Thursday, April 12, 2007

Sexual abstinence 'increases risk of pregnancy'

This is the bizarre conclusion of a report by Ofsted, the Government’s enforcer of educational standards, which, with this example of manifest amoral illogic, ought itself to be subject to the rigours of a higher scrutiny.

According to the enlightened Ofsted inspectorate, schools that ‘preach’ abstinence (and note the derogatory sense in which this verb is deployed) are ‘putting pupils at greater risk of unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases’. They further assert that abstinence-only programmes do not improve sexual health, and express concern with the sex education programmes of faith schools and privately-funded academies.

Unsurprisingly, they laud the success of present teaching about sex education, and praises nurses who hand out ‘emergency hormonal contraception’ (the morning-after pill), and other contraceptives, for the part they play in combating unwanted pregnancies among teenagers.

But the facts are these:

The UK has the highest teenage birth rates in Western Europe - twice as high as in Germany, three times as high as in France and six times as high as in the Netherlands. Schools and parents are manifestly failing in this area, and the system is in need of urgent reform.

Various ‘cures’ have been proposed, including lessons encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex because ‘pupils under 16 who were taught to consider other forms of “intimacy” such as oral sex were significantly less likely to engage in full intercourse’. Or how about the introduction of gay fairy tales for infants? If you ‘normalise’ homosexuality, even Ofsted might understand that such partnerships somewhat diminish the possibility of pregnancy. And then there’s the encouragement of ‘role play’ and masturbation, which some church schools (erroneously) term Onanism. These are all ‘sex education’ strategies being deployed in the nation’s schools, and the victims are the hearts and minds of our most vulnerable.

The Government is even considering national tests and making discussion of sex ‘compulsory for children of 11 and over’. This is abhorrent socialist educational dogma. Cranmer wonders how such knowledge will be assessed. Will students be penalised (or ridiculed) for being a virgin? Will the tests equate homosexuality with heterosexuality? Will there be coursework, or a practical?

Cranmer simply wants to know why sex education has been divorced from talk of marriage and love. He wants to know what is wrong with promoting sexual abstinence and traditional family values. And he wants to know why the spiritual side of the sexual act, so eloquently communicated in Scripture, and pervasive throughout the New Testament, is not talked of at all.

36 Comments:

Anonymous Voyager said...

Christine Gilbert, Head of Ofsted was once Chief Exec of Tower Hamlets; her husband Tony McNulty is Prisons Minister - seems like they have Labour Party one-stop solutions in-house

The Ideologues of the Gramscian Education System always like to copy the US, so we now enjoy the US High School in place of Grammar Schools; urban knife crime and black-on-black killings to make us more like inner-city USA.

What they don't point out is that England now enjoys similar levels of STDs, STIs, or whatever you wish to call VD....and similar rates of teenage pregnancy amongst similar types of social groups.

The US has enormously high rates of teenage pregnancy and illegitimacy within ispanic and Black subgroups, and England manages not to publish breakdown of births by ethnicity and postcode but we can guess which London postcodes for example, and which Northern cities (Hull) hold achievement awards for pregnant schoolgirls.

There is basically no reason for any of them to be pregnant in this day and age; and even less reason why it should be treated as if it was a spontaneous natural occurrence with costs borne by the community.

Since the Poor Law was nationalised and the bills no longer fell upon the ratepayers, no choices have had to be made between paying for schools and someone else's children. When the full costs fell upon ratepayers - and much more social security spend falls locally in parts of Western Europe than here; people are less indulgent of errant behaviour.

We are ruled by people whose own lives are chaotic, whose own experience is however limited and financially well-upholstered to avoid the harsh choices life forces upon others; in short they do not have to consider not being paid, simply because it appears regularly through BACS rather than hoping a paying customer comes through the door to cover the electricity bill.

There is a concerted campaign against Abstinence and an obsessional neurosis about condoms because the agenda is not procreative sex but to make condoms seem essential.....which is why the same loons attack the Pope for not encouraging use of condoms, forgetting that the Roman Catholic Church is opposed to extra-marital sex.

So we must look at whom it is the crackpot elites are really addressing - and it is homosexual use of condoms, whereby encouraging abstinence detracts from the raison d'etre of the activity.

The propagandists of the Loons use the mainstream as a smokescreen for their real agenda. They are the party people who leave others to clear up the mess

12 April 2007 at 11:21  
Anonymous Voyager said...

http://www.cmf.org.uk/press_release/?id=52

The latest research evidence demonstrates that the government, in the form of the Chief Medical Officer and the Department of Health, are quite wrong to ignore abstinence education in the fight to reduce the incidence of sexually transmitted infections in the UK.

http://www.cmf.org.uk/press_release/?id=41

http://www.cmf.org.uk/press_release/?id=54

The Christian Medical Fellowship has called on the government to abandon its 'ambulance at the bottom of the cliff' policies on sexual health in the wake of a Brook survey showing that only one third of 16 to 18 year olds having sex bother to use a condom.

CMF General Secretary Peter Saunders said, ‘The government has persistently clung to promoting condoms as the main plank of its policy to counter the highest rates of teenage STIs (sexually transmitted diseases) in Europe, when what is really needed are policies aimed at behaviour change.’

“The best way to counter this epidemic effectively is to promote real behaviour change through such programmes as the very successful ABC (Abstain, Be faithful, Condoms) programme in Uganda or the Love for Life programme in Northern Ireland”.

12 April 2007 at 11:25  
Anonymous bob said...

Although I know many, or most, will disagree with the content, I have to admit, that in light of Cranmer's article, the following struck me as rather prescient:

Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

- Humanae Vitae, 17 (Pope Paul VI)

12 April 2007 at 11:43  
Anonymous John Hayward, The Difference said...

Incisive, as ever. However, both you and the report miss the opportunity to note that the Government's £138 million Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, which includes making morning-after pills available to teenagers, has failed to stem the rise in teenage pregnancies, has had no effect on conception or abortion rates and, most damning of all, has been blamed for fuelling record levels of sexually transmitted diseases.

12 April 2007 at 13:56  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Hayward,

His Grace welcomes you to his august blog of intelligent and erudite musings, and congratulates you upon your own blog.

However, he did not, as you say, 'miss the opportunity' to note the fact you mention; he simply did not know. The fact that you did, and were able to contribute it to the discussion thread, is manifestly due to His Grace's post which indeed offers you the opportunity to do so.

His Grace remains profoundly grateful to the learned wisdom and apparently limitless knowledge which stems from the contributions of Mr Voyager.

12 April 2007 at 14:56  
Anonymous Colin said...

"Sex sells". Apparently, His Grace's erudite blog is no exeption.

12 April 2007 at 19:25  
Anonymous Colin said...

Interesting topics from the " Humanae Vitae, 17 (Pope Paul VI)":

"Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue..."

On July 25, 1968, Paul VI issued his final world on birth control, in the encyclical Humanae Vitae, condemning human sex as sinful and proclaiming that it should not to be performed except for the purpose of procreation. In other words, the Catholic Church is asking a husband and wife to have sex just twice in their lifetimes - to fill their zero population growth quota.

The Catholic Church is fighting the "general lowering of moral standards"

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognise them…" (Matthew 7:15-16)

Pope Sixtus IV, who built the Sistine Chapel, licensed the brothels of Rome, bringing himself an extra income of 30,000 ducats a year. Pope Alexander VI had ten illegitimate children, and surely broke some kind of record sleeping with three generations - his mother, his mistress, and their daughter (the infamous Lucrezia Borgia).

The history of papacy reads like a tale of scandal, intrigue and crime, full of murder, "romance", war and treachery (ref. Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy. More evidence can be found online at The Popes of Rome:

"SERGIUS III (904-911)
Standing in his way to the throne had been Leo V, who reigned for one month before he was imprisoned by an usurper, Cardinal Christopher. Sergius had both killed. Then he exhumed his predecessor and had him beheaded, three fingers chopped off and thrown into the Tiber.
...
JOHN XII (955 - 963)
He invented sins, it was said, that had not been known since the beginning of the world - including sleeping with his mother. John XII ran a harem in the Lateran Palace, he gambled with the offerings of pilgrims and he even toasted the devil at the high altar during the mass.
...
BENEDICT IX (1032-44, 1045, 1047-8)
Elected pope at age eleven, he was twice driven from his position due to his participation in plunder, immorality, oppression and murder.
...
In 1208 Pope Innocent III declared: "Death to the heretics!" Great privileges and rewards were promised to those who would annihilate the "heretics" and to every man who killed one of them, the assurance was given that he would attain the highest place in Heaven!"


(Sounds like a jihad of the Bishop of Rome.)

"In Bram the papal soldiers cut off the noses and gouged out the eyes of the Albigensian "heretics"."

"For over 600 years, spanning the reigns of over 80 popes, the Inquisition tortured and killed tens of thousands of Protestants including the Waldensians, Hussites, Lollards and Huguenots."

12 April 2007 at 20:10  
Blogger Sir Henry Morgan said...

I'm Atheist.

With you on this Your Grace.

12 April 2007 at 22:33  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Yes, compulsory shirtlifting is obviously the only answer.

12 April 2007 at 23:16  
Anonymous bob said...

Colin, I know many doctors who smoke despite the associated health risks, and despite the fact that they regularly tell their patients not to smoke. Their hypocrisy does not detract from the soundness of the advice not to smoke. Similarily the moral weakness of the papacy in history does not detract from the soundness of the moral position that Catholicism adopts.

13 April 2007 at 00:25  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Your conclusion being, Colin........?

13 April 2007 at 06:33  
Anonymous Colin said...

"Colin, I know many doctors who smoke despite the associated health risks, and despite the fact that they regularly tell their patients not to smoke."

Good point, Bob.

However, the advice of doctors, e.g. not to smoke, is based on strong evidence derived from many comparisons of survival rates among smokers and non-smokers.

Where is the evidence supporting the teaching of the Catholic Church that a husband and wife having sex just 2 or 3 times in their lifetimes for procreation, has been mandated by God and improves fidelity and duration of marriage? And how would the Pope know since they claim not to have any experience in sexual matters. In addition, about 33% of Roman Catholic priests have a homosexual orientation with estimates ranging from 10% to 50%, see review here.

Furthermore, doctors don't claim the moral highground in regard to their advice. They simply state the facts, i.e. it isn't good for your health if you smoke and it's better if you stop smoking. Doctors don't claim that God has issued a command not to smoke and that disobedience is a sin which will have negative consequences for gaining access to paradise. If your doctor tells you such nonsense, simply consult another doctor because the head of the former needs a MRI.

13 April 2007 at 11:22  
Anonymous bob said...

Colin please, please, please show me where in any piece of Catholic teaching does it say that a husband and wife should have sex only 2 or 3 times. I would very much like to see that.

13 April 2007 at 11:42  
Anonymous Colin said...

Bob,

"Colin please, please, please show me.."

My pleasure. It's very simple. The Catholic Church teaches that sex is only permissible for procreation.

The majority of married couples have 2 children or less. In conclusion, they are only permitted to have sex for producing these 2 children, i.e. at the time of ovulation which can be termined by measuring body temparture (Knaus-Oggino method). Hence, 2-3 times sex at the time of ovulation is all that is required for the procreation of the average 2 children of married couples. I wish you a happy marital life, Bob.

13 April 2007 at 12:01  
Anonymous Voyager said...

The majority of married couples have 2 children or less.

"Fewer" is the English comparative of quantity, not "less".

Moreover this feat of logic using the Barbara Syllogism invites the conclusion that the majority of married couples are in fact Roman Catholic, a fact I would dispute.

I should also dispute the data on family size derived as it is from an ethnocentric and culturally-biased sampling of Colin's immediate experiences.....there are many people in the world who grew up in families far child-rich than the two Colin specifies; he might also note the Germany has a paucity of progeny and a lack of devout religiosity which tends to indicate that increasing secularisation of German society has made it a country where people choose not to reproduce at all

I do hope Colin can employ a more disciplined methodology that to mask personal predilections as if they were factually based

13 April 2007 at 13:03  
Anonymous Colin said...

"I do hope Colin can employ a more disciplined methodology that to mask personal predilections.." (Strange style or grammar for a native speaker?)

And I do hope Voyager can employ in the future a more disciplined methodology because fact is that the number of children in European countries is below the replacement level of 2.1 child per woman. This includes Italy and Spain which are inhabitated by the strongest European believers in the Catholic Church. In other words, the average couple needs only 2-3 sexual intercourses in order to produce 2.1 offsprings. Quod erat demonstrandum.

13 April 2007 at 13:40  
Anonymous bob said...

You didn't actually answer my question Colin. I asked you to cite exactly where in Catholic teaching this instruction is. I am asking you to give me a reading list of Catholic documents where this is stated.

And as you don't know me I would ask you to refrain from making any comments on my personal life.

13 April 2007 at 13:57  
Anonymous Voyager said...

NO Colin, you are as I suspected too wrapped up in your own environs. The Roman Catholic Church is a global church in Africa, Asia, South and Central America, and the USA....all of which have far higher birthrates than Olde Worlde Europe.

Indeed were it not for immigrant populations from the other continents making their way to nest in Western Europe, no doubt whole towns would be mausoleums by now with the mummified remains of Europe's former youth dessicated in their armchairs.

Europe is fine but noone wants to plan a future there

13 April 2007 at 14:44  
Anonymous Colin said...

Bob,

"You didn't actually answer my question Colin. I asked you to cite exactly where in Catholic teaching this instruction is."

I never said that the Catholic Church had an instruction to have sex only 2-3 times during the lifetime of a couple. What I said was that the teaching of the Catholic Church to restrict sex to procreation has this implication.

"And as you don't know me I would ask you to refrain from making any comments on my personal life."

That's a fair demand and I will in the future take outmost care to avoid any ironic remarks which might be considered offensive by you. Irony was never the strength of religion as Theo van Gogh had to learn the hard way. My apologies! I only wanted to bring some action in this thread and it seems that I have been successful at least in this regard.

13 April 2007 at 19:15  
Anonymous Colin said...

Voyager,

Your 2:44 pm comment is correct.

However, I fail to see what this has to do with the demand of the Catholic Church to restrict marital sex to procreation. Undoubtedly, you will enlighten me to see the connection.

13 April 2007 at 19:18  
Anonymous bob said...

Colin -

1) Where is the evidence supporting the teaching of the Catholic Church that a husband and wife having sex just 2 or 3 times in their lifetimes for procreation, has been mandated by God and improves fidelity and duration of marriage? That seems to me like you were saying that the Catholic Church's teaching has such an instruction. Perhaps you should tighten your grasp of the English language.

2) Your views on the teachings of Catholicism on marriage and sexuality are exceptionally narrow. I would ask you to read up on them, but the last time I asked you to do something like that I ended up being accused of arrogance. However, it may interest you to know that the late Pope John Paul II wrote in his book "Love and Responsibility" that a wife must not out of misplaced kindness fake orgasm, since this practice can hinder her sexual fulfillment and harm the marriage in the long-term. This would suggest to me a view of sexuality within marriage that is broader in its view than procreative, although this is central for Catholicism.

3) I may lack the necessary sense of humour, but that has nothing to do with me being religious. Part of the appeal of blogging and debating on blogs is the anonymity. I have, therefore, no wish to have my life speculated upon by you.

And to Cranmer, my apologies for taking this discussion off topic.

13 April 2007 at 19:47  
Anonymous Colin said...

Bob -

"Perhaps you should tighten your grasp of the English language." My grasp of the English language is fine. But thanks for the advise. May I advise you in turn to perhaps tighten your grasp of logic.

"Your views on the teachings of Catholicism on marriage and sexuality are exceptionally narrow. I would ask you to read up on them." I followed your advice. Thanks again. Here is what I found on the websites of the Vatican as part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"Offenses against chastity

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes."


In other words, sexual pleasure without intention of procreation is morally disorderd. (Attention logic!) It follows that sex without the intention of producing children, i.e. fewer than 2 children in Europe or fewer than 10 children in Africa, is "morally disordered" according to the Catholic Church.

"Part of the appeal of blogging and debating on blogs is the anonymity. I have, therefore, no wish to have my life speculated upon by you."

Your wish is understandable and justified. Different than Voyager, who tried to find out the IP addresses of communicants as His Grace has pointed out in an earlier thread, I fully respect everybody's anonymity. Therefore, permit me to point out that I did not speculate in any way upon your life but that I simply wished you a happy marital life. Here again the sentence which you consider a speculation upon your life and a danger to your privacy. Since I assumed that you are married I wrote: "I wish you a happy marital life". If you find this sentence offensive, let me simply wish you a happy life, Bob.

Honestly, I start to find the entire topic and my own contributions boring. I simply wanted to get the debate going and the essential ingredient for a lively debate is controversy and emotion. However, it seems that I have hurt the feelings of a number of people who I deeply respect, not the least you, Bob. It is difficult to debate about religious matters without hurting anybody's feeling. And since I do not like the latter, it seems to be better that I simply shut up.

13 April 2007 at 20:55  
Anonymous bob said...

Colin,

I am not married, so it seems pointless to wish me a happy marital life.

Secondly, if you want logic, then that's what you shall have. You quote from the Catechism. You fail to see that there were two words - procreative and unititive. You focused only on one of them. Therefore, by simple logic, you have a narrow view of Catholicism's teaching on the subject.

Thirdly, you grasp of English is not nearly as tight as you would assume it to be. This is regularly on display when you address Cranmer directly in your posts. The correct way to do this when addressing him personally would be to say "Your Grace." You, however, always address him in these circumstances as "His Grace." This is, admittedly, a minor flaw, but one which an adept English speaker would not make.

13 April 2007 at 21:13  
Anonymous Voyager said...

However, I fail to see what this has to do with the demand of the Catholic Church to restrict marital sex to procreation. Undoubtedly, you will enlighten me to see the connection.

The Roman Catholic Church makes no such demand on its married congregation. It is most keen that they not utilise contraception, but I am sure you recognise that a female human is not able to conceive on every day of the week, so the situation you describe is fallacious

13 April 2007 at 22:11  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Different than Voyager, who tried to find out the IP addresses of communicants as His Grace has pointed out in an earlier thread

Do tell me more. I should like to publish a paper on this phenomenon. To my knpwledge only His Grace could identify IP numbers, but what you suggest Colin is a breakthrough and I should like to publish this innovation you have identified with myself, so I might become an innovator in the WWW

13 April 2007 at 22:15  
Anonymous Colin said...

Bob,

(1) "I am not married, so it seems pointless to wish me a happy marital life." I didn't not that. However, my wishes also included any future possibility.

(2) "You fail to see that there were two words - procreative and unititive. You focused only on one of them." I am sorry, Bob, but my interpretation is in agreement with Boolean Logic: "The AND operator requires that all the concepts you've requested are present." In other words, an unitive purpose is not sufficient, a procreative purpose is also required for avoiding that "sexual pleasure is morally disordered".

Furthermore, my interpretation is in agreement with the teaching of the Vatican. HUMANAE VITAE - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PAUL VI ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH from the Vatican's website:

"The Church ...teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life."

(3) "you grasp of English is not nearly as tight as you would assume it to be...You, however, always address him in these circumstances as "His Grace." This is, admittedly, a minor flaw, but one which an adept English speaker would not make."

You are correct in regard to the correct address of His Grace. Thank you for making me aware of my mistake. You are right that "an adept English speaker would not make" such a mistake. However, I was talking about my ability to correctly understand and to write clearly in English and not about minor flaws. I regularily lecture and publish in English. And editors have never found more than 3 mistakes in my manuscripts. Naturally, speed typing on this blog without proofreading produces more errors. But this has nothing to do with my understanding which you had doubts about. Nevertheless, you are right in regard to my incorrectly addressing His Grace. Mea culpa!

But isn't it funny when native English speakers, who rarely are able to speak and write in any other language without making major mistakes, are complaining about imperfect speakers of ESL? The French call this attitude cultural imperialism.

13 April 2007 at 22:40  
Anonymous bob said...

I'm not a native English speaker. It's my second language. Irish is my first. Ach, níl na daoine sa bhlóg seo ábalta Gaeilge a labhairt, agus mar sin de labhairim i mBéarla.

The Church does indeed teach that the sexual act must be open to procreation. But this is not the limit nor the totality of its teaching, and your presentation of it suggests that it is, therefore I maintain the narrowness of your grasp of it.

13 April 2007 at 22:48  
Anonymous Colin said...

Voyager wrote:

"Do tell me more. I should like to publish a paper on this phenomenon. To my knpwledge only His Grace could identify IP numbers, but what you suggest Colin is a breakthrough and I should like to publish this innovation you have identified with myself, so I might become an innovator in the WWW"

That isn't funny, Voyager.

His Grace is able to identify the IP addresses and locations of his communicants as demonstrated by the clustermap displayed on his website. The location combined with information concerning profession etc. narrows down the possibilities. His Grace warned you in one of his comments that you shouldn't try again to intrude into his system because he is very proficient in such matters and knows how to protect his anonymity and those of all communicants.

It isn't exactly a revelation to people surfing and blogging in the internet that their activities can be traced via IP addresses on all the servers they have visited.

At the time when I read His Grace's warning to you, I found it most interesting that someone who regularily palavers on this blog about his strong Christian faith and high moral standards has no moral scruple to illegally intrude into other people's databases and privacy.

13 April 2007 at 23:05  
Anonymous Colin said...

Bob,

"I'm not a native English speaker. It's my second language. Irish is my first." But you had to speak English at school in Ireland, don't you. That's why the Irish, Scots, Americans, Indians etc. are native speakers of English. At the age of puberty, unused neurons are removed from the brain and the ability to learn another language without accent and errors is limited.

"The Church does indeed teach that the sexual act must be open to procreation. But this is not the limit nor the totality of its teaching, and your presentation of it suggests that it is, therefore I maintain the narrowness of your grasp of it."

Bob, you are absolutely right. I am unable to understand the logic behind teaching two opposing views as correct.

The narrowness of my grasp doesn't permit me to understand that the "Church ...teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life" and at the same time is able to teach that this is not the case.

Therefore, I am willing to admit that you have won the debate.

Thank you for the interesting discussion and have a good night!

13 April 2007 at 23:24  
Anonymous bob said...

As I went to school in one of the Irish speaking areas known in Ireland as Gaeltachts, my schooling was conducted primarily in Irish. English was spoken only during English class.

Colin once again you wilfully misinterpret me. If you want to persist in your narrow minded beliefs about Catholicism, please feel free.

13 April 2007 at 23:36  
Anonymous Voyager said...

It isn't exactly a revelation to people surfing and blogging in the internet that their activities can be traced via IP addresses on all the servers they have visited.

It is simply incorrect Colin. Dial-Up using dynamic IPs within bands allocated to an ISP; Broadband uses dynamic IPs within a banding, and very few people have fixed IPs. There simply are not enough to allocate to each terminal.

ONLY the ISP can supply details any more specific than the city in which an IP is operating.

You are back at your usual misrepresentation, a characteristic that has become a trademark in your comments, and which sometimes gives the impression you are unfamiliar with the language, or unconstrained by normal standards of factual accuracy

14 April 2007 at 07:01  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

"The Church ...teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life."
To maintain this relationship in principle is it not sufficient to refrain from interfering in such a way as to make procreation impossible? That is how I understood Catholic teaching.

14 April 2007 at 11:10  
Anonymous Colin said...

Voyager,

First, dynamic IPs are given by the internet service provider (ISP) and it is possible to trace the surfer back to the local server of the ISP. This was clearly demonstrated to everyone by a program which His Grace had previously on his website. The program showed the name of cities and even villages of surfers, e.g. a small rural area from South Wales, London, Istanbul etc. While the latter two are no problem for anonymity, the former certainly is.

Second, the name of a small city or rural area in combination with other information such as the profession, e.g. priest of the CoE, should make it possible to identify this individual. And that's what I claimed.

Third, His Grace's system is none of your business and your action was immoral and illegal.

15 April 2007 at 20:30  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Third, His Grace's system is none of your business and your action was immoral and illegal.

What action ?

I should remind you that libel is also actionable....and an Order of The High Court will have your details public for a Libel Writ to be served Colin.

16 April 2007 at 06:34  
Anonymous Gingerdave said...

" Sexual abstinence 'increases risk of pregnancy' "

I suspect - not having read the entire report - that it's similar to the US experience of teaching abstinence in schools.

Average age of first sexual activity was delayed by 1 year, compared to the national average.

However, when they did become sexually active, rates of contraceptive use was lower than in the general population, and rates of STDs and pregnancies were higher.

A variety of conclusions may be drawn from this, of course!

16 April 2007 at 09:33  
Anonymous Observer said...

A variety of conclusions may be drawn from this, of course!

including the validity of the report itself...which would be best broken down by ethnicity and zip code....whether the teenager came from a single-parent household, and how far alcohol, drugs, cigarettes were correlated

Headlines are political, analysis is so often buried in such reports because the correlations say something deeper that many wish to keep from the light of day

The fact is that abstinence does not cause pregnancy by definition. Ceasing to be abstinent may, but even then it suggests a very high frequency of activity in view of hormonal cycles

16 April 2007 at 16:13  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older