Charter Member of the Sub-Media

July 08, 2004

Teenage Sex and Teaching Abstinence « Social Issues »

Okay, I'll grant you that some teenagers will have sex no matter what you tell them or teach them. But why not try to tell them to not have sex until they are out of college, anyway? If even one person listens, it will be worth the effort. But liberals apparently would rather that we have a widespread problem of teen pregnancy, teen abortion, and STDs than risk hurting the self-esteem of teenagers by telling that it is a bad idea to have sex before full adulthood.

Heck, I'd still prefer social castigation for not waiting until marriage, but I recognize and readily admit I'm a Christian social conservative. Telling kids to wait until they stop being kids to have sex, i.e., graduate college and/or support themselves in life, would be a step in the right direction.

See, the normal result of sexual intercourse is pregnancy. We have championed sexual gratification to the point of perversional fetishes, we have improved contraception technology to the level that the risk is small...but it is still a risk.

Personally, I do think liberals deliberately, if unconsciously, encourage immorality and other harmful behaviors because it increases the dependency of the individual onto government, and, by extension, onto liberals. Ever notice how self-control and responsible decisions never result in the need for liberal programs...

But there's one point that liberals miss in all their attempts to manipulate social expectations to their benefit.

Sexual gratification is not a human right, basic or otherwise.

Posted by Nathan at 06:16 PM | Comments (3)

Off the Cuff: I think that liberals do not so much encourage premarital sex as they cannot fully back-up any moral reason for not having sex.

That is to say they don't have the moral 'authority' since they're not inclined to be moral (by conservative standards) - you can't get anyone to back an opinion/position on something if their heart isn't in it.

Posted by: Mad Mikey at July 9, 2004 07:06 AM

Obviously, that's the more reasonable explanation...
But I find myself increasingly attracted to what may be merely a "tinfoil hat brigade"-style conspiracy theory:
If you teach abstinence and it is largely successful, it becomes much harder to justify the necessity of abortion-on-demand, because one of the main tear-jerking sob-stories they share is the desparate bereft teenager who will go into a backalley with a coat-hanger if they can't get a publicly-financed abortion without parental notification.
If you teach abstinence and it is largely successful, then you will most likely see a significant reduction in the Great Society welfare system that discourages young girls from aspiring to be more than baby factories to get their welfare check. (Yeah, welfare reform reduced that somewhat, but nowhere near the reduction you'd see if we instituted broad, comprehensive abstinence programs).
These are liberal constituencies, and while I'm absolutely certain no one has ever cynically decided to encourage their growth (I did say I thought it was happening unconsciously), liberals have been rewarded for coddling/encouraging these populations with votes, power, and funding. Rewards tend to increase behaviors...
(more in the next post)

Posted by: Nathan at July 9, 2004 07:33 AM

Pursuit of sexual gratification is a human right (increase and multiply and all that), but it is not an absolute human right.


Posted by: Wince and Nod at July 9, 2004 04:44 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?