The government’s abstinence only campaign is expanding its target audience to any unmarried persons, aged 29-years and under.  Abstinence education programs previously concentrated on preteens and teens, teaching them that abstaining from sex is the only acceptable method of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and giving them no instructions on safer-sex methods, such as using condoms.  Now the government expects consenting adults to give up sex and practice abstinence unless they are in the secure bonds of marriage.

James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, says “They’ve stepped over the line of common sense. To be preaching abstinence when 90% of people (age 20 – 29) are having sex is in essence to lose touch with reality. It’s an ideological campaign. It has nothing to do with public health.”
In fact it has nothing to do with public health. 

If this had anything to do with health, information on disease prevention would be taught along with abstinence.  As the article says, abstinence may be the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and disease, but it is not feasible to expect such a huge population of people to give up a sex because some politicians are worried about babies born to unwed mothers.

 
There are thousands of children born out of wedlock by women aged 19-29 every day.  In a way, it is sad as there are a lot of single mothers out there, but if these women don’t know sex makes babies, then their sexual partners should be warned against intercourse with the handicapped.  Further, when you look at the statistics that say only 49.7% of people are married in this country, it makes sense that more women are giving birth out of wedlock: not all of them are without a mate, they just aren’t married to them.  In the case of homosexual couples who choose to start a family, they are unable to marry their partner.

 
How people view the institution of marriage in this society has changed.  Some believe it is a holy union between a man and a woman.  Some believe it’s the final step to cementing an existing relationship and has nothing to do with religion.  Some view it as government sanctioned sexual discrimination.  More and more people view it as an antiquated formality and are choosing to live a single life (living alone or with roommate) or to live unmarried in the same dwelling with their partner.  This includes both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. 

 
This is just one more example of interference with the personal lives of private citizens.  This is just one more waste of government dollars on an ill-conceived program.  This is just one more example of how the ideologies of the present administration are completely out of touch with the reality of present-day life. 

Be Sociable, Share!