http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/12/19/premarital.sex.ap/index.html just in case there are any people left that think either publicly or privately funded abstinence only sex education programs have any place in the real world.
There have been vast racts of history in which abstinance wasnt considered a virtue or a norm. All of this is just Victorian boo-boo-Jee-Bee.
The key point, IMHO: "Finer said the likelihood of Americans having sex before marriage has remained stable since the 1950s, though people now wait longer to get married and thus are sexually active as singles for extensive periods." So all this supposed decline in values and morals boils down to this--people are single longer. I'd like to think this might shut a few pompous Puritans up. But I doubt it. I smell stern lectures on what a country of moral degenerates we are.
And at the other end of the spectrum, many theorize the increasing rates of divorce can be tied to the hightening life expectancy. Couples have to put up with each other for 30 years longer than they use to.
Funny. I read this in the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121901274.html Oh. I see the difference. The Post figure leaves out 44-year-old virgins. Wasn't that a movie with Steve Carrell?
Meh. If 95% of the country did something you fundamentally disagreed with, you'd take a different tone. When you're fine with the world, it all seems natural and inevitable. When you're not, you get all uppity and activist. You see this as a declaration of reality; others see it as a declaration of reality, a reality that needs to be changed. Whatever.
Cute, but I wasn't reacting to the statistic (which is wholly unsurprising) but rather Dolemite's statement.
So you think, despite evidence to the contrary, that abstinence-only programs are a good idea? I have no problem with individuals choosing to behave in one way. But why impose that behavior on others when it only works for a tiny segment of the population?
go ahead and try to change it. you can try to move a mountain as well if it makes you feel better. but please don't piss away government tax revenue on programs (ie abstinence ONLY sex education) that are destined to fail. that's all i'm saying.
Is there anything that 95% of Americans agree with? Any activity or philosophy or political position? I really don't think you will find any, except for having sex when the opportunity comes around and not waiting for marriage. Fighting against this isn't like trying to convince people of following a new political or science paradigm - it's trying to make people give up something that's just a little lower in importance than breathing. And any such attempt is absolutely doomed to failure in any free society.
My first lay was a Mormon girl...a very hot Mormon girl that brought a lot of experience to the table. Ah memories...
The brief reign of emperor caligula comes to mind. This is another debate that is unfortunately colored by how polarized we are these days. On the one side, people preach absolute abstinence and the statistics prove that this is folly and will only lead to bad decisions, preganancies and disease for those kids who start out with good intentions and get caught up in the "moment" in the back seat of a Prius (does a prius even have a back seat? In college, I had a 76 Impala with a back seat big enough to handle multiple parties ). On the other side, as a parent, I have a hard time laying out a selection of french ticklers and "ribbed for your pleasure" protection and telling my kids to go to town. What is wrong with teaching kids that they should make all of their decisions in advance when they are sober and rational, that abstinence is a great short term policy and that if they make a decision together with their girlfriend or boyfriend, then these are the things that you HAVE to do to keep yourselves safe and baby-free.
Aren't Mormons the ones that are allowed to do whatever they want pre-marriage as long as it isn't with another Mormon, so they end up screwing "heathens" like rabbits and just don't have sex with another Mormon until marriage?? I think the Amish are like that too. I really should make a trip to Lancaster County one of these days. As for the 5%, my guess is that they were technical virgins.
Maybe not. Any lawmaker looking to back federally sponsored sex education & resources for such can use these numbers to prove their point.
Nope. I nailed Mormons, Athiests, Heathens, etc. all before I got married. They're pretty strict about no funny business before marriage regardless of your partner. It's what got me bounced out of the MTC, and all I did was get to second base after I got my "orders" and did the whole interview thing. I could have kept my mouth shut and completed a mission. But then I would have never been sent home early and run into my wife. How's that for serendipity. Oh, I nailed her before we got married, too.