So… it seems that our current
administration is cutting funding for investigations into how to prevent teen
pregnancies. And, of course, this thrills conservative Christians who favor
abstinence-only positions. And liberals are less than thrilled, since it’s
rather demonstrably true that abstinence-only polices pretty much always result
in increases in teen pregnancies. So of course, there has been the usual chorus
of liberals and secularists pointing out this fact as if it ought to affect the
policy. But I don’t think it will work, because it never does. And I’d kinda
like to talk about why I think that is.
Now, this is just my personal
theory. I may be way off base, here, and I encourage anyone who thinks they
know better to correct me. But I think that trying to point out the effect of
different policies on teen pregnancy rates completely misses the point. It’s
based on the assumption that the target audience agrees that teen pregnancy is
a problem, and that reducing it ought to be a policy goal. And I don’t think
that’s true.
I don’t think that conservative
Christianity, or at least that portion of it seriously involved in government
policy and practically orgasmic over the current administration’s eagerness to
pander to their agenda, cares even a little bit about teen pregnancy. We
liberals and secularists may think they should, and we may even have good
reasons for thinking that, but they just don’t. What they care about is premarital sex.
You see, to secular society, the
problems with teenagers having sex is the possibility of contracting an STD,
and that getting pregnant at such a young age frequently leads to health problems,
unnecessary abortions, and long-term educational and economic disadvantages for
both the mother and the baby. Since those are the problems, and it is
demonstrably true that sex education (including abstinence, birth control
methods, how conception and pregnancy work, and how STDs are transmitted)
reduces the chances of these occurring, then it only makes sense to have a
comprehensive sex education policy.
To conservative Christianity, the
problem is with anyone, of any age, having sex outside of marriage because
their god doesn’t approve of that sort of thing. It doesn’t give a fig whether
we’re talking about teenagers or geriatrics; if they’re married they can have
sex and should get pregnant, and if
they’re not married they should not have sex for any reason. Full stop. The
only possible policy that meets this goal is abstinence outside of marriage. It’s
not about whether anything negative happens as a result of sex. The
consequences are immaterial. Their god said you shouldn’t do it, so you are supposed
to obey.
Thoughts? Anybody?
I
think that we sometimes talk about fundamentally different worldviews that value
different things as if they value the same things. We like to focus on what we
have in common, and in general I think that’s a good idea. But we shouldn’t allow
it to blind us to how the differences impact the way we talk to each other. Or
rather, allow it to let us talk past each other because we make too many
assumptions. It behooves us to pay attention to what other people profess to believe,
and take them seriously. I know it bugs me when other people treat me as if I
don’t actually believe what I say I believe. I figure I owe other people the
courtesy of taking them at face value.
No comments:
Post a Comment