Skip to comments.
Study: 'Abstaining' Teens Still Risk STDs
Fox News ^
| 19 Mar 05
| AP
Posted on 03/19/2005 3:34:17 AM PST by stm
NEW HAVEN, Conn. Teens who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are more likely to take chances with other kinds of sex that increase the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, a study of 12,000 adolescents suggests.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: std
1
posted on
03/19/2005 3:34:17 AM PST
by
stm
To: stm
"...found that teens pledging virginity until marriage are more likely to have oral and anal sex than other teens who have not had intercourse."
WTF? Here they are already naked, huffing and puffing with the uncontrolled results of a teenager's raging hormones.......and they are gonna abstain from doing the "nasty" part!!!!!
Where do these people come up with this kind of thinking?
2
posted on
03/19/2005 3:49:40 AM PST
by
DH
To: DH
Where do these people come up with this kind of thinking?Bubba Clinton!!!
3
posted on
03/19/2005 3:53:10 AM PST
by
Road Warrior ‘04
(Kill 'em til they're dead! Then, kill 'em again!)
To: stm
Um, maybe they're just lying about abstaining. It happens, ya know.
4
posted on
03/19/2005 4:54:27 AM PST
by
keats5
To: stm
So this means...? No need to abstain I suppose since you are gonna get an STD anyway?
5
posted on
03/19/2005 4:55:38 AM PST
by
expatguy
(http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
To: expatguy
I don't thingt that's what this article is saying, but I think their definition of "abstinence" is really misleading.
If they are abstaining from sexual intercourse but engaging in other forms of sexual activity I would hardly call that abstinence. Education is still the key. When I was growing up in the 70's an indiscretion cout get you a penicillin shot. A few days later you were right back in the fight. Nowadays it can get you fitted for a coffin. I have two teenage daughters. No time or effort has been spared trying to educate them on the dangers
6
posted on
03/19/2005 5:07:01 AM PST
by
stm
To: stm
Teens who are raised right know that virginity is as much a state of mind as a state of reality. A teen who would perform oral or anal sex to protect her hymen is no more a virgin than one who took on the football team.
This Post is merely another boatload of BS that sounds like it was perpetuated by a bunch of high school boys in their attempt to talk some girl out of her panties.
To: stm
If things get wet, you're not a virgin anymore no matter what anyone says. You're someone's source of free milk and the only reason to not to have sex is to not to get pregnant.
If you sleep over with someone, you might as not well be a virgin anymore, either. No one in their right mind would believe you're not a source of free milk.
8
posted on
03/19/2005 5:42:26 AM PST
by
Nataku X
(Food for Thought: http://web2.airmail.net/scsr/)
To: stm
but I think their definition of "abstinence" is really misleading. Yes, misleading and accidently on purpose probably. I didn't read the whole article but I assume its point is to make (real) absinence look like a silly choice.
9
posted on
03/19/2005 5:54:40 AM PST
by
libertylover
(Being liberal means never being concerned about the truth.)
To: sgtbono2002
A few years ago, a friend of mine told me about a conversation between her two teen aged daughters. They were venting their disgust at many of the girls at their school who talk incessantly about their anal and oral experiences. Their mother asked some questions and it appears that the girls themselves are into this, enjoy it and still think it isn't sex.
There really wasn't a need to speak further with the two daughters. They were outsiders who were being put down by the *experienced* girls for being clueless virgins.
This is in a tiny rural HS, BTW.I would bet that many of the involved girls are taken to church regularly and that their parents have no idea of what is going on.
As the parent of a son, I can recall back in the late 1970s/early 1980s, when he was in HS, intercepting *love notes* mailed to him by girls. Suffice to say, they put down on paper intimate thoughts I would think twice about committing to paper even to my husband of over 30 years. They would call the boys and it was the girls who were into suggestive talk.
I can think back even further to a day in 1954 when I was an ignored 11-year-old in the corner of a room filled with teen aged boy relatives. They were discussing a *lively* girl whom I had always assumed was *popular*. Right. They were laughing at her and held her in complete contempt for being sexually available. Every young girl should be privy to this sort of male conversation. I would be surprised if attitudes had really changed beneath the current veneer of acceptance of such behavior.
To: stm
The report by Yale and Columbia University researchers... That's all I needed to read.
Bogus science by liberals.
11
posted on
03/19/2005 9:47:40 AM PST
by
clee1
(We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
To: stm
If they are having sex they ain't abstaining.
12
posted on
03/19/2005 1:24:55 PM PST
by
Chewbacca
(When it comes to Social Security, I'm Pro-Choice. I want to be able to opt-out.)
To: Chewbacca
That depends on what the meaning of "sex" is.
13
posted on
03/19/2005 9:15:46 PM PST
by
clee1
(We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson