SIlver Ring Thing in the UK - doomed to failure

by Abaddon 17 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Abaddon

  I've seen coverage of this band of celibates before. They're one of the groups spearheading abstinance-based sex 'education' in the USA.

  Despite not one shred of proof that it works in reducing teen pregnancy or STD infection rates, this is the flavour of the month under the Bush administration.

  In TV coverage I heard one of the councillers telling teenagers that condoms could not prevent the transmission of virus particles. If the abstinance-based idea is such a good thing, I wonder why they have to misinform people?

  The assumptions is that sex is only for marriage. Fine if you believe that, but if you don't then it's like being told you can't eat pork - a reasonable thing for a Jew or Muslim to subscribe to, but one that non-religious people or people of other religions would not agree with.

  As in the USA, in Britain sex education is pretty basic, and as with the USA the rates of teen pregnancy are far too high. But education on contraception is the way to reduce this, as continental Europe shows rather well (far lower rates of teen pregnancy, as in a quarter or less) and all this education doesn't even encourage the kids to have sex any earlier (the age of first sex is around the same).

  But not only are British kids under-educated sexually, they have grown up in a massively secular country where a bunch of celebate Americans teens and tweens telling them not to do it 'cause it's a special gift from god must seem like aliens from the planet you must be kidding.

  Oh, yeah, one of the ring thing girls was saying on the radio how she knew it would suck seed... whoops, I mean suceed, as they had the 'truth'.

  And what do we do when people say they have THE truth children? We stamps on their footsies and runs for the door, that's what we do my precious, keeping our handsies on our wallets as we does so, yes!

  One ring to rule them all?

  Not bloody likely!

  http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/25/1088144972916.html?oneclick=true
• 

  dorothy

  Very interesting. I can not understand why people persist in lying to try to convince others to do things their way. People inevitably learn reality and then your whole theory - even the parts that may be true - comes crashing down.
• 

  Emma

  Loved the post! But don't you know the US is a "Christian" country and we need to get back to god? (Need to spew about now.) I find it so frustrating that the argument by the abstinance folks really boils down to having the "truth" and pleasing god. There is no basis for discussion because their argument isn't based on logic. We just have to make sure the information gets out to their kids.

  While it is true that the percentage of kids taking the celibacy oath stay celibate for a longer period, the majority of them do break that oath, and when they do are far less likely to use protection. Thus unplanned pregnancy and getting an STI are higher among them.

  Emma, of the donating money to Planned Parenthood class.
• 

  blobby

  Abad..

  sorry to disagree but the principle of what they're doing is good, ..............(speaking as a father of a 20 year old girl).

  I'm against the Christianity bit but it's about time somebody stuck up !!!!! for defending virginity, nobody has to bend to peer pressure, it should be a matter of choice. Kids have too much pushed into their faces on the TV about how cool and mature it is to sleep around etc. Its good that they see another view point,

  Maybe the way that this "Christian" group is doing it is more of a problem....charging £10 per ring !....and tee shirts on sale etc.................nice work if you can get it.

  ......................woops just read all those innuendo'es......oh well ...how many can you spot?
• 

  Abaddon

  hi ya blooby...

  A balanced but comprehensive sex education program is what will give people the confidence to delay sexual intercourse until they are ready. For example, the USA's average age of first sex is around six months YOUNGER than the Dutch one -you know, the "sex mad liberal" Dutch have sex, on average AFTER their "puritanical conservative" American counterparts.

  All ignorance-based programs (poor sex education plus abstinence equals ignorance) mean you end up with horny teenagers having sex ANYWAY, and doing so without protection (the USA's teen pregnancy rate is seven or eight times higher than the Netherlands).

  I think we agree that it's giving the confidence to delay sexual intercourse until they are ready, and the knowledge of how to have sex in a safer way that is important.

  Comprehenisive secular sex education does this. Faith based programs like the SRT don't, and in addition lie about stuff (the condom thing mentioned above) - something one can't justify.

  Virginity only has cultural value because women were once possessions, and their value was higher if they still had hymens. It is not an issue of morals , or worth... just one of experience.
• 

  glitter

  I saw something on the news last week about silver-ring groups coming to the UK and the report showed one of their lessons in the USA - it was stated it was the only sex education programme available in the school they featured (perhaps the case in many others, I don't know).
  
  By all means tell kids to wait, and tell them about the difficulties they could well face by having sex too young - but for crying out loud, still hand out condoms at the end of the lesson to the kids and teach them how to use them and where to go for advice if they *do* decide to break their vow of abstinence before marriage!
• 

  Odrade

  And what do we do when people say they have THE truth children? We stamps on their footsies and runs for the door, that's what we do my precious, keeping our handsies on our wallets as we does so, yes!

  LMAO!!!

  Actually, I know quite a few of these "chastity ring" kids. There definitely seems to be a group of them who are well informed about safe sex, and an entirely separate group who have made a religion out of abstinence. The first group is not particularly committed to waiting until marriage, but is determined to wait until sex is more appropriate, and then act responsibly. The second group has about as much foundation for their decision as a typical splinter-group fundamentalist christian has for determining what length skirt is acceptable for its women adherents.

  It's not a bad idea, and I don't necessarily believe it is doomed to failure. At the very least, it buys some of these kids enough time to develop a little bit of commonsense. It's definitely not the answer though, and I've seen some of the presentations made by the "abstinence is the only way" camp. Misleading, and very often shame based.

  I liked much more what my 11th grade health teacher did. She bought a box of convenience store condoms, filled them with air, and had us watch for leaks. Several decended to the floor rather quickly. Leaks. Good visual, I'm sure it was a better argument than repeating "sex is baaaaad, don't dooo iiiitttt!"
• 

  Odrade

  Oh, one more comment on teens and sex... if people weren't so determined to teach each successive generation that "sex is dirty," you wouldn't have near as many children get caught up in the moment and have unprotected sex. Personally, I think that caught up in the moment thing is usually bullshit. Kids cannot plan to be prepared for the possibility of sex because that would be dirty. Instead they have to fool themselves and everyone else into thinking it just accidentally happened.

  I think this is particularly the case with religious households similar to and including the JWs. If a young JW girl has sex, one of the things she is asked is if she used protection. See, using contraceptive is a determining factor in premeditation. ("Did you plan your sin?") No protection = piss poor planning = no premeditation = less culpability. (In their minds anyways. Again, commonsense says otherwise.)
• 

  Cassiline

  Meeker, a nationally known pediatrician and author of the book, "Epidemic -- How Teen Sex Is Killing Our Kids," presented the audience with some startling information about the results of having sex at younger ages.

  "Sex is really, really cool, but not for kids," Meeker announced as a way to grab the attention of the audience.

  She explained to the crowd that it was important to their health to wait until they were older to begin having sex.

  "One thing that we doctors now know is that your bodies are very different than when you are an adult and the cells in your body are very different than your cells will be when you are older," Meeker said. Because of the difference in cell structure, she said, young bodies are more susceptible to germs and more susceptible to disease.

  "When germs come into contact with your young cells, they can become cancer much easier," Meeker said.

  This is really irritating, as I have never seen a study to justify such a statement that germs cause cancer. I may have believed such as a JW but this is nonesense. If you want to look at children ( as in pre-teen) are they not more so unhygenic then what most would want, then most adults are today? Sneeking out of the bathroom without washing hands, eating off the floor? Wiping thier noses with their hands and then eating, and eating out of a friends hand which has just done the same? If this were the case then every child/adult should end up with cancer at any stage in their life.

  Take it a bit further, I've never seen a single study which suggests that a child, not a teen who decides to have sex, but a child who has been the victim of pedophilia/rape has a higher chance of being the victim of cancer. What about cultures which promote early marriage? And those here in the states which can be studied easily? I would think if cancer were the result of rape or insest at a young age lawyers everywhere and D.A.s would be either suing or convicting criminals. Not only on charges of rape and incest but attempted murder or attempted manslaughter and after death from this cancer causing forced sex--murder-- Lawyers pockets would be larger than they are now if indeed it existed.

  On top of that seems to me to be a lie-- government grants are paying for bibles to be passed around to these children to ensure what? Certaintly not seperation of church and state.

  Cassi
• 

  Abaddon

  Odrade

  I was trying to come up with some ironic parse of the "One ring to rule them all...", but Gollum popped up instead. *grin*

  Oh, one more comment on teens and sex... if people weren't so determined to teach each successive generation that "sex is dirty," you wouldn't have near as many children get caught up in the moment and have unprotected sex. Personally, I think that caught up in the moment thing is usually bullshit. Kids cannot plan to be prepared for the possibility of sex because that would be dirty. Instead they have to fool themselves and everyone else into thinking it just accidentally happened.

  YES! Very good point. If you're packing a three pack you're 'bad', if you had unprotected sex... well, the guy must just kinda fall over when the girl has her legs apart for it really to be an 'accident'.

  Oh, either those condoms hadn't passed USA standards or your teacher was playing silly buggers with pins to make a point (har har).

  Cassi... I also think the deception used by people seeking to force a religiously-motivated agenda says a lot. We know the Borg lied to keep us under control. Where's it any different?