Teenage nightmare: 25% of American girls have STDs
posted at 2:15 pm on March 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
If anyone needs evidence that a sexually permissive society can damage its children, a new CDC study provides it. A study shows that 25% of all teenage American girls have at least one sexually-transmitted disease, at least one of which can cause cancer and infertility:
One in four teenage girls in the United States has a sexually-transmitted disease, a study has indicated.
The study, by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), found an even higher prevalence of STDs among black girls.
Researchers analysed data from a nationally representative sample of 838 US girls aged 14 to 19.
A virus that causes cervical cancer – HPV – was the most common, followed by chlamydia, trichomoniasis and herpes.
The rate goes much higher among black teenage girls, closer to 50%, but whites and Hispanics have rates above 20%. The prevalence of HPV should cause a great deal of concern. It portends not just a costly health-care eradication program but also a wave of cancer and infertility that will have dire consequences for the US in later years. It’s especially sad, since HPV can be prevented with a simple vaccine, if given early enough.
Interestingly, no study has been done on teenage boys, and the BBC report doesn’t mention them at all. Girls have more risk in the long-term damage these infections can do, but obviously boys have to be passing these infections along. The CDC’s recommendations for better screening for sexually active teenage girls should also apply to the teenage boys. At the very least, we shouldn’t be placing all of the burden of these STDs on one partner in the transaction.
The size of the sample seems rather small. Using 838 cases for a study gives enough information for a theory about the prevalence of the disease in the general population, but the CDC should widen its study to see if the numbers hold up — and they should start testing boys as well. If confirmed, it shows that we have failed to educate our children about the risks of sexual activity. Making condoms as available as Chap-Stick obviously hasn’t made them any safer or wiser.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
There are huge emotional consequences to having sex without the commitment of marriage. Especially for teens. “Emotional Stuntedness Hell” may be strong, but sexually active teens are putting thier emotional well being at risk as well.
I used to tell the kids at Church – “Watch your peers. See how long they can go without suffering the consequences. Outside of a monogamous marriage, it never fails: someone always gets their heart broken, breaks someone else’s heart, gets pregnant, or catches a disease. Maybe not the first time, but very soon.”
Dork B. on March 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM
My theory is that unwed pregnancy used to be rare even while abortion was still illegal not because it wasn’t happening, but because it wasn’t staying unwed. It used to be as disgraceful for the young man not to marry a girl he got pregnant as it was for her to be pregnant. When that stopped and the taxpayer took over his responsibility, we left him free to go make more babies and spread disease around.
NellE on March 11, 2008 at 3:54 PM
I’m calling BS. The sample may have come from a bad neighborhood. Either way, this proves that abstinence is the way to go in sex ed classes.
malan89 on March 11, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying you shouldn’t talk to your kids about it. My parents took the “it’s wrong” approach when talking about it, which didn’t help any.
However, my ability to help myself off didn’t make it easier for me to stay a virgin in my teens. If anything the more “quality” time I spent with myself, the more curious I became.
Esthier on March 11, 2008 at 4:00 PM
#1. This is not a “Nightmare”, most of the STDs mentioned are not particularly dangerous. HBV increases the risk of cancer, but it doesnt mean you’ll get it. Chlamydia carries a risk of infertility, but most people who get it simply get better with no damage done.
#2. People get STDs because they are being stupid, not because they have sex. If they have a lot of partners and don’t use condoms, well, duh, they’ll get STDs sooner or later. If they only have sex in long term relationships, they don’t even need condoms. If they have sex outside of relationships but stay away from high risk partners and use protection, they are pretty safe too.
#3. Fewer men have STDs than women. Why? Ask Allah: alpha males sleep with A LOT of women, betas get a few crumbs. Alphas are STD vectors, they pick them up from the many women they sleep with, and then distribute them to all the rest.
The spread of STDs is, in my opinion, much worse because most women will have sex with the same elite group of extremely high risk ‘hot’ guys. Also, if a girl REALLY likes you, condoms suddenly become optional.
kaltes on March 11, 2008 at 4:02 PM
I thank the Sears catalog, JC Penny’s catalog, and a few ads in various homemaker magazines for getting me through my teen years disease free (that, and all the girls that would have nothing to do with me….).
Frozen Tex on March 11, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Or keeping it in your pants gentlemen!
hollygolightly on March 11, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Flies spread disease. Keep yours zipped.
petefrt on March 11, 2008 at 4:11 PM
The fact that we’re talking about “girls” and “boys”, and that the terms are being used in an age-appropriate way, is achingly sad.
TexasDan on March 11, 2008 at 4:16 PM
There’s a good reason why God told us not to commit fornication or adultery. Not only this risk of STD’s – but more so the loss of integrity, loss of familial values, unfaithfulness, irresponsibility which can lead to abortions, broken families, mistrust, etc.
It’s like falling down from a building, living in the ecstasy of flying for a few seconds, then what?
Sex is a wonderful thing if you enjoy it within the boundaries that God intended it to be.
maynila on March 11, 2008 at 4:26 PM
I question the timing.
And, of course, we mustn’t be judgemental. //snark off
No doubt STDs are rampant in a significant number of young-uns swapping fluids, but the sample size (838) does seem awful small for such a wide net of dire conclusions from the CDC. Heck, there’s some burrows in L.A. or NY with more sluts per city block than 838. I hope the CDC ain’t getting all ‘lancet’ on us.
Yup. Funny how experience & common sense aren’t inheritable traits. But don’t try and explain that to a lib.
What scares me most about this report is the creeping ‘fashion’ politics embedded into it:
Eleven to twelve?? For a virus sexually transmitted? Do they even bother to spell statutory rape??
locomotivebreath1901 on March 11, 2008 at 4:28 PM
I hope you’ll use that money to buy a good book on probability. Law of Large Numbers and Central Limit Theorem is the topics you want to look up first.
freevillage on March 11, 2008 at 4:31 PM
The vaccine has to be given at a fairly young age, and lasts for 4 years or so, before needing boosters. You have to vaccinate before the girls become sexually active. It’s not ridiculous to imagine that may become true at 14-16, right? I mean that’s not unimaginable. So 11-12 they vaccinate.
Also, statutory rape only applies to adults and minors, not two sexually active minors.
apollyonbob on March 11, 2008 at 4:35 PM
With impressive numbers like these we can only hope that Planned Parenthood and the NEA move forward with plans to teach sex-ed to fetuses.
They’ll get those numbers to 100%, just you wait and see!
Benaiah on March 11, 2008 at 4:39 PM
To help satisfy Esthier, may I rephrase “many teenagers can’t or won’t control themselves.” IF THEY DID, WE WOULD NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM ESTHIER!
txstar on March 11, 2008 at 4:47 PM
Here in Texas, our illustrious governor Perry (Zoolander)tried to sneak through an executive order requiring all girls in 6th(maybe it was 7th) grade to get the HPV vaccine – luckily the state reps and sens fought him and won. Turns out he was getting alot of contributions from the makers of the vaccine.
Corsair on March 11, 2008 at 4:54 PM
That was great.
On a snark sidenote: Rove, you magnificent…
Better snark yet: This is Bush’s fault! He must have a sex machine to go along with the weather machine…
knob on March 11, 2008 at 4:58 PM
The vaccine being offered scares me and it is not something I want for my daughter.
To me, it is important to deal with issues of sex and sexuality with honesty, and while teaching abstinence is best, it isn’t always gong to work. hormones go haywire, peer pressure to do it is overwhelming, wanting to be loved, wanting someone to love (a baby), confusing love and sex, being bombarded with a highly sexual entertainment industry, kids get the idea that sex is cool, without knowing the darker side – the unexpected pregnancies, the std’s, the emotional mind-benders. Those preaching only abstinence jump on the dark side, and kids – when they experiment and discover sex to be enjoyable – begin to disbelieve everything that is told to them.
sex is beautiful, but it can be a weapon, a depressant, an upper, a form of escapism, a replacement for any number of things. It is natural and confusing and irrational and wonderful and life-changing. Parents need to be involved in educating their children and that is not happening when males aren’t being held to the same standard. a guy rarely has to deal with the repercussions on the same level as females. Even as females enjoy greater sexual liberation, males are having their responsibilities even more compromised. and the emotional element is ignored.
welcome to the equality of the sexes.
Blight on March 11, 2008 at 5:00 PM
I am going to apologize, I am really sick today and not thinking real clearly. My biggest issue with the sample size is that the Confisence Level is going to be low, not the Confidence Interval. Certainly below the 95% or 99% usually aimed for in these kind of studies.
I would also like to see some type of description of sampling techniques beyond getting a blanket statement that they are
The CDC should tell us how they came up with this sample and let us decide if it nationally representative. Of course the CDC might have it in their report, but no one in the press knows enough about statistics to make any evaluation on whether things may or may not make a difference to the reliability to the stated findings.
Buford on March 11, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Blight, that was perhaps the best comment I’ve ever read on this site. No silly moralizing, no absurd appeal to authority, and no call for some form of gov’t intervention. I applaud your comment about the ptfall of “abstinence only” education – it’s quickly revealed as a lie told to kids by adults who want to keep them from having fun and growing up. That sort of thing is why kids lose their confidence in authority and respect for the law.
Viscount_Bolingbroke on March 11, 2008 at 5:11 PM
Lies, damn lies and statistics….
Every now and then a local AM radio station runs a PSA. “over 186,000 women in the Baton Rouge area have been sexually assaulted….” Pretty had to believe considering there are only about 400,000 people in the area. Doing the math…. assume 200,000 are female then that would mean 93% of women in the Baton Rouge area have been sexually assaulted. That’s pretty difficult to believe. I don’t believe much of what the CDC reports.
roux on March 11, 2008 at 5:13 PM
You don’t have to yell at me. The truth is that all of them CAN. Won’t is appropriate, but it’s pure BS to say that they can’t.
I don’t know why you have a problem with that.
Esthier on March 11, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Enough to keep me in tip-top shape for Varsity cross country and track. See, I went to a nice Catholic high school. After hanging out with pregnant and STD-having 12 and 13 year olds in public junior high, I requested to go to private school.
NTWR on March 11, 2008 at 5:34 PM
I agree with those who are hesitant with the HPV vaccine. This is definitely not a “simple vaccine” with proven results. Here in Texas, we’re hearing of multiple problems linked to it & it’s not something that as of now I would want to give my daughter.
People may poke fun at teaching abstinence, but it’s the only method that’s 100% effective.
BTW – I also don’t trust much of what the CDC has to say on the matter. For *years* people have been talking about a link between HPV & cervical cancer, but it wasn’t until there was a “vaccine” available that the CDC jumped on the bandwagon.
Tim on March 11, 2008 at 5:46 PM
I went the opposite route, but as someone who’s been in both, I certainly understand your request.
Esthier on March 11, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Esthier, so sorry – no need for me to yell and I certainly apologize, just wanted to get my point across. It was not intended that way. Some “can’t” could be reasons such as being disabled or too ignorant to know the difference. The odds would be very minimal I assume. But you are right, “won’t” would be more appropriate for the majority of teenage permiscuity. Sigh, it is just a sad story, nonetheless with no real answers.
txstar on March 11, 2008 at 5:53 PM
I’m not surprised by these statistics. My guess is that the numbers will only increase in the future.
I fear for my own 15-month-old daughter. What would the world be like when she’s 15 years old?!?
Yet another reason to homeschool your… teenage daughter!
newton on March 11, 2008 at 6:01 PM
Don’t blame ya!
newton on March 11, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Last year a book came out that was titled Unprotected. The author is Dr. Miriam Grossman, a psychiatrist working at UCLA. One article I read stated that “Her ideas are so contrary to the basic feminist mantras expected from UCLA professors, Dr. Grossman was reluctant to even put her name on the book. Its official author is “Anonymous, M.D.”
What was so controversial? From an article by Mona Charen:
From one student “Olivia”:
INC on March 11, 2008 at 6:06 PM
From FrontPage Magazine:
INC on March 11, 2008 at 6:07 PM
I just finished building a chastity belt for my daughter. And I’m guarding the key with my shotgun.
Pope Linus on March 11, 2008 at 6:07 PM
From an NRO interview with Dr. Grossman [my emphasis]:
INC on March 11, 2008 at 6:07 PM
Congratulations! I have an 11 month old and I have no idea how my husband and I are going to raise her safely. So far we’re thinking lots of 4H/FFA and sports.
NTWR on March 11, 2008 at 6:08 PM
Things are going down the drain quickly in a society when the word silly is used to describe moralizing.
INC on March 11, 2008 at 6:10 PM
Good for you! I’m not even married yet, let alone a father, but I know, if I ever have a daughter(s), I’m gonna be absolute, living, flame-breathing HELL on any future boyfriends. And as for sons? Keep it in yer damn pants, and if you can’t, here’s a Victoria’s Secret catalog, there’s the bathroom, make sure we can’t hear you.
Frozen Tex on March 11, 2008 at 6:19 PM
what’s the incidence of std’s among hookers from the emperor’s club?!?!?!?!?
reliapundit on March 11, 2008 at 6:22 PM
On that at least we can agree. Thank you for the apology. In case it wasn’t obvious, I didn’t intend for the discussion to get personal. I simply wish we would stress personal responsibility, at least for those who have the ability to choose for themselves.
Esthier on March 11, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Speaking of making it thru the teen years, my love Maryann from Gilligans Island got popped for grass in Idaho! But I still love her.
gbear on March 11, 2008 at 6:47 PM
Ed’s right. Boys need to be included in the surveys. Last I heard, it’s still true that more young boys are having sex than young girls. That would suggest to me that more boys have STDs than girls.
eeyore on March 11, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Blame the sex ed teachers: Not enough condoms on the cucumbers.
Or maybe it’s not enough money for public education. Would that be not enough teacher pay or too large a class size?
What a crock.
petefrt on March 11, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I miss the days it was actually possible to be a slut.
jman on March 11, 2008 at 7:54 PM
Maybe postponement of love and family, until ten years or more after young people’s sexual maturation, just isn’t a very good plan.
Kralizec on March 11, 2008 at 8:13 PM
Folks, as a family physician, I am very suspect of this study and I don’t believe the stats presented. There is an agenda behind the article and the study and I can’t speak specifically to the faults of the study but I don’t believe for a minute that 1 in 4 teenage girls have an STD. Read behind the lines to see what the agenda. Here’s a hint….it has something to do with vaccinations!
rightwingpastor on March 11, 2008 at 8:19 PM
1 in 4 hussies in high school?
Gross!
madmonkphotog on March 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Seriously?
aengus on March 11, 2008 at 8:46 PM
Let’s put aside for a moment the religious argument (Old Testament kickin’ it old school) and just focus on the emotional state of a teenager. During the age that one’s emotions are developing “self-love” is simply emotionally insufficient.
Even the most brain-dead MTV-watching teenager needs to feel emotionally connected at some level and that at minimum is a warm body participating in sexual congress along with you.
That is the absolute minimum for most kids to feel normal and wanted. It doesn’t even begin to take in the legions of teenagers with particular needs: cheerleaders who want their boyfriends to think they have a perfect body, Goth boys who want that weird girl in The Cure t-shirt to think they’re really intelligent, football players who want someone other than their Coach and friends to value them etc. etc.
The list is endless. Teenagers are especially vulnerable and “self-love” just won’t cut it. (Not that they won’t engage in it all the same.)
It does not complement abstinance education because it does not require self-discipline.
aengus on March 11, 2008 at 9:03 PM
From the article:
“A study shows that 25% of all teenage American girls have at least one sexually-transmitted disease”
Hrm. Before the age of 18, 44% of girls in the US are still virgins. Assuming their sample was representative of ages within the general population, that means about 40% of the total sample should have been virgins. Let’s say 35%, just in case. Doing some quick math, that would mean that the overall STD rate amongst sexually active teenage girls is actually 38%. Seems a bit high, eh? As others have pointed out, this “study” doesn’t seem very credible.
c6gunner on March 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM
I would take this with a big grain of salt. The sample consisted of 838 girls! In a nation of 300 million people, that’s meaningless.
The CDC I’m sure wants everybody to get the HPV vacinne, and that’s skewed their point of view.
PattyJ on March 11, 2008 at 9:25 PM
just for a little balance here
“HPV causes cancer” is not necessarily true.
most cases of cervical cancer do not involve HPV at all. most girls with HPV will not get cervical cancer.
still bad stat though.
blatantblue on March 11, 2008 at 9:56 PM
Part of the problem is that everyone jumped on the “using a condom = safe sex” with no proof that its true. Last I checked, if used properly a condom is 90% effective at preventing pregnancy. Now lets factor in that viruses are orders of magnitude smaller than sperm, a woman (or girl in these cases) can only get pregnant for a few days a month, and that many adults don’t use a condom properly for preventing pregnancy, much less infection (and teens are even worse)… Nobody knows how effective condoms are at preventing viral infections, or even if they’re effective at all.
If you can call it “safe sex” because you’re using a condom, then you can call driving down a dark, gravel road at 100 mph “safe driving” if you wear your seat belt.
taznar on March 11, 2008 at 10:11 PM
As a Women’s Health Nurse Practitioner and a mother of a 16-year-old daughter, these issues affect my work and my life. Though the link between HPV and cervical CA is well-established and I would very much like to see fewer patients with abnormal Paps, I have not had my own daughter get the vaccine. She is extremely low-risk right now and I would rather wait for a few more years to see how the current vaccine works out in actual use. She can make her own choice then.
Having worked in public health off and on for almost 20 years, I can offer that the CDC stats sound pretty much in line with what I have seen for that population. What is discouraging is the casualness with which STDs are regarded. These young people just show up for their shots or pills and move on to the next partner and the next STD. (And contrary to the above poster, chlamydia does not just “go away” on its own. Untreated chlamydia can lead to serious problems.)
To the new parents – don’t be discouraged. It is very much possible to bring up sexually responsible kids even in this day and age. Just be involved in their lives and very nosy! It sounds too simple but just be sure you know who their friends are and where they are when they’re not at home. Surround yourself with other families who reject the prevailing culture and raise their kids likewise. Raise them in and be active in your faith, if you are so inclined. It won’t be easy but it’s worth it. I am continually amazed at the maturity and good sense of my daughter and her friends (more than I had at their age) and my son is a great kid as well. They are not sheltered by any means but they have the resources to make good choices when challenged and they have done so more often than not. Hope that’s not too preachy but you will probably do better than you think possible right now.
inmypajamas on March 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM
I hope my sister isn’t one of those ho’s or I’m in big trouble. Cuz, I’ve got four sisters, so I’m toast.
2Tru2Tru on March 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM
Apparently syphilis, Gonorrhea and HIV weren’t part of the test.
That means the percentage could be even higher.
Speakup on March 12, 2008 at 2:57 AM
I wish I had heard this when I was in high school. It addresses every topic on sexuality in a way that is morally, theologically, and logically true.
I’ve still never had sex, but I still wish I’d heard it.
PaisleyCow on March 12, 2008 at 3:49 AM
As I implied in my comment on March 11 at 8:13 PM, it seems good for one to reconsider thoughtfully the notion of a post-pubertal child. I accept that human beings are an unusual case, but it still seems worth considering that, as far as I know, we don’t consider the young of any other species still to be children a few years after puberty.
Parents probably do a pretty good job of keeping their children from having sex. In the industrialized countries, including the United States, the real problem may be that early adulthood is being mismanaged because it’s been misconstrued as late childhood.
Kralizec on March 12, 2008 at 4:47 AM
Dare I ask why you feel that your daughter is not going to be responsible enough to manage her romantic life without you keeping it under lock and key? Not that I think you’re serious, but if that’s the general attitude you take towards your kids’ sexuality it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Nitpick: bad analogy. With proper use, condoms are in fact fairly effective at reducing the risk of pregnancy and STDs (e.g. this study, which showed that properly used condoms would reduce the risk of pregnancy to 2%/year); the problem comes because typical use of condoms is imperfect. So, a better analogy: condoms are like cars. Just because you know how to fasten your seatbelt and turn on the engine doesn’t mean you can drive safely.
Anyway, this study is fairly obviously bogus. What’d they do, take their samples from 42nd street? As rightwingpastor suggests, it’d be nice to know what stock these people have in vaccination against STDs and the like. More importantly, why is it that so many of the commenters are uncritically accepting the study and using it to justify the whole “cesspit of immorality” bs rather than applying a little logic to the situation? It’s quite annoying that people are using this ridiculous number to moralize about the sinfulness of the younger generation. For me to hear that I’m inherently irresponsible because I’m 16 is similar to Michelle’s lecture about broken souls and cynical laziness. I’ve already seen several posts that go “well, in this age of sex sex sex from every angle, how could you expect kids to know better?” I find that insulting to my intelligence and the intelligence of my generation – especially when the critics can’t be bothered to do the basic math required to put this study to bed.
Math_Mage on March 12, 2008 at 5:47 AM
The formula I used to estimate the margin of error from the CDC study (+/- 3%) was based on a 95% confidence level, which is what is most frequently used and accepted.
Of course the margin of error assumes that the sample was random/representative of the nation. If so, it means it is more likely that someone from California, New York or Texas will be included in the sample than say someone from Wyoming—because they have higher populations. Teens in populous states may be more sexually active than in others.
I take the CDC study at face value that the STD rates are high among teens in the US… not all of these STDs are very dangerous but should be prevented and treated.
Still-A-Neocon
stillaneocon on March 12, 2008 at 8:59 AM
Love ya, Ed but I have to take issue with this. The overwhelming trend the last 10 years or so has to push an pro-abstinence/anti-any kind of pre-marital sex agenda. Condoms aren’t nearly as available as when I was in highschool 13 years ago.
I used to be able to go to the nurses office and grab a load of em and they gave us instruction on the use of them in sex ed and explored the risks of sex with or without condoms.
Since I have graduated, the school has been forced to lose the auto-condom distribution where you have to have a note from a parent (how many kids do you think got that note?) and sex ed is now a 1 week course in gym class.
The longer people seem to carry this willful ingnorance to forget how they were in high school/college the longer these trends of increased STD’s will continue.
Seriously folks, how many of you actually saved yourself for marriage when you were 25? All of those with their hands up feel free to write ‘liar’ on your forehead.
MannyT-vA on March 12, 2008 at 9:20 AM
I got married at 22 and had sex with the man I married at 20. We would have gotten married before, but financially it made sense to wait until we graduated college.
You don’t speak for everyone when you say sex ed has gotten worse. I had to study sex ed in junior high, high school and again in college through courses that were required for graduation.
I don’t know if the nurses gave out free condoms with free tips on how to use them, but 1) they’re not expensive, 2) they’re available at any grocery store, gas station, walmart, planned parenthood, etc. and 3) only an idiot will have trouble figuring out how to put one on.
Esthier on March 12, 2008 at 9:43 AM
I just read a story in my morning paper, header “Doctors shocked at report findings”. Shocked? Doctors? You have parents passing on sex ed for their children, favoring the school system do it. Condoms passed out in schools. Lessons on use with a banana as show and tell. Boys and girls having open sex in class, while class is in progress. After school sex clubs for latch key kids. MYSPACE and FACEBOOK for kids with parental OK, and no supervision. SHOCKED INDEED.
pueblo1032 on March 12, 2008 at 10:08 AM
I educated my own kids about sex. Part of that education included having respect for yourself, and others, and taking responsibility for your own actions. That’s the part that’s missing in the school sex ed classes. So far, it’s been successful.
I am very resentful of this push to have all our daughters vaccinated against HPV. If this is so safe, and so important, why not vaccinate the boys to prevent them from spreading it around?
BeachBaby on March 12, 2008 at 10:12 AM
Thank god I have a son. I only have to worry about one penis. Parents with girls have to worry about ALL OF THEM.
Masscon on March 12, 2008 at 11:25 AM
I love my parents. They taught me well in many, many areas, but sex was not one of them. Even though they consider themselves Christians, they did not teach me Biblical truth. They are blue-state pro-choice Democrats who pride themselves on being able to talk about “sexual liberation”. They openly warned us children about the risks of disease and pregnancy, but their answer to that was condoms. They were perfectly OK with (and therefore encouraged) our “exploring our sexuality” as long as we were “safe” and used condoms.
I lost my virginity at the age of 17 and was excited about it at the time. I was sexually active all the way through college.
At the age of 23, I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, and decided to abstain from sex from that point until marriage. I married a little over three years later. My spouse was a virgin at the time, but thought I wouldn’t want to know the truth and (without actually lying) coyly allowed me to think they were like me and weren’t a virgin.
It wasn’t until an argument two years later that I learned my spouse had been a virgin when we got married, and inwardly resented the fact that I wasn’t.
I can’t begin to explain how much I regret having had premarital sex. If I could go back now and change things, I would gladly give up the six years of premarital sex during High School and College in order to enjoy a marital sex life that would be free of the emotional hurt that premarital sex caused.
Young people who experiment with sex really are playing with fire. The heat feels good for a little while, but you get drawn in and get burned.
Too few people are willing to tell the truth. Abstinence until marriage is best. No diseases. No unplanned pregnancies. What you get from premarital sex is not worth what you give up. Save it for marriage and you’ll be much happier.
That’s not the message delivered by Planned Parenthood. They give teenage girls the weakest possible dose of birth control pills, so that if the girls don’t take it at the same time every day they are highly likely to get pregnant. How many teenagers are disciplined enough to do anything at the same time every day? Planned Parenthood counts on these same girls needing an average of three abortions in their lifetime. Planned Parenthood makes a lot of money off of these abortions. The whole thing is sick.
And oh, by the way, Hillary Clinton thinks even partial-birth abortion should be legal. She voted against the ban. And both she and Obama voted against confirming John Roberts and Samuel Alito. What kind of judges and justices do you think they would nominate?
McCain isn’t that much better…the best you could hope for from him would be moderates, not conservatives.
Red Pill on March 12, 2008 at 11:29 AM
The problem is that the sample size is too small for a 95% confidence level. For a 95% confidence level you would need a sample size of about 1070. So not only is the confidence level lower than what is considered reasonable for such a study, the margin of error is also impacted. I don’t really feel like getting into the exact math on this, especially since there is no data on how they selected their sample. My gut tells me they used something like data collected from school nurses around the country and considered that “Nationally Representative,” when in reality this is only representative of students whose primary gynecological care comes from the school nurse, which will be greatly skewed towards certain socio-economic demographic and not “Nationally Representative” at all.
Buford on March 12, 2008 at 11:54 AM
The solution? Implement Sharia Law! Once we’ve got all our girls bundled up in Abaya’s, STD’s and premarital sex will disappear overnight! And if the little Harlot dishonours your family by sleeping around anyway, you can always slit her throat!
Seriously, right now I’m seeing more similarities than differences between Muslims and you fundie Christians. Get a grip.
c6gunner on March 12, 2008 at 12:05 PM
That does it. No sex with teenagers. I’m going with the old broads of Code Pink!
TooTall on March 12, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Just like firearms the lure of forbidden fruit is irresistible to young people and just like firearms the lack of education ensures disaster.
Education does not exclude abstinence and in fact makes it more likely, the issue is the kind of education given young even children that being the ACLU kind of go forth and have sex ye of no good judgment.
This is another failure of liberals, if it feels good do it, government control of our kids by removing parental controls.
Its also why I keep close watch on my kids until I determined they had reasonable judgment.
Speakup on March 12, 2008 at 4:49 PM
HPV vaccine might take care of one STD…but what about the others? Should we spend even more money on developing vaccines to protect teens from every possible consequence of their actions, or should we perhaps teach them to associate sex with love and children? (crazy association, I know) The ’safe sex’ training and vaccines are working so well, after all.
There’s a reason why STD rates have gone down in Uganda since they elected to introduce abstinence-only education (”no grazing” as they call it) and up in the rest of Africa since they elected to introduce ’safe sex’ education. I wonder if we’ll learn from others, or instead choose to keep repeating our own insanity because we’re addicted to the fantasy of sport sex with no morning after?
Gaunilon on March 12, 2008 at 5:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2