Sex in media boosts teen promiscuity-study

[Baron Kurtz]

So, is there anyone here that is saying that teens having sex is in and of itself bad? Or are we generally of the opinion that the lack of information as to options (condoms, the pill, etc.) is the problem?

if the former, i fear we're on a hiding to nothing. If the latter, thereare things we can do about this issue ...

bk

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Knowing the way the Lounge's winds blow, I have a feeling the answer is: (a).

 

[Section10]

Certainly illicit teen sex is bad. I didn't know that was a viable question. Is playing russian roulette bad? Or is it only bad if you blow your brains out?

 

[Lincsong]

Marc and John; my sentiments exactly

People should be able to drink at 18. Plenty of countries allow drinking at that age, and it hasn't caused extra chaos. Honestly: kids are ALREADY drinking here at 18, law or no law. They're driving drunk, too. The law is not stopping them.

.

If you treat someone like a child their going to act like one. If you're old enough to get drafted and killed for your country then you're old enough to have a shot a whiskey before you're called to duty. I was around booze my whole childhood, had TWO screwball uncles who got lound when drunk; the other TEN and my Dad held their liquor and you never knew they were drinking.

 

[Briscoeteque]

Certainly illicit teen sex is bad. I didn't know that was a viable question. Is playing russian roulette bad? Or is it only bad if you blow your brains out?

Do you live a monastic lifestyle free of risks? If you do, I apologize, but if you have even one vice in which you indulge, is it only bad if it negitively impacts you?

Moderation, vigilence, and self control. With these I'm of the impression that most vices can be indulged in safely. Gambling, drinking, sex, smoking, all things that be enjoyed. But only if these habits do not take dominion over the rest of one's life. Alchoholics shouldn't drink, compusive gamblers shouldn't gamble, but does that make these activities catagorically bad? I do not think so.

I don't want a risk-free lifestyle. That's for the birds. I'm not going to play russian roulette, but I'm also going to smoke a pack of cigarettes over the duration of 3 months, have a few glasses of whisky on the weekends, and play poker for small stakes if I've got a chance of winning. I'd hardly call these activities a one-in-six chance of getting shot in the head, provided I don't let any of them get out of hand. But I look at it this way. Getting hammered is not fun, you get sick. Getting addicted to cigarettes is not fun, for a number of reasons. Losing way too much money at the tables is no fun. So I don't do those things, and actively prevent them from happening. I also happen to think being a puritan is no fun, so I'm not one. I work hard enough during the week, and I'm a fan of a good time.

*I apologize for not talking about sex and staying proper on topic, but I'm of the impression that I should talk of what I know, and sex really isn't one of those things. While I may know much about liquor, tobacco, and enough about gambling, I'm all thumbs with the dolls.

 

[jake431]

Certainly illicit teen sex is bad. I didn't know that was a viable question. Is playing russian roulette bad? Or is it only bad if you blow your brains out?

Yes but the Baron is not talking about "illicit" sex - unless you think all sex between teens is illicit. What he is saying is that if it is not unequivicoally bad - you know, that circumstance might modify the moral tone of the encounter - should we ensure that said teens can engage in sexual activities with a minimum of risk? To say "no, we shouldn't" seems short citied to me;The notion that teens shouldn't be given suitable information about how to protect their own life engaging in risky behavior seems illogical to me. There are plenty of activities that people engage in that are risky, and usually there is a lot of safety gear that goes along with it to ensure that everyone is safe (or safe as can be).

-Jake

 

[John in Covina]

Illicit sex

At one time all sex out side of marrige was "Illicit."
Actually it still is, it's the culture has changed, not the "Law.":eusa_doh:

Rodney Dangerfield said: "Oh, I was scared the first time I had sex, real scared, well I was all alone!"[huh]

 

[mysterygal]

As far as safe sex goes, I think there's enough information out there...I've even heard of schools dispersing condoms. My concern is do they really know what they're doing. The maturity level is just not there yet. There's more that goes on than just the act of sex.

 

[Lena_Horne]

Are there really any teens under 18 that choose not to drink because the law tells them so? I'd like to meet those three.

*Raises hand sheepishly*

I have chosen not to drink until I am twenty-one and to do so in as responsible a matter as I can. I do not consider it a fun thing to get drunk and in going to college had my share of drunken friends to watch as an example. Accompanying one friend to the grocery store barefoot to purchase more wine at one in the morning was wild enough for me. I have never been in the car with a drunk driver and barring sheer stupidity never will.

Besides, I'm not alone in this designation, I had friends at school who also remained the only sober ones in the room and got to watch everyone else act like morons. No thanks. That is also the reason why I abstain from narcotics of any kind (that and I hate everything associated with them). I have no desire to take a break from this world beyond the natural act of going to sleep at night.

I can also take a little pride in that my hero Robert Kennedy also waited, for one reason or another, until he was twenty-one to have his first true drink. His father offered each of his nine children one thousand dollars not to drink or smoke until they came of age. Robert (and apparently the oldest, Joe Jr.) were the only ones who won the money. But to be fair that was way back in the thirties and forties when children and teens were still far more accountable for their actions.

And Baron's right, fftopic:

L_H

 

[Section10]

*Raises hand sheepishly*L_H

Why raise it sheepishly? Raise it proudly.
All intimate sex outside of marriage is bad. I didn't make the rules; I just know what they are.

 

[mysterygal]

good for you Lena! that is something to be proud about. :eusa_clap

 

[Briscoeteque]

Why raise it sheepishly? Raise it proudly.
All intimate sex outside of marriage is bad. I didn't make the rules; I just know what they are.

Agree to disagree then, I suppose. I'm of the impression that I'd rather people have sex before marriage than get married too early. And like it or not, most times it's one or the other. I don't think sex before marriage is catigorically bad. It definately can do harm, but catigorically bad?

It is something to be proud of Lena. It's your own choice to make. I have a number of friends who don't inulge in my many delightful vices, and they have a good time too. It's absolutely essential to respect the conclusions of others.

 

[jamespowers]

I suppose life has some risk taking involved but let's not forget that there are STDs out there that are not only not curable but they also defeat certain forms of "protection" as well. If the virus is small enough then you are going to get it. Not exactly my kind of risk taking. Hand me the tobacco pipe first.
Oh, wait, I am married. I suppose I don't count. I am not a teen either---thank God.

Regards,

J

 

[herringbonekid]

i've had sexual relationships (with various loving partners) and i'm not married. i wasn't aware that i was doing anything 'illicit' or dangerous or bad. i suppose i'll be more careful next time.

 

[Katt in Hat]

If you could enforce, would these be the rules for all of us?

All intimate sex outside of marriage is bad. I didn't make the rules; I just know what they are.

I don't, she doesn't, none of us know save you; what's what? Does personal FREEDOM ever enter into your thinking? Just exactly who made these rules which you are wedded to and so certain of?

I am truly interested in your response and will be happy to continue a reasoned discourse with you.

 

[Section10]

Good morning

I think most people know the rules. They just don't want to admit them. As for enforcing--no. To enforce this would only result in oppression. Their virtue lies in self-enforcement. We are all free to do and believe as we see fit, but some behavior and beliefs come with built-in consequences. It's like the dotted line in the highway. It's not there to restrain your freedom, it's there to protect you and preserve order. You can certainly cross it if you like, but eventually you will get hurt and you will hurt others. The 'rules' come from the teachings in the Bible. I know many folks discount them, but that again is a personal choice.

When were the good and the brave ever in a majority? H.D. Thoreau

 

[Briscoeteque]

Good morning

I think most people know the rules. They just don't want to admit them. As for enforcing--no. To enforce this would only result in oppression. Their virtue lies in self-enforcement. We are all free to do and believe as we see fit, but some behavior and beliefs come with built-in consequences. It's like the dotted line in the highway. It's not there to restrain your freedom, it's there to protect you and preserve order. You can certainly cross it if you like, but eventually you will get hurt and you will hurt others. The 'rules' come from the teachings in the Bible. I know many folks discount them, but that again is a personal choice.

When were the good and the brave ever in a majority? H.D. Thoreau

Believe it or not I really agree with you, I am a true believer in the catagorical imperitive. I just disagree that this act in particular is catigorically bad. My rules don't come from one book; I say, why limit yourself to one? There's a lot of good stuff in the Bible, an awful lot, but some of it is outright outdated. Ever wear a blended fabric, cotton/wool, cotton/linen? That's against the law of the Bible too. I guess it could somehow hurt someone (heck, everything could hurt someone), but I love my cotton/linen pants too much to give up, and on an issue like that I can't accept 'just because' as an answer.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

on an issue like that I can't accept 'just because' as an answer.

I'm taking you slightly out of context. Apologies:

What Briscoteque said is something i've been advocating recently in a number of threads. Namely: "It's just wrong" is not a valid argument. It includes no reasoning (sounds like a "kitchen sink" argument to me).

Back to the topic. Some questions.

What does "illicit" mean in this context (teen sex)?

Does a teen who's married somehow have a monopoly on maturity?

Is it impossible to get STDs when you're married (or not a teen)?

bk

 

[mysterygal]

NOTHING in the bible is outdated...everything in there is really for our protection. I have known a couple of friends who waited until marriage and it was so baeutiful seeing how it was meant to be. With sex, your giving yourself away to another...again I think the risk lies more heavily for girls...what happens to the teenage girl who ends up getting pregnant and the boyfriend leaves..be a single mom? have an abortion (which brings on even more serious issues)...std's...or getting her heart crushed because the boyfriend has moved on? That is the safe guard of marriage.

 

[mysterygal]

A teenager who's married does not have the monopoly on maturity. From personal experience I know! I got married in my senior year...was not ready for marriage at all, and neither was my husband.