I was fairly perturbed after reading “Abstinence-only fosters tragedy,” a column published on September 25, 2007. First, as a conservative Christian and proud virgin until marriage, I see many benefits to balanced abstinence-only programs. Second, I do not see the justification in blaming abstinence-only education as the catalyst for cold-blooded murder.
Contrary to popular belief in America’s very open-minded, sexualized society, abstinence is the only true form of safe sex. I find it hard to believe that politicians and educators advocate teaching middle and high school students how to obtain and correctly wear condoms, yet frown upon teaching students the values of saving sexual activity for marriage or – for the sake of sounding politically correct – until they are mature enough to handle the physical and emotional implications of sex.
As far as Ms. Rhodes is concerned, I do not deny that much fear and apprehension must have overtaken her during her pregnancy, nor do I deny that her feelings could have caused irrational behavior. However, I could never chock murder up as just an “irrational act.” Unfortunately, there are imbalanced, judgmental communities and churches in our nation.
Everyone makes mistakes and no person should have to confess his or her sin – in Scarlet Letter style – to anyone but God.
It’s sad that condemnation has been a common practice in some communities and churches, but that does not give Rhodes an excuse or provide a reason to end abstinence-only education.
Oh, and stating that Mary was an “un-wed mother” is a ridiculous support to the thesis of the article. According to Christian belief, Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit of God, not by premarital sex.
Therefore, there is no comparison.
Shannon Steven is a senior majoring in secondary English education