Aids or Purity?

What is cooler, increasing the aids risk or keeping sex within Marraige?

"US President George W Bush's top adviser on HIV/Aids has said the world is losing the battle against the virus" BBC News.

This comes out weeks after our Trashy Educational System backed up by the courts has outlawed a young girls right to ware a "purity ring"...she spoke of her "disappointment" after the High Court ruled yesterday she had no legal right to wear a "purity ring" to school as an expression of her belief in Christian values." The Independant

I think the legal system has used the press to publish it's Godless values abroad!

http://education.independent.co.uk/news/...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pa...

i take anything a bush adviser sez with a HUGE grain of salt...remember 'slam dunk?'
i read that story on-line about the court decision, and was very disappointed...i cannot, for the life of me, see the problem with a girl wearing a 'purity ring', especially in light of the 'hey, i'm just a brainless ho, use me and abuse me' clothing that young girls are allowed to wear to school...but i guess advertising the availability for random sex is protected expression or something
(edit)
that being said, i don't think that aids or purity are the only two choices-i know which choice i want my kids to make, but i'm not THAT naive, and i still remember my own youth-i fully expect them to have the best possible information regarding birth control and prevention of STD's and other li'l nasties...abstinence IS the most effective method of preventing the above, but 'abstinence-only' sex education has proven to be a failure...i know how to 'bring up' my kids properly...i just wish others would do the sameHow about educating people on safe sex practices instead of misleading them so they conform to you're personal moral values?
That's interesting, because wearing a purity does not mean you are Christian, merely holding the belief against pre-marital sex.

What's next? Girls can't wear skirts below their knees because it shows they have moral values?
Sex in marraige is a lot cooler. but I wouldn't expect to be recognized for it.
That's like asking which is better -- botulism or baseball?

Monogamy creates the same risk of AIDS or STD transfer whether you get a marriage license or not.

And marriage has nothing to do whatsoever with disease transfer, because someone who has AIDS -- such as through drug use or tainted blood transfusion -- can transfer that disease to a spouse just as easily as anyone else.

And given how many so-called 'defenders of marriage' commit adultery -- it's pretty obvious that marriage is not the same as monogamy.

Please stop trying to enforce your personal religious beliefs on everyone else as a matter of law. We don't follow your religion, and we don't want to.

As far as the ring -- you're misrepresenting the court holding. The court held that the "no jewelry" policy of the school applied regardless of whether the ring was for religious reasons, or personal reasons, or merely cosmetic. The court didn't single out the purity ring for special treatment.
she should have the right to express herself within reason, in that same vein though I think christian hipocracy would rear it's ugly head if a Wiccan were to wear wiccan jewlery. I think monogomy is important, but in lieu of that, safety should be practiced. It's the suppression of our animal instincts (food, sex, safety) that bring out our reckless behaviors.