"The growing body of evidence proving the failure of abstinence-only education is as irrelevant to Christian apologists as the failure to find any scientific evidence that would support Intelligent Design. They would like it if abstinence-only programs worked, but their failure is a minor matter compared to the potential of teaching Christian principles under the guise of neutral education standards. Getting Christian beliefs taught in public schools — and hopefully accepted by more people in America culture — is certainly wroth [sic] the trade-off of increasing numbers of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. After all, young girls shouldn't be having sex anyway, so they are only getting what they deserve."
This blog is only one PZ spin off. The fallacies are the same although the hate is somewhat muted compared to that of PZ. But let's analyze his statements.
(1)Abstinence-Only is a failure. Of course it is! It is undermined at every juncture with sexual promotion, cultural Clintonism, guaranteed abortion of the foetus to save the trouble of facing the consequences of random sexual profligacy. Abstinence-only fails because it is trivialized by the very people that influence teens the most.
(2) Abstinence-only is guilty by being associated - in the post - with ID. Now, ID has no chance of being scientifically provable, and is not falsifiable. Abstinence-only would be both empirically provable and falsifiable, if and only if the external variables were controlled. In our culture, the pressure to have sex early and often far outweighs any possible pressure to abstain; the tail swings the dog. Abstinence cannot succeed in a pressure cooker culture that is warring against it.
(3) The pressure placed on Abstinence-only is seen here, where it is charged with the increase in sexuality and pregnancies that are actually culture-related, not Abstinence-related. The Atheist-pagan grip on the media of all types and the easy-out inducement of abortion drugs and procedures has produced a cultural corruption that is unprecedented in this country. This is lauded by the atheo-pagans, who turn and blame it on the Abstinence supporters, as if it is a bad thing in that one particular case.
It doesn't wash, logically, rationally, or ethically.
The final statement drops into the realm of manufactured hate propaganda:
"After all, young girls shouldn't be having sex anyway, so they are only getting what they deserve."
This is a sarcastic twist of what Abstinence-only supporters believe, a gratuitous and false statement intended as a stab in the back. What is it about Atheism that prompts such falseness, such hatefulness? One thing is for certain. Atheism does produce it.
8 comments:
"What is it about Atheism that prompts such falseness, such hatefulness?"
Being told gleefully that your are going to burn in hell, and quite often, causes a good deal of annoyance amongst us. (The gleeful part, as we don't believe in a hell, and it is discouraging to think a fellow human being would get joy out of another's perceived torture.)
And many a Christian has made statements that you claim are gratuitous and false. Perhaps not you, and perhaps not your 'type' of Christian.
But people going around that call themselves Christians say that 'girls who have sex before marriage are just getting what they deserve if they get pregnant or sick' quite often and loudly.
Just look at the groups rabidly trying to fight against the HPV vaccine.
Samuel Skinner
If you fail it was because the EAC was out to stop you? Yeah- real falsible.
How does either of these comments refute what I have said? (What is the EAC?)
What has been pointed to is the false and hateful messages of an Atheist. To say that Christians deserve it is no justification. I'm sure that there are "junk Christians" that are hateful also. That doesn't fit into the issue here, which is false and hateful statements from atheists that are intended to be harmful.
Samuel Skinner
Well, your argument is circular. Abstinance only eduxation not working? Must be someone else fault. Lets blame the media!
There is also a huge problem- it doesn't work. Yes, yes I know, people are causing it to fail- doesn't change the fact that normal sex ed is better. You might say "in a different culture", but the fact is we live in America, not The Culture.
You are right about abstinence only education being falsible... which it proceded to do in our society.
Atheists and pagans do not control the media. That would be (que drum roll)- the JEWS!! Wait- they don't either: the media is dominated by Christians and moderates. Atheists cannot be pagans.
The EAC stands for the Evil Atheist Conspiracy.
If that were actually what I did, it would be "shifting the blame", not circular. But of course it is not what I did. What I did was to correlate the environment vs the result. When I was young there were virtually no pregnant teenagers (probably less than 0.1%), there was no condom distribution, no abortion on demand, very few STD's being passed around, and no "hooking up". People "went steady" and groped, but knew the consequences of intercourse.
Today there are no consequences other than a destroyed human at the embryo stage of development; lifetime guilt for having done that; STD's at every juncture including killers like AIDs; single mothers everywhere without male role models for their children; males who are brought up without male role models and who are too self-absorbed to form relationships. This was not brought about by Abstinence Only.
This was brought about by hedonism and the paganistic self-worship attendant with Atheism. Even gay leaders now acknowlege that STDs are the result of their hedonistic lifestyle.
Although the world has more technology to sell today, it is not a better world.
You might deny all of this, but as usual, denial without factual backup is just noise. Bring facts to the party if you want to play the games.
Samuel Skinner
Okay, you are making the "Past was perfect" fallacy. For starters there were abortions legally in this country until the 1830s. And there were still abortions until Roe v Wade- they were just more dangerous.
You just didn't see it. You didn't look. It is like gays- they have existed for all of human history- we just see them now.
Err- abstinence only is about sex, not family.
Okay facts:
Not all gays are hedonistic- that is a lie.
The reason we have more single parents is the ease of divorce.
STDs had to come from somewhere- they were already heavily prevalent in the population.
Male role models are essential, considering how bad some people can be.
People live longer now than ever before- that is good. However, inequality is higher in the US than anytime in the past thirty years, leading to all sorts of social deterioration as the middle class has essentially treaded water. In fact, this is responsible for a large amount of the bad trends we see today.
Paganism isn't about self worship. Neither is atheism.
I have the truth. All you have are random accusations. It is also worth noting that you have admitted the programs won't work "because the US doesn't fit them". Wow- programs to reduce sexual activity in teenagers only work in a society where there is low sexual activity?
Maybe you see the problem there.
Samuel Skinner
For the record, paganism is the worship of many Gods (ironically meaning most self described pagans, aren't actually pagans) and atheism is the lack of belief in any Gods.
Hedonism is the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake... which people have done since time immortal. I mean EVERYONE has drugs in their culture of some sort and all civilized and urbanized societies produced a prostitute class.
Finally I misspoke on male role models. I don't consider them essential. They increase the odds of success for kids growing up, but they aren't essential.
Congrats on a comment that is readable and intelligible.
Didn't say the past was perfect, did I? I said it was different in the regards that I noted.
(1) Yes there were abortions; they were very rare. Just as the other issues of our current social decay were rare.
(2)STD's were rare compared with the raging wave of today. AIDs was unheard of.
(3) Abstinence Only: did I say it was about family? What is about family is the social rot that has been incurred in the past 30 years that you seem fond of. That social rot encompasses the destruction of any personal responsibility for any ethical decisions, including sexual outcomes.
(4) Gay leaders do in fact promote hedonism, as anyone who has observed "gay pride" activities knows full well. Don't distort what I say, it just annoys me and won't convince anyone else that you have a point.
(5)So you agree that the ease of divorce - "no fault" - has caused the huge number of single moms...that elimination of consequence has produced ill in the culture? But it is more than that, isn't it? The number of illegitimate births now equals or exceeds the number of legitimate, depending on racial background. So the "eunuching of males" is rampant.
(6)Having lived in a Southern state before, during and after the civil rights movement of the 60's and 70's, I'm here to tell you that inequality is NOT worse than ever, now or at anytime in the past 30 years. The *economic* equality of Americans has been driven by the economic downgrading of almost everyone, to where all families need two incomes to get along. Perhaps those two incomes come from one person, the single mom. Many single moms wind up on welfare because of such economic equalization.
There are places where incomes are very high; so is the real estate and so are taxes - equalization in pjrogress. There are corporate officers who make obscene $; this is not new. There are politicians that tap into special interest $; that is not new either. The obscenely wealthy have always existed.
But you are wrong about general inequality; that is a liberal construct to convince people that they are helpless victims. People who feel that they are perpetual victims need saviors because they have been convinced of their helplessness and personal inabilities. Is this category increasing? Show me some data.
(7)Self-worship is definitely paganism; Atheism promotes self to the ultimate intelligence in the universe, and thereby is elitist, self-elevated, and pagan.
Webster's unabridged, 1979:
"pagan:
(1)(a)formerly: a person who is not a Christian;(b) now, a person who is not a Christian, Moslem, or Jew; heathen.
(2)a person who has no religion."
Again you speak from opinion, not from fact.
(9) Finally, you use the ultimate amateur's defense: "I have the truth". What you have is just what I expected: denials without data. And your supposed "facts" are not correct. Try again.
Post a Comment