Should parents allow their kids to have sex at home? Your thoughts.

reply to post by Forevever


If you don't see how society is pushing younger and younger people to have sex...

I don't think sex is unavoidable for teenagers. I just think people have no self control and the idea of self control is no longer a virtue.

Teens are going to do alcohol and drugs anyway, that's the way society programs them.

Originally posted by 547000
If so, parents should teach them proper drug safety because they are going to do drugs anyway.

Yep, I think all parents should also keep an emergency supply of coc aine and heroin in the house for the kids too, in case of sudden withdrawal symptoms. Not that they're CONDONING drug use but I mean, kids these days, what can you do?

You certainly can't be a parent.

I think some of the parents in this thread need to grow up, yes you heard what I said. I am 19 (On Sunday) and lost my virginity at 17 at my girlfriends house even though we wern't allowed, we continued to have sex there and then started at my house.

My parents found out and we argued and she accepted my case in the end (as long as they never knew when).... now recently me and that girl (now an ex) met up and decided we wanted to have sex...the first time was fine we had an empty house, the second time both of our parents were asleep... our great choice following that? We parked my car up somewhere quiet instead...

With another girlfriend I have gone camping overnight in the fields specifically because relatives were over and it was too risky.

With yet another girl we simply found a quiet spot in a country park at night...once your in 'that' mood your inhibitions are gne and I'm sure all of us here know that.


My point is IF they want to have sex then your only way to stop them is to drop them off at school, pick them up from school, and then keep them in your view all day and night, every day and night, all year. You CAN not feaseably stop it no matter how much you think you can, if you have managed 100% no room of doubt wahtsoever, then it is because they wern't really all up for it anyway.

So where would you rather your kid has sex...in a safe house where you know protection is available...or in the bushes in a local park where any number of things could happen?

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by 547000
If so, parents should teach them proper drug safety because they are going to do drugs anyway.

Yep, I think all parents should also keep an emergency supply of coc aine and heroin in the house for the kids too, in case of sudden withdrawal symptoms. Not that they're CONDONING drug use but I mean, kids these days, what can you do?

You certainly can't be a parent.

Teach them about hard drugs and soft drugs so they won't do something stupid when peer-pressure makes them want to do drugs. Teenage sex is as likely as teenage drug use. If the reason why they should have sex in your house is because you "can't stop them" why not allow them to smoke weed you can't stop them either?

And if I were a parent I would never damn well condone teenage sex.

Teach them about hard drugs and soft drugs so they won't do something stupid when peer-pressure makes them want to do drugs. Teenage sex is as likely as teenage drug use. If the reason why they should have sex in your house is because you "can't stop them" why not allow them to smoke weed you can't stop them either?

Well yea why not ? I'd quote tobacco and alcohol death stats vs weed death stats, or I could talk about how over half of the US population is hooked on some kind of legal pill like zanex, but I guess it is just a waste of time.

Weed is not heroin or coc aine. In Holland where it is legal, most kids don't bother, because there is no lure of rebellion involved.

Less than one hundred thousandths...or we could say 1 in every 100,000 women, or in this case, teenage child experimenting with a sexual partner.

Well we could say that, but that would be false. That isn't how this type of percentage works. It isn't a guarantee that 1 in 100,000 women will get pregnant whilst using multiple forms of contraceptive by any stretch of the imagination. It is almost literally just the pharmaceutical companies covering their asses for the 1 in several million who may still get pregnant.

Why don't you do a little research and find out what truly was the reason for a marriage to succeed then where it fails so miserably today...better yet I will...that way we can compare notes and see what we come up with...that would be more fun.

I hope that staying together in a marriage is not the wrong thing to do...then or now...I mean of course there are times when a marriage must end, such as abuse, and extreme circumstance like affairs...but those are just examples of a reason that I could understand a divorce being the only way out. How many cases from the 50's do you think we can find where a woman, or man, divorces their spouse because they were just unhappy...nothing more...just plain unhappy?

Sure do the research, I'm fairly confident the predominant factor as to why marriages lasted longer back then was social stigma. I must admit I have studied American sociology so I could be mistaken, if so I'm happy to apologize.

Why is unhappiness not a good enough reason for divorce ? Why should people stay together with someone they are deeply unhappy with ? Kids ? Well ok fair enough *if* both parents can continue functioning as a unit, though I would argue that if the parents are falling out all the time it is actually better for them to separate as long as they both still do their part in raising their children. After the kids are gone though I don't think people should be forced to remain in miserable relationships with a person they know longer love. It is after all a fine line between love and hate.

And how many cases do you think we might be able to dig up for the unhappy... and for no other reason... divorced person in this day and age?

Many I'm sure, personally I think its a good enough reason though. I don't think you should just give up on a relationship, certainly not for the sake of boredom or misplaced lust, but true unhappiness? Sorry but I think that is a perfectly valid reason. If I made my wife unhappy, consistently unhappy, I hope she would talk to me about it and should I refuse to help rectify the situation than I would hope for her sake that she would have the strength to leave me.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

We are talking teens and sex here, not God.

P.S. When I see girls in mini-skirts I think unholy things

edit on 24/6/11 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)

Soooooo . . . uhhhh . . .

1. Is it your assumption that teens are 0.00000% priority to God?

or

2. That God is 0.000000% priority to teens with 100% impunity?

or

3. That there is no God?

or

4. That sexual acting out has no consequences for the individuals concerned nor for their future marriage partners?

or

5. Some combination of the above?

reply to post by BO XIAN


Is is your assumption that there is a God?

Don't play games with me here, I've heard of the line "I KNOW God exists!" to last me a life time.

Maybe just stay on topic without bringing your personal religion into the equation?

reply to post by maskfan

Well we could say that, but that would be false. That isn't how this type of percentage works. It isn't a guarantee that 1 in 100,000 women will get pregnant whilst using multiple forms of contraceptive by any stretch of the imagination. It is almost literally just the pharmaceutical companies covering their asses for the 1 in several million who may still get pregnant.

Let's see if the rules of mathematics applies here.....00001%...okay...let move the decimal two places so we can look at a whole number. .0000001...okay now we have a whole number and it represents 1 in a million...so I was wrong it is not 1 in 100,000...my apologies. So it is one in a million or so according to the pharmaceutical companies who are lying anyway to cover their asses...that is better on average...still scary for a dad of 4 young girls...so you can hopefully understand this is still not good enough for this dad anyway. I suppose I won't be happy if he chances of pregnancy were 0%...because I just don't think it is right and that is not likely to change...maybe I am just stubborn and in which case I hope it my err is on the side of the better.

Many I'm sure, personally I think its a good enough reason though. I don't think you should just give up on a relationship, certainly not for the sake of boredom or misplaced lust, but true unhappiness?

I am going to agree with you here. True unhappiness is different and should be a reason I suppose...I just have to wonder why someone would be truly unhappy if there was really no reason to be. If there is a reason then okay I buy that, but just because is not going to work...look at the number of people on anti-depressants today for no other reason than they are just depressed...no environmental cause, no behavioral cause, nothing other than just general unhappiness...matter of fact I think that might even be a diagnosis..."general depression".

Could that be a factor today...just general unhappiness? Is that cause for divorce you think? Does that fit into the term truly unhappy? I don't know...and even if it did...shouldn't every possible effort be made to help the unhappiness before we move onto divorce...anti-depressants, counseling, etc...and then divorce if all else fails?

Anyway the marriage thing is kind of getting off topic...either way we are talking about little girls, or teenage girls if you prefer, and whether they should be having sex in my home or not...and all things considered from your point of view and others in the thread...I am going to have to still say no...I have not seen a convincing enough argument to support teenage sex as a productive venture in their life...certainly not one that cannot wait until they are a bit older...let's say 18 at least...when they have some better idea what they would like to do with their lives.
I would hate my 15 year old daughter to miss out on the opportunity to go to college because she has to raise a child now, or god forbid a couple children, or maybe worse a incurable disease because the idea of having sex at 15 years old was okay and normal by societies standards. Can we agree that would be a waste?

Jumping in to answer the OP question. Being the parent of 6 children, up until a couple months ago, my answer was no, not in my house.

However, I have changed my stance a bit. My oldest (son), has been dating a girl for over a year. He's almost 20. I have allowed her to stay over on occasion. He has also been over to her house with her parents. They are (and have been) having sex any way. I would prefer they are home, either here or her house, versus being out in a car somewhere. Do I want it flaunted? NO. Do I want to hear any of it, NO! Do I know its going on behind close doors? I'm pretty sure it has. However, during the day (especially on the weekends), we can be out running about, and they are here alone. I know when the house is empty, they are going to no matter what.

I was not allowed to growing up. My parents made it taboo. Hell, even after I married I felt SO strange sleeping in my room when visiting with my husband. It still felt 'wrong'. Knowing how my parents were vs other parents growing up. It was those of us who were forbidden to do things, that found a way no matter what. The other kids, whose parents allowed it, to them, it was really no big deal.

I remember being a kid, in love (in my older teen years). When there is a will, you find a way. If you make it a big deal, you're kids are going to do it any way. I have taught my kids to be responsible. I have stressed of ending up pregnant (or getting a girl pregnant) will change your life forever!! They see me struggle through tough times. They know how much responsibility it is to have to take care of kids. My older children help out with the still somewhat younger ones.

Two things I have done over the years that have really made my kids think about sex and ending up pregnant.

First, they have seen births. We raised animals; From dogs to goats to horses and cows. They have seen live births. They have seen the animal labor, up until the babies were born. Some animals are not quite (like some women) when they give birth. The first birth my oldest daughter watched she asked "is that what its REALLY like to have a baby?", when I told her it was she replied, "I am so glad I have 3 sisters, because I am NEVER doing THAT!".

The second thing I did, when my girls started noticing "cute babies", and cooing over them-making comments that they couldn't wait to have a "cute little baby"...I borrowed a baby for a night or a weekend. I would offer to relatives or friends a free night out while we took care of the baby. Luckily, we didn't have any that slept through the night. And I made sure they were up with each and every feeding or teething cry that came about. And when something would come up while they were on duty, I told them they had the responsibility of the baby for the night so they couldn't go out. Talk about an eye opener!!

I am not ready to be a grandmother yet. I don't want my kids to ruin their futures by being tied down to a child before their time. You can talk, make sure they are mature enough to understand and make wise decisions. Kids are going to be kids, and if you wont allow it, they are going to have sex no matter what. Just make sure they are ready and responsible for the act, or what could come out of the act--accidents DO happen!

And this may sound sexist, but with my son I am okay with it now. Not sure if its his age or the fact that he's a boy. The thoughts of my daughters being his age in a couple years, I'm not sure how I will honestly feel if the same were to happen with their boyfriends.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

Maybe just stay on topic without bringing your personal religion into the equation?

Hmmmmmmmmmm

How is it that folks purportedly trying to DENY IGNORANCE

purport to be able to emphatically and arbitrarily declare and insist

that sex and sexual behavior is of . . . what . . .

such lack of consequence???

as to have absolutely nothing to do with ultimate belief systems?

Sounds rather uninformed, to me.

Every robust long enduring religion I know of has codified standards for permitted and unpermitted sexual behavior.

For what . . . 60-75% of the world's populace, there's no separating sex from religious convictions and emotions about sex nor religious boundaries regarding sexual behavior.

Oh, certainly feel free to declare, believe and act like sexual behavior has absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with RELIGION

FOR YOU!

Please avoid presuming the arrogance of deciding that

FOR THE REST OF US.

The parents came first. They pay to keep a roof over their heads. They can do whatever they want under their roof. If they choose to have their children "experiment" with sex while under their watch and for the idea of safety instead of elsewhere, that's their problem. Let them pass on their genes of immorality, err, "free-will" to their children. Let them know what it is like to make a dozen babies and see if these kids can support feeding the brats.

Originally posted by pikypiky
The parents came first. They pay to keep a roof over their heads. They can do whatever they want under their roof.

And you're talking about being immoral, yet are trying to dictate to on your own children! Weren't you once a kid? Do the children have much of a choice, but to be under your roof until a certain age? What you're talking about is foolish, and quite lame.

If they choose to have their children "experiment" with sex while under their watch and for the idea of safety instead of elsewhere, that's their problem. Let them pass on their genes of immorality, err, "free-will" to their children. Let them know what it is like to make a dozen babies and see if these kids can support feeding the brats.

Immorality?! Whose morals are you referring to? Your own! Trying to use the concept of morality as an absolute is, again, foolish. You're attempting to control other individuals thought patterns, and that's just silly!

People who have sex don't automatically pop out a dozen kiddos. I've successfully had a LOT of sex, don't use condoms or the pill, and merely pull out on time, without any impregnation to date!

Fail!!

If kids want to screw,they will...no matter what you say....so yeah,they can use the house as long as they lock their door....

reply to post by calstorm





A very interesting thread and a star for you and i flaged the thread on the strength of your

post. I understand fully what you are saying I have a 14year old who has a wise head on

her shoulders despite her young years. i can see exactly what you are saying because

among her friends are some of whom get coerced into doing things they don't realy want to.

but are too young and don't have the confidence to say NO or go against the crowd mentality

of what is 'cool' and 'hip' to do.

This thread has 'lumped' them all as 'teens' but there is a vast difference between a 13yr old

and a 19yr old. Six years of emotional development makes a lot of difference, From a girls

point of view it gives them the time to develope and grow in confidence and so be strong

enough NOT TO GET COERCED into doing what they may not realy want to do, but are

frightened of not being one of the 'in' crowd.

This should a carefree time growing up free from pressures. Youngsters these days don't seem

to have any childhood there is too much pressure to be an adult. My feelings are make the

most of your youth you're an adult for a very long time.

Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by calstorm

 

This should a carefree time growing up free from pressures. Youngsters these days don't seem

to have any childhood there is too much pressure to be an adult. My feelings are make the

most of your youth you're an adult for a very long time.

Very well said and I agree with your point here.

My parents allowed me to have sex at home. Of coarse that didnt mean every night and they made sure to leave before. But I think it taught me a lot about safe sex.