A primrose is a little yellow flower that often adorns gardens. In the quotation above, Ophelia uses the analogy of strolling down the pleasant garden path as a symbol of an extremely pleasant experience. In fact, she is directly referring to sexual pleasure in likening her brother to a libertine, someone who indulges in sexual pleasure for its own sake.As I suspected, "primrose path," like so many of our modern figures of speech, seems to have been coined by William Shakespeare. The first recorded use of the phrase comes in his 1602 play Hamlet, when Ophelia, rebuffing her brother Laertes’ insistence that she resist Hamlet’s advances, accuses Laertes of hypocrisy: "Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven, whilst like a puffed and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads, and recks [heeds] not his own rede [advice]." http://www.word-detective.com/112402.html
All of this information is a roundabout, literary way of asking the question in the title of whether teenagers raised in families with conservative religious values are less likely to engage in early penile-vaginal intercourse, before they marry. The quote from Shakespeare is also relevant to this question about religious values, because Ophelia accuses her brother of being a hypocrite–that is, believing in sexual restraint before marriage, but nonetheless violating that belief by engaging in premarital sexual behavior himself. Even during the time of Shakespeare, religious leaders who preached the severe, restrictive commandments about sexuality were suspected of being likely to break those commandments in their own personal lives.
This issue presents a perfect opportunity to call upon the scientific method to put popular intuitions about how people behave to the empirical test. The results of a study by Bradford Wilcox, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, were released earlier this month by the Russell Sage Foundation (see an opinion article by him, entitled Preaching to the Choir at http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110010452). Professor Wilcox examined the sexual behavior and relationship patterns of evangelical Christians–those more likely to advocate the importance of sexual restraint–compared to the patterns of non-evangelical individuals. When controlling statistically for demographic differences among his study participants, conservative Christians tended to engage in sexual behavior at virtually the same age as non-conservative participants; the average age was about 17 ½ years (see a commentary by Michael Gerson on this issue at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072601846.html).
This finding seems to indicate that religious beliefs make no difference in terms of engaging in premarital sexual behavior. However, the issue is more complex than this piece of information would lead you to believe. Dr. Wilcox delved even deeper into factors that might be related to following one’s religious values. He examined evangelical Christians separately based on whether they attend church services each week or whether they attend services rarely or never. Those who attend weekly might be considered devout believers, while those who attend rarely or never Dr. Wilcox referred to as nominal evangelicals–those who are evangelical in name only.
According to Dr. Wilcox, ". . . evangelicals who attend religious services weekly, when compared with average Americans, are less likely to cohabit as young adults (1% vs. 10% of other young adults), to bear a child outside of wedlock (12% vs. 33% of other moms) and to divorce (7% vs. 9% of other married adults divorced from 1988 to 1993)" (see the Preaching to the Choir article). In contrast, "nominal evangelicals have sex before other teens, cohabit and have children outside of wedlock at rates that are no different than the population at large, and are much more likely to divorce than average Americans" (see the Preaching to the Choir article).
These data might lead to the conclusion that those who are strongly dedicated to their religion are more likely to follow the sexual values promoted by that religion. This is possibly a reasonable explanation of the behavior of the devout Christians. Yet, the difficulty with this conclusion is that Dr. Wilcox does not report that he measured their actual beliefs so that he could explicitly show an association between beliefs and sexual behavior. Attendance at church is a proxy, or substitute, for belief in Christian values.
Another factor that may underlie the differences between devout and nominal evangelical Christians is that nominal Christians were more likely to be poor and uneducated. The differences in sexual behavior between the two types of Christians remained even when income and education were taken into account. Consequently, income and education are not the major influences on penile-vaginal intercourse rates.
Rather, Dr. Wilcox speculates that the nominal Christians who participated in his study come from a culture that leads them to engage in sexual behavior patterns that are different from the sexual morality advocated within fundamentalist Christianity. In his own words, "I suspect that many nominal evangelicals are products of a Scotch-Irish ‘redneck’ culture, still found in parts of Appalachia and the South, that . . . has historically been marked by higher levels of promiscuity, violence and impulsive behavior" (see the Preaching to the Choir article).
Dr. Wilcox is arguing essentially that nominal evangelical Christians are influenced more by non-religious cultural values than by fundamentalist religious values. In contrast, devoted evangelicals, who have frequent contact with others advocating more restrictive sexual beliefs, are apparently more motivated to follow those restrictive values.
The issue actually involves even more than the influence of religious values alone, however. In another article that reviews a book by Mark D. Regnerus, Dr. Wilcox points to the finding that teenagers who are Jewish or mainline Protestants (non-evangelical Christians) are also less likely to engage in early sex as adolescents (Hormonographics: Red States, Blue States, and Sex Before Marriage at http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13668&R=1138119DC9). Therefore, it is not only restrictive religious values that cause teenagers to delay penile-vaginal intercourse. Jewish and mainline Protestant adolescents from the middle and upper classes in Regnerus’ study tended to have a stronger future orientation; they had their sights set steadfastly on what they wanted to accomplish in the future, especially related to getting a higher education and advancing professionally. These adolescents viewed early sexual behavior as dangerous, because pregnancy, children, and sexually transmitted diseases would prevent them from accomplishing the bright future they imagined for themselves.
Especially surprising, the lower rates of early penile-vaginal intercourse occurred in spite of the fact that the Jewish and mainline Protestant adolescents tended to have more liberal or permissive sexual beliefs. They did not necessarily believe that it is important to avoid sexual intercourse before marriage. The dominating principle for these individuals however tends to be following a plan of action that will get them to their academic and professional goals. They avoid any diversion that will take them off of that path.
So, the bottom line is that "yes," conservative religious values do tend to keep adolescents off of the "primrose path," meaning engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse. However, this is true primarily in conjunction with attending church regularly, which probably indicates a stronger influence by these values. Yet, it is also true that having a strong desire for academic and professional accomplishment keeps adolescents away from penile-vaginal intercourse, as well. This means that more than one set of values lead individuals to avoid certain types of sexual behavior. The association between personal values and whether adolescents engage in other types of sexual behavior will be an interesting topic for another entry in this blog.
29 comments:
It's been my experience that sitting in church every week doesn't always keep kids accountable to their morals. In my faith, we believe that sex is God's marriage gift to a man and woman. It is meant to be kept sacred. I can think of one couple in particular whose faith and morals lost out in that area. I have seen quite a difference, with regards to sexual activity, in friends who attend church regularly and those who do not. For those who are not regular attenders, morals seem to go by the wayside at the first tinge of urge. Almost all of the people from our church circle uphold sex as a sacred gift from God. I strongly believe, without reading any research, that the strength of a person's relationship with God very strongly influences their moral standards. Of course, we're all human and subject to temptation.
I would have to agree that being religious and going to church does not always keep young adults from premarital sex, although I don't think that it could hurt anything. I feel that the common factor in children who don't take part in sexual relations before marriage is their parents and home environment. It is very important that the parents take a proactive stance. They should be open and willing to talk to their children. If they choose to bring their child up in the church that is all part of their parenting styles. I don't feel that any one thing can be attributed to keeping a child from 'wandering down the primrose path'. It is a combination of things, all of which are very important in parenting.
I agree with some aspects of this post, but also disagree somewhat too. I think attending church regularly and practicing good religious faith does help prevent teens from doing sexual acts that are considered going down the "primrose path". I also believe there are many other factors that are involved. Like someone previously said, it also depends on how the kid is raised by his or her parents. Another thing that comes into play is the group of friends that they hang out with. Peer pressure from friends can have large influences on the actions of people. This may be one of the larger determinants. How much of the religous practices kids actually take in and understand also plays a role. My girlfriend's mother is the daughter of a pastor, and she had premarital sex when she was seventeen. On the other hand, her two siblings waited until they were married to engage in sexual behavior. This is a good example of how children's perceptions of the religion impacted sexual decisions as well as the other factors. Overall, religious practices can prevent kids from going down the "primrose path", but there are other factors that must be considered in this discussion as well.
Conservative Religious Sexual Values do not keep teens from wandering down the "Primrose Path". By attending church, some individuals are doing so to please their parents. Others attend church weekly to learn and enrich their faith. For those individuals who attend church meerly to please their parents, they are learning very little if anything at all while their minds wander aimlessly towards what they are going to do and who they are going to call as soon as they get home. FOr this reason, I do not believe religious sexual values keep teens from straying down this path.
However, on the other hand teenages who love to attend church and hold close to their values regarding sexuality are probably held back from wandering down this path.
I was raised Catholic, I do not agree with everything the religion teaches, but I do respect what it has to offer. I do not think that just because one makes the decision to go down the path of sexuality that their morals are ruined. Sexuality is an individual choice, not one made by attending church every Sunday.
Yet I contradict myself because I feel that marriage is also a gift to man and woman given by God, and sexuality within that marriage should be held sacred as well. I feel that individuals carry out this by remaining faithful with their sexual ways.
What ever path one chooses is their own and they control it. I'm not saying that God and church are not important, they are extremely important and make life much easier when you believe and have faith in God. However, I do not believe it a sin for teenagers to express their sexuality.
I completely agree that it is not a sin for someone to express their sexuality. If one does not do such a thing, then it is going to most definitely lead to some sort of oppression and create some consequences later. Religion, to me, is more of a social aspect early on in life. People go to church every Sunday to see the other families and friends and to catch up on events in the church as well. I know that when my family missed a Sunday of church due to vacation or just wanted to sleep in, my mom and dad were asked if everything was okay, and vice versa when another family missed church as well.
Not only until I was living on my own did I make church valuble in my life. I did please my parents by going to church every Sunday and by ultimately not getting preganant until marriage.
I was more influenced socially than spiritually, to be completely honest. Sex was a weapon, that I was not ready to handle in high school. When I had friends 'having sex' regularly with their boyfriends and girlfriends, I was dealing with my little sister at home. When I was 15, my mom and dad had my sister Aubrey, and then viola, a live-in babysitter. I was very close with my sister, and she would climb in my bad at night, and prefer to have me give her a bath at night, etc. I felt the wrath of having a child in high school, also the joys as well. This was birth control! Religion helped me more in a mental state than in a sexual guideline. I did not want to be involved in the sexuality that my friends were, wondering if they were pregnant, or losing a boyfriend because they starting having sex.
I did not have conservative religious sexual values, but my parents did. Having strict parents ultimately, made me stay off of the 'primrose path' and just be socially influenced, in a positive way.
I think Conservative Religious Sexual Values do not keep Teenagers from Wandering down "the Primrose Path". Persons raised in a highly Christian moral environment and participate in attending church and youth groups tend to not indulge in sexual behavior. I believe the reason is because the majority of the young persons have been taught it is bad and against their God's wishes.
The divorce rate in the Catholic church is approximately at 50%. One must ask, "why?" I believe it is because the church teaches that one must not have sexual intercourse until they are married. So many young persons rush into a marriage without really knowing each other well.
I believe the vast majority of young persons think about sex all the time. I also believe the young person who are abiding by their churches teachings and following the rules are interacting with each other, spending time together, and socializing which is early preparedness for sexuality.
There are a great deal of adults who are alienated from the church because they feel their pubescent sexuality was stolen from them, and that they ended up in unhappy marriages because while in the marriage their sex lives were not good, because sexuality and pleasure were still not encouraged; rather sex was for reproduction.
Conservative religious values in my opinion are becoming less desirable because teenagers are more informed in current society, and they are learning that pleasure is good not bad!
There are many factors that affect premarital sex and keep one from going down the primrose path of sexual activities. We learned about personalities, history and religious viewpoints of churches and how they hold negative beliefs toward premarital sexuality and being promiscuous and overly sexually active. I think family background, treatment by one’s parents, and early experiences as a child have an impact on personality and sexuality development too. If grandparents or relatives are strict this also has an affect. One’s peers and adolescent experiences have an influence on one’s
sexuality development too. A person could have very successful friends at private schools, rich and religious. It seems as if being upper class has an affect on learning to control one’s sexual nature and have less kids to budget their money better. For example, one could have respectful and highly functioning friends in society versus friends in gangs, high school drop outs, porn actors, criminals or poor single mothers with six kids with little education. These people tend to have more kids than the higher socioeconomic classes according to my sociology classes I have taken. However, there are always exceptions. There are some rich people with many kids and there are some religious people with a child who has had sex and is a single teen mother. This does not always prevent premarital sex and being overly sexually active. On the other hand, I figure if someone is seriously dedicated to one’s faith and believe it than they will have better self control than the average person. Like the article says, wanting goals and being successful prevents sex too. Hanging out with people similar to them and with the wrong crowd affects it too. People learn through observing others' behavior. If people observe positive behavior, desired outcomes in the observed behavior than they will want to sothe same according to social learnig theory. Like we learned before, the sexual self schemas are related to sexuality and can be positive or negative. The positive schema of a person has to do with being passionate and romantic, and open and direct about sexuality. The negative schema is having embarrassment and conservatism about sexuality. They have sexual anxiety and are avoidant of sex. These factors all have an affect on sexuality and taking the primrose path in life.
As a member of a very devout catholic family, we were raised to not have sex until marriage. But I know many people in my family who have not followed this belief. I think that a younger person's sexual involvement isn't really based on old religious views, but more on what their family has impeded on them. If a family is aware of the fact that culture today teaches kids that sex is normal, then hopefully they teach their kids about safe sex. In my family,although our religion teaches us not to have sex, we were taught to just be safe in our decisions. So no, I don't think that in today's society, religion is not a huge factor for teens to engage in sex or not.
I definitely agree with parts of this article, while I also feel the need to disagree with other parts. I can see the point that someone who attends church regularly probably has a set of values instilled in them which tell them to hold off from "wandering down the Primrose Path." I also agree with the point brought up later in the article that stated that even many teens that are very motivated to develop a career in their lives are less likely to engage in sex at an early age because they are aware of the consequences and do not want to risk their future.
However, it is my own experience that the holding off of sex has much more to do with parental involvement and openness to it. I have a very close friend who is a preacher's kid of a religion that believes in waiting until marriage to have sex, however his parents never talked to him about this, and therefore the value was really not instilled in him fully.
Overall I feel like there is not one thing that is going to keep teenagers from engaging in sexual activity, but more of a culmination of many different things.
In reading this article, I was not surprised at the results. I believe that Christians are just as likely to engage in early sexual behavior compared to people who do not go to church that often. When raised in a Christian household you are taught to wait until marriage to have sex. Well, we all have read in our text book that the numbers are extremely high for those individual that do not. I also think that so many of our so called religious leaders have failed their followers. How many times in the last couple of years have you heard of well-known religious leaders either caught in an affair or caught in a homosexual affair? This is especially hypocritical considering these are the things they denounce in their church sermons weekly. I did not find one portion of the article surprising and that was the fact that people of the Jewish faith or mainline Protestants did not engage in sexual activity as early as others in the Christian faith. This has everything to do with the way they were raised. And not just to wait for marriage for sex, but to achieve great things in their lives. How many Jewish doctors do we all know? This is because education was stressed more than anything in their household. And early sexual activity could possibly lead to an unwanted pregnancy, which could ruin their plans for higher education and a successful career. So to sum it up, the values and goals we are raised with will possibly have a bigger impact on our lives than just going to church weekly.
Although church attendance is somewhat correlated with the likelihood one will or will not engage in premarital sexual behavior, I think there are many other factors to consider. As several other comments have stated, family and peer influences may have a large role as well. It may be that people who attend church or consider themselves religious may also place a large emphasis on family. They may surround themselves with other families and friends that are like-minded, which could impact sexuality. This is similar to Dr. Wilcox’s possible explanation that the Scotch-Irish “redneck” culture may have more of an influence on nominal evangelicals, except that this explanation seeks to explain why nominal evangelicals ‘deviate’ from their religious beliefs.
Other factors such as socioeconomic status, education levels and cultural expectations are also important to remember when considering sexuality and behavior. It is most likely that the combination of these factors, and several others, has more to do with delaying or engaging in sexual behavior.
This is what religion is for. It is a key component in our society and is always at the base of almost anything. Though I am not a holy person towards one specific religion, I believe it is absolutely wonderful if attending church will keep a child from potentially harming themselves. The only problem I see with this particular situation is a child not receiving enough sexual education. I think it is incredible that churches preach abstinence, but it is also important to educate. Let’s face it; sex is a vital element in life. The brevity of our society when it comes to the topic of sex is very harmful to our youth. Therefore, only teaching children to “not have sex” will simply cause a child to wonder. You cannot just tell a child that sex is bad and it is sinful before marriage. There is no education in these statements. When a child decides to have sex anyways, which happens quite often, but has no knowledge on the subject, they will likely be irresponsible in their actions and possibly cause an unwanted pregnancy, or contact a potentially deadly sexually transmitted disease. What happens then? Do we say “Oops, maybe we should have taught our young adolescents about birth control methods?” Young people may know that there is birth control methods out there, but may not know how to use them correctly, or feel that using contraceptives would be shameful to their church. Many may fear that their family, or someone from the church will notice them buying such dreadful objects and their secret will be revealed. We are teaching young children to be sneaky and irresponsible when we are not educating them. Sex is not a shameful thing unless it is done irresponsibly. Sex is who we are.
I believe that conservative religious sexual values can keep teenagers from going down “the Primrose Path”. I think a lot of it has to do with how you were raised and what your personal beliefs are. A lot of people go to church every week, but they still engage in premarital sex or other things that they are told they shouldn’t do. I’ve known several people that are pastor’s children and were at church all of the time, but they seemed to be very promiscuous. One the other hand, I do believe if you are involved in church you are less likely to engage in things like premarital sex. People are going to do what they want to do depending on what they believe.
Blog 6
First of all, I find it kind of ridiculous to call penile-vaginal intercourse “the primrose path”. I understand the origin, and I do believe that one should practice what one preaches, so the hypocritical actions of Laertes are criticized rightly by Ophelia. However, the whole issue whether religiously conservative individuals engage in premarital sex is irrelevant to me. I think it is more important to see that the individuals who do engage in sexual behavior are educated correctly and are aware of the consequences. An interesting fact in the article is that individuals who are focused on career and academic goals also have a lower likelihood of engaging in premarital sex and cohabitation. Their reasoning is more a fear of direct consequences and not that of heavenly forces. Either way, these people should be less scared of pregnancy and stds and more educated.
I would have to agree that church and religion doesn't stop people from having pre-martial sex. Because you could go to church regulary and try to follow the right path.In today's society kids are going to do what they want to do with comes to going down that primrose path. But I do think if parents are open with the children about pre-martial sex and the consequences that come along with those actions then I think they would maybe listen. You have to give your children guidance and just pray that they make the right decisions.
Of course values systems effect teens. It seems that this study was a waste of time to conclude that “those who are strongly dedicated to their religion are more likely to follow the sexual values promoted by that religion”, this seems more like common sense than purpose for an empirical study. The researchers also found a number of factors that influence the frequency of sex before marriage in evangelical youth. It is clear that one’s relationship to parents, church members and leaders, and peer group all influence them. My question is why are we spending so much time trying to figure out what Christians do? There seems to be such a focus on Christianity is all aspects, sexuality included. I have not noticed any similar studies that focus on Islamic, Buddhist, or New Age Spiritualist attitudes/ideology on sex and wonder why.
It seems to me that if the same rate of initial intercourse is happening in "different populations" that there must be more similarities between them. My guess would be that it is having a reason not to engage. It's simple but it seems to be true. I don't think it matters really what the reason is but it is happening. That is something worth studying.
Personally, my problem is with the attitude behind those of faith proclaiming to hold a higher moral standard. Maybe they are correct or maybe they are not, but there is an intent to place one above and one below that really drives a wedge between groups. In reality it isn't really about morals a much as it is adherence to a behavioral social code. This gets a little off subject. The maim point I wanted to make is that both secular and groups of faith have an equal base rate of initial sexual behavior. That is good. A next question could then be asked of the outcomes of those who waited to have sex until they were married, or were older, or where using a method of birth control. Do they marry young then get a divorce? Do they wait to have children? Etc. There are a number of things that rub me the wrong way with a lot of people but when I look at this data I have to wonder if it really matters who does what and says what when i can see that we are basically the same.
I think the research in this article is important because it gives us evidence that one's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) is not the dertimining factor in when one begins to engage in sexual activity, but rather it's the individual's primary values. As mentioned in the article, Jews engage in sex at a later age not because their religious beliefs say they should, but because engaging in sexual activity at a younger age could interfer with their more primary values in relation to future success. Committed evangelists, on the other hand, don't engage in sex at a young age because they consider it to be a sin, which would interfer with their primary value of being good and pure.
dd
I have been working with our youth group for the last 6 years. During that time I have taught such classes as "True Love Waits" and Passport to Purity to groups of teenage girls ranging in age from 13-17. It has been my observation that yes attending church on a regular basis can keep you accountable for certain things, such as premarrital sex, however I believe that there is only so much that "church" can do. I have seen young girls who attend church every week and even make a pledge to purity, give in to temptation just as easily as those who don't attend church, they just are more secretive about it. I believe that attending church and having a strong faith that teaches you morals is a good place to start, however if this is not demonstrated on a daily basis by those around you, it is quickly forgotten when in the heat of the moment. All to often teenagers go to church because it is what their parents do and they may claim to have "faith", but it is a faith absorbed from their parents. They haven't really decided for themselves what they believe, so when faced with temptations they do give in. I think that it is important to teach our teens more that just the religious moral aspects of sex. I believe that they need to be told what having sex before marriage takes away from them as a person, and what it will take away from their marriage. I'm not talking just about the religious aspect of it, I think that when you have sexual relationships at an early age you lose you self respect, not to mention that most if not all teens are not ready to deal with the emotional issues that come along with sex. I know that I struggled when I first go married, the number of partners that my husband had was an issue for me, and not to sound to corny but I had a long term sexual relationship before I was married and I feel sometimes that I can't give everything to my husband because I gave part of myself to someone else. I also agree that giving them a strong desire of wanting to succeed in life is important. I have found that in our area we have a lot of unwed mothers and premarrital sex, simply because there is nothing else to do, if they have college in mind they are less likely to develop a serious relationship in high school. We need to inform them about all areas of sex and let them know what exactly defines sex. I find it very scary that their are so many people out there claiming not to have had sex just because it wasn't penile-vaginal, this can lead to the spread of STD's. I also think it is important for parents to realize that just because you go to church and have faith in God doesn't mean you are not raising a normal teenager. Their still needs to be an open line of communication between parent and child. You may be an outstanding Christian and they may only have Christian friends but they are still influenced by their environment. Don't think that they aren't thinking about sex just because you tell them it is wrong. I think that being able to talk openly about all areas of sex with your child will be your best game plan. Like I said i've seen many Christian teens fall into temptation, they just don't advertise it.
I think that this article proves that religion is just one of many factors that influence human sexuality. People often correlate religious devotion with high morality. However, all of these judgments are very ambiguous because some people are hypocritical and do not necessarily act according to their beliefs. Morality is an ambiguous concept in itself since it depends on the culture, religion and other social factors. A person can speculate fact that more religious evangelical Christians are less likely to get involved in a sexual relationship before marriage and as a result they have fewer children out of wedlock because they feel strongly about their religious values. I think that religious beliefs only one part of a every person. Religion influences each person as much as family values, peer pressure, and pop culture. A person’s decisions about sexuality are the result of the balance between all these factors and influence a person to respond accordingly in certain situations. The human train of thought is a very complex process and different values are applied to every life decision a person makes. I do not think that anyone can predict the way a person is going to act in certain situations based on information including the values the person acquired throughout his or her life. Each person is unique and unpredictable. The reasons the researchers gave for delaying penile-vaginal intercourse in the population of Jewish and Protestant teenagers do not necessarily include religious beliefs. Instead they indicated the reasons for abstaining from sex are the fear of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and other consequences. I think that the decisions these teenagers make are not affected by hormones but by their personal values and beliefs.
I believe this is true to an extent like many other things. Like the reading said adolescents who attend church regularly are less likely to engage in penile-vaginal intercourse. From personal experience I can remember very few girls who attended church regularly and were “pure” in their adolescent stage. It might have been because I was from a smaller high school, but many girls who attended church seemed to not engage in drugs or alcohol, but many times they were sexually active. Doing a larger study may result in a little bit larger difference. I believe that the adolescents who state they have strong conservative religious beliefs, but do not attend church regularly, may state this because their household is conservative in religion, but they do not really follow. There can be many theories, but adolescents who attend church regularly are constantly reminded not to have sex before marriage because it is a sin.
This is an interesting topic of discussion. It seems like one of those things that people might assume is true, but never really think about or try to affirm. One might be led to believe that being taught to abstain from premarital sex would cause people to abstain from just that, but then again the difference is probably in the motives. If regular church attendance does directly relate to the strength of a person’s belief (which is probably not true anyway), then it would make sense that a person who goes frequently takes these teachings to heart, and chooses to avoid premarital sex. However, church tends to be more of a cultural thing than a personal one, at least for many people, so a person’s adherence or rejection of the teachings in their own lives may be based more on feelings of belonging or conformity, or just wanting other members of their family and community to perceive them as somebody who does the “right thing.”
Because of these multiple dimensions of possible personal motivation in the decision to engage in or abstain from premarital sex, I find it difficult to believe that accurate statistics of this occurrence can be obtained. Sure, it is easy to put together data on things like divorce and unwed mothers, but when a researcher tries to conduct a study based (presumably) on survey data of self-proclaimed conservative Christians, it seems likely to me that a person might lie, even given the anonymity of the survey method.
It is not surprising to see that conservative religious values tend to keep adolescents from engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse. Teenagers that regularly attend church seem to be more likely to be around others that have the same beliefs of waiting until after marriage for intercourse. Teenagers that do not attend church regularly may not hang around people do not support the idea of waiting until marriage, and thus they may feel peer pressure to conform and have intercourse. As for being goal orientated, teenagers that are consistently told to wait may focus their attention towards other things such as the future and their goals. Our culture, in general has had the connotation that if you are having sex before being in a committed relationship, then you are putting your future in jeopardy because of possible consequences. That connotation may lead to teenagers to wait so they do not jeopardize their future. Dr. Wilcox distinguished devote Christians from nominal Christians based on attendance at church, but what would the research show if it distinguished a third group, one that consisted of teenagers that went to church, not because they wanted to, but because their parents made them. Would they still have a lower rate because they attend church regularly or would it differ because they may not hold same values or morals as the teenage groups?
I find it no surprise that religious identification alone does not predict earlier engagement in sexual behavior. It seems so ironic to me that many religious leaders breach the sexual standards their religion enforces, what’s worse is that some devout followers stick to the strict rules of conduct… how ludicrous is that? It reminds me of the fact that American society enforces body image ideals that technically are unachievable, even the most beautiful of people are airbrushed into being even more ideal... the ideal is physically unachievable; Barbie would not be able to stand up straight with her proportions translated into true life. Just like the strict regulation of sexual behavior, the people enforcing the rules cannot even stick to them themselves; it just seems so hypocritical to me.
It makes sense to me that attendance at church is a better indication of restricting sexual behavior; I think church attendance goes hand in hand with degree of religiosity and naturally those who are more religious would adhere more strictly to the values of the church which is so central to their life. Even though identifying with a religion per say does not affect engaging in sexual behavior, I suspect that there is a difference in how people define their behavior. I think that those who are religious would more likely justify certain types of behavior as being not sex; like they would engage in sex that is not penile-vaginal and still consider themselves to be virgins. I just feel like the pressure of religious context causes some individuals to create their own interpretation of their behavior, like bending the rules to suit themselves.
The main the thing to be taken from the article for me is that there is a number of competing factors in determining engagement of sexual behavior; it seems family values, social context, sex, race, religion and other demographics have an affect on engaging in sexual behavior.
By this point in the class, we have seen that many factors are at work in shaping our sexuality. It is not surprising that young people who attend church regularly are less likely to engage in sexual activity at a younger age. While I think this probably has something to do with conservative sexual values – which purport chastity and purity – I believe there is more to it. Attending church regularly may have more to do with forming healthy social networks and promoting self-respect. If a teen is involved in church activities, they may be more likely to be doing things that give them a sense of purpose and value that outweighs the pressure to have sex before they are ready. This kind of involvement, in conjunction with a healthy spirituality, might help cultivate the coping skills and fortitude needed by a teen to resist going along with the crowd in terms of sexual experimentation. It is also more likely that a teen who attends church regularly has a family unit that is more involved and active in their upbringing. These factors will also undoubtedly be a mitigating factor in a teen’s sexual activity. So, again, I guess it is hard to say what exactly keeps teens from going down the “primrose path,” but conservative religious values or church attendance do not seem to hurt.
I agree that it is more likely for a teenager who goes to church regularly each week is less likely to engage in premarital sexual activity. However, I believe that these reasons may have to do with the sexual schema that forms from many different factors; for instance, our parents and upbringing before we reach sexual maturity may be the variable that truly keeps certain individuals, who go to church regularly, from engaging in premarital sexual activity. Because of this, it may be the parents rather than the church that cause this difference. Many teenagers who do not attend church also do not have any structure or guidance at home, and that may have an effect on how they handle situations in which sexual activity is a question. If the teenagers who go to church regularly with their parents learned that their parents had engaged in sexual activity prior to marriage, would those same teenagers still feel the same about premarital sexual activity because the church has taught them? I have a feeling that the teenagers would question their own idea on sexuality because their parents were the primary teachers of when sexual activity is appropriate.
This article seems to show findings that, to me, just make sense. That is it makes sense that if an individual attends church often than they would hold the values preached at that church closer than those not in attendance. This article shows this by showing that the theory holds true only for people that attend weekly not the ones that simply say they are members. I think that it has to do with who the young adults self identify with. If a person identifies with the general population more than they are likely to act like the general population. However, if they identify with the church members more, than they are more likely follow the guidelines set by the religion.
Post a Comment