Skip to comments.Study: 61 Percent of Teens Want to be Virgins until Marriage (Planned Parenthood hardest hit)
Posted on 02/10/2011 11:03:34 AM PST by Libloather
Study: 61 Percent of Teens Want to be Virgins until Marriage
By Jennifer Riley | Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Feb. 09 2011 07:40 AM EDT
Contrary to popular opinion, a solid majority of U.S. teens would like to be virgins when they marry, a newly released study finds.
Sixty one percent of Americas youth said they would like to not have sex until marriage, finds OneHopes comprehensive study, Spiritual State of the Children, released Wednesday. And 63 percent of respondents said they would like to regain their virginity if possible.
The 91-page study which also includes data about teens belief, values and spirituality was released just ahead of Valentines Day.
Results from the report are surprising given the increase teen exposure to sexually explicit media content such as the latest controversy over MTVs Skins and how they are portrayed by the media.
Other notable findings by the study for the child-focused ministry include:
82 percent believe God intended marriage to last a lifetime
50 percent consider an unmarried man and woman a family
59 percent said the Bible has little/no influence on their thoughts and actions
62 percent believe truth is relative
57 percent believe being good people and doing good deeds will get you into heaven
69 percent watch MTV on a weekly basis
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
There's only one way to do that - no?
Well, then THIS CANNOT STAND!
We must get more “sex positive” propaganda and pressure out there.
“Brave New World” is the utopia that we leftists seek!
I hate articles like this. All fluff and no substance.
How many of these ‘youth’ believe in Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth fairy? I’d guess approximately 61%.
Without age groups, this article is pointless. What ‘youth’ is going to tell their Sunday School teacher “Yeah, I’m the biggest slut in school”, or “I’ve already nailed 6 classmates”?
What answer do you THINK you’ll get from a church based ‘research’?
This is akin to doing a study on how many people arrested on possession of pot, swear that that bag of weed wasn’t theirs. Golly ... I’ll be it’s even higher than 61%
And I'm not just talking about Joy Behar. I mean the one she serves.
“61 Percent of Teens Want to be Virgins until Marriage”
Not buying it.
How about “61 Percent of The Teens That We Asked Say They Want to be Virgins until Marriage.”
Good for them! These are kids to be proud of...
is the target.
All leftist/Luciferian policies have the primary goal of destroying the nuclear family.
FYI....CPAC televised LIVE on C-span 3. At 2:30 EST, Forum on Traditional Marriage begins
Yeah, that was my thought exactly... human nature doesn’t change, and kids are not going to tell the ‘Grups’ what they reallly think...
It is mildly encouraging, but, the sample was hardly scientific.
Voluntary, self-defined teens on the internet could have been anyone.
A comprehensive survey that includes the right percentage of public, private, and homeschooled teens would really show the truth.
However, many parents won’t let their kids participate in “surveys,” I probably wouldn’t, I don’t trust the surveyors not to put pervy ideas in their heads, like:
“Would you like to remain a virgin until marriage?”
“Would you consider oral sex, sex?”
“Have you ever desired to have sex with a __________?”
“How many times? And how often do think about _____?”
It’s like a scuzbag in an alley asking your kids all these questions, so I wouldn’t trust it. Etc., I’d be suspicious.
1) 82 percent believe God intended marriage to last a lifetime
Look at 3). Something about the truth being written on their hearts regardless of how the "feel" about the Bible.
2) 50 percent consider an unmarried man and woman a family
A "family"? Really? Blame PC indoctrination and anti-judgementalism. See 4).
3) 59 percent said the Bible has little/no influence on their thoughts and actions
They need to study some history and philosophy. Without the precepts of the Bible, there can be no freedom.
4) 62 percent believe truth is relative
Which leads to gov't being the arbiter of what is true, meaning gov't replaces God.
5) 57 percent believe being good people and doing good deeds will get you into heaven
What's heaven to these kids? This is a [eternally] DEADLY belief. How do you know when you've done enough? Self definition?
6) 69 percent watch MTV on a weekly basis
This is most of the problem.
Well when I was a teen 10 yrs ago I wanted to stay a virgin too but then I got a girlfriend and she was quite peristant that we do the deed...me being a guy was tough to resist and well I tried but failed and it just seemed like all normal teens and people were out there having sex at least I was in a relationship. But culturally Hollywood bombards us with sex everywhere where it’s implied if your not having sex there is something wrong with you
Of course you don't "buy it". Hedonists tend to project. To the degenerate, there is always a desperate need to ensure that the rest of society is as degenerate as they are.
Argumentum Ad Hominem. Please provide specific methodological flaws, simply trying to attack the messenger (ie: Church research) is not a logical or coherent argument.
These stats are messed up, so I don’t believe this report.
“Sixty one percent of Americas youth said they would like to not have sex until marriage”
“63 percent of respondents said they would like to regain their virginity if possible. “
If true, that means 63 percent are not virgins (those who would like to regain it).
So it’s like they said “Yeah, I’d like to be a virgin, even though I’m not.”
pedantic hat on.
Actually, it’s more of a genetic fallacy than an ad hominem.
The poster was discounting the data because of its source.
Now, if he attacked the presenter of the data because he was from a church, this would be more of a circumstantial ad hominem...
(just havin’ a little fun with ya)
1. Method of asking the questions. If you ask a question that can incriminate, under what question is this question asked? Openly in a classroom, or 1:1 with a percieved 'leader' will likely give an answer that the questioner expects to hear. If you have a room with a small group, people will indicate the answer that is expected, to avoid a 'witch-hunt'.
2. Fear of reprisal. What happens or what risk is the questioner subject to? There is no perceived risk for giving the answer that the questioner wants; however giving a differing answer could cause distress (informing parents, social outcast, humiliation, ect).
3. Risk vs Reward - is there any motivation to give an answer contrary to the expected answer? What motivation is there that the youth will give an 'honest' answer instead of an answer that reflects reality.
4. Conditioning - if children are cautioned not to do something over and over; then are asked if they would do something contrary - most would say 'No'. If you tell them that stealing is wrong - over and over; and then ask them if they will steal; you will get 100% of them to say that they would 'Never' steal. Great, now leave a bowl of candy on your desk and leave the room for 5 minutes; and see what happens
5. What age group was questioned? Pre-adolscents will readily agree never to drink, smoke, chew tobacco, do drugs or have sex, shoplift or jaywalk. I offer the wildly unsuccessful and expensive program DARE as an example. The results after spending gazilloins of dollars promoting DARE showed that this program had NO EFFECT upon later drug use by teens.
Now, are you telling me that you had never thought of these possibilities?
Where did they find a group of teens where 61% were virgins in the first place? I’m calling BS.
So you’re calling me a hedonist and a degenerate because you don’t agree with me?!
Which one of use is projecting?
Not to mention that 50% of teens are guys.
But watch out. You might be a hedonist and degenerate who is projecting.
“...it just seemed like all normal teens and people were out there having sex...”
So you doubt the 61% statistic too.
Having two sons in high school, I'm seeing a lot of very nice, well-grounded sensible young people - wholesome really, and polite. I think many of them are sobered by the challenging economic world they're entering, and they're taking their studies very seriously.
As part of our political process, I recently met our local magisterial justice, who is responsible for 6-7,000 cases annually involving our local community. She has been on the job for over 20 years, and she thinks that the local youth crime rate is steady, not increasing. The only thing she sees increasing among youth is under-age drinking.
These local observations give me hope that some of the excesses may be running their course.
“57 percent believe being good people and doing good deeds will get you into heaven”
Hmm. We worked on the ‘God doesn’t promise you you will be happy’.
Need to fit this in... Maybe next class?
This is something I’ve realized myself, is that the hippies have pushed thsi world to move so fast, that a lot of kids have grown up wihtout realizing the consequences. Kids have been PUSHED to become adults and do adult things, without realizing the seriousness of the consequences of their actions; mainly, because they are kids. In other respects, there are a lot of adults out there behaving like children, bascially children with adult toys. It’s messed a lot of kids up.
Yeh I doubt it...perhaps teens have the intention but actions don’t always add up to your intentions
Ok. So you discount every single social science study that relies on self-reporting data. This would include the “studies” that purport to show that same-sex households are just as good as opposite-sex households, “studies” that show inordinate numbers of youth engage in sexually promiscuous activity, and “studies” that purport to show the ineffectiveness of drug education?
In essence, nothing in social science is good today, right? You can’t pick and choose what you like from such and discard the rest, right?
Not surprising when oral and anal sex is an acceptable alternative to too many teens. Only vaginal counts.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. I show you that level of respect, I expect the same in return.
When a group (ANY GROUP) makes a claim, they should have some method of supporting that claim.
No age range was given, no double-blind test, no sampling across genders ... I expect better data gathering from a college level sophmore than what I saw in this report. And your typical collegel sophmore doesn’t get his results published for public dissemination.
That’s why the numbers given not only defy reality, they defy any reasonable assumption.
The church is trying to push an agenda; and deliberately skewing their suspect data to push their agenda.
It’s wrong when Gov’t publishes bad data, it’s doubly wrong when an institution that is ALLEGEDLY based on telling the truth - tells a bold-faced lie.
When I see a liar, don’t expect me to not challenge him.
Respect is earned, not given. You haven’t proven anything, you’ve simply made naked assertions and bold claims.
If your premise is correct, then you need to discount virtually everything in social “science”. You can’t pick and choose what is compatible with your agenda and then discard the rest.
If I make an absurd statement, like 61% of Teens want to remain virgins .... then I have to back that claim up.
If you make a claim, it’s not my job to point out the flaws - it’s YOUR job to defend your claim. That’s a rudimentary step that even a ‘Socialological’ student should be able to grasp.
Why didn’t they claim 99.997%? Why not 60.5%
I remember being a teen-aged male; and remaining virginal was the absolute LAST thing on my mind. Now, since men make up at least 50% of the population, and there is no shortage of willing partners in the other 50% of the population - it’s pretty far fetched to claim the number this group claimed.
The burden of proof is on THEM, not me. You asked for errors; I provided errors. You have provided absolutely nothing to show that this group did the most basic, the most elementry form of statistics gathering.
I hold ANY church to a high standard. There is nothing more evil, than a church who will use lies to promote their position. And it appears that this is exactly what this ‘fountain of truth’ is perpetuating.
Make a patently absurd statement, provide no basis for making that statement - and cower behind your church. That is pathetic. If you make a statment, have the intellectual honesty to back it up with something tangible and repeatable.
Virtually every ‘social science’ understands the rudimentary basis of publishing statements. If you bother to look, you will see that a study by a reputable group will have a this data.
We have a couple paragraphs published, that could have been overheard in a bathroom stall for all we know.
You are projecting your “experience” onto others. It’s confirmation bias.
The fact is, your “objections” can be applied to ANY social “science” that is in existence today. You just discount what you don’t like, and latch onto what you do.
In essence, your religion isn’t much different than the straw-man that you contend against.
I think you are the one projecting. You ask me what's wrong, I tell you. You attack me by saying that ALL social sciences's must be invalid. I correct you by saying that there are proceedures. Youa attack me again and say that I must prove my criticism - I point out that it is the mission of the publisher to defend their article with fact.
Now, I'm the one projecting? If you read the posts - you will see that YOU have been accused of projecting by almost everone who has responded to you, and it's quite obvious you are.
Can you provide ANYTHING - and I'll be quite lenient as to what 'ANYTHING' means - ANYTHING to support that this study has any validity?
This study could have concluded the existance of the Easter Bunny, with the evidence they provided. There is NOTHING there, other than some 'findings'.
As such, those findings are meaningless - can you prove otherwise? It's not projecting ... it's called 'critical thinking'.
You do not know me, you have no idea what church I belong to, yet you are PROJECTING your insecurities on to me. I have defended my point - you have brought absolutely nothing but attacks, challenges and now you are projecting your insecurities on to me. Grow up.
Did you even look at the actual study? Or just the press release of the study? So do you even have an actual basis for making any complaint about the data at all, or are you really just complaining about the news story as linked?
You obviously don’t like the conclusion, because it seems conflicts with your world-view, but I doubt that you actually looked at the study, for you didn’t point to specifics, but rather made very broad generalizations.
And you are still projecting in your responses. It’s pretty funny too.
I wish the study were true, it would be great news indeed. Fewer abortions, more planned pregnancies and less unwed mothers, lower drop-out rates, lower crime rates from unsupervised youth.
That would be really nice. I’d love this - if this had any bearing on reality.
I’d also like Santa, Iron Man, Superman, Spiderman, the Fantastic Four and the Legion of Superheroes to correct a few international incidents we currently enjoy. The study and these fictional beings have a lot in common. They are imaginary.
Do grow up. Do you have anything to contribute - perhaps you have the study’s... you are defending them. The article provided NO findings, no sources, no studies. Just some blurbs that you have swallowed as Gospel. Do you honestly believe everything you read? The DNC is the party for you!! Here are some sound bites - don’t ask questions, don’t question the results, and attack anyone who asks questions.
Al Gore, Obama and the DNC thrives on people like you. People who need no evidence whatsoever, who will attack anyone who questions fabrications.
Have you gotten your Global Warming T-shirt yet?
Don’t like Obamacare - you MUST be a racist.
Question the findings - why, I must be projecting...
Certainly, anything in the magazine is beyond reproach, beyond question, beyond criticism... yep, I must be projecting.
Usually, maturity comes with age....
Now you are spewing a bunch of ad hominems, (and still projecting) simply because I pointed out that you haven’t even seen the study (which you now admit.)
So in other words, all those broad accusations were based on a couple paragraph news summary of a 91 page study that you hadn’t actually read.
So we don’t have to take anything you say seriously.
“Now you are spewing a bunch of ad hominems...”
And that’s supposed to be your territory, right?
You’re funny in an ironic kind of way.
That’s why I’m criticizing the story.
How long is your attention span?
The story did not link to the study, the story simply gave some findings that sound very dubious - and I question them.
Just like Obamacare, Global Warming, Off-shore drilling, ANWAR, Toyota uncontrolled acceleration, ect.
And you throwing out the ‘projecting’ thing without an iota of effort on your part.... put the souce there to see.
Why do you think this study has any basis on fact?
Why do you believe it?
What are the conditions fo the study?
Put up some facts. I’ve presented my critique’ ... defend the story - don’t attack me. I know the DNC has a habit of attacking anyone who questions a talking point (Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter, ect) and that is EXACTLY what you are doing.
Answer the questions.... present some facts. Or are your projecting ‘Wishful thinking’?
Facts please, sources please.
Again ... sources please. Some facts would be nice.
Some sanity woud be nice too.
Why would I want teens having sex? Why would I want unwanted babies born to unwed mothers? Why would I want more abortions?
I question the story, as it was fluff.
So, please post your facts, your sources. I suspect you have nothing - - and you are proving my suspicions correct.
YOU criticized the story and made the assertions, so it is incumbent upon you to actually look at the study itself.
Were I parent of a teen today, I would allow no dating activities until age 18. The risks outweigh the benefits, and there’s plenty of time for dating in adulthood.