Abstinence and Contraceptives

[let_go_let_God]

For a debate that I am involved in for a class, I am taking on the role of why there should be abstinence taught in schools. To do this I need to present facts on why abstinence is a "good thing" for teens to practice. However, so I can have a good arguement, I am in need to find where others stand as well. So pham I bring the topic here to debate with you, I thank you now in advance for your help.

My first statement: The common theme in schools is that "everyone is doing it." So why don't we give students condoms and access to the pill? It won't do them any harm, and it will be promoting safe sex.

God bless-
LGLG

[thessalonian]

Well it depends on what you mean by "won't do them any harm". If increasing their sexual promiscuity is no harm then you might be right. If decreasing their ability to have ordered and faithful relationships is what you mean then once again you've got a winner. If allowing them to continue in behavior with BC pills that increases greately the likelyhood that they will contract an STD is what you mean by no harm then there's a big problem. Your putting them in a game of Russian Roulette with 3 bullets in six chambers. 1/2 of sexually permiscous teens have an STD or two. The most common, HPV causing cervical cancer and sterility, so that young women have lost their opportunity at the blessings of children for life. Okay, give them condoms you say. Well, you've decreased the consequences a bit so that more of them end up having sex more often. It's like saying, well we're only going to put 1.4 (85% failure rate of condoms) bullets in 6 chambers but we're not going to stop the activity. In fact we're going to increase it by making them feel safe about what they are doing. Likely doubling it by taking the consequences away. Well I guess you've got a wiener of an arguement there. Not to be confused with winner.

[let_go_let_God]

Kids are going to be kids, even by telling them, "You can't have sex, you can get an STD" it's not going to stop them. If you tell them they can't, it only says that there is a secrative and mystical quality about sex and they would be willing to take the risk just to find out what sex is about. It's better than girls getting pregnent and having to put children in the hands of adoption agencies or having babies aborted.

[avemaria40]

I think it was mentioned that 50% of all abortions are due to contraceptive failure. also, more than half of teenagers today are virgins, so not everyone is doing it. condoms have a failure rate of 18.4% in kids, i believe the age range was, 16-24. Birth control pills, according to the National Institute of health carry a risk of breast cancer, and if taken more than 10 years, cervical cancer, which a girl is also at risk for if she catches HPV (which can be spread even with a condom or any form of protection) or has sex with more than 3 ppl in her life time. Chlamydia (which 1/5 of all girls have gotten) and gonerrhea (sp) sometimes can be spread with no symptoms in women, and it will sterilize them. HPV and herpes can harm babies in the womb if a girl gets pregnant if she has those diseases. They say HIV could be prevented by a condom, but among teenagers, as i have pointed out, condoms fail, and if u get AIDS from that, there is no cure for it, u have to get tested and go on antiretroviral drugs right away, u are advised not to get pregnant, and if u are, u have to be closely monitored, and u can't ever attempt to nurse ur baby, b/c AIDS spreads through breast milk. Also, teens do drugs and alcohol, should we have "safe cocaine", safe pot, and safe drinking programs as well? And condoms and pills may prevent babies and diseases but they don't prevent broken hearts. Girls esp. are more susceptible to this b/c oxytocin is produced in sex, bonding a girl closer to the guy and makes her feel closer, so the guy dumps her for being to clingy and she feels immensly sad. This is why abstinence until marriage should be taught in schools. Also, more parents have said they'd rather have their kids wait till marriage, or at least in a loving relationship (not necessarily engaged) that could lead to marriage.

[hierochloe]

[quote name='let_go_let_God' date='Oct 6 2005, 11:53 AM']Kids are going to be kids, even by telling them, "You can't have sex, you can get an STD"  it's not going to stop them. If you tell them they can't, it only says that there is a secrative and mystical quality about sex and they would be willing to take the risk just to find out what sex is about. It's better than girls getting pregnent and having to put children in the hands of adoption agencies or having babies aborted.
[right][snapback]748347[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Kids are going to be kids, even by telling them "XXXX" it's not going to stop them. That's true, but it's really irrelevant to your debate. The real question is whether abstinence should be taught in schools.

You can educate and provide children with contraceptives and they could still get an STD or become pregnant. You could teach children abstinence and they could still get an STD or become pregnant. So you see, both methods are equal in this regard (since kids will make the decision on which method to follow, if any, in the end).

Nevertheless, there is a key difference between methods should some children decide they wish to use one or the other. There are two possibilities:

1) Children may choose to employ the knowledge of contraceptives and stll end up with an STD or pregnant, since this method is never 100% safe. Furthermore, the engagement in sexual activity that this allows can bring on all of the numerous long term psychological issuse that thess and others have described.

2) However, if children choose to employ abstinence, they will not end up with an STD (at least not from sex) nor will they become pregnant (short of rape), since this method [i]is[/i] 100% safe. Finally, abstinence prevents many of the long-term psychological impacts caused by sexual activity among children.

Hope that helps and wasn't too confusing.

Edited October 6, 2005 by hierochloe

[Didacus]

You might find this thread useful, especially taking Uganda as an example. I linked to a couple of articles you might also refer to and find useful.

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=38470&hl=abstinence+first"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...bstinence+first[/url]

Best of luck with your debate, i hope it bears fruit!

[let_go_let_God]

Thank you so much for your info so far, I think I should post the side that I am debating and the side that is against me.

[B] Sexuality- What message will best serve students? [\B]

Group A - What happened to abstinence? We need to get this message in the forefront, making other sexuality issues secondary! It's 100% effective!


Group B - Kids are going to "do it," now lets get on with the message of unwanted pregnancy and disease prevention!

(Now back to me trying to be devil's advocate)

Ok, let's say birth conrtol in all it's splendor fails. The girl gets pregnant, an abortion is a safe, easy, and painless way to rid her of this burden and allow her to live a normal life again.

God bless-
LGLG

[hierochloe]

[quote name='let_go_let_God' date='Oct 6 2005, 04:30 PM']Ok, let's say birth conrtol in all it's splendor fails. The girl gets pregnant, an abortion is a safe, easy, and painless way to rid her of this burden and allow her to live a normal life again.
[right][snapback]748659[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Abortion, while arguably safe, does have a serious risk of potential complications resulting from the procedure. It is also not a physically painless procedure for some or most. Furthermore, abortion carries with it a severe risk for long-term psychological problems.

Devil's advocate may rebuttal with use of morning-after contraceptive instead of traditional abortion. However, use of morning-after pill also carries some risk of physical complications. The successful use of this alternative may also lead to a child persisting in unhealthy behavior due to the lack of immediate consequences associated with sexual activitiy before adulthood.

Devil's advocate may then counter that proper education about the risk of morning-after pill could alleviate that risk by communicating it's intended use for emergencies only. However, if abstinence were taught and followed there would be no need of risk from the morning-after pill.

[curtins]

[quote]Ok, let's say birth conrtol in all it's splendor fails. The girl gets pregnant, an abortion is a safe, easy, and painless way to rid her of this burden and allow her to live a normal life again.[/quote]


While she will be rid of the "burden" of parenting responsibilites, she will have aquired an exponentially greater burden- that of living with the guilt of having her own child slaughtered. I'd like to see her try and live a normal life. And there are many things that can go wrong with abortion. Not to mention she has just killed her partner's child, and her parent's grandchild. Talk about stress, anxiety, and we're not talking "I failed a math test" stress. We're talking "my whole LIFE is screwed up now" stress. All for what? 20 minutes of something that could be so much more rewarding and fullfilling if left alone for 10 years.

Challenge the other side to really take a good hard deep look at the implications of pre marital sex.

[let_go_let_God]

[quote name='curtins' date='Oct 6 2005, 06:12 PM']Challenge the other side to really take  a good hard deep look at the implications of pre marital sex.
[right][snapback]748735[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Well because "everyone's doing it," I should be able to as well. I mean there's so much sex in the media these days so I and others are given that impression. What about the gratifying feeling that "I am loved" and every person wants to be loved. I've been told that there is no feeling like it, and if that's the case I am not missing out on that. Anyway I feel that I can take care of a kid on my own, and if not I can just get rid of it.

God bless-
LGLG

[curtins]

[quote]Anyway I feel that I can take care of a kid on my own[/quote]

A child, that is a defensless, helpless, human being, needs someone that can do more than just "feel" like they can take care of him or her. They need someone who KNOWS is absoultly ready and capable and has the means to take care of and properly and securly provide for them. A single (because she will most likely get dumped) 16 or 17 year old may think babies are cute and nice to hold for 5 minutes but has absolutly no idea what it takes to successfully raise a child and does NOT have the capability to do so.

And since when was something determined the good to do just because "everyone is doing it".

Take what you learned about drugs in DARE class, and apply it to sex.

[hierochloe]

[quote name='curtins' date='Oct 6 2005, 07:14 PM']Take what you learned about drugs in DARE class, and apply it to sex.
[right][snapback]748789[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
That's actually a pretty good approach.

[Norseman82]

Take the failure rate of contraceptives and compare it to that of abstinence.

There is only one case on record where someone became pregnant while abstinent, and we celebrate it with a holiday in December.

[curtins]

[quote name='Norseman82' date='Oct 6 2005, 08:38 PM']Take the failure rate of contraceptives and compare it to that of abstinence.

There is only one case on record where someone became pregnant while abstinent, and we celebrate it with a holiday in December.
[right][snapback]748816[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


haha I like that

[let_go_let_God]

That is great! Although I cannot find anything else really to back the "devil's advocate" can you please still give reasoning as to why abstinence is the best way to prevent STD's and pregnancy, and also some uber reliable sources. That's where I'm lacking for this debate.

Thanks and God bless-
LGLG