Religions > Atheism > Analysis of Negative Abstinence Reports Reveals Faulty Logic
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
15 May 2006 02:15:33 PM |
| Object: |
Analysis of Negative Abstinence Reports Reveals Faulty Logic |
http://family.org/cforum/extras/a0040477.cfm
Study shows attacks are rooted in false representation of scientific
evidence.
A flurry of news stories proclaiming abstinence education does not decrease
unwanted pregnancies among unmarried teens, and that teaching it is
dangerous, prompted one group to investigate the source of those claims.
The Medical Institute for Sexual Health - a nonprofit organization dedicated
to evaluating scientific evidence - examined two recent reports in the
Journal of Adolescent Health. The position papers, written by a team headed
by John Santelli, maintained that abstinence education is "scientifically
and ethically problematic."
The authors claimed that teaching young people to postpone sexual activity
until marriage is "inconsistent with commonly accepted notions of human
rights." The articles recommend that "children and adolescents (should be
ensured) adequate access to confidential sexual- and reproductive-health
services."
"Reproductive-health services" is a common liberal euphemism for abortion
and condom distribution.
In its analysis titled "The Attack on Abstinence Education: Fact of
Fallacy?" the institute examined the methods used by Santelli and found them
to be exceptionally flawed.
"We found a significant number of serious omissions, misrepresentations,
deviations from accepted practices and opinions presented as facts," the
report states. "Logic, if employed, was often faulty."
The institute pointed out that most of the blatant mistakes should have been
discovered by editors and reviewers prior to publication.
For example, Santelli rejected the idea that moral considerations have a
place in sexual-health pregnancy-prevention messages, stating that "many
advocates of abstinence-only education programs are primarily concerned with
issues such as character and morality - based on their specific religious or
moral beliefs." He argued that terms such as "commitment to abstinence" and
"being responsible" were rooted in such beliefs.
"A majority of parents across the U.S. have asked their adolescent children
to be responsible about everything from household chores to homework and
seatbelt use," The Medical Institute report points out. "Most would be
surprised to find that, according to Santelli et al, such requests are a
priori considered to be based on 'specific religious. beliefs.' "
Yet, Santelli justified teaching teens about sexual practices, such as using
condoms, and having access to reproductive-health services, arguing that it
was the "ethical" thing to do.
The institute points out the dichotomy in Santelli's logic is obvious when
the definition of "ethical" is considered: "Having to do with ethics or
morality, of, or conforming to, moral standards."
In other words, ethics that promote sexual activity are OK, ethics that
promote abstinence are not.
Linda Klepacki, analyst for sexual health for Focus on the Family Action,
added that when Santelli's ideas are applied to other moral issues, his
logic doesn't hold.
"I guess if you took it out to the absurd, then he would agree that children
should be able to make their own decisions about illegal drugs at any time
in their lives, and there shouldn't be any drug education in our schools or
gang education in our schools or even anything about bullying," she told
CitizenLink. "So he'd say there shouldn't be any ethics or morality in our
schools. What would that look like?"
Klepacki said most people have the ethics and the morals to want the very
best health for children, whether it concerns drugs, alcohol, gangs or
sexuality.
So why is Santelli trying so hard to discredit abstinence education?
"Dr. Santelli does not believe that abstinence education should be in
schools, because he believes that children at any age should be able to make
their own decisions about whether to be sexually active or not," Klepacki
said. "He doesn't believe parents have the right to have any input."
In fact, she said, Santelli and his colleagues have tried to say that kids
can make adult decisions even when they are 4 and 5 years old.
"A 4- or 5- or 6-year-old mind is not the same as an adult mind," Klepacki
said. "They're not mini-adults. We love them. We nurture them. That's what
parents are for - to grow them into adulthood."
The truth is that abstinence until marriage provides the best possible
outcome for kids, she said. The risk of sexually transmitted disease is
zero, the risk of unwanted pregnancy is zero and the emotional and
psychological impact of becoming sexually active at too early an age is
zero.
"We want kids to be as safe as possible," Klepacki said. "We want them to be
safe physically and emotionally and mentally and spiritually. And not being
sexually active until they're married is the way to keep them healthy."
--
----------
J Young
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Analysis of Negative Abstinence Reports Reveals Faulty Logic |
15 May 2006 02:24:24 PM |
|
|
schrieb:
http://family.org/cforum/extras/a0040477.cfm
Study shows attacks are rooted in false representation of scientific
evidence.
A flurry of news stories proclaiming abstinence education does not decrease
unwanted pregnancies among unmarried teens, and that teaching it is
dangerous, prompted one group to investigate the source of those claims.
Poor moron: you still can't answer this very simple question: how come
countries with the most liberal attitude toward sexual education and
toward sex in general are also the ones with the lowest teenage
pregnancy rate and the lowest abortion rate?
Why are you encouraging a program which is a proven failure and leads
to more abortions? Could it be that you're a... gasp... hypocrite?
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Analysis of Negative Abstinence Reports Reveals Faulty Logic |
15 May 2006 02:53:55 PM |
|
|
"Parsifal" <jeanpascalvachon@gmail.com> writes:
youngopinions@aol.com schrieb:
http://family.org/cforum/extras/a0040477.cfm
Study shows attacks are rooted in false representation of scientific
evidence.
A flurry of news stories proclaiming abstinence education does not decrease
unwanted pregnancies among unmarried teens, and that teaching it is
dangerous, prompted one group to investigate the source of those claims.
Poor moron: you still can't answer this very simple question: how come
countries with the most liberal attitude toward sexual education and
toward sex in general are also the ones with the lowest teenage
pregnancy rate and the lowest abortion rate?
Why are you encouraging a program which is a proven failure and leads
to more abortions? Could it be that you're a... gasp... hypocrite?
Saying you shouldn't teach teens about condoms because they should
refrain from sex is like saying you shouldn't teach teens about seat
belts because they should refrain from crashing their cars.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Analysis of Negative Abstinence Reports Reveals Faulty Logic |
15 May 2006 03:12:41 PM |
|
|
Hypocrite fundy nutbar <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xbidndm3AvWhTvXZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
http://family.org/cforum/extras/a0040477.cfm
"Family.org"?
<smirk>
"If you are going to quote a source as fact, please make sure it is a
reputable one. Thankyou."
From: "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com>, hypocrite extraordinaire.
Message-ID: <soadnTLhfJOaelzenZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
