[slap_j]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

Barrier methods are an entirely different matter; as OiBoyz pointed out, STD's are not prevented by birth control.

Chastity belts.

[OiBoyz]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

The birth control pill is a drug, it does chemically alter you, and you should certainly see a doctor and obtain a prescription before getting it. Barrier methods are an entirely different matter; as OiBoyz pointed out, STD's are not prevented by birth control. Why deny anyone access to something that's easy to use and can save both their lives and the lives of others?

Not to mention, there are some serious and significant risks to taking Birth Control pills. They aren't necessarily safe, and they aren't necessarily effective. And the same teen who has such a chaotic life that they don't have concerned parents, are in a position to be having sex, are probably not going to be the most reliable in taking prescription BC. You want the Depo shot or IUD? Those also have serious and significant risks associated with them. And again, they don't protect against AIDS or any other STD which can risk both life and health. And future fertility. It just makes irresponsible parents and other adults feel like they're doing something responsible.

[OiBoyz]

Originally Posted by tlj009

A woman (not child but woman) walked into a pharmacy to refill her birth control pills here in Louisiana. The pharmacist tells her that it has only been a week since the last time she had it filled. It turns out that the woman thought that she was suppose to take them every time she had sex. Don't you think that the doctor should have made it clear to this woman before prescribing the pills?

[doing the math...] Wow.

[tlj009]

I say do both. That's the practical solution to both the symptom and the problem.

How can you focus on the problem (which is the parents) if you are advocating leaving the parents out of the decision? Did I read your post wrong?

"I find it ridiculous that teens need parental consent to get prescription birth control and that we still keep teaching abstinence only sex ed."

[OiBoyz]

Originally Posted by tlj009

How can you focus on the problem (which is the parents) if you are advocating leaving the parents out of the decision? Did I read your post wrong?

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by OiBoyz

Not to mention, there are some serious and significant risks to taking Birth Control pills. They aren't necessarily safe, and they aren't necessarily effective. And the same teen who has such a chaotic life that they don't have concerned parents, are in a position to be having sex, are probably not going to be the most reliable in taking prescription BC. You want the Depo shot or IUD? Those also have serious and significant risks associated with them. And again, they don't protect against AIDS or any other STD which can risk both life and health. And future fertility. It just makes irresponsible parents and other adults feel like they're doing something responsible.

How exactly does this argument even relate to what is being discussed? I never said that BC will prevent against STDs. We aren't talking about STDs. We are talking about teen pregnancy.

Yes it is a symptom of a larger problem. I get that. We need to work on curing the problem as well. But if I have a medical condition that causes headaches, the doctor doesn't tell me I can't have Tylenol to treat the headache.

Originally Posted by tlj009

How can you focus on the problem (which is the parents) if you are advocating leaving the parents out of the decision? Did I read your post wrong?

"I find it ridiculous that teens need parental consent to get prescription birth control and that we still keep teaching abstinence only sex ed."

yes you misread my post, or you didn't read the whole thing. I have never suggested that parents don't have a responsibility to their kids to talk to them about sex. They should be doing it. But a lot don't. You say we should wait for those parents to get around to being responsible. I'm saying, great idea, but impractical. Talking to them about safe sex methods and so forth anyway is a practical solution. Allowing a teenage girl who is sexually active get BC without parental consent is a practical solution. We live in the real world and have to act in a practical manner alongside an effort to treat the underlying problem.

[OiBoyz]

Originally Posted by Bryan

How exactly does this argument even relate to what is being discussed? I never said that BC will prevent against STDs. We aren't talking about STDs. We are talking about teen pregnancy.

How does it apply? Are you serious? Giving a teenage girl something that could kill her or maim her without parental knowledge? You think that's the way to deal with pregnancy? You think I'm exaggerating?

I know a woman who was taking birth control pills, she got a clot, had a stroke and will spend the rest of her life without full use of the right side of her body. Her hand doesn't work, and she can barely walk. You're talking about a life sentence. She's in her 60s and has spent the last 30 some odd years that way. And that's not a fluke. There's a reason there are warnings on those drugs.

But if I have a medical condition that causes headaches, the doctor doesn't tell me I can't have Tylenol to treat the headache.

No. But if you're a teenage girl, the school can't give you that Tylenol without parental permission.

I have never suggested that parents don't have a responsibility to their kids to talk to them about sex. They should be doing it. But a lot don't.

Gimme a break. From the time I was in second grade, I had some variation of sex ed all through school. It's not lack of knowledge that gets kids pregnant.

And Bryan? I really wish you'd take the "I'm right and the rest of you are idiots" attitude down a notch. It's getting old.

[tlj009]

yes you misread my post, or you didn't read the whole thing. I have never suggested that parents don't have a responsibility to their kids to talk to them about sex. They should be doing it. But a lot don't. You say we should wait for those parents to get around to being responsible. I'm saying, great idea, but impractical.

I was saying that we need to address the problem with the parents. That is really the opposite of waiting "for those parents to get around to being responsible".

Talking to them about safe sex methods and so forth anyway is a practical solution.

It's not overly practical, since, I maintain, kids aren't exactly ignorant of sex, birth control, pregnancy, etc. And you still have no way to enforce your "safe sex methods". I put them in quotes because no birth control is fool proof and prescription birth control (which is what we are actually talking about) doesn't protect from STD's.

Allowing a teenage girl who is sexually active get BC without parental consent is a practical solution. We live in the real world and have to act in a practical manner alongside an effort to treat the underlying problem.

No one has argued that all birth control should be strictly off limits. The article was about prescription birth control. And the fact that there is a difference between condoms and prescription birth control has been pointed out and you have acknowledged it. So there is no reason to address the strawman of preventing teenage girls from getting birth control.

[OiBoyz]

And no one is arguing against a girl getting prescription birth control. I think it's the "without parental notification" part the most of us are arguing against.

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by OiBoyz

How does it apply? Are you serious? Giving a teenage girl something that could kill her or maim her without parental knowledge? You think that's the way to deal with pregnancy? You think I'm exaggerating?

I know a woman who was taking birth control pills, she got a clot, had a stroke and will spend the rest of her life without full use of the right side of her body. Her hand doesn't work, and she can barely walk. You're talking about a life sentence. She's in her 60s and has spent the last 30 some odd years that way. And that's not a fluke. There's a reason there are warnings on those drugs.

how, exactly, would a parent have changed that situation? (Granted I know she was an adult when it happened.)

Gimme a break. From the time I was in second grade, I had some variation of sex ed all through school. It's not lack of knowledge that gets kids pregnant.

I didn't until I was a senior in High school and took Health.
Besides, there is a difference from knowing about safe sex practices and contraceptives than actually being told that it is a good idea to use them if you are going to have sex from someone with influence in teens' lives.

And Bryan? I really wish you'd take the "I'm right and the rest of you are idiots" attitude down a notch. It's getting old.

that's not my intent. I'm sorry if I come across that way.

I put them in quotes because no birth control is fool proof and prescription birth control (which is what we are actually talking about) doesn't protect from STD's.

SO? What does a pills ineffectiveness against STDs have to do with whether or not they should get them w/o parental consent?

I'm going to restate my position one more time then I'm done posting because I'm getting too involved and will probably end up saying something I regret.

Teenagers are horny. They are going to have sex. A lot of them will do it against their parents wishes. Teenage pregnancy is a huge problem. Kids need to be educated about safe sex practices and ways to keep from contracting STDs and getting pregnant. This includes, abstinence, condoms, and oral contraceptives. The best people to do this education are the parents. However, not all parents take the time to education their children on this and many never have someone be a positive influence in their life regarding sex. Because of that, schools should send the same message through actual sex ed.

But given that we live in the real world, teens are going to have sex anyway. So we should make sure they have access to the tools they need to be sexually active in a responsible way. So even though a parent may not want their kid having sex and therefore refuses to give them BC pills, they should still be able to get it. And yes, the doctors should make sure that the teen understands that the BC pill will not protect against STDs.

This does not change the fact that we need to keep educating parents that they have a responsibility to their children to be a positive influence in their lives when it comes to sex.

[tlj009]

I didn't until I was a senior in High school and took Health.
Besides, there is a difference from knowing about safe sex practices and contraceptives than actually being told that it is a good idea to use them if you are going to have sex from someone with influence in teens' lives.

There is a difference. I am just not sure that the difference is "good".

SO? What does a pills ineffectiveness against STDs have to do with whether or not they should get them w/o parental consent?

You took one sentence out of content and questioned it. Perhaps if you read the rest, you would understand where it came from. The pills ineffectiveness is why I put "safe sex methods" in quotes. It isn't why I have argued against w/o parental consent.

I'm going to restate my position one more time then I'm done posting because I'm getting too involved and will probably end up saying something I regret.

Teenagers are horny. They are going to have sex. A lot of them will do it against their parents wishes. Teenage pregnancy is a huge problem. Kids need to be educated about safe sex practices and ways to keep from contracting STDs and getting pregnant. This includes, abstinence, condoms, and oral contraceptives. The best people to do this education are the parents. However, not all parents take the time to education their children on this and many never have someone be a positive influence in their life regarding sex. Because of that, schools should send the same message through actual sex ed.

I am a little confused with "many never have someone be a positive influence in their life regarding sex". I don't believe that kids are as ignorant regarding sex as you claim. But even giving that, what is the meaning of that quote? It appears to be more than simply presenting facts to a class. Something that could be done with a pamphlet.

But given that we live in the real world, teens are going to have sex anyway. So we should make sure they have access to the tools they need to be sexually active in a responsible way. So even though a parent may not want their kid having sex and therefore refuses to give them BC pills, they should still be able to get it. And yes, the doctors should make sure that the teen understands that the BC pill will not protect against STDs.

This a little lopsided. I don't know how you go from "So we should make sure they have access to the tools they need to be sexually active in a responsible way" to "So even though a parent may not want their kid having sex and therefore refuses to give them BC pills, they should still be able to get it". The kid is still able to get non-prescription birth control. And believe it or not, condoms are highly effective. So why the pill? And why advocate for something with could very well harm her for the rest of her life (I don't know of anyone who had a clot like OiBoyz mentioned but I do know of some who could never have a child because they were on birth control for so long.) when condoms are already readily available and they not only protect against pregnancy but also STD's? Surely, I am missing something very important here.

[Role Modlin]

The problem is that we're trying to solve a moral issue using social and political methods. Too many people have adopted the "they're going to do it anyway" stance when it comes to sex, alcohol and drugs. Instead of taking the moral stance, we've decided it's better for them to be safe. That totally skirts the real issue. We're talking about sinful behavior. The correct response (and the most difficult) is to stand up for the right thing to do. The truth is that the only sure way to avoid teen pregnancy and STDs is to not have sex...period.

We're talking about sinful, destructive behavior here. Until we get to the root of the matter, it's not going to go away. Until we find a way to realign the moral compass of the culture, we're not going to solve the problem. I don't believe that enabling them to continue in their behavior without the negative consequences is doing them any favors.

[Bryan]

And letting them continue in their behavior with the negative consequences IS doing them favors?

"You fornicated and now must live with the consequences!"

That's hardly the attitude I'd expect from Christians.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by Leboman

Too many people have adopted the "they're going to do it anyway" stance when it comes to sex, alcohol and drugs.

I don't have any kids so I will just pose this question to you and anyone else who does. Illicit sexual behavior has been going on since time immemorial. Nowadays it seems to be far more acceptable. Is there any place for condoms or BC in mitigating foolish behavior or does that only facilitate the problem? And short of becoming a culture warrior what does one do otherwise? In a secular school system you can't really be hawking biblical narratives about sex (which, I think, is the most potent alternative to condoms and whatnot).

[Role Modlin]

Originally Posted by Bryan

And letting them continue in their behavior with the negative consequences IS doing them favors?

"You fornicated and now must live with the consequences!"

That's hardly the attitude I'd expect from Christians.

THAT is reality, regardless of whether you are a Christian or not. I didn't say we judge them and hate them, but I do not believe that equipping them to carry on wrong behavior is the answer.

I do not judge my liberal brothers and sisters when I think they are full of it so I don't appreciate the judgmental attitude being leveled at me right now. I have already stated, we're talking about two very distinct issues. There is a moral problem and a social problem. I suggest that abstinence is the smartest solution for both of them. It doesn't need to be taught from a Judeo-Christian viewpoint either.

The TRUTH is that if you don't want to get pregnant or get a disease, you don't need to have sex. Statistics do not change that. Political correctness doesn't change it either.