Cervical Cancer Vaccine Does Not Equal License to Have Sex!

More Sex: The Baffling Argument Against Cervical Cancer Vaccine

By JudyJiastyle, published May 25, 2006
Published Content: 45  Total Views: 153,038  Favorited By: 0 CPs
Rating: 2.9 of 5


Baffling. 

Does not compute. 

These are the words that should be used to describe the opposition of conservative organizations for mandatory cervical cancer vaccines. The vaccine protects against the human papilloma virus (HPV), which is the most common cause of cervical cancer.  Half the sexually active women in the US between the ages of 18 to 22 are infected with the virus.  In the US, it kills over 3,700 women a year, and the numbers are even higher in third world countries where cancer detection is low. 

Spearheaded by the Family Research Council, religious groups are gearing up to protest mandatory cervical cancer vaccinations.  Reason?  They preach abstinence as the best way to prevent STDs, including HPV.  The vaccine could be seen as a license for young adults to have sex, which completely undermines their abstinence message. 

There is a hole in the argument right off the bat.  There are other STDs that can be contracted even if someone has been vaccinated for HPV.  How many young women even know what HPV is?  Will they be so emboldened by the vaccine for a particular virus that they will think themselves invincible to other viruses?   If that’s true, than the problem is bigger than teenagers having sex, it’s the entire education system. 

This also exposes how abstinence is being taught, not as a moral conservative belief system, but as the only way to not get infected with STDs.  This type of subversive scare tactic for abstinence will only lead to more broad generalizations and misconceptions about sexual health and well being.  Does everyone who has premarital sex have an STD?  That’s certainly what they are insinuating.  So it’s either their way or the STD way.

Cervical Cancer Vaccine Does Not Equal License to Have Sex!

The cervical cancer vaccine is not a license for sex.

Credit: tijmen

Copyright: sxc.hu

Takeaways
  • 3,700 women in the US die of cervical cancer. The rate is higher in poor countries.
  • There are over 20 sexually transmitted diseases identified, HPV is just one of them.
  • Sex after marriage does not prevent HPV or cervical cancer.
Did You Know?
The vaccine is almost 100% affective against two of the cancer causing HPV strains.
Resources
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 9 of 9
 
 
sharon: nobody cares

Posted on 07/10/2008 at 12:07:55 AM

 
thankyou sharon van gaskin for the excessive amount of comments

Posted on 05/13/2007 at 6:05:00 AM

 
I want to know how long after getting the vaccine I have to wait before I can have sex?

Posted on 04/16/2007 at 7:04:00 PM

 
Honestly, though, my solution wouldn't work for most individuals because most people simply are too impatient.

Posted on 02/03/2007 at 7:02:00 PM

 
There is a 6-month window for the vaccine to be fully administered and take effect. My dh and I (both virgins when we met) waited 9 months (mostly I was the one waiting, he would have been ready whenever). The point is once our relationship progressed I could make decisions about vaccinating. Also, if both partners test negative for HPV, why vaccinate? Most medical experts recommend both individuals get STD testing before sexual activity with each other. A simple vile of blood drawn versus decreased immune function from vaccination? To more holistically-minded individuals such as myself the answer is clear.

Posted on 02/03/2007 at 7:02:00 PM

 
In response to your comment about "raising children in a bubble," that is exactly why the vaccine shouldn't be mandatory. Can't a 14-year-old female make this decision for herself? If she doesn't have sex until she is 18, why get vaccinated years earlier? Ultimately, the only person that has a say in this issue is the female exposes herself to the vaccination risks. I have to wonder why the pro-choice movement ignores medical autonomy regarding EVERY aspect of a female's body? If you're not having sex, you don't need to be vaccinated for an STD. You can make a decision about vaccination WHEN you decide to become sexually active.

Posted on 02/03/2007 at 7:02:00 PM

 
Also, I would encourage my dd to make the decision about getting the vaccine. I'm ultimately prochoice, but it's interesting that many prochoice individuals feel they can dictate what their children put into their bodies. I would no more require my dd get a vaccine then I would mandate that she takes oral contraceptives. Sadly, many parents insist on such dictatorial style of parenting.

Posted on 01/26/2007 at 8:01:00 AM

 
Bottom line- I would encourage my dd to consider getting the vaccine when she decides she wants to become sexually active. I really don't see the need to get a vaccine that might not be necessary. I can't tell you how shocked Planned Parenthood was when I showed up for BC BEFORE becoming sexually active. Apparently, most patients they see show up 2 or 3 years later. Plus, I don't think the vaccine risk factors will be clear until it is on the market much longer.

Posted on 01/26/2007 at 8:01:00 AM

 
I'm against the vaccine being mandatory but not for the reasons you mentioned, but because I'm anti-vax. If I had known what I know now when my dd was an infant, I would have had her on a delayed vaccination schedule and not gotten unnecessary vaccines such as Hep B. The current infant vax schedule is based on the idea that underprivileged kids don't get to the doctor beyond age 2. So the gov. wants to ensure that these kids get all their vaccines before age 2. Since I planned on taking my child for well-baby visits every year, there was no need to load her developing body up with vaccines before that age.

Posted on 01/26/2007 at 8:01:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 9 of 9
 
Most Commented On