When stupidity gets a foot hold, there is no end to how far it will careen out of control. To say that most of those in power and positions of authority are imbeciles is an understatement. With them, all you get is the same old failed rhetoric that actually causes any problem that they are speaking about to get worse. These morons do not understand the problem because they are the problem. Their solutions never work.
A recent study of 838 girls found that 26% of them had a sexually transmitted disease. This is about 218 of them. This means that the majority of these girls did not have a sexually transmitted disease. Based upon this finding, it is estimated that there would be 3 million teen girls who have a sexually transmitted disease. This is an exaggeration. How do they know that there are that many? They don’t and yet they want us to believe that this is accurate.
838 teen girls is a very small sampling to base such a large claim on. What is at issue in this study, is doing away with the only method known to prevent sexually transmitted diseases wherever it is practiced: abstinence. Abstinence has proved to be 100% effective in stopping all teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. You would think that such an effective method would be hailed by all.
The atheists think that they know better than God what should be done. God’s way is abstinence. Chaperoned courting rather than dating is God’s way, it has worked in times past and works in the present and will do so in the future. The atheists method only encourages the very problem they seek to solve. They exacerbate the problem rather than solve it. They think that man can avoid the consequences of his actions.
"Those numbers are certainly alarming," said sex education expert Nora Gelperin, who works with a teen-written Web site called sexetc.org. She said they reflect "the sad state of sex education in our country." She is a sex education expert meaning she seeks to promote promiscuity. Her salary comes from teens being sexually active rather than practicing abstinence. She has an economic interest in promoting her version of sex education.
Here is a quote from a 12 year old girl contained in the Quote of the Day section of this website, "I go to a school where they teach abstinence-only sex ed. I don’t believe in this. People should see both sides of the argument and then make their decisions." I wonder what this girl will decide when weighing both sides of the issue? If sexect.org has their way, she will be having sex at 12. Purity is looked down upon and scorned. Promiscuity is exalted as good and healthy, unless of course, you just happened to get pregnant because of failed birth control or contract a sexual disease. I wonder if sexect.org will be there to pay for girls like this 12 year olds abortion and medical bills for contracting a sexual disease?
Gelperin goes on to say, "Sexuality is still a very taboo subject in our society," she said. "Teens tell us that they can't make decisions in the dark and that adults aren't properly preparing them to make responsible decisions." How many parents actually want their children to be sexually active before marriage? Only the idiotic would support such nonsense. Where do most teens spend their days? In the government schools whose agenda is to pass out condoms, teach sex education and provide abortions for pregnant teens without their parent’s knowledge or permission. It is the government schools that keep these teens in the dark as to the dangers of sexual activity, not the parents.
The responsible decision is to abstain from any sexual activity until marriage. Any other decision, by definition, is irresponsible. Gelperin talks about making responsible decisions and then preaches irresponsibility. She may have good intentions, but the old saying is true, "the path to hell is paved with good intentions." Being an atheist Gelperin can preach only one gospel and that is death. Sexual promiscuity produces death. Just ask Gov. Eliot Spitzer. He may end up with death to his political career because of his promiscuity. Sexual activity has consequences.
"Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said the study shows that "the national policy of promoting abstinence-only programs is a $1.5 billion failure, and teenage girls are paying the real price." In what way have abstinence-only programs failed? They did not fail. According to this study, they have been effective. 620 teens or 74% of girls participating in this study, were not pregnant and did not have a sexually transmitted disease. Only those girls who chose willingly not to heed the abstinence-only message have suffered any ill results.
Richards, whose whole livelihood depends upon raising up the next generation of simpletons, needs new victims to ply Planned Parenthood’s ghastly trade. If every teen girl practiced abstinence, Planned Parenthood’s survival would be threatened. This study will be used in an attempt to garner more tax money for Planned Parenthood’s coffers and for more condom distribution. What has caused the problem is seen as a solution to the problem.
What is lacking from this study is a voice from parents and from the Christian community. If you do not believe these studies are skewed to an intended end, you are a fool, who believes that abstinence does not prevent teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. There is only one message that teens need to hear in regard to this study, "Stay pure until marriage. You will never regret it."
3 comments:
Sir, who do you presume that those of us who disagree with your position on sex education are atheists? You do a disservice to your argument by painting us all with such a distasteful brush. I am a person of faith who embraces our Lord Jesus Christ.
I presume because I do not ascribed to the myth of neutrality. God's law says abstinence until marriage and purity within marriage. Those holding to sex education are thus atheistic by definition. Their position is opposite of God's law. Being opposite makes one act as if there is no god.
Correction: I presume because I do not ascribe to the myth of neutrality.
Post a Comment