Teaching abstinence to anyone is great, especially to inner-city youth. I am a strong supporter of abstinence myself for my own reasons, but I would never try to impose my views upon anyone else. This article claims that teaching abstinence prevented the start of sexual activity in 6th and 7th graders. While that is all fine and dandy, it does not prove that it will have the same effects on teenagers, the real target of this class. Teenagers are known to be rebellious. If you tell them not to do something, you might as well have told them to go out and do it! A class teaching abstinence will just make inexperienced teens all the more curious about what it is they are missing. While I do not believe that an abstinence-only class will have a major impact on youth, I do believe that talks abut abstinence with parents and friends will be productive. A child learns what they believe to be right and wrong in the home first. If topics like this are discussed early on, then there will be no need for an intervention right on the cusp of a teen’s “Spring Awakening”. We should stop acting as if such topics are taboo, and explain to children the gravity of having sex at an early age. Teens and pre-teens respect frankness, therefore, I believe that straight-forwardness is the way to go. There is no need for spending federal money on unnecessary classes; instead, the government should invest that money in condoms at local clinics for the rebels. -Monique Mitchell
According to this article, teaching abstinence to inner city youth is the best alternative method for prolonging sexual intercouse until a more mature age. As a result of research and findings, after abstinence was taught to youth that were in sixth through seventh grades it was discovered that more than half of them had waited two years after being taught, to engage in sexual intercourse. This was far better than people in the past years.
It is believed that the abstinence class will have the same affect on teens as it had on the sixth through seventh graders. I agree with this approach of teaching abstinence to teens and those younger because it has been proven that speaking with youth at a younger age will help instill the information in their mind and have a greater impact on them. It is better to teach abstinence because it helps eliminate the chances of youth attracting sexually transmitted diseases. When their are sex aid classes their is a great chance of people attracting certain diseases because there are lessons and distributons of condoms which sometimes encourages youth to have sex. The safest way not to attract diseases is by not engaging in sexual activity. -Lorina Kegler
Abstinence is a great thing to be promoted, especially to the young teens today. Although the article says that teaching abstinence to the inner city youth is the best alternative method to help prolong sexual intercourse but I dont fully agree that it should be a class in schools. Once a teenager has gotten a certain age its pretty difficult to convince them not to do something that all of there friends are doing. Unfortunately students are peer pressured into doing things when they're in high school, so having a class that talks about abstinence would be pure comedy and would not really stop anyone from having sex. To be quite honest, nowadays young teenagers are peer pressured and dont fit in because everyone is doing things they arent necessarily supposed to be doing. Some teenagers feel they have to lie and say they have had sexual intercourse to fit in or pressured into doing so for a guy to like them. I dont think the class will necessarily delay the course but it will only make those who havent, curious to know more. Due to society and how celebrities, tv shows, music etc. all promote sex because sex sells, it makes it difficult for teens to save themselves when they live in a orgy world. Some may argue that the abstinence class would have an affect on teens, which is true but it depends on the age of the teen. Sure sex would be gross to some sixth and seventh graders, but when you instill information to them it has a greater impact. I'd rather them have available condoms for teens to keep themselves safe, rather than telling them not to do something because in actuality telling a teen they cant do something is just like telling them to do it. Its rediculous that some have a mentatlity like that but its whats going on right now in many of our neighborhood high schools. Although I dont think an abstinence class is necessary to add to school course, abstinence is the way to avoid pregnancy and sexual transmitted diseases. Yes, condoms are supposed to be for protection but to be 100% protected is to not have sex at all.
I do believe in abstinenec and agree with this op-ed about teaching abstinence to inner-city students especially at the young grades of sixth and seventh since the age of having sex is getting lower each generation. I agree that abstinence should be talked about as being important especially in the inner-city communities where there are high rates of STD'S and teenage pregnancies. Even though I do believe in teaching abstinence, there should more importantly be the teaching of protection to the young inner-city students. Although abstinence is very important, many young students especially in a sex driven society that we have now will not fully commit to abstinence unless they are strong enough to deal with peer pressure or if they have strong family based morals on staying abstinence and even with having strong family based morals, a person may fall into having sex. The teaching of abstinence will be important because at a young age, many students especially in inner-cities will be able to learn about not only protection as beinga safe route, but also how being abstinence can help keep yourself from dealing with the case of and STD or a teenage pregnancy.
Having a class to teach abstinence only to sixth and seventh grades is a great idea. Even though condoms are supposed to be 99.9% effective the only true way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases is to practice abstinence. Through the study it is proven that after two years only a third of the student who partook in the class engaged in sexual intercourse as compared to half of the student who did not receive the class that engaged in sexual intercourse. However, I do not feel this same program would have an equal effect on children of a high school age. In middle school children are still learning and tend to believe what is told to them. By high school kids have started to develop their own opinions and make their own decision. In today’s society teenagers are being perverted by television, music and the internet exposing them to so much sexually explicit content. With all of this sex put in front of them, teenagers believe everyone is doing it so they must to. After already having this mindset, a class to teach abstinence would be futile. The teenagers would take it as a joke because it goes against their norms, and would outcast them from their peers. If the government wants to spend federal money on an abstinence class they should do it in the middle school age range where results are proven, and not waste their money on a high school class that would not produce results.
I agree with the notion of teaching abstinence in schools. In my opinion teaching abstinence may be able to delay or prolong sexual activity within youth. It is never too late to teach teenagers about the positives of abstinence. Some fail to realize that many teenagers will be more open to not just embracing abstincence, but healthy lifestyles when exposed to the harms associated with STD's. Many minority students of low-income schools are not available to sexual-health resources within many higher-income surburbian schools.Should abstinence programs be introduced into said schools the students are able to retain important information concerning sexual health.Thereby, the chances are increased of younger students and older students refraining from sexual activity to decrease teenage pregnany rates .Also, I think it is important for teachers to express the dangers of promiscuity and of Sexually transmitted diseases and infections. African-Americans and Latino Americans represent the highest percentages of those infected with HIV/Aids, chlamydia, and herpes. These disproportionate percentages construe stereotypes for minorities and predict patterns of future generations to come. In some eyes, these percentages represent minorirites as a whole and the paraded notion is now that the federal government should not fund abstinence programs because obviously they are not effective if these percentages continue to increase. This argument may earn some merit in certain situations, but not enough to make the hasty generalization in concuding that these programs are ineffective. Whether many believe it, not all Hispanic Americans and African-American youth are living to be reflected into these stereotypes, and these programs will continue to help these students even if it appears that they are overshawdowed by statistics.
I agree with the notion that teaching abstinence in schools is an effective method of greatly reducing sexual intercourse at a young age. In my opinion teaching abstinence has the potential of delaying or prolonging sexual activity within the younger generation, especially if it is advised to wait until a more “mature” age, and not until marriage. I know if I was in 6th and 7th grade and approached with this option, the mentioning of abstinence until marriage would intimidate me, but preaching of its positive attributes and the request of prolonging until a mature age I would be able to connect with.
I believe that this method of sexual prevention will be much more effective with children of a younger demographic. The 6th and 7th grade is pivotal time in the maturing process of children, if you are able to instill these morals into a child who is just formulating and acting upon their opinions of sexual relationships it will have a much bigger effect. Many kids aren’t aware of the possible repercussions of sex, and children who now and days draw more influence from music and television than their parents will have even more of a biased opinion of it. Many children can name different sex positions because of their favorite Plies song, but have no idea of what an STD even is. Awareness always results in caution, which is why I believe that this will help the youth, especially those in the inner city.
I do agree with the author of the article and believe that having a program will be effective however, it should be enforced and discussed in their home as well as school in order for it to be very effective. One of the biggest contributions to the high sex rate of teengers are mainly because the parents really don't like to talk to their kids about it commonly because they are uncomfortable with it but it shows when the child gets older. I agree that it is good to start discussing these things with 6st and 7th graders while they make the transition through puberty. Instilling this awareness while they're young could help them when they get older if they choose to involved themselves in sexual activies and if they do decide to for them to at least be aware of all the risk and precautions that come along with having sex. Inner-city kids tend to be those that are expose to sex at a early age anyway through the media and the daily music that they listen to so its good to instill these risk and factors in them while they are young so when they are exposed to it they have already formulated their opinion about sex already. Asia
The claim put forth in the article is that the decision to promote abstinence-only sex education as a result of the the data from the study, is a, "...willfull misreading of the implications of [the] study."
I disagree with the claim. I believe that the facts are the facts and are not to be disputed. One cannot argue against the information simply because they do not want abstinence-only sex education.
I believe that sex education should be taught separate from any bias. I see it as a black and white issue. "These are the actions...These are the consequences and possible benefits..." In my opinion, sex education should be a presentation of facts, and a discussion of those facts among the students.
From there, students should be allowed to make their own choices. I also do believe that students should be able to ask questions of people who made the choice to have sex outside of committment, and those who did not. This would help them decide on their own, whether or not they will have sex period, inside or outside of a committed relationship.
I also believe that in this progressive world, children know a lot more than they are given credit for, and we need not treat them as though they are mindless. We should not treat sex as a forbidden conversation, because that is what causes many to not ask questions, and instead, jump into sexual activity. We should treat the sex conversation as an open door, and be willing to share information honestly and openly.
In regards to middle school students, studies have proven that abstinence-only programs have achieved the greatest results for delaying sexual activity. However, under the Obama administration compromise would have to made. A shift would have to implemented from their previous approach to a abstinence-until-marriage approach--which both encourages students to "wait until they were more mature" and provides knowledge of pregnancy and STD prevention. Teaching abstinence is an essential part of the development of 6th and 7th graders, but standing alone, these methods are unbeneficial.
Sexual activity may have been delayed, but it was not prevented. These students waited longer to engage in these activities, but entered them less prepared because of their previous abstinence-only teachings. In the long run, this lack of knowledge of prevention methods will be detrimental to the outcome of their life, and the lives they may produce in the future, through teenage pregnancy. I believe that if overall prevention of sexual activity is not the outcome of the program, then safer sex techniques must be added to the curriculum in order to achieve a program that is beneficial to the long-term lifespan of the student. Ultimately, the students overall well-being needs to be taken into consideration, rather than the short-term gratification attained through the abstinence-only program.
In the article, “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author reports the findings of a study conducted in Philadelphia which enrolled black middle school students in four different types of sexual education courses; measuring which was most successful in terms of how many students chose to delay sexual activity. It was the abstinence only group that was found most successful, and as a result of these findings Obama is being urged to restore federal funding to the abstinence only education programs begun under the Bush administration. The author of the article however, believes this is a misinterpretation of the study, citing that the program in the study taught practical measures for remaining abstinent, whereas the government funded programs preached rigid ideology-based curriculum; a key difference that the author believes dictates one program’s success and the other’s failure.
I agree that though both programs advocate abstinence, their differing methodologies do have great bearing on their rate of success. Youth are more apt to be receptive to programs that engage them and provide logical reasons for abstaining until a more mature age, rather than programs that demand they abstain until marriage on the basis of moral righteousness. Even if the latter’s philosophy was accepted by some, its effects only last as long as an individual’s will power, whereas programs such as the one in the study provide an education that will serve as a foundation for a healthy choices throughout the individual’s life.
However, it is my personal opinion that youth should be exposed to all manners of safe and healthy contraception as well as STD prevention, instead of only abstinence, so that in the event that they choose to engage in sexual activity, they are aware of their options.
I agree that teaching inner city youth to be abstinent is a effective way to keep children from either becoming pregnant or receiving a sexually transmitted disease. I believe that the idea of creating programs that enforce the delay of sexual activity is a safe and important for all youth. Not only will the choice to not have sex at a young age be wise, but overall it'll be beneficial for them. For children to be taught this as 6th and 7th graders could possibly keep them from having sex until they're "more mature" or engaged to be married. Some students might be mislead by older siblings or an influential figure that they admire. Their peers may inform them that sex is cool and being a 6th or 7th grader does not matter. Children may attend the abstinence classes and learn about the "benefits" of not having sex, but ultimately it is their choice. Overall, I believe that in most cases students would do as they please regardless of the programs they attend. The only thing that the administrators' of the programs can do is present the information to the students and pray that they use good judgment before choosing to have sexual intercourse. -Jay Carter
In this op-ed, the author puts forth the notion that teaching abstinence to inner city children in grades 6 and 7 can prolong sexual activity until they are "more mature". I agree with the author about being able to prolong sexual activity in the youth of the inner city but I disagree with the fact that it was a class. Although the teaching and practicing of abstinence is important, it cannot be forced upon a person because it is a choice that the individual has to make. One must be open-minded and ready to receive these values. Teaching these children to abstain from sex until they are mature enough to handle it can be both a good and bad idea. On the positive side, they will wait until they are mature enough. But on the other hand, everyone has a different definition of what maturity is and when a person becomes mature. When they think they are mature enough to handle being sexually active, they still might not be. But one can only hope and pray that every one of the students thinks things through, makes wise decisions, and uses good judgment before having sex, or stays abstinent until marriage.
In the article “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author presents the study of a group of youth undergoing an abstinence course to reduce their probability of becoming sexually active. The study found that the group of students who were taught the logical and hard facts of the risks of becoming sexually active was more likely to remain abstinent. Although this study has come out, conservative politicians and supporters are pushing Obama’s administration to continue Bush’s ideological approach to abstinence, “No Sex Before Marriage!” Well I’m sorry to say to all of the idealist out there but touting around the gospel of no sex before marriage no longer works for children. Teenagers today just aren’t as afraid of the moralistic repercussions as they were years back. I believe that it is best to tell students the proven evidence of where sex can land them. Having the knowledge that performing sexual acts can lead to things such as contracting STD’s, pregnancy, and in extreme cases death, just resonates with children more. It scares teens into being more careful with their bodies and makes them more of the realities of sexual activities. When we separate the fantasy of sex with the reality of it people get a better understanding. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that having the strength and intelligence to save sex for marriage is a lot more beneficial for the youth; I feel that it’s more logical to continue abstinence only programs and leave our idealist values at the door. Let the parents do something for once.
In the article, “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author reveals his findings on a study taken on children in the sixth and seventh grade involving the teaching of abstinence as a way of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. I agree with the claim that the author puts forth regarding teaching abstinence in children. I feel that teaching abstinence is the only effective way to delay sexual activity in children rather than the use of contraceptives such as condoms. This article shows the benefits of teaching abstinence to children in middle school but I don’t feel as though this study would have the same effect on students that are in high school. It is obvious that teenagers are the main focus in this case. Due to the fact that most teenagers have already developed their opinions on certain issues I don’t feel as though having classes on abstinence could change their thoughts and opinions but it could be somewhat effective. Only having classes at school to teach children about abstinence and the negative effects of having sexual intercourse before marriage isn’t as effective as it would be if the parents got more involved in what is going on with their children. In order for classes to be fully effective parents need to be more involved with their children in order to help them make better decisions.
Although the author argued that teaching "abstinence-only" courses to students in grades six and seven successfully encourages them to abstain from sex, I believe that this approach will not completely do the job that it is intended to do. Especially amongst teens that have already engaged in sexual intercourse, teaching abstinence simply will not reach out to them. In those cases, it will be more effective to promote safer sex, including the use of contraceptives and safety precautions. However, I do believe that teaching younger children abstinence will reach out to them at a time when their minds are most vulnerable and open to learning and adopting new skills and qualities. I do think that when the students reach a certain point in which they have already learned about sex and have begun to fuel their curiosities, adults should simply promote safer sex. There comes a time in each teen's life in which they decide that they are going to do whatever the want to do, so keeping that in mind, adults should simply allow the teens a safer way to do what they want. That way, instead of being blind to the facts, they are helping teens make better choices. When the audience is younger and more open to learning new things, abstinence being taught would not be such a bad thing.
I believe that abstinence is something that should definitely be promoted, especially to the inner-city youth. Abstinence is a good alternative to help prolong sexual intercourse, but that does not mean that it will necessarily work. These days peer pressure is a very big issue. Teens are pressured into doing things that they would not usually do, and they take part in the acts so they can be part of the popular or “in” crowd. When students hear the word sex they find humor in it and don’t focus on the lesson that is being taught. If an abstinence course is taught and the intent would be to inform teens and prevent them from having sexual intercourse, I think that it would lead the students to be more curious. Yes, there is the risk of getting a sexually transmitted disease, but when you are constantly showered with provocative images on television, movies, billboards, commercials, etc., it leads them to want to know more. There is also the idea that you must have sex in order to fit in. Guys have it harder than girls when it comes to sex because by the time you make it to high school. They share their sex stories. You either have the choice of making a story up and trying to have the best, going out and having sex to have a real story, or just admitting that you are a virgin. If taught to middle school students, I think that they will retain the helpful information better than the high school students. -Adia Brady
Teaching abstinence to anyone is great, especially to inner-city youth. I am a strong supporter of abstinence myself for my own reasons, but I would never try to impose my views upon anyone else. This article claims that teaching abstinence prevented the start of sexual activity in 6th and 7th graders. While that is all fine and dandy, it does not prove that it will have the same effects on teenagers, the real target of this class. Teenagers are known to be rebellious. If you tell them not to do something, you might as well have told them to go out and do it! A class teaching abstinence will just make inexperienced teens all the more curious about what it is they are missing.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not believe that an abstinence-only class will have a major impact on youth, I do believe that talks abut abstinence with parents and friends will be productive. A child learns what they believe to be right and wrong in the home first. If topics like this are discussed early on, then there will be no need for an intervention right on the cusp of a teen’s “Spring Awakening”. We should stop acting as if such topics are taboo, and explain to children the gravity of having sex at an early age. Teens and pre-teens respect frankness, therefore, I believe that straight-forwardness is the way to go. There is no need for spending federal money on unnecessary classes; instead, the government should invest that money in condoms at local clinics for the rebels. -Monique Mitchell
According to this article, teaching abstinence to inner city youth is the best alternative method for prolonging sexual intercouse until a more mature age. As a result of research and findings, after abstinence was taught to youth that were in sixth through seventh grades it was discovered that more than half of them had waited two years after being taught, to engage in sexual intercourse. This was far better than people in the past years.
ReplyDeleteIt is believed that the abstinence class will have the same affect on teens as it had on the sixth through seventh graders. I agree with this approach of teaching abstinence to teens and those younger because it has been proven that speaking with youth at a younger age will help instill the information in their mind and have a greater impact on them. It is better to teach abstinence because it helps eliminate the chances of youth attracting sexually transmitted diseases. When their are sex aid classes their is a great chance of people attracting certain diseases because there are lessons and distributons of condoms which sometimes encourages youth to have sex. The safest way not to attract diseases is by not engaging in sexual activity.
-Lorina Kegler
Abstinence is a great thing to be promoted, especially to the young teens today. Although the article says that teaching abstinence to the inner city youth is the best alternative method to help prolong sexual intercourse but I dont fully agree that it should be a class in schools. Once a teenager has gotten a certain age its pretty difficult to convince them not to do something that all of there friends are doing. Unfortunately students are peer pressured into doing things when they're in high school, so having a class that talks about abstinence would be pure comedy and would not really stop anyone from having sex. To be quite honest, nowadays young teenagers are peer pressured and dont fit in because everyone is doing things they arent necessarily supposed to be doing. Some teenagers feel they have to lie and say they have had sexual intercourse to fit in or pressured into doing so for a guy to like them. I dont think the class will necessarily delay the course but it will only make those who havent, curious to know more. Due to society and how celebrities, tv shows, music etc. all promote sex because sex sells, it makes it difficult for teens to save themselves when they live in a orgy world.
ReplyDeleteSome may argue that the abstinence class would have an affect on teens, which is true but it depends on the age of the teen. Sure sex would be gross to some sixth and seventh graders, but when you instill information to them it has a greater impact. I'd rather them have available condoms for teens to keep themselves safe, rather than telling them not to do something because in actuality telling a teen they cant do something is just like telling them to do it. Its rediculous that some have a mentatlity like that but its whats going on right now in many of our neighborhood high schools. Although I dont think an abstinence class is necessary to add to school course, abstinence is the way to avoid pregnancy and sexual transmitted diseases. Yes, condoms are supposed to be for protection but to be 100% protected is to not have sex at all.
I do believe in abstinenec and agree with this op-ed about teaching abstinence to inner-city students especially at the young grades of sixth and seventh since the age of having sex is getting lower each generation. I agree that abstinence should be talked about as being important especially in the inner-city communities where there are high rates of STD'S and teenage pregnancies.
ReplyDeleteEven though I do believe in teaching abstinence, there should more importantly be the teaching of protection to the young inner-city students. Although abstinence is very important, many young students especially in a sex driven society that we have now will not fully commit to abstinence unless they are strong enough to deal with peer pressure or if they have strong family based morals on staying abstinence and even with having strong family based morals, a person may fall into having sex. The teaching of abstinence will be important because at a young age, many students especially in inner-cities will be able to learn about not only protection as beinga safe route, but also how being abstinence can help keep yourself from dealing with the case of and STD or a teenage pregnancy.
Having a class to teach abstinence only to sixth and seventh grades is a great idea. Even though condoms are supposed to be 99.9% effective the only true way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases is to practice abstinence. Through the study it is proven that after two years only a third of the student who partook in the class engaged in sexual intercourse as compared to half of the student who did not receive the class that engaged in sexual intercourse.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do not feel this same program would have an equal effect on children of a high school age. In middle school children are still learning and tend to believe what is told to them. By high school kids have started to develop their own opinions and make their own decision. In today’s society teenagers are being perverted by television, music and the internet exposing them to so much sexually explicit content. With all of this sex put in front of them, teenagers believe everyone is doing it so they must to. After already having this mindset, a class to teach abstinence would be futile. The teenagers would take it as a joke because it goes against their norms, and would outcast them from their peers. If the government wants to spend federal money on an abstinence class they should do it in the middle school age range where results are proven, and not waste their money on a high school class that would not produce results.
I agree with the notion of teaching abstinence in schools. In my opinion teaching abstinence may be able to delay or prolong sexual activity within youth. It is never too late to teach teenagers about the positives of abstinence. Some fail to realize that many teenagers will be more open to not just embracing abstincence, but healthy lifestyles when exposed to the harms associated with STD's. Many minority students of low-income schools are not available to sexual-health resources within many higher-income surburbian schools.Should abstinence programs be introduced into said schools the students are able to retain important information concerning sexual health.Thereby, the chances are increased of younger students and older students refraining from sexual activity to decrease teenage pregnany rates .Also, I think it is important for teachers to express the dangers of promiscuity and of Sexually transmitted diseases and infections. African-Americans and Latino Americans represent the highest percentages of those infected with HIV/Aids, chlamydia, and herpes. These disproportionate percentages construe stereotypes for minorities and predict patterns of future generations to come. In some eyes, these percentages represent minorirites as a whole and the paraded notion is now that the federal government should not fund abstinence programs because obviously they are not effective if these percentages continue to increase. This argument may earn some merit in certain situations, but not enough to make the hasty generalization in concuding that these programs are ineffective. Whether many believe it, not all Hispanic Americans and African-American youth are living to be reflected into these stereotypes, and these programs will continue to help these students even if it appears that they are overshawdowed by statistics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the notion that teaching abstinence in schools is an effective method of greatly reducing sexual intercourse at a young age. In my opinion teaching abstinence has the potential of delaying or prolonging sexual activity within the younger generation, especially if it is advised to wait until a more “mature” age, and not until marriage. I know if I was in 6th and 7th grade and approached with this option, the mentioning of abstinence until marriage would intimidate me, but preaching of its positive attributes and the request of prolonging until a mature age I would be able to connect with.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this method of sexual prevention will be much more effective with children of a younger demographic. The 6th and 7th grade is pivotal time in the maturing process of children, if you are able to instill these morals into a child who is just formulating and acting upon their opinions of sexual relationships it will have a much bigger effect. Many kids aren’t aware of the possible repercussions of sex, and children who now and days draw more influence from music and television than their parents will have even more of a biased opinion of it. Many children can name different sex positions because of their favorite Plies song, but have no idea of what an STD even is. Awareness always results in caution, which is why I believe that this will help the youth, especially those in the inner city.
I do agree with the author of the article and believe that having a program will be effective however, it should be enforced and discussed in their home as well as school in order for it to be very effective. One of the biggest contributions to the high sex rate of teengers are mainly because the parents really don't like to talk to their kids about it commonly because they are uncomfortable with it but it shows when the child gets older.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is good to start discussing these things with 6st and 7th graders while they make the transition through puberty. Instilling this awareness while they're young could help them when they get older if they choose to involved themselves in sexual activies and if they do decide to for them to at least be aware of all the risk and precautions that come along with having sex. Inner-city kids tend to be those that are expose to sex at a early age anyway through the media and the daily music that they listen to so its good to instill these risk and factors in them while they are young so when they are exposed to it they have already formulated their opinion about sex already.
Asia
The claim put forth in the article is that the decision to promote abstinence-only sex education as a result of the the data from the study, is a, "...willfull misreading of the implications of [the] study."
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the claim. I believe that the facts are the facts and are not to be disputed. One cannot argue against the information simply because they do not want abstinence-only sex education.
I believe that sex education should be taught separate from any bias. I see it as a black and white issue. "These are the actions...These are the consequences and possible benefits..." In my opinion, sex education should be a presentation of facts, and a discussion of those facts among the students.
From there, students should be allowed to make their own choices. I also do believe that students should be able to ask questions of people who made the choice to have sex outside of committment, and those who did not. This would help them decide on their own, whether or not they will have sex period, inside or outside of a committed relationship.
I also believe that in this progressive world, children know a lot more than they are given credit for, and we need not treat them as though they are mindless. We should not treat sex as a forbidden conversation, because that is what causes many to not ask questions, and instead, jump into sexual activity. We should treat the sex conversation as an open door, and be willing to share information honestly and openly.
-Talayne Gardiner
In regards to middle school students, studies have proven that abstinence-only programs have achieved the greatest results for delaying sexual activity. However, under the Obama administration compromise would have to made. A shift would have to implemented from their previous approach to a abstinence-until-marriage approach--which both encourages students to "wait until they were more mature" and provides knowledge of pregnancy and STD prevention. Teaching abstinence is an essential part of the development of 6th and 7th graders, but standing alone, these methods are unbeneficial.
ReplyDeleteSexual activity may have been delayed, but it was not prevented. These students waited longer to engage in these activities, but entered them less prepared because of their previous abstinence-only teachings. In the long run, this lack of knowledge of prevention methods will be detrimental to the outcome of their life, and the lives they may produce in the future, through teenage pregnancy. I believe that if overall prevention of sexual activity is not the outcome of the program, then safer sex techniques must be added to the curriculum in order to achieve a program that is beneficial to the long-term lifespan of the student. Ultimately, the students overall well-being needs to be taken into consideration, rather than the short-term gratification attained through the abstinence-only program.
In the article, “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author reports the findings of a study conducted in Philadelphia which enrolled black middle school students in four different types of sexual education courses; measuring which was most successful in terms of how many students chose to delay sexual activity. It was the abstinence only group that was found most successful, and as a result of these findings Obama is being urged to restore federal funding to the abstinence only education programs begun under the Bush administration. The author of the article however, believes this is a misinterpretation of the study, citing that the program in the study taught practical measures for remaining abstinent, whereas the government funded programs preached rigid ideology-based curriculum; a key difference that the author believes dictates one program’s success and the other’s failure.
ReplyDeleteI agree that though both programs advocate abstinence, their differing methodologies do have great bearing on their rate of success. Youth are more apt to be receptive to programs that engage them and provide logical reasons for abstaining until a more mature age, rather than programs that demand they abstain until marriage on the basis of moral righteousness. Even if the latter’s philosophy was accepted by some, its effects only last as long as an individual’s will power, whereas programs such as the one in the study provide an education that will serve as a foundation for a healthy choices throughout the individual’s life.
However, it is my personal opinion that youth should be exposed to all manners of safe and healthy contraception as well as STD prevention, instead of only abstinence, so that in the event that they choose to engage in sexual activity, they are aware of their options.
I agree that teaching inner city youth to be abstinent is a effective way to keep children from either becoming pregnant or receiving a sexually transmitted disease. I believe that the idea of creating programs that enforce the delay of sexual activity is a safe and important for all youth. Not only will the choice to not have sex at a young age be wise, but overall it'll be beneficial for them. For children to be taught this as 6th and 7th graders could possibly keep them from having sex until they're "more mature" or engaged to be married.
ReplyDeleteSome students might be mislead by older siblings or an influential figure that they admire. Their peers may inform them that sex is cool and being a 6th or 7th grader does not matter. Children may attend the abstinence classes and learn about the "benefits" of not having sex, but ultimately it is their choice. Overall, I believe that in most cases students would do as they please regardless of the programs they attend. The only thing that the administrators' of the programs can do is present the information to the students and pray that they use good judgment before choosing to have sexual intercourse.
-Jay Carter
In this op-ed, the author puts forth the notion that teaching abstinence to inner city children in grades 6 and 7 can prolong sexual activity until they are "more mature". I agree with the author about being able to prolong sexual activity in the youth of the inner city but I disagree with the fact that it was a class. Although the teaching and practicing of abstinence is important, it cannot be forced upon a person because it is a choice that the individual has to make. One must be open-minded and ready to receive these values. Teaching these children to abstain from sex until they are mature enough to handle it can be both a good and bad idea. On the positive side, they will wait until they are mature enough. But on the other hand, everyone has a different definition of what maturity is and when a person becomes mature. When they think they are mature enough to handle being sexually active, they still might not be. But one can only hope and pray that every one of the students thinks things through, makes wise decisions, and uses good judgment before having sex, or stays abstinent until marriage.
ReplyDeleteIn the article “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author presents the study of a group of youth undergoing an abstinence course to reduce their probability of becoming sexually active. The study found that the group of students who were taught the logical and hard facts of the risks of becoming sexually active was more likely to remain abstinent. Although this study has come out, conservative politicians and supporters are pushing Obama’s administration to continue Bush’s ideological approach to abstinence, “No Sex Before Marriage!”
ReplyDeleteWell I’m sorry to say to all of the idealist out there but touting around the gospel of no sex before marriage no longer works for children. Teenagers today just aren’t as afraid of the moralistic repercussions as they were years back. I believe that it is best to tell students the proven evidence of where sex can land them. Having the knowledge that performing sexual acts can lead to things such as contracting STD’s, pregnancy, and in extreme cases death, just resonates with children more. It scares teens into being more careful with their bodies and makes them more of the realities of sexual activities. When we separate the fantasy of sex with the reality of it people get a better understanding.
Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that having the strength and intelligence to save sex for marriage is a lot more beneficial for the youth; I feel that it’s more logical to continue abstinence only programs and leave our idealist values at the door. Let the parents do something for once.
In the article, “Abstinence Education Done Right”, the author reveals his findings on a study taken on children in the sixth and seventh grade involving the teaching of abstinence as a way of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. I agree with the claim that the author puts forth regarding teaching abstinence in children. I feel that teaching abstinence is the only effective way to delay sexual activity in children rather than the use of contraceptives such as condoms.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows the benefits of teaching abstinence to children in middle school but I don’t feel as though this study would have the same effect on students that are in high school. It is obvious that teenagers are the main focus in this case. Due to the fact that most teenagers have already developed their opinions on certain issues I don’t feel as though having classes on abstinence could change their thoughts and opinions but it could be somewhat effective.
Only having classes at school to teach children about abstinence and the negative effects of having sexual intercourse before marriage isn’t as effective as it would be if the parents got more involved in what is going on with their children. In order for classes to be fully effective parents need to be more involved with their children in order to help them make better decisions.
-Re'Nada Smith
Although the author argued that teaching "abstinence-only" courses to students in grades six and seven successfully encourages them to abstain from sex, I believe that this approach will not completely do the job that it is intended to do. Especially amongst teens that have already engaged in sexual intercourse, teaching abstinence simply will not reach out to them. In those cases, it will be more effective to promote safer sex, including the use of contraceptives and safety precautions. However, I do believe that teaching younger children abstinence will reach out to them at a time when their minds are most vulnerable and open to learning and adopting new skills and qualities. I do think that when the students reach a certain point in which they have already learned about sex and have begun to fuel their curiosities, adults should simply promote safer sex. There comes a time in each teen's life in which they decide that they are going to do whatever the want to do, so keeping that in mind, adults should simply allow the teens a safer way to do what they want. That way, instead of being blind to the facts, they are helping teens make better choices. When the audience is younger and more open to learning new things, abstinence being taught would not be such a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteI believe that abstinence is something that should definitely be promoted, especially to the inner-city youth. Abstinence is a good alternative to help prolong sexual intercourse, but that does not mean that it will necessarily work. These days peer pressure is a very big issue. Teens are pressured into doing things that they would not usually do, and they take part in the acts so they can be part of the popular or “in” crowd. When students hear the word sex they find humor in it and don’t focus on the lesson that is being taught. If an abstinence course is taught and the intent would be to inform teens and prevent them from having sexual intercourse, I think that it would lead the students to be more curious. Yes, there is the risk of getting a sexually transmitted disease, but when you are constantly showered with provocative images on television, movies, billboards, commercials, etc., it leads them to want to know more. There is also the idea that you must have sex in order to fit in. Guys have it harder than girls when it comes to sex because by the time you make it to high school. They share their sex stories. You either have the choice of making a story up and trying to have the best, going out and having sex to have a real story, or just admitting that you are a virgin. If taught to middle school students, I think that they will retain the helpful information better than the high school students.
ReplyDelete-Adia Brady