I continually read "abstinence" in this Counterpoint. That is good when followed. It did for me. However, not everyone has the larger support group that some do. Without that, abstinence may not be the easiest way to avoid a pregnancy. I am a firm believer that there needs to be some form of birth control information/device available as well.

So, what does the FLC say on this?

Shalom

Darryl,
The "Wise Guys" program was one of the first to identify and work with "at risk" males rather than just females, as had been the model. It is not just abstinence, but teaches RESPONSIBILITY for getting a girl pregnant and how to avoid the pitfalls.

The Family Life Council:
Years ago, I was on the board of this great United Way Agency, and it is truly one of our hidden jewels. I hope Cyndy, Emilie and the others keep doing this great work.

TLC, while I did not intend to critique the "Wise Guys" program in quite the way I did; I just fine it hypocritical to only speak of abstinence in this Counterpoint.

TLC, you and I both know that AFTER getting pregnant is too late to talk about NOT having sex or having SAFER sex!

That is my point here. I applaud this program and what it does for the young people who become associated with it. However, talking with these "at risk" young people about abstinence and nothing else seems futile. Both of us know that this sex (un)education formula is practically useless. Look at what has transpired with the Crawford Clown administration using it!

I am just a strong advocate for offering all of the options that are there for people, regardless of age. Who knows, it may be your own children and family (anyone's) who are spared a circumstance such as unexpected pregnancy. (I prefer this term over "unwanted." That really seems harsh to think of a child in that manner.)

Shalom

`

Darryl,
I am with you 100% on sex education. Funny how all the "anti-abortion" folks are also "anti birth control" or at least against teaching it in school.
Catholic Church should be ashamed of themselves for opposing the handout of condoms in Africa! Guess they just want more deaths from disease. I'd have a lot more respect for the "pro-lifers" if they would embrace birth control and the teaching of birth control.

`

I don't think I'm in the minority but I'm against abortion as a form of birth control but I'm not against all forms of birth control. I think condoms are the best because they do offer some protection against std's.

However, condoms are not fool-proof and I do not disagree with teaching abstinence.

Abstinence is about 100% protection against STD's as well as pregnancy. Perhaps even more importantly than phsyical health matters to many people, a lot of folks are also interested in protecting their children against the spiritual and emotional consequences of becoming sexually active before they are ready.

Condoms don't protect you from God's judgement nor do they protect you from the emotional fall-out of becoming sexually active too soon.

It is logical to me that trying to convince an adolescent to remain abstinent while at the same time handing them a condom is sending mixed messages.

Like the analogy I used before, it's like telling kids to not smoke week but handing them rolling papers. Not the best analogy. Perhaps telling them to not shoot up heroin but giving them a clean needle in case they do.

I have absolutely zero problem with someone teaching kids about birth control. However, sometimes that teaching can implicitly condone sex in the child's mind. That's where we have to be very careful.

I can understand why those who are truly against children having premarital sex might not want to incorporate birth control methods in their agenda.

Before the 'nutso rightwing extremist ultra religous fanatic' labels start flying, let me just add one more thing.

Everybody has different beliefs. Demonizing ones that you disagree with shows more about your tolerance than anything.

On the subject of abortion, I'm pro-life. However, like most things, I do see many sides to it that give me compassion to those who have had to be in that situation before.

But before you judge those who you deem as fanatics when it comes to abortion, ask yourself this question:

If you truly believed that killing an unborn child (or fetus or whatever you wanna call it) was the same as killing a 3 year old, would you act fanatical?

`

Nit,
Your "pre=emptive" caveats are laughable. If you were so cocksure of yourself, as you try to pose, then no caveats would have to be offered. Handing out condoms is not like handing out rolling papers. Are you so old as not to remember the "God given" sex drive of a teenager? Oh, and if you believe that sex drive is NOT God given, then I might as well hang up on you! If you think giving a boy a condom is gonna make him have sex, then give him Bible, and that will make him a preacher. Whew! It's not about disagreement, it is about lunacy plain and simple! Not every child comes from a "Leave it to Beaver" family like you, Vernon Robinson and others would have the world believe. If they are going to engage in high risk activities such as SEX, don't you at least want them to KNOW how to be safe? Or do you want them to get a girl pregnant so you and others can protest down at the clinic when they try to undo the process? Get a grip and try to think logically and with an eye toward problem solving, not self righteous condemnation. If you oppose abortion, then try to prevent teen pregnancy! It ain't rocket science!

`

~

Oh, and while we are focusing on hypocrisy and lunacy, let's take a look at the latest "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Family values" politician to go down. (pardon the pun!)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/28/politics/main3211447.shtml

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/28/craig.arrest/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/

Unbelieveable!! He seems to be saying, "No, I'm NOT Gay, but I do like playing footsie with other men in the airport crapper!" Good old pro family values Republicans--Ted Haggard, Mark Foley, Coy Privette, Jimmy Swaggert...and on, and on, and on.

"Family Values Republicans"--The Gift that Keeps On Giving!!

`

I do not believe that it is the "handing a young man a condom" scenario. That is not what I was intending by my previous comments. Rather, I would that young men had access to a condom/s should he feel the need to have one handy.

I would rather a young man carry a condom in his wallet till it rotted and not be needed than to need one and not have one, nor access to one. And access does not necessarily mean the local convenience mart, Wal-Mart, etc.

How many father's of a daughter would rather the young man whom this young lady is choosing to be intimate with have a condom? Regardless of what/how you feel about that "daughter," it happens. And it EVEN happens in the "best" of family's!

That is my point, having access and communicating these things in ways that these young people can understand. I have had conversations with twenty-somethings and was using "proper" terminology. I was told that was not necessary! Which relieved me greatly knowing that I could be more open and speak plainly. Plus, that young person knew that I was not some "prude" either!

It was a refreshing conversation as well!

Shalom

`

Darryl,
Good points.
The problem arises when the moralists, such as "nitpicker" and other want to place some made up version of morality on a cross section of people. If those folks don't want their children to learn about birth control, they can "opt out", just as we have had our children "opt out" from giving their names and information to military recruiters through the schools. These moralists have little or no interest in the health, and wellness of our children, rather they only want to place their myopic religious views upon the whole of society. If that is what they truly want, then they can go live in an Islamic Country. Nitpicker just blows like the wind when it comes to this type issue, trying to frame the issue with biblical certitude, but allowing for his own personal "wiggle" room in case the bible thumpers come down hard on him. Makes for a funny divergence.

`