Government to teach children how to have safe sex? Is this for REAL? (Opinion)

March 18, 2009

by George Vogt

North Texas (MetroCatholic) - I ran across some information through the mainstream media today regarding “the REAL Act”, which stands for Responsible Education About Life. 

Apparently, this has been flying below my radar. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) were set to formally introduce a bill yesterday that would authorize federal funding for so-called “comprehensive sex education”. I have yet to confirm that the bill was indeed introduced.

Of course this is another attack on our youth in the guise of “helping” them. Supporters of this bill attack abstinence programs, calling them “ineffective” and those who promote them as “misleading”.

Said Lautenberg, “Growing up isn’t easy and our young people find themselves in tough situations every day. They need all the information to make smart choices, and ‘abstinence-only’ programs simply aren’t working. It’s time for our nation’s young people to get the education they need to take on the real life situations facing them every day”

Isn’t the “smart choice” abstinence? And the rhetoric about “taking on real life situations facing them every day” makes it sound so critical that, once again, the almighty government needs to come to the rescue. Government needs to bail out our children, I suppose, and take its rightful place in teaching them that morality just doesn’t work. Wow!

And from Lee, “It’s time for us to get real about sex education. We should absolutely be teaching young people about abstinence, but we shouldn’t be holding back information that can save lives and prevent unwanted pregnancies. Instead of ‘abstinence only,’ what we’re proposing is ‘abstinence-plus.”

Let’s see…if a person abstains, how does that put them in a position which requires life-saving? Additionally, if one abstains, it is the ONLY sure way to avoid pregnancy, save the Incarnation. “Abstinence-plus”? No, the key here is Lee’s referral to so-called “unwanted pregnancies”. It is just another way to say that having children is a problem and an inconvenience. Undoubtedly, this terminology would be a central theme to such “education”. Its use tells our children that pregnancy is not something wonderful and beautiful, but simply an obstacle to an enjoyable life for themselves.

I can hear the argument now. “Well, they are going to do it anyway, we should teach them how to be ’safe’.”  Ha! Safe? Well, you know your teens are going to drink alcohol right? Come on, you were a teen once too. So, why not just tell them to be “safe” about it. Go ahead, let the school teach them. Better yet, let the school hand out free beer! That will do the trick. We can just tell them to be careful with the beer and not to drive after drinking. Wow! Isn’t it wonderful how the school just saved their lives?

“But we have to teach them about STD’s!” Great! Show them pictures of what STD’s do to the human body. Show them video interviews with people who have STD’s to show that the effects go beyond the physical. Don’t thik that you are doing them a service by giving them a false sense of security through false teaching.

Advocates for Youth President, James Wagoner says, “The REAL Act is a necessary first step if we are serious about providing young people the important education and information they need to make responsible decisions about their sexual and reproductive health.”

There you have it. This is the “first” step. What’s next?

I’ll give you a hint. “NARAL Pro-Choice America” loves this bill and is actively lobbying for it’s passage.

Comments

7 Responses to “Government to teach children how to have safe sex? Is this for REAL? (Opinion)”

  1. Scott on March 18th, 2009 6:04 pm

    This act, which has been in fact introduced, is a wonderful update to this country’s sex-ed programs. The Sex-ed class I took in highschool, if you can call it that, was woefully inadequate. We learned about the reproductive organs and then jumped straight to gestation and birth. No mention was even made about sex. When a student asked about condoms the teacher spouted something about not being allowed to talk about them. Studies have shown that abstinence-only sex-ed does not work. When people are told that condoms are ineffective they just don’t use them, they don’t refrain from having sex. A recent study shows that even people who make pledges to refrain from sex are just as likely to have sex as the general population but are less likely to use condoms.

    This act is a good thing.

  2. Amy on March 19th, 2009 8:48 am

    The statement that abstinenence only education does not prevent teen pregnancy is not an attack, it is a fact based on research.
    I’m sorry that the research does not make what you believe in look like the most effective way to prevent teen pregnancy, but you’d best wake up and realize that what you believe DOES NOT WORK. Simply saying that it works does not make it a fact, you need research to prove your point and research does not support your point of view.
    Instead of taking that personally, I suggest that you start believing in things that are based in FACT, instead of opinion.

  3. Victor on March 19th, 2009 11:11 am

    If your abstinence only education program’s sole moving idea was “If you aren’t ready to be a parent, then don’t have sex”, then the program was pretty sad indeed, though probably not uncommon. It is not surprising that individuals who have not followed through on their pledges to abstain from sex have the same likelihood of conception as others. I would argue that children tend to follow the examples they grow up around, and that there is more “success” with abstinence only programs when there is higher consistent parental involvement. After all, anyone will admit it that following through with abstinence today far more difficult and less popular than just slipping on condoms.

    The self-defeating aspect of contraception-based education is that it breeds promiscuity that relies on technology to solve the “problem”-aka pregnancy. It tells people to do whatever they want and to just trust a pill, diaphragm, or a thin layer of latex in a condom. Aside from feeding this false notion of responsibility to individuals, the mathematics alone exposes the false hope in contraceptives.

    Feeding promiscuity only brings that 1 in 100 chance of pregnancy to a certainty as people have more and more sex over time. And when people reach the end of their sexual luck and conceive a child, the false hope in the statistics of contraception vanishes as the fear of pregnancy rapidly sets in. Hence, the mutually profitable relationship between the contraceptive and abortion industries reveals itself. The oxymoron with contraceptive-based sex education is that it invests in products, services, and technology-not in building up people holistically (which is what education is truly about).

    Isn’t it clearer how a poor abstinence only program and a strong contraceptive-based program have similar results? They both build on a a fear of unintended pregnancy (and responsibility), which need not be so if support exists for pregnant women and new fathers.

    The right solution is in a strong, community-based program that does not build itself on fear and false promises. The real solution is the education that fully explains and embraces the true purpose of sex (intimacy and procreation).

    Let’s acknowledge that technology and statistics do not save humanity from an Epicurean sexuality. The path of personal integrity and sexual responsibility is more difficult, but so much more worthwhile and an integral part of the solution to this modern sexual crisis.

    Peace!

  4. Amy on March 20th, 2009 9:35 am

    Actually, research shows that those who do not follow through on their pledges to remain abstinent are actually MORE likely to conceive, since they know nothing about the proper use of contraceptives. Were Victor to actually look at the mathematics, he would see that his statement is false. As it stands Victor is pulling numbers out of thin air (a 1 in 100 chance of getting pregant increasing over time? The odds are much higher, starting the first time intercourse begins and depending on the female’s cycle, which means that these odds vary over time, they do not increase).
    The only relationship between the contraceptive and abortion industries is that, when more contraception is used, less abortion takes place. This is a solid fact reflected in every scientific survey of populations around the world both before and after contaceptives are introduced. Refer to the World Health Organization’s website to see for yourself, they have been tracking this for some time.
    Victor is correct in that the right solution is a program that does not rely on false promises, andabstinence-only education IS a false promise the majority of the time, therefore ineffective. Technology and statistics do not save humanity from an Epicurean sexuality, but in this case as in many others (I’m sure you have all benefitted from Science the last time you saw a dr.) they do help prevent that society from illness, disease, and death. That sounds useful to me.

  5. Dr. Tangent on March 22nd, 2009 6:04 pm

    You may still teach your children to abstain from sex in your home, but now the children will have to learn about this particular fact of life. Not teaching them doesn’t make sex go away.

  6. George Vogt on March 24th, 2009 9:29 am

    To the point exactly! NONE of this should be taught in school. However, if it is, then the only true and safe methods should be taught. That is abstinence.

    If one wants to provide their child with contraceptives and misleading information, they can do that in their own home as well.

  7. Amy on March 25th, 2009 9:48 am

    If you want to teach teens abstinence only values, that should be done at home. Making everyone in America follow your abstinence only values creates a public health problem because abstinence only ideals do not prevent teen pregnancy or lower STD rates, but increases them.
    All evidence points to contraceptive education being more effective at keeping teens from having sex, getting pregnant, or catching STD’s.
    Denying that fact is equal to LYING. Isn’t lying a sin? Especially lying to cover up the truth? Shame on you.

Got something to say?





Home | About | Archives | Advertising | Contact | Privacy Policy

MetroCatholic, Inc · 5604 Belton Ln. · Suite 400 · McKinney, TX 75070
Ph. (972) 400-2423 · Fax (888) 248-7696

The sites and respective links above offer additional information on the Catholic faith. Please note that DFW Catholic is not officially associated with any of these sites and is unable to effectively monitor all information contained therein. Please use your own judgement when visiting these or any websites. If you find information that is objectionable, contact us.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish an article without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "MetroCatholic". Any Internet re-publishing of original MetroCatholic articles MUST additionally include a live link to http://www.dfwcatholic.org. Republishing of articles on DFWCatholic.org that have come from other news sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources. MetroCatholic may at times publish content that is taken from the internet and thus considered to be in the public domain. Anyone contrary to the publication of said content need only to contact the editorial office which will immediately proceed to remove the content.