Celibacy, who else is practicing it?

Student Lounge College Life
81

<p>Oh, you’re silly. How did we get from the Pope promoting celibacy in Africa to studies evaluating sex. ed. programs in the U.S.? Most of those studies have to do with how the federal government is wasting money on such programs, etc. They all have a political agenda and I’m not sure it’s worth my time to parse them all.</p>

<p>One quote I found from one of the first studies, though:</p>

<p>“Some policymakers and health educators have questioned the Title V, Section 510
abstinence education programs, believing that the focus on abstinence may put teens at risk
of having unprotected sex. The evaluation findings suggest that this is not the case.
Program and control group youth did not differ in their rates of unprotected sex, either at
first intercourse or over the last 12 months. Less than 10 percent of all study youth
(8 percent of control group youth and 7 percent”
"</p>

<p>Looks like you didn’t even read post #76 anyway.</p>

<p>Basically, it seems like they just take kids in middle school (who may not have not sexually matured yet), get them to pledge abstinence, then let those kids disperse into different high schools with different peer networks and rising sexual feelings with no reinforcement of abstinence, have a follow up a few years later, and then say “Welp, looks like abstinence pledges don’t work.” Well, duh. I mean, I remember having sex. ed. promoting abstinence as the best prevention in 7th grade. Then, nothing in 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th…</p>

<p>“Sex is natural”</p>

<p>So are STDs.</p>

82

<p>So the massive amounts of studies that question abstinence are just silly?</p>

<p>Please. It’s all dandy when the science and logic backs you before, but now that it doesn’t, one brief reading of a study proves it all wrong.</p>

83

<p>“So the massive amounts of studies that question abstinence are just silly?”</p>

<p>No, you are. Wildly throwing largely irrelevant studies (which you likely havent fully read) at me and making smug comments. And you still refuse to counter my points, assuming that links will do your work for you.</p>

<p>I don’t know when I had science and logic backing me before; I merely said that they weren’t necessarily backing YOU at the time.</p>

<p>EDIT: Also, you keep saying that they question abstinence; they do not. They seemingly all question the utility of the currently federally funded U.S. abstinence-only sex. ed. programs.</p>

84

<p>I tried making points myself, but they weren’t logical and proven enough for you. Now I’ve linked to real studies with real scientists, and it’s still not good enough. Don’t know what to say, other than</p>

<p>Game.
Set.
Match.</p>

<p>EDIT: Hence the idea that abstinence-only education isn’t the answer. As the studies suggested, a broad-based educational program should be used. Promoting abstinence as some cure-all in combination with “self-control” doesn’t work.</p>

85

<p>

</p>

<p>The Church’s teaching does not change because some people are unwilling to lead what it considers a moral lifestyle. Argument fail.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not on a micro-level. He is not claiming that condoms themselves spread AIDS more. He is saying that a society reliant on contraception aggravates the problems.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, it does. The fact that some students are not willing to be abstinent doesn’t mean that abstinence doesn’t work. It means that there are students who don’t want that lifestyle.</p>

<p>Why should the Church or any pro-abstinence person change their beliefs because other people do bad things (from their POV)? Why not teach that murder is okay if one believes that murder is an inevitable part of society? Because there are beliefs that transcend individual behavior trends.</p>

86

<p>Does it matter? They’re obviously unwilling to compromise, and as a result cause further problems, they need to get out of the way. </p>

<p>The Pope doesn’t like condoms. Period. He’s wrong in either case.</p>

87

<p>

</p>

<p>…because they don’t want that lifestyle. Period. Yelling at people and telling them they are wrong usually doesn’t work. Especially when it’s a view contrary to common sense and science.</p>

<p>Why should neoNazis change their beliefs because other people do bad things (from their POV)? It’s to prove a point - just because someone shouldn’t change their beliefs doesn’t make them right. Nevermind that they’re losing converts because they’re out of touch with reality.</p>

<p>Believe whatever you want – it doesn’t matter to me. But it’s pretty obvious that abstinence isn’t working in Africa or anywhere else. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather prevent more people dying from AIDS, not just point at them and say “oh, you should have been a good Christian and been abstinent.”</p>

88

<p>“Hence the idea that abstinence-only education isn’t the answer. As the studies suggested, a broad-based educational program should be used.”</p>

<p>You changed the topic from the Pope <em>promoting</em> abstinence-only prevention in Africa to government funded sex. ed. programs. You are basically saying that, left to his own devices, the Pope is going to take over the governments of Africa and institute his own abstinence-only sex. ed. programs, while squelching the pro-comprehensive program advocates.</p>

<p>"Does it matter? They’re obviously unwilling to compromise, and as a result cause further problems, they need to get out of the way. "</p>

<p>The Pope could say the same thing about the secularist viewpoint.</p>

89

<p>1) It’s the overall point that abstinence doesn’t work. 1 + 1 = 2. Do I really need to tell you this?</p>

<p>2) The Pope and the Catholic Church have pretty big sway over a lot of people. Africa is their fastest-growing region. Do I really need to remind you that religion plays a major part in a person’s life, and people ultimately make up a country, and thus can influence their government?</p>

<p>3) Except the Pope isn’t backed by scientific studies. Nor is the “secularist viewpoint” trying to push some agenda, other than science and AIDS prevention.</p>

90

<p>“1) It’s the overall point that abstinence doesn’t work.”
OK, so current U.S. abstinence-only programs don’t work = abstinence does not work period. Flawless logic. Truly a marvel of human intellect.</p>

<p>“1 + 1 = 2. Do I really need to tell you this?”</p>

<p>Where did this come from? More browbeating… “<em>cry</em> you don’t agree with things that I personally find to be obvious so I’m going to treat you like you’re uneducated. waaa”</p>

<p>“2) The Pope and the Catholic Church have pretty big sway over a lot of people. Africa is their fastest-growing region.”
“Do I really need to remind you that religion plays a major part in a person’s life,”</p>

<p>Unless it doesn’t.</p>

<p>" and people ultimately make up a country, and thus can influence their government?"</p>

<p>Maybe if you don’t live in Africa.</p>

<p>“3) Except the Pope isn’t backed by scientific studies.”
I see you hace developed quite an appetite for studies since you decided that a few of them “proved” your world view.</p>

<p>" Nor is the “secularist viewpoint” trying to push some agenda, other than science and AIDS prevention. "</p>

<p>That is an agenda. Also, I could say that "nor is the “religious viewpoint” trying to push some agenda, other than religion and AIDS prevention. "</p>

91

<ol>
<li>Doesn’t take a genius to realize that</li>
</ol>

<p>*abstinence promoted by the Catholic Church in Africa</p>

<p>and</p>

<p>abstinence promoted by the Catholic Church in the rest of the world*</p>

<p>are related.</p>

<p>2) Unless what doesn’t?
3) An appetite for studies? Hahahahahha. As if religious doctrine is somehow an acceptable alternative to a scientifically backed investigation. Why prevent AIDS when we can just push our “world view” instead?
4) Ya got me on the word choice there. Aren’t those pesky godless secularlists trying to push an agenda of AIDS prevention and science! How dare they try to make a difference with their “world view”! No matter that it’s actually practical and based in reality.</p>

<p>That’s the same mentality as those who said Katrina was God’s punishment for homosexuals.</p>

92

<p>1) doesn’t address my point.</p>

<p>2) religion.</p>

<p>3) You seemed to think “Common Sense” was before. You are quite inconsistent in your values. AIDS prevention and religion are not mutually exclusive.</p>

<p>4) Aren’t those pesky god-fearing religious nuts trying to push an agenda of AIDS prevention and religion! How dare they try to make a difference with their “world view”!</p>

<p>“No matter that it’s actually practical and based in reality.”</p>

<p>Ughh, don’t start with this. I don’t want to get into another one of these debates.
Regardless, people should not have practicality and your “reality” forced upon them with no consideration of other views.</p>

<p>"That’s the same mentality as those who said Katrina was God’s punishment for homosexuals. "
Irrelevant rhetorical device.</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>Go tell that to a man dying of AIDS because he wasn’t educated well-enough about condoms. </p>

<p>Tell that man that informing him about the relative failures of celibacy and the relative successes of contraception would be “forcing a reality upon him”. </p>

<p>Tell him that no matter what the scientific evidence, the view that results in disaster is alright to promote, merely because it’s a view. </p>

<p>Raping virgins cures AIDS? Of course not, but since it’s a commonly held belief, we should respect it.</p>

<p>…and preaching Christianity to Africans isn’t “forcing a reality” upon them. Not at all.</p>

94

<p>"Go tell that to a man dying of AIDS because he wasn’t educated well-enough about condoms. </p>

<p>Tell that man that informing him about the relative failures of celibacy and the relative successes of contraception would be “forcing a reality upon him”. "</p>

<p>Tell him that no matter what the scientific evidence, the view that results in disaster is alright to promote, merely because it’s a view. "</p>

<p>Oh wow; I can play these rhetorical games too…</p>

<p>Go tell a man dying of AIDS because he didn’t practice celibacy that science says that his condition is natural, because sex is natural and good despite the fact that STDs such as AIDs exist. STDs are natural as well; what is happening to him is natural, just cause and effect, the laws of the universe unfolding. Science says that he cannot control his own sexual urges, the urges that led to the intercourse that gave him this disease. Religion is just superstition that people use to give their lives meaning; there is no meaning to life, or death, according to science. Tell this man that his death does not matter, that there is no loving God, no afterlife; he will never see his family again after death. They will mourn him for a while, but then they will move on, as is Human Nature, until eventually he is forgotten by the passage of time and the fact of his existence carries no meaning whatsoever.</p>

<p>“Raping virgins cures AIDS? Of course not, but since it’s a commonly held belief, we should respect it.”</p>

<p>Is it a commonly held belief? Is this a hypothetical scenario? If you are trying to relate belief in religious doctrine to belief in the idea that “raping virgins cures AIDS,” I don’t even know how to respond to this. Straw man.</p>

<p>…and preaching Christianity to Africans isn’t “forcing a reality” upon them. Not at all. </p>

<p>I am pointing out that both Science and Religion are ostensibly dogmatic in this case.</p>

95

<p>…and this has degenerated into a religious debate. Somehow I’m not surprised, although I really don’t see how AIDS-prevention has anything to do with religion. </p>

<p>Straw man argument? Your entire post is a strawman argument. I never said anything about “science debunking religion and making life meaningless.” For all you know, I could be a protestant Christian who wants to help Africans fight AIDS.</p>

<p>Science is a tool. Do you not understand that? Doctors aren’t promoting condoms because they’re petty enough to promote their worldview upon someone else. They’re promoting condoms because they help prevent diseases. Get over yourself and your narrow-minded view of anything that isn’t “Christian”, whatever that even means.</p>

<p>And yes, it is a commonly-held belief (in Africa) that raping virgins will cure one of AIDS</p>

<p>[South</a> African Men’s ‘Sex With Young Virgin’ AIDS Cure Belief Shocks Theron](<a href=“South African Men's 'Sex With Young Virgin' AIDS Cure Belief Shocks Theron”>South African Men's 'Sex With Young Virgin' AIDS Cure Belief Shocks Theron)
[Focus</a> Aids: The myth that sex with a virgin can cure HIV - Life & Style - The Independent](<a href=“Focus Aids: The myth that sex with a virgin can cure HIV | The Independent | The Independent”>Focus Aids: The myth that sex with a virgin can cure HIV | The Independent | The Independent)</p>

96

<p>"…and this has degenerated into a religious debate. Somehow I’m not surprised, although I really don’t see how AIDS-prevention has anything to do with religion. "<br>
Well, this is a thread about celibacy.</p>

<p>“Straw man argument? Your entire post is a strawman argument. I never said anything about “science debunking religion and making life meaningless.” For all you know, I could be a protestant Christian who wants to help Africans fight AIDS.”
In that case, you use science when it suits you and not at other times, while maintaining it as a valid way of rejecting certain perspectives as categorically wrong…</p>

<p>“Science is a tool. Do you not understand that? Doctors aren’t promoting condoms because they’re petty enough to promote their worldview upon someone else. They’re promoting condoms because they help prevent diseases.”</p>

<p>Science is a system of enquiry into the natural world. But the problems come when you attack a system not based on “natural”, physical utility such as religious doctrine and attack it with a system that values pragmatism over all else. In any case, Abstinence also “helps prevent the spread of disease,” apparently just not as perfectly as you would like. Well, contraceptives are not a perfect solution either.</p>

<p>" Get over yourself and your narrow-minded view of anything that isn’t “Christian”, whatever that even means."</p>

<p>I’m narrow minded? I don’t see how this can be the case when I am actually arguing in support of a position that I don’t personally support. I don’t see you trying to look at perspectives other than your own.</p>

<p>“And yes, it is a commonly-held belief (in Africa) that raping virgins will cure one of AIDS”
Well, that is interesting. However, this is hardly equivalent to the belief that celibacy is a viable means of AIDs prevention.</p>

97

<p>Hold up.</p>

<p>I haven’t read through this whole thread, but are there actually people trying to claim that abstinence is 100% effective against STD’s?</p>

<p>Someone’s been lied to.</p>

<p>Considering most teenagers and college students I know don’t consider oral sex to be sex (and they consider themselves abstinent), you’re grossly misinformed if you think the only way to get an std is through intercourse.
Who I know may be anecdotal, but I’m from a city where nearly everyone attends a religious high school, where they get abstinence-only education shoved down their throat. I know a huge number of girls who think its perfectly “safe” to have/give oral.</p>

<p>And then there are std’s like crabs, which can be spread just from contact.</p>

98

<p>Well, we can debate the meaning of abstinence; but we are primarily discussing abstinence in the form of celibacy, which would not allow for such behaviors.</p>

99

<p>m also celibate nd m under loads of pressure to shag some1 from ma buddy</p>

100

<p>Are we debating the merits of various sex education topics now?</p>

<p>Well the answer is obvious.</p>

<p>Practicing abstinence is like quitting smoking or going on a vegetarian weight-loss diet. Many people can do it, but it is difficult for many to overcome the urges, and they will wind up doing it anyway, even if its illogical or not what they truly want.</p>

<p>Of course, abstinence is much easier for some people (guys primarily and homely women) because they don’t have people actively hitting on them and seducing them as much. It’s easier to abstain when you refuse to make active effort, rather than have to practice active resistance. Either way, when an opportunity, like a steak tossed to a dieter, is thrown your way, people are going to cave.</p>

<p>That’s why contraceptive education is necessary and vital. When a hefty percentage of abstainers do cave in, they need ways to protect themselves and prevent baby-making.</p>

<p>And truly, the proper use of a condom (easy) + birth control makes pregnancy extremely unlikely (something like 0.01% per year - but most people don’t use both correctly). Condoms are also extremely effective vs. STD transmission. AGAIN, if used correctly.</p>

<p>Most of the ‘failure’ rate comes from this: not using a condom EVERY time, ALL the time. For example, boyfriend and girlfriend fool around a bit and start having intercourse and put the condom on 5 minutes into it. Or maybe 20 minutes. You get the idea. Or the guy just doesn’t want to use one one time, figures she’s on birth control, or he’ll pull out.</p>

<p>That is the vast majority of the failure rate. Note that is has nothing to do with the product itself. The other is extremely cheap condoms from your university health center. Just buy some decent ones, people. Trust me it’ll be a lot cheaper than Plan B, an abortion, or a kid. Those free ones usually don’t fit properly and probably break more often.</p>

<p>Putting on the condom itself is nearly idiot-proof. Though I guess some people can manage to screw it up.</p>