• recent comments

  • recent posts

  • My Recent Tweets

  • about

  • My Flickr Pics

    www.flickr.com

  • Miss California, Miley Cyrus, teenage girls wearing purity rings. It’s amazing how much this issue gets under the skin of liberals. They question the validity of a movement that tells girls (and boys) to wait for sex until they are married. It’s like they are offended that anybody would choose to only have one sexual partner. What is it about virginity that so threatens these individuals???

    A friend asked me if the end goal of the purity movement was to prevent unwanted pregnancies and the spread of STDs. To me those are just consequences of sex, teen or adult. The real issue is respect. Millions of Americans subscribe to Judeo-Christian ethics - one of which is not having sex until marriage. This is a religious belief for many and one that parents are trying to teach their children. As a society we would never dare to question other religion’s practices, i.e. the Muslim women wearing their garments as a means of showing modesty. But the Christian movement to teach children abstinence has become a source of public scorn and criticism.

    As a Christian mother I have the right to raise my children according to my religious beliefs. I also have the right to protest a system that would teach counter to those beliefs in my children’s schools. It’s not a matter of forcing Christian beliefs on other children. It’s a matter of parents having the freedom to raise their children the best way they see fit.

    If it’s okay to teach children about condoms then it is perfectly okay to offer them an alternative - purity.


    3 Responses
  • When you are around I have problems with impure thoughts.


    Posted by: chris faulkner on April 28th, 2009 | Comment Permalink |
  • Thanks for the thought provoking comment, honey.


    Posted by: angela on April 28th, 2009 | Comment Permalink |
  • Thought I’d share my thoughts in public, since I’ve already e-mailed them to you….
    Just read an article from the libs on this issue and I’m so saddened by yet anothe lib expressing their distaste for the abstinence movement. As a previous pro-choicer, I shared a small part of her views for a long time. I was sold on sexual freedom and my body -my choice.

    Only when I truly fell in love , and he made me wait for him (not that we were virgins, but it was a respect thing), did I understand my worth as a woman and a wife to him. Keeping in mind that I was already a pro-lifer when I met him, this was the first time I had ever regretted my past “sexual freedom reign”. I had given away something I could never get back, and we could never share that with each other. It’s a lacking we have overcome, but definitely something we both thought about. These libs think they’re selling sexuality, but they’re in the self worth along with their effects on all the other people they’re misguiding with the “sex is no big deal” approach to the most intimate experience a couple can share.

    I love that libs sell pre-marital sex as un-dirty, I think we can all dispute that with some STD statistics……Also the “punishing act of saving oneself” is pretty ironic considering all the debilitating effects of STDs, not to mention the disgusting amount of depression facing young women, the statistics are staggering, but I’m sure the libs are right and that it has nothing to do with their lack of self worth, I’m sure all the women out there enjoying sexual freedom aren’t the ones facing STDs or depression……

    Sorry for my rant, apparently I’m passionate about this issue as well. Guess I’m not a one issue conservative…….

    PS - Chris you’re just not right…..but funny - hehheeh


    Posted by: Rachel Plank on April 29th, 2009 | Comment Permalink |
  •    
    Leave a Reply
    Name: Your Reply:
    E-mail:
    Website: