based sex education. Each panelist emphasized the importance of ensuring that young people are free to choose what's best for them as individuals.
I'm not sure a person can be expected to choose "what's best" when he or she is told that both alternatives are equally acceptable. Young people are always free to choose abstinence or contraception. Even programs that strongly encourage abstinence don't deny them that choice; however, they can only make an informed decision when they've got a clear picture of both alternatives, and they certainly won't get that from the sort of program Tuesday's panelists described.
Acknowledging the validity of abstinence as a healthy choice while contending that it can be unhealthy to repress one's sexual urges is an apparent contradiction. How can self-restraint be healthy and unhealthy at the same time?
Calling abstinence until marriage "ideal," as members of Tuesday's panel repeatedly did while admitting that you don't expect young people to choose it is pointless. Why mention abstinence if you're going to insinuate that it's practically impossible to practice? Someone who sings the praises of "choice" but implies that young people are incapable of choosing to master their sexual urge clearly has very little faith in their ability to choose.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 19
SRC74
SRC
posted 2/15/07 @ 9:54 AM CST
"Calling abstinence until marriage "ideal," as members of Tuesday's panel repeatedly did while admitting that you don't expect young people to choose it is pointless. (Continued…)
Ryan
posted 2/15/07 @ 10:13 AM CST
[QUOTE]An argument for contraception is essentially an argument against self-restraint and for consensual objectification. The contraceptive attitude says, "Let me use you, and I'll let you use me. (Continued…)
Travis
posted 2/15/07 @ 1:39 PM CST
Ryan, your statement that
Wow, that's just a load of crap. How about "an argument for contraception is an argument against STDs and unwanted pregnancies and for two consenting adults to do something that is no business of yours or your church's". (Continued…)
Anastasia Kraus
posted 2/15/07 @ 2:54 PM CST
The reason why contraceptions should be taught as equal to abstinence is because there will always be couples who will have sex before marriage. Dating back for hundreds of years, when you could be cast out from society, people were still going at it. (Continued…)
Brad
posted 2/15/07 @ 3:05 PM CST
"How does this attitude not teach people to have healthy sexual relationships? It's much more healthy than failed abstinence-only plans. Why does mutual respect require abstinence? I guess it is easy to think this way if you discount all of the healthy relationships which have mutual respect without abstinence that people are in right now. (Continued…)
Brad
posted 2/15/07 @ 3:06 PM CST
"How does this attitude not teach people to have healthy sexual relationships? It's much more healthy than failed abstinence-only plans. Why does mutual respect require abstinence? I guess it is easy to think this way if you discount all of the healthy relationships which have mutual respect without abstinence that people are in right now. (Continued…)
Joe
posted 2/15/07 @ 4:39 PM CST
Travis, your comparison of sex to global warming is priceless. I love how you attempt to validate your biased point of view by trying to use irrelevant scientific facts. (Continued…)
Megan
posted 2/17/07 @ 10:07 PM CST
This editorial is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. I hate when people have such an elitist attitude about sex and abstinence. People like Emily wish for the "good-old" Puritan times when everyone was suppressed. (Continued…)
Abul Abbas
posted 2/18/07 @ 8:21 AM CST
The irony in the pro-contraception position presented at the seminar is that contraception is diametrically opposed to a "holistic" approach to the human person since contraception is a way for the individual to treat their body (as apart from their soul) as an object for manipulation for their own selfish ends. (Continued…)
W. A. Krotoski, M.D., Ph.D., M.P.H.
posted 2/18/07 @ 10:25 AM CST
Although in a somewhat more philosophical mode, Emily did it again! She put out the truth, and that is what sets us free. Whether or not one chooses to accept the truth is another issue, of course. (Continued…)
Post a Comment