Seems like a pretty obvious conclusion to me, but idealistic politicians are not so easily swayed. I wonder how much more money they will throw away trying tosweep the instincts that drive us under the rug.
I remember watching "The Godfather" and there's a scene where Michael is out for a walk with his Sicilian girlfriend. Walking along behind them are these elderly aunties all dressed in black. That's really about the onlyeffective way toinsure abstinence as far as I"m concerned.
__________________
Proud parents of our own "Daddy's Little Girls"
I heard Jesus He drank wine and I bet we'd get along just fine.
Abstinence isn't hopeless idealogy. It simply requires the efforts of all. If parents aren't pushing it at home, a class at school is going to be virtually useless. When parents buy their daughters birth control prescriptions or tell their sons "IF you are going to do it, make sure you use a condom," abstinence classes aren't going to do much good. Even churches, supposedly the first line of defense on such issues, are no longer willing to preach to their congregations that premarital sex is a sin because they fear of offending some of their tithing parishioners. Too many churches are quick to talk about how the issue of gay unions are endangering the sanctity of marriage but refuse to talk about the endangering of the sanctity of marriage being caused by the sex outside of marriage and divorce that are taking place in their own pews.
Oops, I'm getting off on an unrelated rant, aren't I?
__________________
We must be the change we wish to see in the world -- Ghandi
http://www.rightminded.net
Abstinence isn't hopeless idealogy. It simply requires the efforts of all. If parents aren't pushing it at home, a class at school is going to be virtually useless. When parents buy their daughters birth control prescriptions or tell their sons "IF you are going to do it, make sure you use a condom," abstinence classes aren't going to do much good. Even churches, supposedly the first line of defense on such issues, are no longer willing to preach to their congregations that premarital sex is a sin because they fear of offending some of their tithing parishioners. Too many churches are quick to talk about how the issue of gay unions are endangering the sanctity of marriage but refuse to talk about the endangering of the sanctity of marriage being caused by the sex outside of marriage and divorce that are taking place in their own pews.
Oops, I'm getting off on an unrelated rant, aren't I?
I agree that parental guidance can have some influence over a child's sexual life decisions. But the feminist cat is out of the bag, and unless society up and reverts to its more conservative former self, the concept of sexualliberty isn't going away. And anyway, it's not as though kids didn't have sex before...they just kept their damned mouths shut and didn't go online bragging about it.
Whether reading the news today, or something Classcial Greek and Roman social commentators chiseled thousands of years ago, it is plainly obvious that people are wired for sex. We're physically animals, and animals live to reproduce. Intellect only goes so far in repressing that instinct.
Aught Six, i totally agree with you. i could care less what kind of abstinence program folks use. Just stop spending 170 million of ourfederal dollars each year on feel good"abstinence" programs. The US government has no businesstrying to control teen age hormones that parents are either unable or unwilling to control.
"The federal government now spends about $176 million annually on abstinence-until-marriage education. Critics have repeatedly said they don't believe the programs are working, and the study will give them reinforcement."
Aught Six, i totally agree with you. i could care less what kind of abstinence program folks use. Just stop spending 170 million of ourfederal dollars each year on feel good"abstinence" programs. The US government has no businesstrying to control teen age hormones that parents are either unable or unwilling to control.
"The federal government now spends about $176 million annually on abstinence-until-marriage education. Critics have repeatedly said they don't believe the programs are working, and the study will give them reinforcement."
I think Falcon has it right on this one.
I heard an announcer on the radio today say the only reason why he abstained when he was a school kid was because the girls weren't having any of it -- the girls controlled the game. Today girls wear much more provocative clothes, sex is so much more integrated into conversation and culture. Under these conditions it seems difficult to keep the sex locked down. Did anyone see Desperate Housewives last night? This airs at 8 PM here in Texas. Lots of sex -- implied sex, women in sexy lingerie, talk about sex. So if you want your kids to abstain, it is going to take more than "feel good" programs in schools. It will take parent/church involvement.
I think keeping kids from getting involved in sex early is good for a number of reasons. It reduces teenage pregnancy. If kids aren't yet actively engaged in having sex there is a better chance they can devote more of their energies to academic studies. It won't dry up and fall off if you don't use it before you are 22. Still, the best we can probably hope for is to keep the kids from getting into it before they leave high school. How many college juniors are still juniors?
Human Biology Isn't Repressed So Easily
