Which is absurd, right.
And what is wrong with this? Nothing, of course.

I think casual sex, even with a condom, has too much risk given the potential consequences. Until he finds a woman that he trusts enough to have sex with understanding the risks, even if their choice is to use a condom, don't. I would rather give him a subscription to Maxim or Playboy and a box of Kleenex.

You seem to be ignoring the qualifier: "... if you're going to have sex..." means that it's too late for Maxim or Playboy, it's going to happen. If they're going to masturbate, sure give them a magazine or something. If they're going to have sex, provide them with the understanding necessary to do it responsibly, which means contraception.

What % of teens do you think believe using a condom is safe and eliminates the risk of pregnancy or STD?

There is a problem with "abstinence only", but there is also a problem with "safe sex" for teens.

well this is going in circles, and is only tangentially related to Palin anymore

Who said it "eliminates" the risk? The point is that statistically most kids are going to have sex. Short of murdering them all and dooming our species to the history books of our planet, we're not going to stop—or even slow—teen sex. Understanding that as a virtual certainty, the next best thing to abstinence would be proper and responsible sex practices such as being tested regularly and using contraception. Condoms have a roughly 90-98% depending on who you ask. Birth control pills also have a high success rate (generally between 92-98%, depending on who you ask). STD and AIDS testing are nearly certain. These are not perfect options, but they are the best options available to sexually active individuals not wanting to catch something or get pregnant.
Not even a little. It's the best system that can exist.

Well, no, there is a problem with it still, and that is that teenagers are stupid and aren't going to listen to mom and dad.

But that's also the problem with abstinence education. I compare it to the kid with a cookie analogy. You tell a kid to eat his brussels sprouts, and he won't do it. You tell him to eat the sprouts and he gets a cookie, he's more likely to do it.

You tell a kid "no sex, ever, period" and he's likely to disobey, not only because kids like to disobey but because sex feels good and the kid is one big walking hormone with very little brainpower to stop himself from doing it. But if you give him the alternative of "if you absolutely insist on having sex, but you use a condom, you're less likely to face dire consequences," lets the kid have his cake and eat it too. He's more likely to do the activity that he was going to do anyway, but this time in a safer way.

No, I was talking about the latter, "safe sex for teens" (which I assumed meant comprehensive sex education). Comprehensive sex education is the best system we have.

I know. I was referring to the fact that even if you tell them about condoms, etc, some of them will still be stupid and not use them. Nothing you can do about it, really, because it speaks more to parenting and societal conditions than it does to the effectiveness of comprehensive sex ed.

I understand reality, but I would like to live in a society were children faced less sexual pressure. Moving in the direction of a social norm of teen abstinence is what my goal is. I am not ready to send up the white flag of surrender, saying - since we know you (teens) are going to do it...

"If you're going to have sex, use a condom" isn't pressure. Pressure generally comes from three things: peers, media, and biology.

It's never surrender to accept the truth, btw. It wasn't surrender when we all admitted that the earth wasn't the center of the universe, it was progress.

Us democrats or not-conservative-enough people are encouraging sex because we invest in condom companies.
Just like Gore and his Prius factories.

---------- Post added at 08:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 PM ----------

Pressure would be telling them not to have sex. Or to have sex.
Try to remember your teen years. You're just an erection with an awkward body behind it, and that's really what it is. The only way to have adult sex only become the norm would be by curbing the hormones in our teens through some drugs.
It's a part of us. We're animals, we're geared to reproduce, and we're wired so that naturally, we want to do it most at 16-17-18. Women have their sexual peak later in their 20s, but the novelty and appeal of sexual desire and activity is something that's hard to say no to.
As a species, if we were wild, it'd be fine to have sex at 14, 15, 16, with or without protection. But it's the fact that we live in a society such as ours, where 18 is set as baseline for most things of adulthood, that makes it "dangerous" to have teen sex.
Sex is not part of adulthood exclusively, no matter how strange/wrong it may seem. Biologically, its there from ages ~13 and up.
So educate, so that they can do it safely. Cuz they're gonna.

If you (teenager) are going to go a party and drink, use a designated driver. Or, you (teenager) should not drink at a party

If you (teenager) are going to disturb a nursing grizzly bear, wear some good running shoes. Or, you (teenager) should not disturb a nursing grizzly bear.

The last one might be too hyperbolic to be applicable, but the first one is a good example. You can't stop most kids from drinking, so why not instill responsible drinking habits in them? The interesting part is that the advice I'm giving is really less nanny-state-ish and more libertarian. I know that if you're educated properly, you can make the right decisions on your own about these things. Forbidding them isn't going to do anything but raise the level of taboo.

If you (teenager) are going to experiment with habit forming drugs....

At what point do you say, enough? At what point do you say teenagers simply should not be engaging in certain adult activities? It would certainly be "good" if we encouraged teens to use clean needles and show them how to test for purity and potency, because we know some of them are going to do "drugs" anyway, but I simply not ready for that type of "good".

Give it up, Will. ace has a feeling about this. He'll never be dissuaded.

Pray god he never "feels" that I've wronged him. No force in the universe can prevent my demise.

This is so true.:thumbsup:

I focus on positive energy. There would be no "demise", there would be "assimilation".:orly:

---------- Post added at 06:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 PM ----------

I don't know who Kate Gosslin is, so Palin is winning.

I'd add opportunistic to the list, but yes that's pretty much sums up my thoughts on her.


All that's true. Only I see the right being far more interested in her then the left. As far as I'm concerned the left sees her as the joke she is, the right seems very interested in her and her plan... fascinated enough to send her and her PAC 100k's of dollars... so far.

That's not a simple issue. Most teenagers are going to experiment with marijuana, but with a statistically lower number will be experimenting with harder drugs.

If they're likely to do it, it makes sense to prepare them to do it responsibly. If they're less likely to do it, it makes sense to explain why it's a bad idea and reinforce the statistics. Just saying "no" to everything is so far beyond the outer boarders of negligently stupid that I'm considering building a time machine to go back to the 90s and start slapping anti-drug officials. "Just say no" is actually just saying yes to ignorant naivete. Not only was it a spectacular failure, but it demonstrated to an entire generation (my generation), that the establishment didn't have anything meaningful to say on the subject. For us it was a bunch of morons that couldn't grasp our culture because they didn't even try, all they wanted was to look tough on crime and drugs.
Even with a 10 million man dedicated police force and closed circuit cameras in every house in America, you're not even going to slow down teen sex, drinking, and light drug use. The only and best method for prevention is education. Always has been, always will be.

Hell, I WANT my kids to experiment with alcohol and possibly even mild drugs. Releasing them into the wild as young adults, utterly unprepared for life experience... I'm just not for that. Nothing teaches responsible drinking like a night over the toilet (I also can't drink rum anymore..). Statistically, the chances of anything really serious happening to them are vanishingly low; think about all the trashed teenagers in the US on your average Saturday night. I believe you can draw a direct causal line between sheltered teenage years and fratboyism.

You better believe that any kid of mine is going to know the entire anatomical and biological ropes when it comes to sex, too. I'm not all that adamant that they be some certain age before their first sexual experience, but I am dead committed that they have their eyes fully open about the consequences, and how to navigate those waters as safely as possible.

I also reject overly padded playgrounds, on the same basis.

split the Palin sex discussion off from the resignation thread.

Would you rather a kid get proper info on condom use, anatomy, menstruation, STDs, and sexual health, or not be shown anything deemed to be offensive by some adults, such as *gasp* vaginas, penises, and diagrams detailing their mechanisms.

A kid/teen is curious... if they don't get responsible answers, they'll find answers wherever they can. It could be porn, where condom use is very rare, and other unsafe practices are shown as "cool." Or it could be their buddies, who know very little, and often have erroneous info on sex.

Education gives you the power to make an informed decision. Absence of education gives you a much less-informed decision, because you might not know all the precautions/possible consequences/FACTS of life.

What about cigarette smoking? Chewing tobacco? How do they do that responsibly? In my view there are some things adults can do that teens should not do, I simply say sex is one of them. I would not want schools saying if your are going to smoke here is how to do it responsibly and I don't want them doing that with sex either.

I disagree. I think people can be informed and "just say no". "just say no" is a slogan, I don't advocate ignorance.

I think I am older than you, and what was a failure was the over the top scare tactics in the 60's and 70's. As soon as a person realized that a puff of marijuana did not actually turn them into a drug crazed raving maniac "the man" lost all credibility. "Just say no" is a much softer more realistic approach.

There are some interesting trends at work, and it is difficult to pin down the explanation, but we can not say, "just say no" to teen sex is not a factor.

http://www.guttmacher.org/graphics/g...gr050107f1.gif

Teen Pregnancy: Trends And Lessons Learned

This is an interesting report although a bit dated. You have to be careful when the use the term "sexually experienced teens" compared to the entire population. When looking at teen pregnancy, the biggest impact will come from addressing "sexually experienced teens" as compared to the entire teen population. If we segregate the groups, I would agree the "sexually experienced teens" need a more specific form of sexual behavior education, I just don't see it as the responsibility of the schools. Schools should focus on the ABC's of educating, not trying to mold sexual behavior..

---------- Post added at 11:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 PM ----------


I agree. I want to be the one teaching my son, I want to make sure the information is consistent with what I know to be real. Like I wrote earlier, I don't want someone in a school handing my son a condom, just because...I don't want him thinking that just because my teacher/counselor/dean/nurse gave it to me, it is o.k.

It'd be nice to get a heads up.
Your view is irrelevant. What's relevant is the best course of action to produce the most beneficial outcome. We agree that unwanted teen pregnancies are detrimental, yes? We agree that STDs are detrimental, yes? As we both have access to the same data, there is only one answer. Views aren't a part of the equation.
I was referring to drug use when I mentioned "just say no". Anyway, I was told not to have sex until I was married from a very early age. My first sexual experience was at 13. I've never had an STD or a legitimate pregnancy scare in nearly 13 years of sexual activity. Am I not living proof that education can reduce the previously mentioned detrimental outcomes? Or am I a rarity? By age 19, seven in 10 teens have engaged in sexual intercourse. Teen pregnancy rates have declined 36% since 1990, and the majority of the decline in teen pregnancy rates is due to more consistent contraceptive use (as opposed to abstaining). It's education that will lower unwanted pregnancies, reduce the number of STDs, and lower abortion rates.
Anything is more realistic than outright lying, but is it really realistic to expect that saying "don't have sex" will result in kids not having sex? Not really.

Effective Sex Education

Teen sex can be fun, British health officials say - The Globe and Mail

I haven't read this thread, but I did see this article a while ago and wish that this was the sex ed I had in school.

Given our focus on "safe sex" it has not worked. The children born of teen mothers are far more likely to be in poverty than children born of adults. And there are more (absolute numbers and ratios) of these children being born in poverty today than during anytime in the past 50 years. These children get trapped in a cycle of poverty. This cycle has to end. Abstinence will if we commit to it and give it an opportunity to work. The Bush plan was never widely used and was a voluntary program.

Even with your knowledge and education if you did not have unprotected sex as a teenager, you are the exception. Given all of the current focus on protected sex, I am not sure how you assume it is working. A girl taking a birth control pill, which would reduce the risk of pregnancy, is not protected sex. I would never assume a teenager would have the discipline to actually practice safe sex. STD's are at alarming rates among teens.

STD Statistics - Teen STD Statistics

Here are some more facts, not feelingsSexual Activity

SADD Statistics

You can not blame these facts on conservatives and the promotion of "abstinence only"

Wouldn't teaching kids how to be in stable, long-term, monogamous, kid-free relationships be a better solution?

Uhm...since when is drinking or smoking basic human urges? We're basically all hardwired to want to have sex, so comparing sex to smoking or drinking isn't really fair is it?

No, as been mentioned several times before, sex education should be informing kids that abstaining from sex is the best way to avoid unwanted pregnancies or STDs, but IF they are going to have sex condoms etc. is the best way to reduce risk.

The only reason children can't make these decisions is that parents try to keep them ignorant and stupid way too long. You can't make informed decisions without information. What is so hard to understand about that? A lot of kids burn their hands on stoves, not knowing it is hot, but if you teach them that it's hot and will hurt, they are less likely to just put their hands on a red hot element.

Children who are taught of the consequences of actions will make better decisions than those who aren't taught at all. Why do you think there are efforts to get at risk kids into programs that tour prisons? It's so they know the consequences of their actions.

And yes, before it's brought up, some people will go ahead and do the wrong thing, no matter how well you teach them. We call them neo-cons

What I don't understand is, for example, how you expect a 13 year old girl to make an informed choice to engage in sex compared to a 23 year old woman?

Ten percent of 15 year old girls who engaged in sex, say it was forced - rape.
23% of teens report they engaged in drinking or doing drugs before engaging in sex.
70% of teen girls who had sex say they wish they had waited.


On a side note. I remember when Magic Johnson announced that he tested positive for HIV. He went on, kinda like an HIV tour, educating people about the disease. At that moment you would have thought that every NBA player, fan, or just people aware would have said, "hey if it can happen to Magic...". So after all that education, information, and it coming from a real role model to millions of young adults, what happened? Reported cases of HIV/Aid continue to go up. So, all I suggest is give children a chance to be children, there will be plenty of time for them to engage in adult behaviors and take adult risks as adults

---------- Post added at 07:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:20 PM ----------

Why do people smoke and drink? Why is it almost impossible for some to stop onnce they have started? Why do you assume all humans are "hard wired" the same way?

Ace, what makes you think a teenager would be more inclined to abstain than to practice safe sex? Do you think it takes more discipline for a teenager to abstain from sex or to put on a condom?

It is interesting that 70% of teenage boys said they used a condom but only 56% of girls said they used a condom. If 70% or 56% say they used a condom I bet the number is actually lower. I am betting 100% know what a condom is and why they might want to use one. I doubt education is the problem. I do not think teens have the discipline to safely engage in sex. I think as a society that we send a message to teens that abstinence is what is expected and that sexual activity has risks.

One of the statistics I saw showed that those who are exposed to sexual content on television overestimate the sexual activity of peers. I think the social pressure put on teens to be sexually active is too high, and I think a permissive attitude from schools would make the problem worse. Between 1991 and 2005 there was a decrease in the percentage of teens who reported they had sex. Our goal should be to drive the number lower.

Like I have written several times, I don't want a school passing out condoms giving children the false impression that the presence of a condom makes sex safe. I have no problem with education, however schools are not the place to give guidance or counseling on how teens should engage in sex.

I am still not clear on where some of you would draw the line. Is it 12? 11? 10? I know it is arbitrary, but I draw the line at the age of majority - until then the answer from schools or other institutions should be - abstain. One more time - I am not saying don't educate.

The urge to reproduce sexually is older than religion and social pressures, far more important to the survival of the species, and will ALWAYS beat out both of them, on average, when push comes to shove.

Ace, you keep going back and forth about supporting this kind of education or that kind of education...point blank question here, with extremely limited weasel room:

Should schools give statistically accurate unbiased information about available birth control and STI prevention methods?

Should schools provide information on how to use those methods correctly?

Should schools provide information regarding disease transmission statistics, for the full spectrum of sexual behaviors, with and without various types of protection?

I am not going to trust the school to provide those two (edit: three) things, by the way. I have a daughter, so this isn't just theoretical for me. She is statistically going to have sex when she is a teenager. I want to delay this until I feel like she is mature enough, obviously, but I also know that as a father, I'll likely have a hard time EVER feeling she's ready. However, despite my gut feeling (and accompanying shotgun purchase), I want to ensure that when she chooses to have sex, she uses a condom--the first time and every time.

edited to add question about sexual behaviors

I remember Maslow's hierarchy of needs for humans, as I recall things like food and shelter came before sex.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

I also want the schools to talk about the poverty rates of children born from single teen mothers.
I want the schools to talk about and show the consequences of STD's
I want the school to talk about what rape is, and the rights they have.
I don't want schools passing out condoms.
I don't want counselors giving medical advise on birth control pills for individual girls.
I want the schools to educate teens about the porn industry, prostitution, sexual slavery, etc., in a factual manner.

I have no problem with information and education. But the schools should adopt a policy of abstinence being the expectation for teens. I don't want a wink, wink, we know you are going to do it attitude.

I don't understand what you're objecting to, then...that's sex education. Abstinence-only sex education answers NO to all of those questions, and Palin's policies, which you claim to support, would not address any of those issues.

Also: If you agree that teen birth is bad, why wouldn't you like teenagers to be on birth control? You're applying logic to a situation that doesn't involve it, by making the statistically unfounded assumption that teenagers with easy access to birth control are more likely to have sex. The only thing they're more likely to do is not become parents.

My view of sex and marriage differs from Palin's. I have never read or heard of her taking a position against sex education. My view also differs from some on the left, simply in regards to having a clear and consistent expectation of abstinence. My fear is that some in the school system would treat the issue too casually for my taste. The attitude of passing out condoms and thinking that is a good thing is a joke in my view. If you give a boy a condom, he is going to be doubly motivated to use it. When he tries to use it, he won't - or he will only have one but need two. I think people wanted to paint me as some extreme religious zealot regarding sex. I have no hang-ups and most of the conservatives that I know don't differ much from the way I see it - including Palin.

That is a decision for the girl, her parents and her doctor. I don't want a teacher saying - "girl, you need to start taking birth control pills, here is a number to a free clinic that will hook you up." I want that teacher to say - talk to your parents and your doctor. Period.

I was a teen once. I went to a school with an above average teen pregnancy rate. My sister had two children before she was 20. I knew a person who died of AIDs in his 20's. Generally, I would say I went to a school that treated students like cattle. I have a 12 year-old son and I started talking to him about sex several years ago. When you think he has absorbed information, you later find out he really did not. If he had sex with a girl today, he would not fully understand the risks. He doesn't understand the risks in many things he does. Teens process information differently than adults do. Mentally he is not prepared. Will he be at 13? I don't know, but it won't be because of a lack of access to information. I don't want some uncaring teacher to undo what I am trying to do - they need to tell him to talk to me.

Okay, but you've got to know, that list of wants and don't-wants just gave Sarah Palin the vapors. You're VASTLY VASTLY VASTLY more liberal than she is regarding sex education. The gulf between your views and hers are VAST. There's just no other word for it.

I know you don't know what her positions are but support her positions anyway, but... I suggest that it might be wise of you to educate yourself on a politician before hitching yourself to the letter that follows their name.

You will have to show me, I have not found where her position differs that much. I know her view is that sex should come after marriage, but that is her view on sex in general and I don't care if a person is married or not. My message to my son is to find a partner you can trust. Trust is earned.

Source: Eagle Forum 2006 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire Jul 31, 2006

From Wikipedia, the article on abstinence-until-marriage education, which redirects to abstinence-only sex education:
And just in case you still want to argue terms, from later in the same article, emphasis mine:
It's not just her view. Title V sex education programs are required to push the only safe option being sex in a marriage--not a committed relationship, marriage.

Not my job. I despair of anyone ever successfully showing you anything.

Of course you haven't. :rolleyes:

...Except where it comes to Republican politicians, evidently.