Why do people who oppose non-abstinence-only sex ed in public schools also oppose abortions for women?
It just seems like they don't want to make a compromise to get what they want. I am not a proponent of abortion, but I do think it has its place in our modern society. I just can't firure out why they don't want people to have a clear cut idea of healthy sexual behavior (which also includes being RESPONSIBLE) from professionals, instead of having the media doing so. Do you think this is creating a double edge sword for your cause? On one hand you can baby people who are going to become sexually active (and hope they aren't neglectful with thier loins), and on another hand you can prepare them and potentially LOWER THE DEMAND for abortions.
Answers:
The connection between these two positions is the underlying sexual ethic which says that the only proper use of the sex act is procreation within marriage. This is the basis of the Catholic view. Obviously if you only have sex in order to make a baby, then abortion is not going to be attractive - it is often used as a way of dealing with unwanted conceptions .
Although this is the official ideological position within Catholicism, many feel that non-procreative sex (i.e. sex with a contraceptive) has a function within a committed relationship (either within marriage or not). Frm this point of view, the strict position described above represents an inadequate understanding of the nature of human sexuality, which is seen to have all kinds of other functions than procreation, e.g. -
an expression of love
a way of celebrating life
cementing an reinforcing a relationship
a sacrament of God's love (i.e. way of receiving God's love through a material experience)
etc, etc
I agree completely with you view concerning learning 'healthy sexual behaviour... from professionals'. The problem with indoctrinating young people rather than educating them is that as they mature they will necessarily start thinking for themselves eventually, and they will then have a poor intellectual and factual basis for making responsible decisions. Their adult decisions will be less than fully informed or thought through.
Of course the very nature of indoctrination is to restrict intellectual freedom, while education expands it, so this is part of an ideology of slavery.
Professionals for sex ed? Mine was taught by the phys ed teacher - he was more embarassed and just went out of the textbook. No experts teaching in public school in most places. Didn't learn a thing I didn't already know in the class - would be surprised if anyone else did. In this TV/Internet age, if anyone doesnt know about sex by the time they are being taught it in school, they should remain chaste for life. Really, who needs a class to know about condoms?
Those who are pro-life view abortion as murder. So there is no 'compromise' to be had - assuming you are anti-murder, are you willing to compromise and allow some innocent people to be killed - 10000s or 100000s a year? Don't think so.
if young people think they are RESPONSIBLE enough to be having sex then they should be RESPONSIBLE enouhg to deal with the consequences of SEX ie babies.
Abortion is an easy way out, a way to dodge responsibility.
So by teaching them to abstain from sex seems more sensible and responsible than saying Have all the sex you like as you can get an abortion any way.
Also abortion is murder, i know that Legally a baby isn't a "life" until he/she takes his/her first breath but to say that a fetus isn't alive is calling pregnancy a growth (kind of like cancer), or a parasite (though a parasite living in a human such as a worm is seen as being alive) so tumour is more accurate if your dening that the fetus is a seperate (but dependant on the mother) life.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: