emerald
platform
‘Chastity proaram ’ is auite ill-conceived
Along with the Medicaid and public health
cuts Pres. Ronald Reagan announced last week is
a curious little bugger — a $16 million increase in
family planning funds. That $16 million is ear
marked for a new administration baby called the
"Chastity porgram.”
“Chastity program"?
The Reagan conceived "Chastity program” is
aimed at encouraging sexual abstinence and
self-discipline among teenagers.
Sexual abstinence and self-discipline among
teenagers? Isn’t that an idea whose time has come
— and gone?
As illegitimate as it seems the Reagan admin
istration is planning to disseminate $16 million to
dissuade teenagers from using contraceptives
and to practice sexual abstinence They must
realize sexual abstinence requires practically no
practice.
This "Chastity program” is definitely an im
potent idea. And, at $16 "big ones" it's a natural
for Senator William Proxmire’s Golden Fleece
Award.
What sort of mentality (or lack thereof) sired
the idea to discard contraceptives for teen-age
use when the number of unwed teenage preg
nancies is as high as ever? The problem lies more
in the lack of knowledge, lack of availability and
encouraged use of contraceptives by sexually
active teenagers If the Reagan administration is
attempting a roundabout attack on teenage preg
nancies, discouraging contraceptive use is surely
a rse ways- around
Encouraging sexual abstinence is a rather
rosy idea But the recognition can't be shaken that
abstinence has been preached for so-many
hundreds-of-years with a less than a satisfying
outcome On the one hand, those that will — shall
On the other hand, those that won’t — don’t
Proper information regarding both the con
sequences and rewards of sexual activity will
permit teenagers to make mature decisions
whether or not to engage in sexual activity Thrust
into ignorance, with contraception discouraged,
the results will be shattered lives, guilt, and un
wanted pregnancies.
What is really troubling to ponder is the mil
lions of dollars that will be expended to encourage
self-discipline in lieu of sexual activity Somehow,
spending millions of dollars on sexual self-disci
pline conjures some curious images Those
images aren't merely cast-iron corsets, cold
showers and hairy palms — but a forthcoming
generation of sexually guilty neurotics Will the
rigors of this program elicit a nascent
Freudianism?
The “Chastity program” is a boondoggle and
a bastardization of reality The progenitors of this
program are trying to foist ignorance and out-dat
ed ideals on young adults. The "Chastity pro
gram" is a botch from conception. That $16
million would be spent more wisely on expanded
sex education and ensuring contraceptives are
readily available for use That's addressing the
reality of teenage sexuality
Hk
'NOTHING rORTHt NEXT THREE ''(EARS, I'M WRWD.SIR...'
letters
Fundamentalist-liberal
Last week's editorial made the statement "Fun
damentalist groups are some of the strongest fibers
woven into the fabric of American culture” There is a
reason for this. We often get confused about who is the
attacker and who is the attackee in the fundamentalist
liberal controversy Those of us who have lived most of
our lives in the '60s and '70s assume for some odd
reason that present civil rights ideals, the theory of
evolution and freedom of sexual values have always
been This perspective is wrong The values of the
fundamentalists held sway in the United States until the
1960s. The Constitution was the document that upheld
their lifestyle. This group of people are the attacked and
we are the attackers. It shouldn't surprise us then that a
strong conservative movement is rising The '60s took
the conservative sector of our nation by surprise,
overwhelmed it, and it is just now reorganizing
Could we possibly admit to some good things in the
conservative movement? It is interesting to read "the
belief in an ultimate good triumphing over evil is
essential to the mettle of a culture followed by a
denunciation of anyone who would try to apply such
ideals to real life issues The fundamentalists remember
when such ideals were applied to public life and the
crime rate was lower, the family was more stable,
divorce and its counterpart, juvenile delinquency, were
not so prevalent. While this may be a classic non
sequitur, the fundamentalists don't think so And of
course none of us would bow to such logic unless we
had a controlled experiment where Washington State
was conservative, Oregon State was liberal, and we
measured the results on a dip stick
Could it be that a good society does not just
happen? Historically it hasn't happened What morals
and values build a stable, beneficial society? One where
children have the right to a stable home, where a man
does not desert his family in tough times, where an
advertisement does not say "We care” when it means
"We care about your money", where your bicycle is not
in constant danger of being ripped off, and when word
and integrity can be trusted, rather than badly-worded
contracts that end in suits
I don't think these are terrible ideals, and these are
the kinds of ideals fundamentalists want The problem is
they want to legislate it all Since when can you legislate
a man's character'? Even if they passed all of their
legislation, I think they would be sadly disappointed
If we want a sensible and resonable morality to
characterize our society, we have to work at it person
ally. Very few of us have a well thought out basis for our
morals and life philosophy If you have ' caught'' you
personal morals and lifestyle the same way one catches
measles, it’s time to question them Do you even know
what you believe about honesty, self-control,
trustworthiness, the golden rule, slander, moderation,
generosity, courage, love and creativity1? These are all
qualities of the spirit, and unfortunately many of us are
spiritually deaf, dumb and blind
Rick Doughty
Junior, business administration
Which morality?
Concerning ' Groups fight to revise culture "
The thesis or assumption behind the editorial's
complaints is that fundamentalists would "legislate
morality.”
Whatever you make of fundamentalist activism,
everyone must wake up to the fact that all legislation
and all social action is based on some morality or
another In this sense you can not help but legislate
morality " The question becomes Which morality7'
You may disagree with the motivating morality in
question or with its particular application, but it is utterly
naive and unfair to assume that only fundamentalists
want to "legislate morality." All social action is based
on moral principle — otherwise there would be no
action at all Politics and policies, lawmaking and
lobbying, are all the enactment of a certain morality
The "pro-choice" position rests on the ethical
presupposition (morality) that the developing person
(fetus) has no right to life, protection, or freedom All
pro-choice" activism stems from this morality and
seeks to enact (legislate) this morality To support
legislation granting aid for abortions is to — you
guessed it — "legislate morality," "pro-choice" morali
ty
Does the writer oppose their views7 Would he seek
to legislate against their morality7 If so, now who is
guilty of "legislating morality"?
Douglas Groothuis
graduate, philosophy
staff
Tha Otagon DuUy Emarakl Is publlshad
Monday through Friday axcapl during
finala waak and vacation* by tha Oragon
Dally Ematald Publishing Co.
Maws 636-5511
Adsarbsing/Businas* 636-3712
Clasahlads 666-4343
Production 636-4331
Editor
Sally Hodgkmson
Managing Editor
Gabriel Boehmer
Newt Editor
Harry Esteve
Aaaistanl Naan Editor
John Healy
Photo Editor
Bob Baker
Graphics Editor
Max DeRungs
Editorial Page Editor
Cort Fernald
Sporta Editor
Steve Spatz
Attach* Sportt Editor
Jett Dickerson
Entertainment Editor
Matt Meyer
Night Editor
Gabriel Boehmer
/luocM) CdHort
ASUO
Dane daussen
Community
Marian Green
Department* end School*
Debbie Howlett
Ftitum
Caroline Petnch
Higher Education
Ann Portal
PoliticalEnvironment
Hon Hunt
Ganara/ Staff.
AdrerUelng Director
Darlene Gore
C la named AdverUelng
Sally Oljar
Production tleneger
Ann Peterson
Controller
Jeen Ownbey