Wrong. Other vaccines are for diseases that are far, far more easily spread than HPV. Measles, TB, even Hepatitis can be spread in more than one way. HPV is sexually transmitted. Period. I don't see how my decision on how to raise my kids to see how much safer (emotionally and physically) abstinence is can be considered prudish. There is more to sex than just the physical aspects of it. I know better than anyone else in government what my daughters should be taught in regards to sex. I don't give a crap what anyone else says.
If it were just the Christian aspect of things, then maybe, yes, I could understand how it may seem prudish. But I taught my teen daughter abstinence for many, many other reasons than that. I know what her background is, I know what her situation is, and it is, frankly, up to me to decide how to raise her. If it were TB or Measles, or even Chicken Pox, (which I wasn't thrilled about either), then I could understand. You can't make a choice to avoid those diseases, they are easily spread through the air. This particular disease (HPV) can be avoided in other ways than just a vaccine.
There are lots of diseases out there. But precious few of them have infected 80% of the female population of the United States by their 50th birthday. I don't think your argument holds water.
As for the sex-part, do you really expect that your daughter will never, in her life, have sex? If she does, the odds are good that she will get HPV if she isn't vaccinated. Abstinence isn't enough -- you have to teach your daughter lifetime abstinence if you want to significantly reduce her risk of HPV. That may work for your family, but there aren't enough spaces in the convents of the United States to handle a massive influx of new nuns.