RE: The Purity Movement
December 23, 2014 at 12:13 pm
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2014 at 12:14 pm by TheRealJoeFish.)
GC,
I was, of course, being a bit melodramatic, because your post struck me in a sort of visceral way. I'll retreat from the emotional slant of my words, because I think my sort of ranting manner obfuscated the content, but I won't back away from the content itself.
What I mean to say is this:
1. Everyone here in the USA has the right to believe what they want to believe and raise their kids the way they want, to a point. I don't dispute anyone's right to raise their children in the "purity movement," and I would not want to live in a place where people don't have that right.
2. Just because someone has the right to do something doesn't mean they should.
3. I believe that things like the purity movement affirmatively harm children. Not to the level of child abuse under the law, certainly not to the level that would allow an outside force to intervene against the parents' wishes, but in a real, psychological way nonetheless.
4. I will try my hardest to convince parents who don't want their kids to hear about anything other than abstinence, who teach their kids that it's harmful to feel sexual urges and the like, that they are actively harming their children. I can't do anything about it other than that, and I don't want to.
5. I say this from an American perspective: the gaps between this country and others in the sciences are growing. There are a whole lot of reasons for this, and one of those reasons is religious fundamentalism placing a sizeable portion of each generation in a position to be unable to contribute to academic and societal advances.
To summarize: I'll never interfere with parental rights. I'll advocate up and down that parents change the way they exercise those rights.
Just a couple of things from your response:
1. I never advocated for children being part of a "collective" in the way you seemed to use it. The collectives I'm talking about are "the country" and "the world."
2.
You're right about that. There's value in "waiting until you're ready," and "making responsible decisions." But I don't see, nor care to see, the value in "being a virgin."
I was, of course, being a bit melodramatic, because your post struck me in a sort of visceral way. I'll retreat from the emotional slant of my words, because I think my sort of ranting manner obfuscated the content, but I won't back away from the content itself.
What I mean to say is this:
1. Everyone here in the USA has the right to believe what they want to believe and raise their kids the way they want, to a point. I don't dispute anyone's right to raise their children in the "purity movement," and I would not want to live in a place where people don't have that right.
2. Just because someone has the right to do something doesn't mean they should.
3. I believe that things like the purity movement affirmatively harm children. Not to the level of child abuse under the law, certainly not to the level that would allow an outside force to intervene against the parents' wishes, but in a real, psychological way nonetheless.
4. I will try my hardest to convince parents who don't want their kids to hear about anything other than abstinence, who teach their kids that it's harmful to feel sexual urges and the like, that they are actively harming their children. I can't do anything about it other than that, and I don't want to.
5. I say this from an American perspective: the gaps between this country and others in the sciences are growing. There are a whole lot of reasons for this, and one of those reasons is religious fundamentalism placing a sizeable portion of each generation in a position to be unable to contribute to academic and societal advances.
To summarize: I'll never interfere with parental rights. I'll advocate up and down that parents change the way they exercise those rights.
Just a couple of things from your response:
1. I never advocated for children being part of a "collective" in the way you seemed to use it. The collectives I'm talking about are "the country" and "the world."
2.
(December 23, 2014 at 5:04 am)Godschild Wrote: There is a great value to virginity, one I'm sure you can't nor care to see.
You're right about that. There's value in "waiting until you're ready," and "making responsible decisions." But I don't see, nor care to see, the value in "being a virgin."
How will we know, when the morning comes, we are still human? - 2D
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
