SEARCH:
washingtonpost.com
Web
| Search Archives

The Wisdom in Supporting Abstinence

TOOLBOX

Resize Text

Save/Share +
Print This
E-mail This

COMMENT

Discussion Policy
CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Who's Blogging

» Links to this article
Friday, December 28, 2007; Page A20

In response to Ruth Marcus's Dec. 26 op-ed, "Learning From Jamie Lynn and Juno," I feel compelled to ask: Exactly what is wrong with teaching abstinence and abstinence only to our youths? The message Ms. Marcus conveyed to her children was that when they choose to have sex, unless they are ready to become pregnant, they should use contraception.

Abstinence is the only 100 percent effective, natural means of contraception. If a couple abstains, there is a 100 percent chance that a baby will not be conceived. This claim cannot be made for any other type of contraception.

Educating sons or daughters to use any form of contraception, outside of abstinence, when they choose to have sex does not ensure an outcome any different from that experienced by Jamie Lynn Spears or by the character in the film "Juno." The lesson learned may, in fact, be identical to theirs, placing them on the same path to live the same experience.

FRAN VANBROCKLIN

Olney


© 2007 The Washington Post Company