Posted on 02/10/2011 11:03:34 AM PST by Libloather
Study: 61 Percent of Teens Want to be Virgins until Marriage
By Jennifer Riley | Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Feb. 09 2011 07:40 AM EDT
Contrary to popular opinion, a solid majority of U.S. teens would like to be virgins when they marry, a newly released study finds.
Sixty one percent of America’s youth said they would like to not have sex until marriage, finds OneHope’s comprehensive study, “Spiritual State of the Children,” released Wednesday. And 63 percent of respondents said they would like to regain their virginity if possible.
The 91-page study – which also includes data about teen’s belief, values and spirituality – was released just ahead of Valentine’s Day.
Results from the report are surprising given the increase teen exposure to sexually explicit media content – such as the latest controversy over MTV’s “Skins” – and how they are portrayed by the media.
**SNIP**
Other notable findings by the study for the child-focused ministry include:
• 82 percent believe God intended marriage to last a lifetime
• 50 percent consider an unmarried man and woman a family
• 59 percent said the Bible has little/no influence on their thoughts and actions
• 62 percent believe truth is relative
• 57 percent believe being good people and doing good deeds will get you into heaven
• 69 percent watch MTV on a weekly basis
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
“...it just seemed like all normal teens and people were out there having sex...”
So you doubt the 61% statistic too.
Having two sons in high school, I'm seeing a lot of very nice, well-grounded sensible young people - wholesome really, and polite. I think many of them are sobered by the challenging economic world they're entering, and they're taking their studies very seriously.
As part of our political process, I recently met our local magisterial justice, who is responsible for 6-7,000 cases annually involving our local community. She has been on the job for over 20 years, and she thinks that the local youth crime rate is steady, not increasing. The only thing she sees increasing among youth is under-age drinking.
These local observations give me hope that some of the excesses may be running their course.
“57 percent believe being good people and doing good deeds will get you into heaven”
Hmm. We worked on the ‘God doesn’t promise you you will be happy’.
Need to fit this in... Maybe next class?
This is something I’ve realized myself, is that the hippies have pushed thsi world to move so fast, that a lot of kids have grown up wihtout realizing the consequences. Kids have been PUSHED to become adults and do adult things, without realizing the seriousness of the consequences of their actions; mainly, because they are kids. In other respects, there are a lot of adults out there behaving like children, bascially children with adult toys. It’s messed a lot of kids up.
Yeh I doubt it...perhaps teens have the intention but actions don’t always add up to your intentions
Ok. So you discount every single social science study that relies on self-reporting data. This would include the “studies” that purport to show that same-sex households are just as good as opposite-sex households, “studies” that show inordinate numbers of youth engage in sexually promiscuous activity, and “studies” that purport to show the ineffectiveness of drug education?
In essence, nothing in social science is good today, right? You can’t pick and choose what you like from such and discard the rest, right?
Not surprising when oral and anal sex is an acceptable alternative to too many teens. Only vaginal counts.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. I show you that level of respect, I expect the same in return.
When a group (ANY GROUP) makes a claim, they should have some method of supporting that claim.
No age range was given, no double-blind test, no sampling across genders ... I expect better data gathering from a college level sophmore than what I saw in this report. And your typical collegel sophmore doesn’t get his results published for public dissemination.
That’s why the numbers given not only defy reality, they defy any reasonable assumption.
The church is trying to push an agenda; and deliberately skewing their suspect data to push their agenda.
It’s wrong when Gov’t publishes bad data, it’s doubly wrong when an institution that is ALLEGEDLY based on telling the truth - tells a bold-faced lie.
When I see a liar, don’t expect me to not challenge him.
Respect is earned, not given. You haven’t proven anything, you’ve simply made naked assertions and bold claims.
If your premise is correct, then you need to discount virtually everything in social “science”. You can’t pick and choose what is compatible with your agenda and then discard the rest.
If I make an absurd statement, like 61% of Teens want to remain virgins .... then I have to back that claim up.
If you make a claim, it’s not my job to point out the flaws - it’s YOUR job to defend your claim. That’s a rudimentary step that even a ‘Socialological’ student should be able to grasp.
Why didn’t they claim 99.997%? Why not 60.5%
I remember being a teen-aged male; and remaining virginal was the absolute LAST thing on my mind. Now, since men make up at least 50% of the population, and there is no shortage of willing partners in the other 50% of the population - it’s pretty far fetched to claim the number this group claimed.
The burden of proof is on THEM, not me. You asked for errors; I provided errors. You have provided absolutely nothing to show that this group did the most basic, the most elementry form of statistics gathering.
I hold ANY church to a high standard. There is nothing more evil, than a church who will use lies to promote their position. And it appears that this is exactly what this ‘fountain of truth’ is perpetuating.
Make a patently absurd statement, provide no basis for making that statement - and cower behind your church. That is pathetic. If you make a statment, have the intellectual honesty to back it up with something tangible and repeatable.
Virtually every ‘social science’ understands the rudimentary basis of publishing statements. If you bother to look, you will see that a study by a reputable group will have a this data.
We have a couple paragraphs published, that could have been overheard in a bathroom stall for all we know.
You are projecting your “experience” onto others. It’s confirmation bias.
The fact is, your “objections” can be applied to ANY social “science” that is in existence today. You just discount what you don’t like, and latch onto what you do.
In essence, your religion isn’t much different than the straw-man that you contend against.
I think you are the one projecting. You ask me what's wrong, I tell you. You attack me by saying that ALL social sciences's must be invalid. I correct you by saying that there are proceedures. Youa attack me again and say that I must prove my criticism - I point out that it is the mission of the publisher to defend their article with fact.
Now, I'm the one projecting? If you read the posts - you will see that YOU have been accused of projecting by almost everone who has responded to you, and it's quite obvious you are.
Can you provide ANYTHING - and I'll be quite lenient as to what 'ANYTHING' means - ANYTHING to support that this study has any validity?
This study could have concluded the existance of the Easter Bunny, with the evidence they provided. There is NOTHING there, other than some 'findings'.
As such, those findings are meaningless - can you prove otherwise? It's not projecting ... it's called 'critical thinking'.
You do not know me, you have no idea what church I belong to, yet you are PROJECTING your insecurities on to me. I have defended my point - you have brought absolutely nothing but attacks, challenges and now you are projecting your insecurities on to me. Grow up.
Did you even look at the actual study? Or just the press release of the study? So do you even have an actual basis for making any complaint about the data at all, or are you really just complaining about the news story as linked?
You obviously don’t like the conclusion, because it seems conflicts with your world-view, but I doubt that you actually looked at the study, for you didn’t point to specifics, but rather made very broad generalizations.
And you are still projecting in your responses. It’s pretty funny too.
I wish the study were true, it would be great news indeed. Fewer abortions, more planned pregnancies and less unwed mothers, lower drop-out rates, lower crime rates from unsupervised youth.
That would be really nice. I’d love this - if this had any bearing on reality.
I’d also like Santa, Iron Man, Superman, Spiderman, the Fantastic Four and the Legion of Superheroes to correct a few international incidents we currently enjoy. The study and these fictional beings have a lot in common. They are imaginary.
Do grow up. Do you have anything to contribute - perhaps you have the study’s... you are defending them. The article provided NO findings, no sources, no studies. Just some blurbs that you have swallowed as Gospel. Do you honestly believe everything you read? The DNC is the party for you!! Here are some sound bites - don’t ask questions, don’t question the results, and attack anyone who asks questions.
Al Gore, Obama and the DNC thrives on people like you. People who need no evidence whatsoever, who will attack anyone who questions fabrications.
Have you gotten your Global Warming T-shirt yet?
Don’t like Obamacare - you MUST be a racist.
Question the findings - why, I must be projecting...
Certainly, anything in the magazine is beyond reproach, beyond question, beyond criticism... yep, I must be projecting.
Usually, maturity comes with age....
Now you are spewing a bunch of ad hominems, (and still projecting) simply because I pointed out that you haven’t even seen the study (which you now admit.)
So in other words, all those broad accusations were based on a couple paragraph news summary of a 91 page study that you hadn’t actually read.
So we don’t have to take anything you say seriously.
“Now you are spewing a bunch of ad hominems...”
And that’s supposed to be your territory, right?
You’re funny in an ironic kind of way.
That’s why I’m criticizing the story.
How long is your attention span?
The story did not link to the study, the story simply gave some findings that sound very dubious - and I question them.
Just like Obamacare, Global Warming, Off-shore drilling, ANWAR, Toyota uncontrolled acceleration, ect.
And you throwing out the ‘projecting’ thing without an iota of effort on your part.... put the souce there to see.
Why do you think this study has any basis on fact?
Why do you believe it?
What are the conditions fo the study?
Put up some facts. I’ve presented my critique’ ... defend the story - don’t attack me. I know the DNC has a habit of attacking anyone who questions a talking point (Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter, ect) and that is EXACTLY what you are doing.
Answer the questions.... present some facts. Or are your projecting ‘Wishful thinking’?
Facts please, sources please.
Again ... sources please. Some facts would be nice.
Some sanity woud be nice too.
Why would I want teens having sex? Why would I want unwanted babies born to unwed mothers? Why would I want more abortions?
I question the story, as it was fluff.
So, please post your facts, your sources. I suspect you have nothing - - and you are proving my suspicions correct.
Sources?
YOU criticized the story and made the assertions, so it is incumbent upon you to actually look at the study itself.
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.