I would like to thank Reverend Karl Koch for providing me with a hearty chuckle this morning as I read his Columbus Dispatch letter-to-the-editor, entitled, "Cartoon lies about sexual abstinence" (http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2015/09/29/1-cartoon-lies.html).
The letter reads as follows:
"An editorial cartoon is just that, a cartoon. The cartoon by Pat Bagley in Wednesday’s Dispatch portrayed the 'slogan' about a faith-based, abstinence-only birth-control program producing a pregnant woman.
I defy the cartoonist to show me one single case of a pregnancy when the person followed this program. I know of one, Mary, the mother of our Lord. Following this program requires strength, persistence, knowledge of the truth, strength from God and the support of family and of Christian friends.
The problem is not within an abstinence program but within our culture, which demeans abstinence, self-responsibility and growth to maturity in order that sexual lovemaking might convey the godly blessings for which it was intended, including the children born to those in a marital covenant.
The cartoon lies. The problem is in the inability of individuals to assume a responsible attitude toward sexual conduct. Abstinence, by definition, has never failed.
THE REV. KARL KOCH
Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod
Columbus"
Oh, how naive the reverend is... Reverend Koch can stay in denial for as long as he'd like, but the fact of the matter is people have sex. Whether the purpose is for pleasure, procreation, or a bit of both, humans do the nasty, animals do as well, even tissue boxes would likely fornicate with one another if given the chance. So the reverend can continue to live in never-neverland if he likes, but he's completely missing the point on the issue. The question isn't, "Can we prevent teenagers from having sex?," because the answer to that is no. The question is, "Since teenagers will inevitably have sex, how can we best prevent them from getting pregnant and contracting sexually-transmitted diseases?" The answer, I'm sorry to tell you, reverend, is not through abstinence-only education; the answer is through comprehensive sex education and easier access to contraception.
In a study conducted at the University of Washington regarding the matter, the following results were found (http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureID=1041):
- "Young people who received comprehensive sex education were significantly less likely to report a teen pregnancy compared to those who received no sex education."
- "Abstinence-only programs were not significantly associated with a risk reduction for teen pregnancy when compared with no sex education."
- "In comparing abstinence-only programs with comprehensive sex education, comprehensive sex education was associated with a 50% lower risk of teen pregnancy."
- "After adjusting for demographics, abstinence-only programs were not significantly associated with a delay in the initiation of vaginal intercourse."
- "Comprehensive sex education was marginally associated with reduced reports of vaginal intercourse."
To prove that study's not an aberration, similar results were found in a more recent study, conducted at the University of Georgia (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111129185925.htm), where the researchers concluded this:
"States that prescribe abstinence-only sex education programs in public schools have significantly higher teenage pregnancy and birth rates than states with more comprehensive sex education programs."
An even more recent study conducted by researchers at the Guttmacher Institute found similar results as well (https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Teen-Sex-Ed.html):
- "Strong evidence suggests that comprehensive approaches to sex education help young people both withstand the pressures to have sex too soon and to have healthy, responsible and mutually protective relationships when they do become sexually active."
- "There is no evidence to date that abstinence-only-until-marriage education delays teen sexual activity. Moreover, research shows that abstinence-only strategies may deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of unintended pregnancy and STIs."
- "A 2007 congressionally mandated study found that federally-funded abstinence-only programs have no beneficial impact on young people's sexual behavior."
Need I continue? I'm sorry, reverend, but when it comes to sex, unless you want to see an increase in teen pregnancies, abortions, and sexually-transmitted diseases, ignorance is definitely not bliss. Thanks again for the morning chuckle, though...
The letter reads as follows:
"An editorial cartoon is just that, a cartoon. The cartoon by Pat Bagley in Wednesday’s Dispatch portrayed the 'slogan' about a faith-based, abstinence-only birth-control program producing a pregnant woman.
I defy the cartoonist to show me one single case of a pregnancy when the person followed this program. I know of one, Mary, the mother of our Lord. Following this program requires strength, persistence, knowledge of the truth, strength from God and the support of family and of Christian friends.
The problem is not within an abstinence program but within our culture, which demeans abstinence, self-responsibility and growth to maturity in order that sexual lovemaking might convey the godly blessings for which it was intended, including the children born to those in a marital covenant.
The cartoon lies. The problem is in the inability of individuals to assume a responsible attitude toward sexual conduct. Abstinence, by definition, has never failed.
THE REV. KARL KOCH
Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod
Columbus"
Oh, how naive the reverend is... Reverend Koch can stay in denial for as long as he'd like, but the fact of the matter is people have sex. Whether the purpose is for pleasure, procreation, or a bit of both, humans do the nasty, animals do as well, even tissue boxes would likely fornicate with one another if given the chance. So the reverend can continue to live in never-neverland if he likes, but he's completely missing the point on the issue. The question isn't, "Can we prevent teenagers from having sex?," because the answer to that is no. The question is, "Since teenagers will inevitably have sex, how can we best prevent them from getting pregnant and contracting sexually-transmitted diseases?" The answer, I'm sorry to tell you, reverend, is not through abstinence-only education; the answer is through comprehensive sex education and easier access to contraception.
In a study conducted at the University of Washington regarding the matter, the following results were found (http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureID=1041):
- "Young people who received comprehensive sex education were significantly less likely to report a teen pregnancy compared to those who received no sex education."
- "Abstinence-only programs were not significantly associated with a risk reduction for teen pregnancy when compared with no sex education."
- "In comparing abstinence-only programs with comprehensive sex education, comprehensive sex education was associated with a 50% lower risk of teen pregnancy."
- "After adjusting for demographics, abstinence-only programs were not significantly associated with a delay in the initiation of vaginal intercourse."
- "Comprehensive sex education was marginally associated with reduced reports of vaginal intercourse."
To prove that study's not an aberration, similar results were found in a more recent study, conducted at the University of Georgia (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111129185925.htm), where the researchers concluded this:
"States that prescribe abstinence-only sex education programs in public schools have significantly higher teenage pregnancy and birth rates than states with more comprehensive sex education programs."
An even more recent study conducted by researchers at the Guttmacher Institute found similar results as well (https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Teen-Sex-Ed.html):
- "Strong evidence suggests that comprehensive approaches to sex education help young people both withstand the pressures to have sex too soon and to have healthy, responsible and mutually protective relationships when they do become sexually active."
- "There is no evidence to date that abstinence-only-until-marriage education delays teen sexual activity. Moreover, research shows that abstinence-only strategies may deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of unintended pregnancy and STIs."
- "A 2007 congressionally mandated study found that federally-funded abstinence-only programs have no beneficial impact on young people's sexual behavior."
Need I continue? I'm sorry, reverend, but when it comes to sex, unless you want to see an increase in teen pregnancies, abortions, and sexually-transmitted diseases, ignorance is definitely not bliss. Thanks again for the morning chuckle, though...
I saw that and a similar response, and almost wrote a letter myself trying to say essentially what you did here. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteStumbled on your blog while searching for something else; looks like you're doing a good job (and aren't far from me- in Columbus.)
Thanks a bunch for your comment and kind words! It sometimes amazes me what the Dispatch decides to print (as far as letters-to-the-editor go).
Delete...and yeah, moved to the Columbus area from Omaha about 7-8 years ago, with most of my family in Michigan. I'm still trying to find an effective way of playing the role of Switzerland (neutral) during football season (Huskers, Buckeyes, Wolverines, and Spartans). lol.