Bristol Palin is now the poster child for teen pregnancy and will be campaigning with the Candie’s Foundation to warn girls of the hardships of being a teen mom. The best choice, she says, is abstinence.
Good for her — making something good out of a bad situation, blah, blah, blah, hooray.
But, what I don’t get is that Bristol’s baby daddy (I’m totally cool enough to say that) says teaching abstinence is “not realistic.” Levi Johnston says abstinence is great, but “telling young kids, you can’t have sex, it’s not going to work.”
Buddy, you used condoms and that didn’t work too well, either.
I’m not ready to just give up on the whole idea of virginity and abstinence before marriage — or at least before high school graduation. I’ll be the last person to throw stones at teens who have sex, but why can’t we still hold abstinence as a standard?
I agree that some teens are going to have sex, no matter how many times their parents give them “the talk” and no matter how many public service announcements they see about teen pregnancy and STDs. So yes, I think some messages to teens should talk about contraceptives and safe sex.
But that doesn’t mean we have to give up on abstinence. If parents, the media and people like Levi act as if sex in high school is a given, then kids are going to take that as a green light.
As Bristol told ABC, “Regardless of what I did personally, I just think that abstinence is the only way you can effectively, 100 percent foolproof way you can prevent pregnancy.”
What do you think — is it OK to just give up on abstinence? Is it foolish to think that kids are going to wait to have sex?