Reading, Writing, 'Rithmetic and...Birth Control?

Call me crazy - but I always thought a school's job was simply to teach children fundamental learning tools and skills. You know - those 'Rs' - reading, writing and 'rithmetic. Teach the kids how to read. Teach them how to write. Teach them math. Teach them critical thinking. Teach them history. Teach them science.

You would think that would be plenty for schools to have on their plate and would leave their scheduled chock-full with not much room for anything else. Not so in Maine. Apparently, middle schools in Maine have a firm handle on teaching the basics and also believe it is their responsibility (right?) to offer birth control pills and patches to children. Yes, you heard that right. We are no longer debating the morality of distributing condoms to kids - now we are opening the debate to other birth control devices.

In case you are wondering, no the children do not have to tell their parents - so Maine could give a 6th grade girl a prescription for birth control pills without the parents knowing. Oh, and if you are wondering how she would pay for the prescription, I'm sure the enlightened citizens of Maine can find a confidential way to subsidize the pills for the girl. Heck, perhaps they can even subsidize a hotel room for her and her pimply sixth grade boyfriend to use.

So answer me this...if condoms are so effective (they are not - I'm just using the pro-condom line of thinking) then why the need to give girls prescriptions for other birth control forms? After all, we know kids will use condoms 100% of the time, 100% correctly and that they will block 100% of diseases and pregnancy right? So just continue giving kids condoms...or perhaps they know kids won't use the magic cure-all called condoms like that and that they have a failure rate for preventing pregnancy of around 16% even when used correctly.

So are birth control pills the back-up for when they don't use condoms? But wait!! The pill doesn't offer any protection from HIV or STDs. So aren't we encouraging risky (deadly!) behavior? And aren't there dangerous side effects of birth control pills for these girls.

Long story short - either the Maine schools acknowledge that condoms aren't as effective as they make them out to be or they acknowledge that kids aren't using them as they should. Either way, it seems to really put a wet towel on that whole "safe sex" thing.

Home-grown Talent

Last night the Colorado Rockies, riding perhaps on one of the hottest stretches in baseball history, defeated the Arizona Diamondbacks to earn their first appearance in the World Series. The thing that makes the Rockies rather unique is that they made it to the post-season basically without paying for high-priced free agents and instead relied on their own home-grown talent.

I like that approach. I am old enough to remember the time in baseball when players spent most of their career with the same club. Free agents were used to fill out that last missing piece for a team - not to construct it from the ground up. I think there was more loyalty back then - both ways. Players and fans were more loyal to teams and the teams were more loyal to their players and fans.

What's this have to do with our faith? I think that there is a good lesson here for churches in America. It seems that many churches have become enamored with finding the latest and greatest fad to help their church grow (we'll call them 'free agents'). So the churches all run out and build their churches around these free agents. When they fail (and they usually do) then they feel the need to rush out and get more. And the cycle continues.

How about this? How about we build our churches on the basics (we'll call them 'home-grown talent). How about we lay a foundation of what the church was called to be - strong Biblical teaching, genuine love and community, meaningful ministry to the community around us, urgent evangelism, authentic worship. What would it look like if we built our churches and lives around this formula - and only used 'free agents' as a way to improve upon the foundation that already exists? Think the church might win back some of its influence in America?

Backward 'Logic'

I don't normally watch Boston Legal - I have seen bits and pieces of it and actually enjoy the witty banter but don't appreciate the sexual content on the show. Last night however, I was surfing across my four channels (yup CBS was coming in ok last night) and saw that one of the cases on the show centered on a 15-year-old girl who contracted HIV after sleeping with her boyfriend. Her case? No, it wasn't against her boyfriend - it was against her school for not teaching her about condom use. Instead, her school taught abstinence only.

Now the show's writers did everything in their power to portray the girl nobly. She took 'most' of the responsibility for her condition. However, she believed that her school should take some of the responsibility and more importantly to her, teach about condoms. She didn't even want money!!!

Of course during the trial, they presented the school's principle as simply teaching abstinence because he got federal funding that way. The zinger was that he traded the children's safety for dollars as the camera showed him looking remorseful.

I actually appreciated the school's lawyer's arguments for abstinence - it works! However, it was quickly dispelled by the more emotion-driven arguments of the plaintiff's lawyers who basically played the 'kids are going to have sex and we should give them condoms' argument as well as the over-the-top, abstinence education lies about the ineffectiveness of condoms (which was the actual lie!! - look up the reported condom failure rate admitted by manufacturers!).

The whole thing made my stomach knot up and I had to refrain from shouting at the TV. My family was asleep and my wife says it doesn't do any good anyway. Something about them not being able to hear me.

The thing that got me most enraged was not the arguments put forth for condoms - heard them plenty of times and expected them. What got me going was the thought that our society is so backward-thinking that most people watching the show last night would have agreed with them!
The logic is irrefutable! If you don't have sex, you will not get an STD, HIV or pregnant! Period! (well, except for drug use, etc. - but you know what I mean).

The answer is not to endanger our children by telling them condoms are the safe way to go. Might that lower the risk - sure. But it is still too risky. Besides this doesn't even factor in the emotional risks involved with premarital sex. The answer is to help our kids WANT to abstain for their own good and the good of their future marriage and children. It's not that complicated! Or, for our society, perhaps it really is?