The Con in Condom: Safe Sex!

SAFE. 1. Free from harm or risk, unhurt
2. Secure from threat of danger, harm or loss
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh edition (2007) Pg. 1095

In the last 30 years condoms have claimed to be the savior of sexuality by providing safe sex or safer sex. Condoms are being sold and distributed around the world as the solution to casual sexual behaviors in preventing pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.

Really!

What are the odds?

In best case scenarios of condom use, approximately 3% of couples who used condoms consistently and correctly experience an unintended pregnancy during the first year of use. 1.
However, consistent and correct use does not represent typical use of condoms.

Consistency is defined as using a condom at every act of sexual intercourse. Correct use means "using undamaged, unexpired condoms, using only water-based lubricants, careful opening of the package, correct placement and use throughout intercourse, and correct removal of the condom after ejaculation." 2.

Typical condom use is more accurately represented by a failure rate of 14%, accounting for inconsistent and incorrect use as well as breakage and slippage. Use factors such as experience, condom size and use of lubricant can affect slippage and breakage. 3.

A study involving 26,291 homosexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women who visited the University of Colorado's clinic in Denver over a two year period reported that 57% of the women, 48% of the heterosexual men and 33% of the homosexual men reported condom error. 4

Efficacy rates for condom use is generally reported for pregnancy. However, rates for sexually transmitted diseases vary by disease.

Condoms do not prevent transmission of the human papillomavirus, which is the leading cause of cervical cancer. 5.

Condoms may reduce risk of HIV infection by approximately 69%. 6.

Between The Lines, Michigan's statewide gay newspaper, reports that the risk of anal cancer increases by nearly 4,000% for men who have sex with men. They state that a condom only offers limited protection against developing anal cancer." 7.


HIGH ODDS OF 'ACCIDENT'

What do these efficacy rates mean in terms of human numbers?

Would you get into an automobile or a plane with these odds??????

Suppose, for example, that 20 million people used condoms for 'protection'.
By the best case of 3% failure rate, 600,000 people will experience failure.

How can we envision the immensity of this number? A typical arena for an NBA game holds about 20,000 people. It would take 30 arenas filled to capacity to hold the people in this sample of 20 million who failed to be 'safe' using a condom.

By the typical use rate of 14% failure, 2,800,000 people will be 'unpleasantly surprised'.

That's TWO MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND! Now we're talking about 140 arenas of 20,000 people.


SEDUCTION OF THE YOUNG

Many of us remember when sex was treated with respect and awe because it was the behavior that created new life.
Sex was treated with concern because of the serious diseases that were spread through this behavior.
Sex was not a toy to be experimented with and played with by children.
Sexuality was a sacred behavior to be saved and 'kept safe' for marriage and family.

However, in the last 30 years sexual behavior has been 'sold' to the young as a choice or an option of behavior. Condom companies have introduced their products within the school system with instructions as to its use.

In November of 1991, the New York City high schools inaugurated the first large-scale condom distribution program in the nation. Under a cloak of secrecy, condoms were made available to students, even if their parents objected. 8.

Donated by Carter-Wallace, maker of the Trojan brand of condom, and Schmid Laboratories, the maker of Ramses, 500 or 1,000 boxes of condoms were delivered to each school. A pamphlet explaining how to use the condom was included and teachers also provided instruction. Teachers were taught how to avoid discouraging students who wanted a condom, while reminding them that 'abstinence is a viable option'. 9.

By 1997, 418 public schools made condoms available to students. 10.

Now condoms come in different colors and different flavors!
Young people have been drawn into early and promiscuous sexual relationships.

In March of 2008, researchers at the federal Center for Disease Control and Prevention announced that 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted disease. 11.
The virus that causes cervical cancer, the human papilloma virus, was the most common. Chlamydia, the second most common, is usually without symptoms and can cause infertility.

"America has the highest teen pregnancy rate for developed countries in the world, and has one of the highest teen STD rates as well...in recent years, 65% of STD infections were in people under the age of 24, and one out of four HIV infections were in people under the age of 22." 12.


STRAIGHT TALK

Let's talk straight to the children and youth. Let's tell it like it is.

It is the place of the public schools to teach the truth about behaviors to it's students.
It's the place of the schools to teach young people self-respect, self-control, and self-discipline rather than careless indulgence of sexual behaviors.

Abstinence is the only sure defense against unplanned pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

Sexuality should be returned to the safety of marriage relationships, not handed to children as lollipops.


References:

1. Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitteds Disease (STD) Prevention. June 12-13,
2000. Hyatt Dulles Airport. Herndon, Virginia. Page 10.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. National Institute of Health, Dept. of Health and Human Services.July, 20, 2001.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Facts about condoms and their use in prevcnting HIV infections and other STDs . CDC
HIV/AIDS Prevention: July 1993:1-3.
3. Workshop Summary: (see above) Page 10.
4. Condom Use and the Spread of Sexually Transmitted Dieseases. April 19th, 2008.
http://www.condomman.com/articles/index.php?tag=rising-std-rates.
5. Condoms' Effectiveness in Preventing Pregnancy, Std's at Center of Debate on Revising Package Labels. The Media Project. June
30,2005. http://www.themediaproject.com/news/itn/063005.htm.
6. Weller, SC. "A meta-analysis of condom effectiveness in reducing sexually transmitted HIV." Soc Sci Med. 1993 Jun:36(12):1635-44.
Comment in Soc Sci Med. 1994 Apr:38(8): 1169-70.
7. Glenn, Gary. "Compassionate Society Should Discourage Deadly Homosexual Behavior." American Family Association.
March 19, 2001. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1039280/posts.
8. Berger, Joseph. "Start of Condom Distribution Fails to Faze Many Students". November 24, 1991. The New York Times.
nytimes.com.
9. Ibid.
10. Advocates for Youth. Unpublished data from the School Condom Availability Clearinghouse. Washington DC: Advocates, 1997.
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fsschcon.htm.
11. The Associated Press. Tuesday, March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940/print/1/displaymode/1098.
12. Safe Sex Education in the USA. March 25th, 2008. http://www.condomman.com/articles/index.php?tag=rising-std-rates.

Homosexuality? Caution is Wisdom!

At the end of April, 2008 the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network and the United States Student Association will sponsor the 12th annual Day of Silence in many public schools across the country with the goal of increasing tolerance for the homosexual lifestyle among children.

I am astonished and concerned at how quickly our society has been influenced to move toward the normalization of homosexuality.

I am not here discussing homosexuals, many of whom contribute generously to their community. As individuals in society, every person deserves respect and consideration. I am rather considering the personal and social consequences of homosexuality as a normalized lifestyle.

Some argue that homosexuality has a genetic base. There is much debate about this.
A molecular biologist who headed studies on gay brothers in 1993 concluded that social influences play the leading role in determining homosexuality. He stated, "From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited."1.


Many behaviors, including premarital and extramarital sex, incest, sexual abuse of children, and polygamy, may have genetic predispositions; however, behavior is more than genetics. Behavior has a social dimension. To extend normality to behaviors that may be destructive to individuals and society and may take generations to repair is neither prudent, just, nor practical. 2.

The profound changes that would occur in social organization warrant caution and serious consideration, particularly in regard to social integration, social freedom, social reproduction, and social health.

Homosexuality and social integration

The normalization of homosexuality will encourage social disintegration as men relate intimately to men and women to women. In spite of immense variation within the sexes, there remain fundamental differences in biological and emotional makeup. Misunderstanding will develop as each sex holds the other in unrealistic awe on the one hand or loathing on the other.

The traditional family is the building block for the integration of society as individuals grow in
understanding of various perspectives within the heterosexual family. This family unit integrates men and women, children, grandparents and extended relatives in personal and caring relationships that transcend the generations. Countless research studies confirm that the greatest sources of nurture, support, and meaning for the majority of Americans are found within the family unit. 3. 3a.

To preserve and support the family as the building block for social integration, our schools need to include training in the processes that enable caring relationships in marriage and family, including skills in communication, conflict resolution, and compromise.

Homosexuality and social freedom

The essence of freedom in America does not rest on the belief that every person can do whatever he or she wants to do at all times. Freedom in America maintains our ability to preserve and protect our best values, express them within the culture, and pass them on to future generations. Social freedom requires responsible citizenship.

The family is the foundation upon which freedom is built. The autonomous family preserves and passes down it's unique cultural values to the next generation, providing the checks and balances in society which guard against destructive extremes.

Homosexuality will jeopardize the intergenerational transfer of cultural patterns within society.

Homosexuality and social reproduction

The normalization of homosexuality will jeopardize social reproduction and the intergenerational transfer of genetic patterns. Reproduction within the homosexual union will necessitate contrivance and manipulation.

The specter of eugenics becomes evident as the commercialization of reproduction through the buying of sperm and egg and the creating of children through deliberate planning by professionals (at high cost) replaces the caring and loving union of mother , father, children, and extended family.

Homosexuality and social health

Personal and public health risks associated with homosexual behaviors are deeply troubling.

According to the American Medical Association, homosexual youth are 23 times more apt to contact a Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) than their heterosexual counterparts.4

* Syphilis rates in the U.S. that had significantly decreased in the 1990's, increased between 2001 and 2006, primarily among men. Syphilis rates attributed to men having sex with men (MSM) increased from 4% in 2000 to 62% in 2004.5.

* In a 1997 news article, The New York Times stated that a male teenager entering the homosexual lifestyle today has a 50% chance of getting AIDS by the age of fifty.6.

* By 1998, AIDS was the fifth leading cause of death for people ages 25-44. The first cases were reported in the U.S. in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those affected with AIDS are male. Bisexual behaviors have transferred the disease to the heterosexual community.7.

* In the United States, MSM accounted for 70% of all estimated HIV infections in 2004, even though only about 5-7% of male adults and adolescents identify themselves as MSM.8.

* The cumulative estimated deaths of persons with AIDS in the United States in 2005 was 530,307 persons. 9.

Homosexuality comes to school

In the early 1990's homosexual activists sought to promote tolerance of the gay and lesbian lifestyles in the public schools, and to normalize these lifestyles in the public perception. The National Education Association promoted material entitled Affording Equal Opportunity to Gay and Lesbian Students. 10.

Although children have neither the experience nor the insight to evaluate this information, comprehensive sex education curriculums included discussions of homosexuality even in elementary materials. Teaching homosexuality as a viable and normal behavior to elementary children is of particular concern because preadolescent children typically gather in same sex groups, avoiding the opposite sex. To present this as a possible sign of homosexual attraction jeopardizes the ability of children to move into a healthy heterosexual relationship and marriage.

Caution is wisdom

In 1993, Morton Kaplan analyzed the changing patterns of sexual and family relationships and wisely cautioned against hasty and unexamined changes in family patterns. He states, "Our ability to function rationally depends on taboos and social and legal constraints that maintain character and a sense of appropriateness...I suggest prudence, that we do not allow a slippery slope to take us unawares... We need serious discussion rather than the polemics and the heat we are now generating." 11.

In 2003, a writer in the Wall Street Journal cautioned, "Most of the 'slippery slope' warnings of the last decades have proved tragically accurate despite the mockery that silenced them. From the domino theory, to drugs, divorce, to permissive sexuality, who can deny the devastation wrought by each - broken homes, addictions, AIDS?"

Personal and social effects of changes should be seriously weighed before extending the range of permissible behavior.

References

1. Palen, John A. Social Problems for the twenty-First Century. 2001. McGraw Hill:438-439.
2. Kaplan. Morton A. "Common sense on gay rights." The World and I October, 1993:403-407.

3. Marriage in America: A Report to the Nation. Council on Families. 1995:pgs. 9-11.

http://www.americanvalues.org/html/r-marriage_in_america.html.

3 a. Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-Six Conclusions from the Social Sciences. Institute for American Values. 2005.
New York, NY.
4. American Adolescents: How Healthy Are They? The American Medical Association. 1990: pg 31.
5. Center for Disease Control, STD Surveillance 2006.

http://www.cdc,gov/STD/stats/syphilis.htm. Jan 2, 2008.
6. Sheryl Gay Stolberg. "Gay Culture Sense and Sexuality". New York Times (late edition, east coast), 23, 1997. section4, pg. 1.
7. Center for Disease Control. July 2006. http://wwwcdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/print/msm.htm.
8. Center for Disease Control, April 2004.
9. Center for Disease Control-Basic Statistics. pg. 5. June 28, 2007.
10. Buss, Dale. "homosexual rights go to school." Christianity Today. Vol. 37, No. 6 (May 17) 1993:70-72.
11. Kaplan, Morton A. "Common sense on gay rights." The World and I. October, 1993:403-407.
12. Kaylan, Melik. "The Way We Live Now". The Wall Street Journal. Friday. August 8, 2003. Opinion Page

The Deceitful Web of Pornography

Pornography and sexual temptation are ripping the soul out of our American culture.1. Young people are being drawn into early and promiscuous sexual behaviors that leave them with sexually transmitted diseases and out-of-wedlock children. Many families are being pulled apart by destructive sexual images that come into homes on television and the internet. Pornography has become the standard of sexiness in our society. In today's culture porn is chic. We are being given a license to lust. Our culture is consumed with sex.2.

A lost generation

Ben Shapiro, a 22 year old young man, released a book in 2005 that challenges this breakdown of moral values. He writes, "As societal standards and traditional values have declined, and the crassest elements of sexual deviancy and pornography have taken over the public square, it is the youngest Americans who have paid the price. Never in our country's history has a generation been so empowered, so wealthy, so privileged - and yet so empty."3

What a sad and bitter heritage to pass on to the next generation.

Pornographic images and our own desire to rationalize our destructive behaviors weave a web of deception around us.

Deception: I can handle it!

Pornography is about lust and lust is addictive. It never satisfies and always leaves you wanting more.

Deception: I'm not hurting anyone. It's just entertainment!

Pornography corrupts and devalues our vision of marital love. Sex becomes a self-centered, one sided experience. Public standards of morality are weakened for relating responsibly to others. The women (men or children) are dehumanized and degraded by the industries that employ them.

Deception: Pornography prevents sex crimes.

Pornography is addictive. Sexual addiction can lead to desires that escalate from viewing pictures; to visiting strip clubs; to prostitution and voyeurism; to felony behaviors including molestation, incest, and rape.

Deception: Pornography is protected by the 1st Amendment.

Pornography that has been defined as obscene by community standards is not a form of expression protected by the 1st Amendment. It is the responsibility of citizens in a community to speak out to define obscenity.

Deception: It's not our problem.

Pornography degrades our attitudes about the value of human life, sex, and relationships.
Marriages are destroyed. Sexual images clog the minds of children. Young people are drawn into destructive sexual behaviors. Sexual excess leads to crime.

Deception: Christians aren't involved.

There is an elephant in the pew! A survey by ChristiaNet.com of 1000 internet users found that 50% of Christian men and 20% of Christian women struggle with pornography.4. Churches are failing to address the sexual addiction within their organizations partly because they don't know what to do and partly because so many pastors view pornography.5.


Deception: Sexual desire is natural. It's God's gift to us.

Pornography distorts this gift. God's plan for sexuality creates a family where the love of God can be shared with each individual.

Deception: God gave us beautiful women (men, children) to enjoy.

Pornographic images are not true images of the beauty of a person. They represent unreal, airbrushed fantasies designed to elicit lust and desire. The distorted images set unrealistic expectations for attractiveness and love. The self image and self worth of a husband or wife, girlfriend or boyfriend is wounded by this impossible comparison. Outer beauty and sexual seduction replace the depth values of integrity, loyalty, genuine love and concern.6.

Porn is big business!

Pornography is a $57 billion world-wide industry, including $12 billion in the United States alone. Revenues exceed the combined revenues of all professional sports franchises, including baseball, football, and basketball and the combined revenues of ABC, CBS and NBC.
There are over 4.2 million pornographic websites. The average age of first exposure to internet pornography is 11 years old.7

It's time to speak out!

In a democracy, every citizen can and should play a role in shaping the culture. Too often we capitulate to the media, allowing them to become the dominant force in our culture, regardless of what the consequences are for children and families. The state develops laws based upon the values of the people. When citizens fail to speak out, society "pays the price in a populace with lowered moral vision, greater crime, greater social problems, and a reduced clarity in differentiating between right and wrong."8.

An excellent guide for understanding how to challenge pornography in society has been developed by the American Family Association, under the leadership of Dr. Donald E. Wildmon. This organization has been active in the fight against pornography for 30 years. A 48 page document entitled "A guide to what one person can do about PORNOGRAPHY" is accessible on the internet at http://www.afa.net/pornography/PornGuide.pdf.


1. Rogers, Henry J. 2000. The Silent War - Ministering to Those Trapped in the Deception of Pornography. New Leaf Press.
2. Lambert, James. 1997. Porn in America - The Drift Towards Decadence in Our Society and the Way Out. Huntington House Pub.
3. Shapiro, Ben. 2005. Porn Generation. - How Social Liberalism is Corrupting Our Future. Regnery Pub. pg. 1.
4. Christian Post. Pornography in the Pews. Mon. Jun. 25, 2007. http://www.christianpost.com/pages/print.htm?aid=28146
5. IBS Confronts, Tackles Addictions in the Church. May 25, 2006. http://www.christianpost.com/pages/print.htm?aid=14111
6. Lewis, Andrew R. March 1, 2007. Issues & Answers: Pornography. http://erlc.com/article/issues-answers-pornography.
7. Ibid.
8. Hamliton, Adam. 2005. Confronting the Controversies: Biblical Perspectives on Tough Issues. Abingdon Press. Chapter 1.

Procreation or Production?

Procreation

Reproductive technologies have changed child-bearing in profound ways. Traditionally, deep emotional bonds have joined a man and a woman in sexual bonds of love to give birth and form a family. However, sexual procreation is being increasingly replaced with baby making as a commercial production that we undertake with doctors and specialists.1.

New family forms

Beginning in the 1960's, social movements which accepted and encouraged new sexual and family behaviors played into the rapid commercialization of reproduction. Single parenting, divorce, planned parenthood, abortion, the normalization of homosexuality, the decline of legal and moral support for marriage, liberalized sexuality, and female postponement of child bearing for education and career were creating social support for the movement of society away from reproduction through procreation toward reproduction through scientific and commercial production.

The expanding market of production

By 2003, procedures of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) accounted for 1% of the live births in the U. S. (and 18% of the multiple births). 2. By 2004, making babies had developed into a three billion dollar business.3. Expanding the market is of primary concern in business ventures.

Questions are raised

Advances in reproductive technologies challenge our sexual and family relationships, our human freedom and dignity, and our ethical and religious foundations. Many ethical and legal questions are raised by these new technologies. 4.
* How far should commerce and reproduction mix?
* Are the rights of children of the new biology being ignored?
* What is it doing to the way we think about ourselves, each other, and our children?

Reproductive technology and genetic engineering are destabilizing our procreative foundation and even threatening new forms of reproductive control. Our beliefs about parenthood, kinship and personhood are being brought into crises as our cultural definitions of relatives and kinship ties are redefined.

Brave new biotech world

The new millenium moved us solidly into a brave new world when the human genetic code was cracked in the year 2000, outlining the biochemical recipe, encoded in our DNA, for manufacturing and operating a complete human being. 5.

Eric Lander, of the Mass. Institute of Technology Center for Genome Research at Whitehead, outlined social dangers. 6.
1. Our privacy will be jeopardized because there will be temptation to pry into other's genomes.
2. Genetic determinism will oversimplify our expectations of behavior.
3. Once you see humans as a product of manufacture you cross a line, raising the greatest danger.

The new bio-industrial world

Commerce in genetic materials is fashioning a bio-industrial world that raises more troubling issues than any other economic revolution in history. 7. Well-credentialed and well-financed researchers propose the complete restructing of human life in the construction of a genetic super race. Many of these scientists have a financial stake in the commercial corporations that promote reproductive technologies, serving as advisors or sitting on boards of directors.8

Government response to ART

In 2004, The President's Council on Bioethics called for information gathering, monitoring, and reporting of the uses and effects of ART with special concern for increased consumer protection in regard to the health and development of children born with ART and the health and well-being of women who use these services. 9. Dr. Leon Kass, the former chair of the Council on Bioethics says, "There is a need for boundaries and oversight in areas of deep public disagreement." 10.


References:
1. Howard, Agnes. R. 2006. "In Moral Labor". First Things. March, No.161:9.
2. Wright, Victoria Clay, Jeani Chang, Gary Jeng and Maurizio Macaluso, 2006. "Assisted
Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2003." Center for Disease Control,
MMWR Surveillance Summaries: May 26,/55(SSo4):1-22.
3. Spar, Debora L. 2006. The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the
Commerce of Conception. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
4. McNulty, Timothy J. 1987. "Ethics of Babymaking". Bryan-College Station Eagle. Sunday,
August 30: 1 E.
5. Lemonick, Michael D. 2000. "Gene Mapper" Time. Vol. 156, No. 26. December 25:110.
6. Golden, Frederic and Michael D. Lemonick. 2000. "The Race is Over". Time. Vol. 156,
No.1 . July, 3:22.
7. Rifkin, Jeremy. 1998. "God in a Labcoat: Can we control the biotech revolution before it
controls us?" The Foundation on Economic Trends. Utne Reader. May-June: pp. 66-71,
106-108.
8. Howard, Ted and Jeremy Rifkin. 1977. Who Should Play God? The Artificial Creation
of Life and What it Means for the Future of the Human Race. Center for Urban
Education.
9. The President's Council on Bioethics, March 2004. "Reproduction and Responsibility: The
Regulation of New Biotechnologies."
http://bioethicsprint.bioethics.gov/reports/reproductionandresponsibility/chapter10.html.
10. Kass, Leon R. 2004. "Reproduction and Responsibility" The Wall Street Journal. April 1:
Opinion Page.


These concerns were presented in a 23 page paper entitled:
Who's Rocking the Cradle? From Procreation to Production
Presented at the 2007 Southwestern Sociological Association Meetings
March 15-17, 2007 in Albuquerque, NM

The paper can be accessed on the internet at my website: http://www.wrestlingwithangels.com/

Tragic Statistics! Wake up and smell the coffee!

On March 11, 2008 researchers at the federal Center for Disease Control announced that 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted diseases (STD's). The virus that causes cervical cancer, the human papilloma virus, was the most common, affecting 18% of the 838 girls studied. Chlamydia, the second most common, affecting 4% of the sample, can cause infertility. Nearly half of black teens had one or more STD's, while 20% of white and Mexican American teens were affected. 1.

Sexual temptation is ripping the soul out of our American culture, our children's lives, and our families. As we are bombarded with sexual images, our culture is giving us a license to lust. Little is being said about the tragic consequences of behaviors once considered immoral, even sinful.

Casual sexual behaviors presented as acceptable by Hollywood, television, the press and even our universities and schools have become the dominant force in our society. Young people are being drawn into early and promiscuous sexual relationships.

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING TRAGIC STATISTICS

Abortions:
In the wake of Roe v. Wade in 1973 more than 45 million abortions were performed in the United States by the year 2000. 2.
81% of abortions are to unmarried women
52% are to women younger than 25 years of age
19% are to teens

Out-of-wedlock births:
In 1960, 4% of births were to unmarried women. By 2005 out-of-wedlock births accounted for 37% of the babies born in the United States. 3.

Fatherless homes:
40% or more of children are being raised without a father present in the home. Fatherhood is the most socializing and civilizing role for men. With the increase in out-of-wedlock childbirth and the increase in divorce many men are being left out of this important social function. 4.

Deterioration of child well-being:
Key indicators point toward the deterioration of child well-being, including: rates of delinquency and crime; suicide; depresssion; growing number of children in poverty; and drug and alcohol abuse. The most fundamental factor contributing to the deteriorating well-being of children is the weakening of marriage as an institution. 5.

An epidemic of sexually trasmitted diseases has resulted from the increasing prevalence of casual and non-monogamous sexual behaviors.

3 million new cases of chlamydia occur annually in the U.S. Usually occurring without symptoms, chlamydia can lead to infertility, tubal pregnancies and increased risk of HIV infections. 6.

5.5 million people become infected with the human papilloma virus each year. Cervical cancer, penile cancer and anal cancer are attributed to this virus. 7.

Gonorrhea is the 2nd most commonly reported STD in the U.S. Gonorrhea rates for 15-19 year old women are the highest rates compared to other age or sex groups. These infections are a major cause of pelvic inflammatory disease which can lead to infertility, ectopic pregnancy, and chronic pelvic pain. 8.

Syphilis rates in the U.S. that had significantly decreased in the 1990's, increased between 2001 and 2006, primarily among men. Syphilis rates attributed to men having sex with men increased from 4% in 2000 to 62% in 2004. 9.
7
By 1998 AIDS was the fifth leading cause of death for people ages 25-44.
The first cases were reported in the U.S. in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those affected with AIDS are male. Bisexual behaviors have transferred the disease to the heterosexual community. 10.
The cumulative estimated deaths of persons with AIDS in the U.S. in 2005 was 530,307.

A male teen entering the homosexual lifestyle today has a 50% chance of getting AIDS by the age of fifty. 11.

Shame On Us!

Our parents and grandparents would have made a public outcry to the sexual portrayals assaulting us. Today we are silent!
Our silence and failure to challenge destructive behaviors provide no defense or support for young people that could help them protect their sexuality for a loving family.
Shame on us!


References:

1. The Associated Press. Tuesday, March 11, 2008.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940/print/1/displaymode/1098.
2. Center for Disease Control - Abortion Surveillance - US, 2000.
3. Associated Press. Nov. 21, 2006. MSNBC.com
4. David Blankenhorn. Fatherlessless in America. NY:Harper Perennial. 1996.
5. Marriage in America: A Report to the Nation. Council on Families. 1995.
6. Center for Disease Control. STD Prevention Press release. Dec. 5, 2000.
7. Ibid
8 . Center for Disease Control. STD Surveillance 2006. http.www.cdc.gov/STD/stats/syphilis.htm. Jan 2,
2008
9. Ibid
10. Center for Disease Control, April 2004; June 28, 2007.
11. Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Gay Culture" : NYTimes 23, 1997, section 4, page 1.