I'm writing in response to Judy Ducayne's column in the March 27 The Citizen, titled “Protect your girls from the ‘sex shot.'” I cannot agree with Mrs. Ducayne's logic and I believe she underestimates the intelligence of parents.
I am a Christian (specifically I believe Jesus is the Son of God, He died on the cross, He arose on the third day, and He has forgiven all my sins and I will go to heaven when I die). I have been happily married for more than 10 years to a wonderful man and we are raising two beautiful daughters. We are extremely active in our church and my children attend a Christian school.
My daughters are not old enough yet for the vaccine, but when and if they do receive this vaccine, it will not alter in any way whatsoever my parenting. A vaccine does not have the power to “harmfully awaken their sexuality” as the column suggests. (Why not crusade against toys, clothing and the media?) I will forever remain firm in my stance that God's design is abstinence until marriage and faithfulness after marriage. (Not just to protect against STDs, but emotional and mental difficulty as well.)
No reasonably intelligent parent can honestly believe a vaccine will protect against other STDs, AIDS and unwanted pregnancy. I realize that the vaccine is only effective for a few types of HPV. But I support the development of safe and effective vaccines against HPV and other viruses. I don't expect my children to be exposed to HPV (nor do I expect them to be exposed to measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and hepatitis B). I do oppose mandatory HPV vaccines and will exercise my parental rights to be the primary decision-maker and educator for my children.
My point is ... a vaccine can be just a vaccine against a future improbability. A parent can choose in favor of the HPV vaccine and not compromise their stance on abstinence. For balanced, scientific and logical articles about the HPV, check out http://www.family.org (search for HPV).
Melissa Hofmann
Sennett
My daughters are not old enough yet for the vaccine, but when and if they do receive this vaccine, it will not alter in any way whatsoever my parenting. A vaccine does not have the power to “harmfully awaken their sexuality” as the column suggests. (Why not crusade against toys, clothing and the media?) I will forever remain firm in my stance that God's design is abstinence until marriage and faithfulness after marriage. (Not just to protect against STDs, but emotional and mental difficulty as well.)
No reasonably intelligent parent can honestly believe a vaccine will protect against other STDs, AIDS and unwanted pregnancy. I realize that the vaccine is only effective for a few types of HPV. But I support the development of safe and effective vaccines against HPV and other viruses. I don't expect my children to be exposed to HPV (nor do I expect them to be exposed to measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and hepatitis B). I do oppose mandatory HPV vaccines and will exercise my parental rights to be the primary decision-maker and educator for my children.
My point is ... a vaccine can be just a vaccine against a future improbability. A parent can choose in favor of the HPV vaccine and not compromise their stance on abstinence. For balanced, scientific and logical articles about the HPV, check out http://www.family.org (search for HPV).
Melissa Hofmann
Sennett
The Citizens' Say
There are No comments posted.