PDA

View Full Version : Virginity pledgers' STDs not reduced


nicky g
03-10-2004, 08:01 AM
mwah-ha-ha


Virginity pledgers' STDs rate not reduced

A researcher says 'Just say no' doesn't work in the long term, after finding that the rates of sex diseases for teens who pledge virginity until marriage and for those who don't are similar.

BY JASON STRAZIUSO

Associated Press


PHILADELPHIA - Teenagers who make a one-time pledge to remain virgins until marriage catch sexually transmitted diseases about as often as those who don't pledge abstinence, according to a study of the sex lives of 12,000 adolescents.

Those who make a public pledge to delay also wind up having fewer sex partners and get married earlier, the research shows. But the two groups' STD rates were statistically similar.

One of the problems, researchers found, is that virginity pledgers are less likely to use condoms.

''It's difficult to simultaneously prepare for sex and say you're not going to have sex,'' said Peter Bearman, chairman of Columbia University's sociology department, who coauthored the study with Hannah Bruckner of Yale University.

'The message is really simple: `Just say no' may work in the short term but doesn't work in the long term,'' Bearman said.

UNDERESTIMATE RISK

The analysis also found that in communities where at least 20 percent of adolescents pledged to remain virgins, the STD rates for everyone combined was 8.9 percent. In communities with fewer than 7 percent pledgers, the STD rate was 5.5 percent.

''It is the combination of hidden sex and unsafe sex that creates a world where people underestimate the risk of STDs,'' Bearman said.

The study first questioned 12- to 18-year-olds and followed up on them six years later as adults. It found that the STD rates for whites who pledged virginity was 2.8 percent compared with 3.5 percent for those who didn't pledge. For blacks, it was 18.1 percent and 20.3 percent, respectively. For Hispanics, it was 6.7 percent and 8.6 percent.

The study also found that 99 percent of nonpledgers and 88 percent of pledgers have sex before marriage.

SEX EDUCATION

Critics of abstinence-only education saw the findings as evidence that adolescents benefit from sex education.

''It's a tragedy if we withhold from these kids information about how not to get STDs or not to get pregnant,'' said Dorothy Mann, executive director of the Family Planning Council, an organization dedicated to reproductive health services.

But Pat Fagan, who researches family and cultural issues at the Heritage Foundation, cautioned that one-time pledges were different from abstinence-only education, which he said takes years of support and education. He noted that the virginity pledges delayed sex and led to fewer partners.

''It shows the power of the pledges by themselves,'' he said. ``It also shows that alone, a one-time pledge is not enough. Anyone connected with the abstinence movement would never say it's enough.''

Information from the study, presented Tuesday at the National STD Prevention Conference, was taken from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.
Virginity pledgers' STDs not reduced (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/8148704.htm)

DiamondDave
03-11-2004, 04:57 PM
Telling teens about sex is irresponsible, even in the context of having them promise not to do it.

We as a society should simply refuse to educate our teens about sex. (That way we won't make them curious about it while they are still too young to deal with the responsibility of raising a child. And after all, having children is the only point of it all.)

Someone can then tell them what they need to know just before they get married, just like god intended.

elwoodblues
03-11-2004, 05:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Virginity pledgers' STDs not reduced

[/ QUOTE ]therfore pledging abstinence does not reduce STDs. Do you have an article about practicing abstinence?

Generally, I agree that abstinence only education doesn't work, but that doesn't mean it should be abandoned. If we had studies suggesting that teens that pledged to use a condom every time they had sex didn't show a reduction in STDs, would that lead you to the conclusion that we shouldn't teach kids to use condoms?

RcrdBoy
03-11-2004, 05:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Telling teens about sex is irresponsible, even in the context of having them promise not to do it.

We as a society should simply refuse to educate our teens about sex. (That way we won't make them curious about it while they are still too young to deal with the responsibility of raising a child. And after all, having children is the only point of it all.)

Someone can then tell them what they need to know just before they get married, just like god intended.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this sarcasm?

-Mike

bernie
03-11-2004, 05:31 PM
i read this yesterday(?) in the paper here.

[ QUOTE ]
The study also found that 99 percent of nonpledgers and 88 percent of pledgers have sex before marriage.


[/ QUOTE ]

This line alone kind of submarines the argument as far as saying they are close. They need pledgers who actually will go all the way through with it. Meaning, that they will actually wait til marriage. The pledgers didnt 'just say no.' In that way, it's a flawed study.

b

bernie
03-11-2004, 05:33 PM

DiamondDave
03-11-2004, 06:41 PM
Is this sarcasm?

Yep.

whiskeytown
03-11-2004, 06:55 PM
yah....I went to Bible Schools - some interesting stuff...but for us, we saw the pregnancy.

lots of pregnancy too besides STD's - because obviously kids not planning to have sex aren't planning for Birth Control, so when they get carried away, blammo

or you could believe the spiritual [censored] and think God was punishing them for doing the dirty deed or the dry hump and trying not to get penetration...(God shalt still judge...bastard) - LOL

or you get the rules people who think Oral Sex doesn't fit the biblical context of sex, therefore it's ok to do...LOL - (yah honey...I'm not sleeping with my secretary, but she'll blow me under the desk...but that's not sex, right?)

RB

AndysDaddy
03-12-2004, 01:23 PM
The point of the study was to show that teaching abstinence only is not an effective method of preventing STDs. In this regard, the study is not flawed. Of course some (most) of the pledgers had sex despite their oaths, but this is the point.

Sloats
03-12-2004, 01:27 PM
is there a study coorelating fathers meeting their girl's date at the front door with a shotgun and those who don't?

Rushmore
03-12-2004, 01:48 PM
Let's all roll a joint, flash a peace sign, and screw each other to death.

I mean, that worked out pretty well, didn't it?

Let's face it--the point is not "that abstinence-only education doesn't work." The point is that anyone prudish enough to attempt to educate their children in a way befitting an ostensibly Judeo-Christian nation is nothing more than a naively moronic dupe.

More Smug Left condescension.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an advocate of abstinence-only education. I am an advocate of raising your own children. I therefore believe that Sex Education and Human Reproductive Education are entirely different things, with one being appropriate in schools and the other not. You decide which.

I am also against school prayer.