Lunch Break: Community outraged after city-sponsored site offers condoms to young kids
UPDATE: By special request (Janet & JoyFromIllinois), ”PANTS INFOMERCIAL” link advocating abstinence can be found in the Comments section. LL
Warning: Adult content not suitable for children.
A staggering 63.5% of children have engaged in sex in the city of Philadelphia, making it one of the highest ratios in the U.S. 15% of those children had sex before age 13 — this number double the national average of 6%.
The argument for handing out the condoms to youngsters? “Whether we, as a society, want them to or not, children in Philadelphia are having sex. Therefore, advocates of the movement say they need to be protected. ”
I also heard last night on WLS newstalk (Chicago) that some kids as young as 10 or 11 are skipping school so that they can participate in orgy parties.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hegwgf9_lNY[/youtube]
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
[HT: FoxNewsInsider]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
What is the point of contention for this “community”, exactly? It would prefer that the majority of its kids who are having underage sex not use protection when doing so?
Joan,
I think the idea is that there is no purpose to taking a stand on an issue which already assumes an evil; that is, they start with the premise that kids will have sex outside of marriage. The question “should they or should they not use condoms” is a non-starter because it assumes a premise that simply cannot be accepted. It’s like asking “If I rob a bank, should I wear a bulletproof vest?” I refuse to entertain the hypothesis that you are going to rob a bank, so I naturally will not even consider whether or not you should wear a bulletproof vest. So it is with the kids and condoms. Now you may disagree and say that there is nothing wrong with kids having sex outside of marriage, but for those of us who believe that it is wrong, that is our train of thought. Thus, at the heart of this debate is really whether or not it is morally permissible for kids (anyone, more generally) to be engaging in sexual behavior outside of marriage.
Well, I think this issue pre-dates sex before marriage…. These little ones can’t even legally marry yet, never mind having sex… I think the main issue is WHY so many kids are having sex and HOW to lower those numbers. Let’s admit, when you’re 12 or 13, you can’t in any way give a fully informed consent to sex. At this age boys should be riding bikes and girls playing with dolls, not having sex. I would like to know exactly how many of them are doing it because of coercion by older partner or because of peer pressure? That is a far cry from informed personal consent of an adult person. Giving these kids condoms will not solve ANYTHING at all. First of all, because at that age you’re not really worried about protection and don’t fully understand the consequences of recreational sex. Kids live in the present, they don’t think too far into the future. Other reason is – they would either NOT use the condoms, not use them correctly, and engage in even more sex thinking that the miraculous “condom” makes it all ok, when in fact – the more sex (even protected) you have, the higher numbers in contraception failure it produces.
They have to educate those kids about dignity of their own body, about saying “no” and reaching bigger goals in life than an immediate pleasure.
joan,
For one, putting a condom in a child’s hand is encouraging sexual behavior. This is a bad remedy for a serious problem. Won’t this lead to pregnancies in a younger age-demographic than usual, thereby increasing abortion numbers? Who profits besides the abortion industry?
I’m disappointed, but not surprised. It’s not unusual to come across grandmothers in their late twenties or early thirties here, meaning they had their children and 12 or 13, and their 12 or thirteen year old has a child.
Good point, Vita. Do these kids even know how to use them properly?
We also have the dubious distinction of having one of the highest rates of chlymadia (sp)? and syphillis in the nation. Ben Franklin must be rolling in his grave!
This is the same Philadelphia Health Dept. that did not do anything for years about Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his ‘House of Horrors’. When the Health Dept. puts signs in public restrooms asking people to wash their hands, that tells everyone that most people also do not wash their hands before or after having sex. Ask the Governor to FIRE the complete Health Dept. as their left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing!! Then they should be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
The figures used are estimates usually based on PP’s Guttmacher Institute and are not to be trusted. If anyone has true figures and, therefore, the names and places to go with them, the police should arrest the older person when the younger person is below the age of consent. Stop covering up the breaking of the law.
“I think the idea is that there is no purpose to taking a stand on an issue which already assumes an evil; that is, they start with the premise that kids will have sex outside of marriage.”
That seems like a totally reasonable premise to start with, if it is true that 63.5% of children in this city are having sex. It may not be the ideal, but it is what it is.
“It’s like asking “If I rob a bank, should I wear a bulletproof vest?” I refuse to entertain the hypothesis that you are going to rob a bank, so I naturally will not even consider whether or not you should wear a bulletproof vest.”
The problem with this is that there are effective means of deterring and preventing bank robberies; a super-majority of people are not perpetrating bank robberies for which society has no effective recourse to prevent. In addition to that, a bulletproof vest only protects the wellbeing of its wearer; condoms are designed to prevent the transmission of sexual diseases between both partners, which can then in turn be transmitted to others, and not always through sexual intercourse. Society itself, as a whole, is safer when people who engage in sex outside of an exclusive monogamous relationship use protection.
“Thus, at the heart of this debate is really whether or not it is morally permissible for kids (anyone, more generally) to be engaging in sexual behavior outside of marriage.”
That’s fine. There is a time and a place for that debate, but the fact is that, according to this article, almost two thirds of kids in Philadelphia are having sex. Absent any credible, short-term plan to reduce that number, I can’t see how it is anything but a net positive to offer them something that can make what they’re doing as safe as possible.
“Kids live in the present, they don’t think too far into the future. Other reason is – they would either NOT use the condoms, not use them correctly, and engage in even more sex thinking that the miraculous “condom” makes it all ok, when in fact – the more sex (even protected) you have, the higher numbers in contraception failure it produces.”
Your argument contradicts itself. If kids are, as you suggest, completely incapable of considering the future implications of their actions, then it wouldn’t factor into their reasoning to engage in sex whether or not they are safer because of the condoms. Here’s a better way of looking at this: if we assume a baseline of no kids using protection when having sex, then anything that can potentially cause them to begin using protection, even if improperly, is an improvement. That improvement can be additionally boosted when the distribution of condoms is coupled with an educational campaign to teach people how to wear them properly.
“For one, putting a condom in a child’s hand is encouraging sexual behavior.”
But they’re not handing these out on the streets to every child that walks by. It’s safe to assume that anyone who is seeking out a condom is already sexually active and doesn’t need further encouragement.
“That seems like a totally reasonable premise to start with, if it is true that 63.5% of children in this city are having sex. It may not be the ideal, but it is what it is.”
While that may be true, what I mean by “not accepting” the premise is not to say that it isn’t true that kids are doing this, but rather that we have to assume that they are doing it and the only option is to try and find some way that we can make it “safer” for them to do that. I think my bank robbery analogy was lost on you. The point is that we never have to take any position on something which ASSUMES an evil action. Again, to make another example, suppose I propose that we give out free GHB (the date rape drug) to men so that they can safely rape women. What I mean by that is that by giving the woman that will be raped a drug that knocks her out, she will not suffer the consequences of having to have experienced being raped. So much of teh problem with rape is the trauma that women suffer while being raped. Yet if we can make it so that the woman is unconscious while being raped, she will not suffer many of those traumatic consequences. Add a condom to the GHB, and it’s almost as if the rape never happened! It is TRUE that this would greatly decrease the trauma that women suffer when being forcibly raped. Now if I was to ask any normal, human if they supported or opposed handing out free GHB in order to curb the trauma suffered by victims of rape, one would be perfectly within their rights to say “I do not accept anything which presupposes that a woman must get raped.” All teh same arguments can be made. “He’s going to rape anyway- would you rather have the woman remember it and suffer through it, or would you rather she has no memory of it?” The details and the fact that no one would ever back this idea is irrelevant. The point is that if we believe that it is intrinsically disordered to rape or to have sex outside of marriage, then we are perfectly in our rights to refuse to accept an alternative which makes rape or sex outside of marriage easier.
“Absent any credible, short-term plan to reduce that number…”
And here I would say, is the main problem. We want a quick, short term answer. There is none. They need education, to learn respect for their bodies and each other, to learn about all the dangers and damaging effects of sexual activity outside of marriage, etc. There is no short term solution, there is no quick fix. But I am not looking for a quick fix that may seem to work for a little bit, but then blow up again in teh future. I want to stop this at its core, which is a fundamental lack of understanding of the human person.
So, what is the point of having a minimum age for people being allowed to marry in a society such as we now have?
“A staggering 63.5 percent of children have engaged in sex in the city of Philadelphia, making it one of the highest ratios in the U.S. Fifteen percent of those children had sexbefore age 13 – this number double the national average of six percent.”
So what is it in other major cities? New York? LA? Chicago?
Age of consent in PA is 16.
This Dept. of Health’s sex ed sounds like PP’s. Got this from a friend. “Planned Parenthood is not only the largest abortion provider in the US, but they are also responsible for most of the failed Sex Education programs (which in most cases have not only failed, but increased the problem). …. and don’t forget Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher Institute provides their own teen pregnancy data which supposedly proves the need for more funding to expand their program annually. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE ARE NO REAL TEEN PREGNANCY FIGURES. According to Guttmacher’s own report (http://md05.embarq.synacor.com/zimbra/?client=advanced) , the teen pregnancy rate (see pg 19) is only an ESTIMATE based on the birth rate, the abortion rate, and an estimated miscarriage rate. AND Here’s the kicker… Guttmacher also tells us that the pregnancy rates and abortion rates and may be too low (pg 16). Furthermore on (pg 19) Guttmacher also tells us that the miscarriage rate is also an estimate !!!!!! Finally, consider that most of these reports attempting to prove the need for PP’s Sex Education programs, are done on 15-19 year olds!!!!!! 18 and 19 year olds are legal adults, many are already married, some have planned their pregnancies, and most will never be taking a K-12 sex ed program, because they’ve already graduated! So how does one go about receiving federal, state and even some local funding (which could amount to billions of dollars) based on estimated teen pregnancy numbers, which are based on innacurate abortion numbers and estimated miscarriage numbers ????? …. and how does one enable the “defunding” of “Abstinence Only” programs, claiming that these programs are what are causing the increase in teen pregnancy!!!!! How do they know there’s even an increase in teen pregnancy when there is no data? Even if we did have data, how do they know which programs are causing the problem? There are NO real studies on this: The only way to conclude which programs are working and which are not, is by doing a county by county study on #’s of teen pregnancies per county vs which counties are using which programs (with verifiable outside resources, books/speakers, etc., and with verifiable curriculum guides… This has not been done! …and good luck getting curriculum guides from Planned Parenthood programs, I asked for them 37 years ago, and to date have never received one (from the Miami-Dade program). Remember Planned Parenthood has been in Florida schools for about 38 years (mandatory K-12). Abstinence Only has been in for a relatively short time and only in a few counties!!!!!!
DO NOT BE FOOLED WHEN YOU READ ABOUT THE TEEN BIRTH RATE GOING UP OR DOWN AS A RESULT OF WHATEVER GIVEN PROGRAM…. BECAUSE DEPENDING ON THE ACTUAL ABORTION RATE, You can have a high number of teen pregnancies with a low number of births if the abortion rate is high, or you can have a lower number of teen pregnancies with a high number of births if the abortion rate is low!
If you pull up Guttmacher’s report, please check the data “sources” at the end of the reports. They are all gov’t agencies, but if you go to their sites and check where the gov’t agencies are getting this teen pregnancy data, you disscover that…. They have not done their own studies, they reference each other as “sources”, and most of them reference Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher as the primary source! (also when you see “Family Planning Perspectives” referenced as a source, you must realize that this is PP’s publication)
Around 1974, Planned Parenthood sold the need for sex education (mandatory K-12) to parents on the premise that 1 million teens per year were getting pregnant (this same figure was being used through the year 2005. Sex Education was supposed to reduce teen pregnancy and teen sexual initiations! (SEX ED WAS NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING TEEN BIRTHS THROUGH ABORTION!)
AT BEST, PLANNED PARENTHOOD SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS DO NOT WORK! AT WORST, PLANNED PARENTHOOD SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS HAVE INCREASED THE PROBLEM!”
Patty says:
April 18, 2011 at 2:14 pm
You’ve hit the nail on the head! “Like”
the fix for this is to have everyone keep their pants on and have kids be supervised.
I have yet to see a couple going at it – even as adults on the football field while a game is underway or on the basketball court while a game is on. the only ‘protection’ kids need is keeping their clothes on and being with others they would not want to see them with clothes off.
This is a bit like letting the fox oversee the hen house. so there is a problem – and you want to have the least common denominator be the ideal? When we expect more from our kids, society and government, we will get more. Give them the tools to do that with.
Pants and parents (or other adults – like teachers, etc.). We can demonstrate a better way. And it would help loads if the adults behaved themselves also. Bring out the pants commercial! ;)
Giving condoms to kids is like handing an m16 to a grade schooler and telling them to go fight in the fornt lines. It’s insanity.
What has happened to the minds of these kids? When I was 10 I was still playing with Barbies! When I was 11 I was still playing with barbies! When I was 12 I got my period for the first time and didn’t even know what is was! I knew what a period was but never thought it could happen to me because I still was so childish. I looked like a child and I thought like a child. I wasn’t the least interested in sex at that tender tender age. I think a normal child would not be. These children have been exposed to some titillation whether movies or internet or something being taught to them by sex ed teachers.. I don’t know but this is NOT normal behavior for children that young.
“For one, putting a condom in a child’s hand is encouraging sexual behavior.”
But they’re not handing these out on the streets to every child that walks by. It’s safe to assume that anyone who is seeking out a condom is already sexually active and doesn’t need further encouragement.
Perhaps I could have phrased that differently, because the kids have to order the condoms, but I still don’t agree with you, joan. Have you forgotten what eleven year old boys are like? A couple of the daring ones will order condoms, show them off to their buds at school, and dare them to take one home and try it on. Then tomorrow, they’ll dare them to find a girl in their grade who will let them “try it out”. If they don’t at least appear to go along, they are ostracized from the group. It’s the boys with the lowest self esteem who are going to be most tempted, and the cycle of early sexual behavior begins. Men, am I crazy or what?
~ ~ ~
Bring out the pants commercial!
That’s a great idea, joyfromillinois. I can already hear the zippers zipping and a voice in the background saying, ”Keep ’em up boys, girls aren’t toys.”
Where are the parents that 11 year olds are left unsupervised??
Janet,
I would think they might be making water bombs. :)
Hi Carla,
To direct towards this group mailing condoms or towards their kids?
“A staggering 63.5 percent of children have engaged in sex in the city of Philadelphia, making it one of the highest ratios in the U.S. Fifteen percent of those children had sexbefore age 13 – this number double the national average of six percent.”
So what is it in other major cities? New York? LA? Chicago?
Hi hippie,
FOX NEWS should have mentioned the study their numbers came from, don’t you think? It appears to be from the 2009 Youth Risk Surveillance System report of high school students by the CDC. I’m interested in the influence of alcohol on teen pregnancies so I included those figures and added Broward County, FL for geographic variation. Note the higher incidence of alcohol/drug use – in an area known for Spring Break partying. (Ft. Lauderdale is in Broward County.)
Teen sex:
PHI: 63.5%, LA: 38%, NYC: 39.3%, CHI: 53.6%, BROWARD COUNTY,FL: 52.2%
(NATIONAL: 46%)
Sex before 13:
PHI: 15%, LA: 5.1%, NYC :8.3 %, CHI: 12%, BROWARD COUNTY,FL: 9.2%
(NATIONAL: 6%)
Alcohol or drugs used before last intercourse (among those currently sexually active):
PHI: 11%, LA 18.7%, NYC 18.9%, CHI 18.1%, BROWARD COUNTY, FL: 23.7%
(NATIONAL: 21%)
Interesting that Philly is quite a bit lower than the other cities I’ve listed, in the last category. Hopefully I’ve got the numbers right. Here’s the source:
http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/yrbs/state_district_comparisons.htm
Honestly – can we get that ‘infomercial’ for keeping the pants on – it was hilarious and so true! ;) Simple – and it doesn’t take a federal,state or local agency to do it!
“PANTS INFOMERCIAL” – BY SPECIAL REQUEST. LL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhC5hRm673M
Thanks, Laura Loo!
Excellent response to the lady who said condoms are safe — condoms are not “safe”… it is a false sense of security. I am tired of being lied to about contraception and barrier types of preventing pregnancy. They don’t work people and let’s not forget that the biggest reason for one to have an abortion is — FAILED CONTRACEPTION
Teaching 11 yr old children how to use a condom should be a crime.
Thanks Laura! teens should see that, followed by a discussion on having mastery and a real life based on real things – not on the illusion of love thru sex.
;)
Hello!
Pedophilia!
People, please, this is about sexual abuse, pure and simple. Kids that young are not interested enough to seek partners. If they are having sex, it is extremely likely they are just victims of abuse.
Philadelphia should be giving kids business cards with a phone number to report the abuse.
Giving kids condoms tells them that they should just give in to abuse.
Ugh.
Sick and wrong, people!
Sydney – actually, I was interested in sex at that age, and I couldn’t watch R-rated movies, didn’t have the Internet, and didn’t have sex ed in school beyond “this is the biological way people have babies.” People go through different developmental phases at different rates and we don’t need to shame people because sex interested them when they were twelve. Having sexual feelings is a normal part of adolescence.
Having said that, I sure as heck didn’t have any intentions of having sex when I was twelve, seeing as I was a kid. The idea that I could have sex with someone at the age of twelve didn’t occur to me because, while teenagers might sometimes get pregnant, kids didn’t have sex unless some adult was raping them. My parents raised me with the mentality that they didn’t want me to have sex until I was married, and, while they couldn’t stop me from having sex outside of marriage once I was a financially-independent adult, they were going to be pretty unhappy about it, even though they’d always love me because I was their daughter.
I’ve always hated this whole “they’re going to do it anyway” attitude people have about irresponsible teenage behavior. What if middle-schoolers all started injecting themselves with heroin? Well, they’re going to do it anyway, so let’s make sure they have clean syringes!
Marauder, when I said “interested in sex” I didn’t mean a natural curiosity. I meant desiring to have sex. NORMAL children at that age will not be trying to run around, getting naked and copulating. Thats not shaming anybody but thanks for trying your “shaming” technique on me for having an opinion.
Eh, i’m sorry Marauder. I shouldn’t check email when I’m in a crummy mood. That sounded snarky and I felt irritated by your perceived tone in your comment which may or may not have even been the tone you meant. So I’m sorry. But I didn’t mean interest IN sex, I mean 11 year olds wanting to have sex.
Some kids are “huffing” at that age. I think we should give out cans of paint and solvent, y’know, cuz they’re going to do it anyway.
Ninek said:
Some kids are “huffing” at that age. I think we should give out cans of paint and solvent, y’know, cuz they’re going to do it anyway.
Maurder and Ninek, THANK YOU! The whole “they’re going to do it anyway” mentality is something I’ve been fighting FOR YEARS! That attitude annoys me because it acts like teens are completely incapable of controling themselves, which is simply not true. Maybe if we stopped expecting them to not control themselves and started encouraging their self-control more maybe they would.
I’ve had teens come up to me and tell me they wanted to wait until marriage to have sex. One teen even asked me about talking about chastity to a friend of hers.
Having worked with high school teens, I got some very good, intelligent questions about self-control, chastity, and dealing with hormones/desire. Given the chance, they can do some pretty incredible things–including abstaining from sex and practicing chastity.
Sure, there are those who will probably “do it anyway” but that doesn’t mean we don’t stop encouraging abstainence and chastity just because there’s those who might do it anyway.
The mentality of “oh supply them with contraception because they’re going to do it anyway” doesn’t do anything to lower the problems of teen pregnancy, STDs, and abortion.
Michele @ 7:42
Teaching 11 year old children how to use a condom should be a crime.
I agree, Michele. It should be classified as child abuse.