 |
| Marchers Stretched Along First Avenue in Cedar Rapids |
 |
| Marchers Outside Cedar Rapids Planned Parenthood |
 |
| Marchers Under Our Billboard 1 |
 |
| Marchers at the Start of the March |
 |
| Marchers Under Our Billboard 2 |
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
Cedar Rapids March for Life 2017
We had great turnout for the 2017 Cedar Rapids March for Life. Here are a few photos from the event!
Monday, January 16, 2017
As I read newspaper editorials about current political efforts, I see lots of ignorance of the issues. This is one of the blog posts I intend to make regarding the many issues I see.
Let's start with sex ed.
Some people are under the impression that abstinence programs don't work. They remember what they had decades ago, and assume the worst. They don't believe a "just say no" approach will work. They even point to studies that compare up to four abstinence-based programs with other approaches, and the abstinence programs rank at the bottom in terms of effectiveness. So what are WE missing, since we seem to promote programs that run against the statistics?
Well, let's look at those comparisons for a moment. Those four abstinence-based programs? They were all discontinued many years ago, due to their ineffectiveness. Those approaches to abstinence-based education aren't used anymore, or at least they shouldn't be used. Students like to know the WHY behind the WHAT. So suggesting they just say no doesn't do much for them, unless they know why. But beyond that, nature abhors a vacuum. Saying no makes people think they are missing something. They don't want to miss out. They want something to fill that void. They either end up saying yes to what they should say no to, or something just as bad can fill that void.
Modern abstinence-based programs start with abstinence, but include a long list of things the students are saying YES to. They see WHY it's good to wait until marriage to have sex, without conflicting messages. There has been a decrease in birthrates among teens. But at the same time, we have seen more teens postponing the time in which they first have sex. Those two must correlate, because sex leads to pregnancy.
Of course we send unusual messages with the other programs. Many teens today think of the normal way of having sex is "protected sex." And the way to have children is to have "unprotected sex." Well, most abortions are sought by women who had "protected sex" or so-called "safe sex." When two people give themselves in marriage, they should give each other fully to the other. One should not need protection from the other, and protection in the case of contraception holds back one's fertility.
Some of the most effective programs start with abstinence, but answer the questions the students have. Yes, that means they may have questions about things they've heard about. But what do you think is the most common question students have regarding sex? Many people would be surprised. The most common question asks how they can say no to someone they care about without ruining the relationship.
If students want to know how to say no, and we keep teaching them different ways to mitigate risks if they say yes, then we are missing the mark when seeking the best approach. Also, we shouldn't push content on them that's not appropriate for their age, which is common in Planned Parenthood's curriculum; and yes, they are in our schools.
Imagine if we approached an anti-smoking campaign the same way as we do with sex ed. Whenever I see scenes in movies where they are showing how to put a condom on a banana, I just wonder when the anti-smoking efforts would have had us rolling our own cigarettes, possibly adding a cotton ball as a filter for "protection." Such an approach assumes that students won't do what you say in terms of saying no to sex or tobacco, but for some reason they assume students will listen better to the risk-mitigation steps? What sounds crazy now?
Oh, and in terms of reducing the spread of AIDS in Africa, people again say we should promote the use of condoms. But condoms don't offer significant protection against such diseases as HPV, which causes cancer. The sexual activity that can occur when there's a sense of safety leads to the kind of epidemic we've seen with HPV. But what about AIDS? I seem to have changed the subject. Well, the countries where they focus on abstinence, the rates have dropped. The nations that used condoms have continued to see increases.
We know what works and what doesn't. We chose the side that appears best not only based on some moral basis, but is also backed by statistics. It's much better to start with abstinence and answer the questions students have.
Let's start with sex ed.
Some people are under the impression that abstinence programs don't work. They remember what they had decades ago, and assume the worst. They don't believe a "just say no" approach will work. They even point to studies that compare up to four abstinence-based programs with other approaches, and the abstinence programs rank at the bottom in terms of effectiveness. So what are WE missing, since we seem to promote programs that run against the statistics?
Well, let's look at those comparisons for a moment. Those four abstinence-based programs? They were all discontinued many years ago, due to their ineffectiveness. Those approaches to abstinence-based education aren't used anymore, or at least they shouldn't be used. Students like to know the WHY behind the WHAT. So suggesting they just say no doesn't do much for them, unless they know why. But beyond that, nature abhors a vacuum. Saying no makes people think they are missing something. They don't want to miss out. They want something to fill that void. They either end up saying yes to what they should say no to, or something just as bad can fill that void.
Modern abstinence-based programs start with abstinence, but include a long list of things the students are saying YES to. They see WHY it's good to wait until marriage to have sex, without conflicting messages. There has been a decrease in birthrates among teens. But at the same time, we have seen more teens postponing the time in which they first have sex. Those two must correlate, because sex leads to pregnancy.
Of course we send unusual messages with the other programs. Many teens today think of the normal way of having sex is "protected sex." And the way to have children is to have "unprotected sex." Well, most abortions are sought by women who had "protected sex" or so-called "safe sex." When two people give themselves in marriage, they should give each other fully to the other. One should not need protection from the other, and protection in the case of contraception holds back one's fertility.
Some of the most effective programs start with abstinence, but answer the questions the students have. Yes, that means they may have questions about things they've heard about. But what do you think is the most common question students have regarding sex? Many people would be surprised. The most common question asks how they can say no to someone they care about without ruining the relationship.
If students want to know how to say no, and we keep teaching them different ways to mitigate risks if they say yes, then we are missing the mark when seeking the best approach. Also, we shouldn't push content on them that's not appropriate for their age, which is common in Planned Parenthood's curriculum; and yes, they are in our schools.
Imagine if we approached an anti-smoking campaign the same way as we do with sex ed. Whenever I see scenes in movies where they are showing how to put a condom on a banana, I just wonder when the anti-smoking efforts would have had us rolling our own cigarettes, possibly adding a cotton ball as a filter for "protection." Such an approach assumes that students won't do what you say in terms of saying no to sex or tobacco, but for some reason they assume students will listen better to the risk-mitigation steps? What sounds crazy now?
Oh, and in terms of reducing the spread of AIDS in Africa, people again say we should promote the use of condoms. But condoms don't offer significant protection against such diseases as HPV, which causes cancer. The sexual activity that can occur when there's a sense of safety leads to the kind of epidemic we've seen with HPV. But what about AIDS? I seem to have changed the subject. Well, the countries where they focus on abstinence, the rates have dropped. The nations that used condoms have continued to see increases.
We know what works and what doesn't. We chose the side that appears best not only based on some moral basis, but is also backed by statistics. It's much better to start with abstinence and answer the questions students have.
Sunday, January 15, 2017
Come to the 2017 Cedar Rapids March for Life!
Please join us for a day of prayer for the legal protection of unborn children. Fr. Steve Garner will be the celebrant at a Mass for Life on Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 1:00 at St. Matthew's Church (2310 First Ave NE) in Cedar Rapids.
The Mass will be followed at 2:00 by a March for Life to Planned Parenthood (3425 First Ave SE) where we will witness, pray, and visit. Signs will be available for your use. At 3:00 we will return to St, Matthew's Church Kearn Hall (lower level) for free chili and fellowship. Those who want to join in but will not be able to march can drive the route and participate in the events. All are welcome to attend all or part of this activity. For more information contact coalitionforlife@gmail.com or call 319-721-9730.
The Mass will be followed at 2:00 by a March for Life to Planned Parenthood (3425 First Ave SE) where we will witness, pray, and visit. Signs will be available for your use. At 3:00 we will return to St, Matthew's Church Kearn Hall (lower level) for free chili and fellowship. Those who want to join in but will not be able to march can drive the route and participate in the events. All are welcome to attend all or part of this activity. For more information contact coalitionforlife@gmail.com or call 319-721-9730.
Sunday, January 1, 2017
New Year - New Parking Rules
 |
| No Parking |
Some people already park on Elm Ave SE, 34th St Dr SE, or 35th St NE on the other side of 1st Ave. Other than parking across the street, avoiding the residential spots, these will be the new places we will prefer using in the future.
Planned Parenthood employees had been parking on the street more commonly since October. The parking ordinances apply to everyone, so they will not be allowed to park there either.
The parking signs are the standard signs and clearly mark where you may not park. I tweaked the image associated with this post in a way that makes for an interesting image, but please don't mess with any real signs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)