That really depends on where that fence post is planted.Originally posted by: Fausto1
You'd argue with a fence post wouldn't you?
Excellent question and point. One problem with presenting a balanced case for teaching both abstinence AND protection alongside each other (at least as I've seen in local schools here) is that the only proponents we've had for actually teaching Abstinence are from "Faith-Based" organizations which are not allowed a public voice in our school systems. The "Family Education" that does take place though it references both "protection" and "abstinence" does not do so equally. One very small example from a test which students were given last year is that there was one question asking what is the most certain method for ensuring you do not become pregnant or receive a STD (the answer here would be abstinence). However, there were a number of questions specifically asking about different forms of contraception, how effective each one is, even to the point of noting common side effects from prolonged use (not kidding). My younger sister noted that in her family education class, it was very openly talked about between teachers and students that they could receive counseling and contraception from various establishments without involving their Parents. When my sister asked where she could receive counseling for abstinence, one teacher said "I suppose you'd have to talk to your pastor or church counselor if you have one.", the other said "We provide discussion on abstinence as an alternative and we recommend it but we are not able to direct you to counseling because more often than not - what is available is religeon oriented. That is outside the boundaries of public education." So to say that the argument of teaching responsible behavior should be properly addressed by the Pro-Life movement, ultimately reducing abortions, is in fact a good argument - that is until the hands are tied at the involvement of church and state. I'm sure there is the exception to the rule, and I even note that this is what I've seen locally. It is indicitave of the whole chicken/egg scenario of where should attention on the whole abortion issue be properly leveraged though. Ironically, this same school system I'm referring to now has a in-house gay and lesbian counsellor to protect the interest of those who seek their counsel (their argument? they're not "Faith-based").
I do not have statistics. Only this. Three of my cousins are adopted. Two are children of parents who could not have children, one is from parents who can have children but had two boys and wanted to make sure their third was a girl - so adopted. Both families chose to adopt children from outside the country being that the availability, costs, timeframe and legal issues involved with the adoption of U.S. children was very prohibitive compared to alternatives. It still was not a quick and easy process. Nor should it be. As far as the mental well being of the children (now adults) they were adopted as infants. The first two I mentioned happen to be exceptionally gifted and both entered post-graduate education by their 10th year of highschool. The third I mentioned is not exceptionally gifted as the other two (regarding intellect) but is no slouch at the studies or life pursuits. All three are very well adjusted, productive members of society who exemplify hard work, dedication, appreciation for the love of family and they care very much about those around them. They've at different times in their lives addressed the adoption issue and sought to meet their biological parents. One of them has met their parents. The other two sets of parents are not available for contact. They all say it is very important to them to ask who and why? They all also admit that they cannot envision parents other than who they've known all their lives as Mom and Dad. So at least in their experience, it is the love and care of the parents who provides for them the foundation from which they can experience life and achieve their true potential.
To argue that very same story, one of my close friends has struggled most of his adult life with the idea that he's unwanted and unimportant because his mother left him at the doorstep of a hospital. There was some "miraculous" nature of his survival being that his being found was during the winter and not immediate - but the miraculous nature of his survival has done little to quiet his fears and distrust of those who reach out to love him. He's incredibly intelligent, very compassionate and ready to help someone in need. But he's a tormented soul who's image of himself is so poor that he shy's away from family environments, works a graveyard shift so he doesn't have to interact with too many people and constantly refers to himself in self-depracating means. Knowing him and involving him as a part of my family, just now after 13 years is he comfortable enough to stop by unannounced or commit to holiday gatherings. He's a welcome addition to my family, but such an obviously tortured soul. I only wonder what a different outlook on life he'd have had if his experience wasn't one of being passed from one foster home to another. If he'd had the same attention and love my cousins benefited from.
I know those are isolated cases, but I think they're indicative of the foundation of a loving environment. There are always wildcards that do not fit in a prescribed mold or study, but to the whole - I'd have to say it's a matter of responsibility. I don't know that statistics could be applied to either of these situations responsibly.
You're right that those do exist. No arguments here. They're a black eye on the face of Pro-Life supporters. But you said it yourself "fringe elements". The Pro-Life society is just as capable of policing it's fringe element as anyone else is at policing theirs. How do you "police" someone who has their own agenda in seeking out and destroying property or life at the bejest of their own will? If I know someone has expressed that sort of inclination or desire to perform such an act I am very concerned and will do whatever I can to deter that kind of action or invovle someone who can. I for one am not jubilant that another "abortion doctor" is dead, so much the better bystander. Fringe action does in no way support what I believe in - even in its most loose interpretation. And you are right that the Pro-Life movement would make a lot more progress without hinderence of the fanatical few. It is important to note, neither I or any of those who I know in support of Pro-Life legislation approve of, turn a blind eye to or discount the horrible actions of those who perform those acts. We do in fact police our own, those who do the things you've described are not our own.
Thanks for playing nice Fausto1, your points in this post are thoughtfully expressed and further discussion. I don't know how the statistics would play out, so I can only respond from my experience. Can always do without the heartburn!!There. Discuss. And play nice so we don't give Sketcher additional heartburn.
Facebook
Twitter