gadgetlady

LOL! Ain't that the truth!!!!!

STD's have been skyrocketing for years. The most current statistics indicate that 50% of all sexually active teens will have at least one STD before the age of 25. Scary stuff, indeed. Safe sex isn't "safe" even when one prevents pregnancy.

Just because that's your experience doesn't mean it's everyone's. I have many friends with older kids who have they type of relationship with their kids that I'm aiming for. And I'm also smart enough to know that just because it's possible doesn't mean it's guaranteed.

Yes, you will open your heart to someone else again. Right now it's impossible to imagine it because you're wounded -- especially if you still love him. Have you guys tried to talk through this? Maybe with the assistance of a counselor (whether professional or peer) or pastor? He's probably reeling just as much as you are, so I don't think you can assume that he doesn't love you back -- he might just be really upset with himself, and you're taking that to mean he's upset with you. Now if he's been a jerk to you, that's a different animal altogether. If you don't have anyone to talk to and you'd like to talk to me about this, feel free to PM me and I'll send you my phone number.

I guess since it was me that inadvertently brought this up on the HPV vaccine thread, I should put my $.02 here as well. I believe sex before marriage is detrimental to the marriage. If you have any questions about why, go read the HPV vaccine thread first in case I've already covered it

Oh, puddin, I'm so sorry for what you've gone through. Just remember that every one of us has sinned in one way or another and this certainly isn't unforgiveable -- to God, yourself, AND your future spouse (whoever that might be). Let this experience help you learn where to draw boundries in a future relationship, and also let it help you to be compassionate with others who have been through similar situations.

I'm going to stop defending myself now (at least for the time being) and tell a story. My daughter came to me a few weeks ago asking about something she'd read. I decided it was better for my husband to answer. So without prepping him first, I brought her into the room and said, "Daddy, your daughter read about circumcision and she wants to know what it means." He did an admirable job, calmly explaining it to her. She asked a few questions, was satisfied, and left the room. He then let out a huge sigh of relief and asked me why I had sprung that on him. I told him I thought it'd be better for him to just answer the question honestly than have to think and fret about it in advance. In the end, it was the right way to go: open, unembarrased, honest, and straightforward. And my daughter understands that there is literally nothing she can't talk to either of us about.

I think the mistake most parents make is to say "don't do it" but not to explain why. My daughter already understands the consequences of sex before marriage -- because we've ministered to unwed mothers as a family, and stood in front of abortion clinics watching distraught young women go in to kill their babies. My daughter understands our family's reasoning behind why we save sex for marriage -- because we've studied God's design for sex in the Bible. My daughter understands how STDs are transmitted and how they can be avoided -- because we've discussed how disease goes from one person to another. My daughter understands what happens when you have an uncommitted sexual relationship -- because she has cousins whose little lives are filled with pain because their parents had no desire to get married and no longer talk to each other. My parents made the common mistake. They said "don't do it" but they never explained to me why it would be hard not to. They never explained how powerful sex is. They never taught me where to draw boundries. I won't make the mistake they made. I am not saying I have the perfect family. I do not. I am aiming for a high target because I think my children deserve it. And I'll love them even if they miss that target.

I think there's a third option. That parents can establish a healthy, non-blurry relationship with their kids by admitting honestly the mistakes they, the parents, have made in the past in order to demonstrate to the child that we are all human beings and go through common experiences in life. I think a parent can validate a child's feelings and still gently guide them into doing what is right. I don't think we have to assume a "lowest common denominator" approach with our children. I think we can inspire them to do their best and love them through their mistakes. I also believe that if we establish communication early and often with children when they are young, we can grow to "know" how they think, how they reason, where they struggle, and when they are likely to stumble. In fact, this thread has already been the starting point for discussions between me and my oldest, and I absolutely love that. Call me an ostrich if you wish, but I like the way our family philosophy and dynamic has been working for us so far.

Of course they will have discussions with their friends! But because they have an open relationship with their parents, my hope is that they will come back to US to continue those discussions and get the TRUTH. I do not have a false sense of security here and I am not setting myself up for disappointment. I am trying to innoculate my kids against heartache in the future by teaching them right from wrong now. Do I know they'll make mistakes? Of course I do! But that doesn't mean I should assume they don't have the ability to make good choices either. I apologize for assuming you weren't teaching your son to abstain. It seemed like that's what you were saying in one of your other posts.

Which is why I'm teaching my children not to get their hearts and their bodies engaged before their brains. I regularly go over with them, even at their current ages, what are important qualities in a husband. You can develop sexual feelings for pretty much anyone, given the right circumstances. You can even develop sexual feelings for someone you're NOT married to when you ARE married, so I think by teaching them that "feelings" don't trump logic and good judgment, I'm not only teaching them to find GOOD mates, but also to stay with them. For those of you who are married but had "better sex" with someone other than your spouse, imagine how you would feel if you didn't have someone to compare your spouse to? If you never had to think, "Well, Joe sure did that a lot better than my husband does." Wouldn't that be an awesome feeling? If sex weren't just about "how good" it is, but about how it connects you with your spouse, spirtually, emotionally, and physically, about how it's a reflection of your entire relationship?

Wow. Thanks, Penni. You brought tears to my eyes. I do get tired of defending and explaining myself sometimes, but then I realize that my way of doing things is foreign to some people and I might be the only one they ever know that can explain my way of thinking to them.

On the first "date" that my husband and I had (we already knew each other socially through church events), we sat down and said, in effect, I don't want to be here if this is not leading to marriage. I don't want to give my heart to someone if it's not the person I spend the rest of my life with. We had a series of very serious discussions about our pasts, our futures, and our view of life. 3 days later we were engaged. Fewer than 6 months later we were married. Everyone we know, including friends of ours who are in the process of getting divorced, marvels at how good our marriage is. A good marriage has a lot to do with common goals, common beliefs, and meshing personalities. It does NOT have a lot to do with how well you sit together in a movie theater or whether you wore your best dress or put on your best face for the time you were dating. Wait, what????? You think our divorce rates are higher because "kids these days" abstain? ROFLOL!!!!! The reverse of that would mean that decades ago (like 50+ years -- certainly before the '60's), when kids were actually more likely to abstain, divorce rates would have been higher than they are now -- NOT! I personally believe in short engagements. Settling into a dating relationship for 4 years has the potential to condition you to a certain MO, which most definitely changes when you are married. But settling into cyclical dating relationships also conditions you to a mindset of "spend time together - fall in love - commit - fall out of love - break up", which is most definitely not conducive to long-term marriage. Too many people think that marriage is about "feeling" in love, and if you don't "feel" in love any more, you're justified in getting a divorce. Love is a decision, and it's something you work to regain when you don't "feel" it anymore. Cyclical dating focuses on the "feeling" of love rather than the reality of what love is, at least the kind of love that keeps you married for 50+ years. Besides, why get married if you're living together? I also believe, for a variety of reasons that I don't have the energy to get into right now, that sex and living together before marriage have the strong potential to taint the sexual relationship throughout the marriage. Maybe I'll have the energy to go into this later :confused:

I am well aware of the potential for culture shock. We're working to equip them for that. But that may be limited by the college they choose to attend. They are and will be well aware that people live different lives than they do. Just because they're surrounded by a hedonistic world doesn't mean they have to participate -- not everyone does. I met my husband in church. I think that's a great place!

LOL! You can always trust Carlene to be blunt! I don't think you can call a whole group of people irrational and then say "oh, I wasn't talking specifically about YOU, but only the group you belong to that defines who you are". What you have said about faith and rationality logically means you view me as irrational. You are entitled to your viewpoint, but I want to be very clear that that's what you are saying.

I would say the same for athiests.

So the people I mentioned -- and others -- would have been even smarter and more productive had they not bothered themselves with such irrelevant and irrational things as religion? Or is it, perhaps, that their religion centered them, informed their intellectual thought, and allowed them to be as brilliant and productive as they were? Why is it mutually exclusive so serve both a deity and your fellow man? As an aside, I don't believe the "will of the people" is always what is best for the people. Just as early Americans justified slavery by mental and legal contortions and just because it was the "will of the people", that didn't make it right. "Nature" is so incredibly complex that positing it happened by chance or by natural selection is, in my opinion, irrational. And I disagree that evolutionary explanations stand up to testing. But that's another discussion for another thread.

It is, but it is also a rule that we're hoping they will adopt for themselves. My husband and I believe that dating sets kids up by helping them disguise who they really are, causing them to "fall in love" with a person who's just showing their best side. We are working on helping them understand this philosophy throughout their growing years so that they don't marry someone they don't really know.

That is actually something I considered, but I weighed the slim chances of that happening against the potential, currently unknown risks of the vaccine and not vaccinating won out.

Firstly, when the first one is 26, that'll be in 17 years. So things with the vaccine may change drastically between now and then. Secondly, if they don't change, at 26 my girls can make that decision on their own -- and if they are not yet married then I would actually, at that time, recommend that they be vaccinated for precisely the reason you cite. As much as everyone may think, I'm not burying my head in the sand here! BTW, thank you for validating the fact that they might choose to abstain :confused:

That's right. The only thing they can do without parental permission at 15 or 16 is kill their unborn babies. {sigh} I think you're missing what I'm saying. Our daughters, when they're 15 and 16, will still be homeschooled, so they will not be away from us 8-10 hours per day. They also will not be dating. So it's extremely unlikely that they'll be sexually active at that age. That being said, if our lives change and we do not continue to have the open and honest relationship in 5-10 years that we have with our daughters now, I believe we will know it and will take appropriate action. But right now, there's no reason for them to be vaccinated.

Because we homeschool, our kids aren't participants in these types of conversations, so they do have a better chance. They know (or at least the older one does) that these conversations exist, because WE have them with her -- absent the giggling, the teasing, and the lack of knowledge that occurs when children talk about them. When I was in high school, 25 years ago, I was one of the only virgins -- so things haven't changed that much. I think sometimes we don't give kids enough credit -- you say you wish you and your sister had abstained, but from what you've said it seems you're not teaching your son to abstain either (I could be wrong about this, but it seems that's what you're saying). If our parents don't believe we can abstain, they're certainly not empowering us to do so. I'm not saying I expect it to be easy for kids not to have sex. I am saying it's possible, and we are giving our daughters as many tools as there are in the arsenal for them to make good choices.

I certainly don't think it's impossible that they'll choose a route I wouldn't choose for them. I don't plan on turning a blind eye and blithely believing it's not happening. I am a very realistic person. That being said, my husband and I didn't have sex until our wedding night, so I know it's certainly possible to abstain -- however "unrealistic" you think it may be. And our plan is not to "confine" them to our home, but to give them the freedom to live in our home until they're married. If they choose not to take us up on that, that's their decision. And if, along with that decision, they choose to become sexually active before marriage, then they can choose to have the vaccine.

No problem. There was a whole huge stink about it because he didn't want to swear on a Bible. I'm surprised you didn't hear of it.

Thanks - but I think a little more than luck is required. Unfortunately, my generation was only told "don't do it" and not why. We're working hard to make sure our children understand the "why" so they will make good choices in their lives. But if they disregard our teaching, then they can get the vaccine on their own.