|10/17/2012 9:26:00 AM|
POINT: The Message: Safe sex?
COUNTERPOINT: Safe choices means safe sex
By Tim Lamb
|Safe choices means safe sex|
|BY LAURA FREEMAN|
Why this ongoing, divisive argument over sex, safe or otherwise? We are still fighting 40 years after Roe v Wade, 50 years after the Pill. No one is forced to use these hard-won reproductive rights, neither should anyone's access be taken away.
The rose-colored, nostalgic view that sex outside the confines of a societally-defined union known as marriage is always bad, and that having children is always good, is not only outdated, it is entirely disrespectful to the large number of our population who reject the traditional definition of family, choose not to participate in the institution of marriage, or do not wish to raise children.
The more conservative spectrum of our society clings to beliefs that at one time were rooted in reality but have become obsolete in the face of modern medical technology. Up until very recently, the ability to prevent pregnancy or unwanted childbirth was unavailable to the masses; luckily it was socially beneficial to have multiple children because families needed them. There was high infant mortality, many bodies were needed to help on the farm or in the family business, parents died younger perhaps leaving younger children who needed caring for. Women did not typically work outside the home; their primary purpose was to have and care for a lot of children.
Now, we have the means to control pregnancy and birth through medical advances such as contraception and abortion. Women can choose to work outside the home, inside it, or a little of both. (As can men.)
With proper preparation and protection, sex no longer has to carry the fearful consequence of an unplanned pregnancy. Sex itself can be enjoyed as a pleasurable activity vital to human satisfaction and happiness, not just as a means of procreation in order to maintain society's growth.
But what of the sanctity of life: the idea that all life is special, beginning at conception? Conception is a biological thing.
Not a spiritual thing. If the life cannot be sustained on its own outside the womb, the only person who should decide whether that life continues developing is its host, the mother. If the mother is very young, not fully developed herself, not completely educated, emotionally immature, financially unstable, in short still child-like, she should not be expected to give up her future just so the baby can "live." Bringing a baby to term who will be born into poverty, abuse, ignorance, famine, war, extreme disability, is not giving that baby the best shot at "life." Children are a privilege, not a right, and they are created by their parents, not ordained by some spiritual Creator.
Rather, the message we should be sending our youth, while they are still within the nurturing family circle, is: have some fun! Try new things! Experiment with sex. And love, and relationships. Find your place. Prevent conception (and disease by the way) to the best of your ability. Leave your own birthing and raising until you are fully an adult and ready to take on parenthood whole-heartedly.
If this goes against your parenting philosophy, I am sad for your children.
Sure -- school them in your beliefs, but let them explore all religions and lifestyles and finally make their own choices.
When it comes to reproduction, the truly wise will choose carefully; the unenlightened will abstain responsibility and continue to burden society with their un-planned-for children (not to mention themselves).
Society's role then becomes to help raise those children above their humble beginnings and move them into being responsible, productive citizens, breaking the cycle for their own family at least.
A society that forces children to be born into the most depressing of circumstances, yet does not then take those children to its breast and -- by way of apology for their appalling beginnings -- nurture them until they are grown and can return the favor or pay it forward, is doomed.
(Freeman lives in Chelan.)
The subject of "Safe Sex" has become a focus of parenting, schools, government policy, medical practice and insurance coverage, and it is a troubling issue for moral leaders who would rather focus on promoting abstinence. A sign in front of a church shows two wedding bands and suggests "Slip these on for Safe Sex!" With all the debate over the definition of marriage even those are not sure protection.
Vows are only as safe as the people making them.
I heard a radio preacher the other day exclaim "Safe sex? Sex was never meant to be dangerous."
He's right! Somewhere in our liberal, anything-goes, society we took a beautiful, God-ordained act and made it dirty and dangerous. Not that it began with my generation; sexual immorality has been around almost as long as the act itself.
But the "Baby Boomers" took what was wrong and tried to make it good. (Isaiah 5:20 "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.") We were warned, and look at what has become of it. We teach our children in school how to protect themselves against what they shouldn't be doing because it can make them sick and may kill them, or worst yet, make them pregnant?
We have made reproduction something to fear and to be ashamed of. One person said that "Women must have abortion as a back up to contraception failure." Murder as a backup to the consequences of immorality? Psalm 127:3 "Behold, children are a gift of the LORD, The fruit of the womb is a reward."
Planned Parenthood tells children to go to court if they do not want to tell their parents they are pregnant and want an abortion. John MacArthur quotes a Physicians Association of Planned Parenthood as saying :
"Abortion is a treatment for unwanted pregnancy, the second sexually transmitted disease."
There it is in a nutshell. Practice "Safe sex" so as not to catch pregnancy.
Even our president said: "I've got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby...."
I would like to know what values and morals he is teaching and where he gets them because last I looked the Bible is pro-abstinence, pro-marriage between one man and one woman, and definitely pro-life. Psalm 139:13 "For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother's womb."
The Bible reports that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb and while in the womb jumped for joy to be in the presence of his Lord when Mary came near as she was pregnant with Jesus. Both Jesus and John stood a good chance of being aborted in today's world. The Bible says fornicators and the sexually immoral are not going to receive the gift of eternal life but we tell the kids "Just be safe." Don't we care about their eternal safety?
I know; I can hear the bleeding hearts now, "They're going to do it anyway. What's wrong with experimenting and finding themselves sexually?" What's wrong? What's wrong is that kids are dying from it and babies are dying from it and we hand out condoms and morning-after pills to children - children who should be obeying their parents - parents who should be telling them to abstain. No matter what you think you're helping with sexual permissiveness and "protection" there was less disease and unwanted pregnancy before we liberated ourselves and our children.
Safe Sex? We teach our children it's good to come out as homosexual without warning them of the extreme dangers of that lifestyle. Gay marriage does not solve the disease problem. Teach your children there are consequences for everything and every decision. Simple things like self control and purity are set aside and our children are taught instead that if there are any unwanted results of their actions they are victims.
Children having children is hard on families and expensive on tax payers. No matter what you or your children have already done the crime is in letting the danger continue.
One man, one woman, together for life - it's safe and it's good. Even an unexpected child is a gift. Care for it like life.
Posted: Sunday, October 21, 2012
Article comment by:
Hi I am a young man, so I believe I have a small amount of first hand prowess on this topic.
I have a couple criticisms for the author advocating sex (whom I know and genuinely enjoy). She has been involved with many community projects, and is very plugged in with the schools and various drama programs.
But first I want to agree with her
Yes, if you are not yet a parent or do not want to be a parent, there is no one who should say that you have to be one. Children don't need more parents that are raising their kids out of obligation.
but if you enjoy the pleasure of sex, and you or your partner become pregnant, then you have no choice. Don't want to have kids? Don't sleep around.
What bothers me about abortion the most is frankly what bothers me about most of America we have this idea that we can make mistakes and not live with the consequences. Our country is 16 Trillion dollars in debt, someone's gotta pay for it. 42 Million children per year? It'll just go higher.
My generation does not need anymore people advocating for it to have fun and enjoy life, it needs Fathers and Mothers who are willing to say the hard truths and love us through our wanderings.
We are sexual creatures, its normal, until our society decides to indoctrinate us with its perversion of sexuality. Do you wonder why we have huge abortion rates? Turn on the TV. Our sexual appetites are so blown out of proportion, can someone turn the knob lower please?
Sex addiction is a real problem, and it not so secretly plagues most every male I know.
In fact this idea that a healthy sex life makes you happy is total bunk. Sure on the outside we teenagers look like were having fun and yeah it is lots of fun, but how about the reality of the shame that we feel, the loneliness, longing and pain? That's a spiritual issue. Sex can provoke such strong emotions from us all, where do these come from?
Sex is a spiritual issue. We are not just exploring another body, we are exploring another soul.
Now at what point is a CHILD not dependent upon its mother?
"If the life cannot be sustained on its own outside the womb, the only person who should decide whether that life continues developing is its host, the mother."
I understand this is a biological statement, but it goes so much further than that.
Tell me what child do you know that can sustain it own life at any young age? If what Laura says is the truth, should have the right to kill a one year old child? It is completely helpless and dependent upon its Mother, right?
A fetus? It's a dependent child, just like all children. A fetus is a spiritual issue.
I don't intend to offend here, but I disagree with Laura, Sex is not to be explored, we've done quite enough of that in America, look where we are now. We need something greater than sex to truly make us happy.
The chemicals of sex wear off, and unless you are into changing partners, (which has a whole host of extreme personal and social problems) you better learn to live for a better pleasure.
Our society has breasted us to vanity. We don't care, we just want it to feel good. Kids my age have abortions because children are inconvenient, so don't stop the chemical rush.
My generation doesn't need anyone advocating for sex, we need Parents who will teach us to live life for the truest pleasure, and learn a little self control, or who knows maybe we'll decide some day down the road it's okay to sleep around with more than just other single people our age. Healthy exploration, right? Who's drawing the line where it stops?
We can't use enough drug like stimulation to make us happy. Our hearts were designed for something Greater, and to try and fill them with everything less than we sell ourselves short.
You only get one life, don't "explore" yours to find out you're still not as happy as you should be at 60 and your deathbed is right around the corner.
Sex is a weighty experience, help us long after Something better. We don't need anymore abortions, we need our hearts healed.
- A 20 year old kid.
Article Comment Submission Form