Purity Ball 2007
Tonight is the 4th annual Purity Ball event at Northside Christian Church. This year has been sold out with a waiting list for cancellations. The event begins at 5:45 p.m. with pictures, quartet music, and snacks
The formal part of the event begins at 6:30 pm and will last until 11:00 pm or later. Both dads and daughters are again excited and looking forward to the event.
Mom’s, friends and other family members are volunteering in multiple areas with registration, serving and photography.
Since last year, another local church has also begun a similar program and reported it as a great event as well.
Everyone on the planning committee appreciates the community wide support for the event as well as the sponsors of the event.
posted by Anonymous at 5:50 AM
34 Comments:
"The purity movement is, in essence, about refusing to let girls grow up." Not to mention never owning their own sexuality.
G.Coyle...it's sad that you don't know how wrong you are. Very sad.
Based on the "pledge" that HB published previously, it appears more like making sure their fathers and future husbands "own" them.
I don't get this focus on the girls. Doesn't it usually take two to tango? At least for the best kind of tangoing. Do the boys get a free ride to sow wild oats before taking possession of a bride?
I think it is an awesome event. I am very proud of Dr Dan and Northside for standing up for what is best for these young girls.
When I was in high school I made a vow to stay pure and it was the best decision of my life! I am married to a wonderful Christian man who made the same vow. My husband does not own me instead we have a marriage God intended us to have and it is awesome.
I had friends in high school that made fun of me and thought I was crazy. They thought I was living in a fantasy world and I would not find a man who loved me enough to wait to have sex until marriage. God has blessed me in many ways. I didn't worry that I might be pregnant every month, I didn't have to worry about STDs, and I didn't have a horrible break up from a man who used me for sex. A lot of my friends did deal with these issues and broke their hearts. I also don't worry that my husband would cheat on me. I know if he respected me enough for us to wait until marriage that he would never do anything to hurt me. I am not saying he is perfect or better than anyone else it is just a trust I can’t explain.
I am not judging other marriages nor do I think I am a better person. My point is read the Bible. God has a plan for marriage that is awesome.
I think a girl making a vow of purity is great...if she's doing with and for herself. I find it creepy that a teen-age girl is making sexual-abstinance vows to her Dad. eck. There's something strangely kinky about it.
GCOYLE, You sound like you have problems with your father...
Wonder how many girls go with their dad and make the pledge 'cause they cant admit otherwise?
I've read that there's such an event for mothers and sons, too.
Not my gig ... then again, I'm a pagan.
It would be interesting to see a follow up study on the actual levels of purity maintained by these girls two or three years after their fathers coerce them into signing the pledge. Good intentions aside, teenage hormones are pretty powerful...and it happens in the best of families.
Is there a comparable event for boys and their mom's? If not, I'd have to ask why not? Last I checked, the males were part of the mating ritual and it does seem to me that if the goal is sexual purity for all, it applies to both males and females.
Secondly, no offense to people who responded to Gina, but some folks said some fairly harsh things under the name "Anonymous." Frankly, for what you said to a woman who has the courage to put her name to her words, you need to add your names to your posts. Anonymous criticism of a person's opinions, right or wrong, is, to be blunt, cowardly.
I think this whole issue of “purity” until marriage is a real risk factor for a terrible marriage. It would be interesting to have psychiatrists or marriage counselors weigh in on what problems they see in their practices from couples’ sexual incompatibility or issues resulting from repressed sexuality. I am not talking about 14 or 15 year olds, but the idea that a 20, 22 or 25 year old woman is “damaged goods” if she isn’t “PURE” just sounds to me like religious mind control. I wonder just how virginal on their wedding days were many of the fathers dragging their daughters to the Purity Ball. To create life long guilt over something as natural as sexuality doesn’t strike me as very helpful parenting.
Is g.coyle named Gina?
I find some of the comments disheartening from the standpoint of a local community effort being criticized for attempting to raise a standard that has fallen in our country.
Those making the comments are also the same ones who many times tout “tolerance.
Where’s the tolerance for the Christian viewpoint and the ideals we believe in?
We can disagree over many issues, but we should all be allowed to do what we believe is morally correct as long as it is within the bounds of our legal system.
G.coyle’s initial remarks are just incorrect.
The purity movement is absolutely not about preventing a girl from growing up.
When did having sex define what is meant by “growing up”?
The goal of purity is to allow these individuals the best opportunity to grow up in the safest and securest environment possible without the risk of STD’s, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress and give them the opportunity for family and financial success.
There are numerous studies demonstrating the deleterious effects of early sexual activity and emotional and physical morbidity.
In addition, stable married couples have an easier time financially succeeding.
All of these things are a benefit to the girls, their families and our communities.
We are working on a boy event that will take place in the summer.
A recent review in Sept. 2006 in the UK of the analysis of Millennium Cohort Study data on 15,000 mothers who gave birth during 2000/01 found that, amongst all unmarried couples comprising those who described themselves as either “cohabiting” or “closely involved” at the time of birth, family breakdown is five times more common than amongst married couples.
Nearly 3,000 mothers, 20 per cent of the sample, had become lone parents during the first three years of their child's life.
The risk of breakdown was 6 per cent among married couples and 32 per cent among unmarried couples, comprising 20 per cent of those “cohabiting” and 74 per cent of those “closely involved”.
It is the belief of many that by promoting cohabitation and undermining marriage, policy-makers are exposing more children to the perils of family breakdown, reflected in higher levels of crime, anti-social behavior, educational failure and mental and emotional disturbance.
This analysis and report was submitted in evidence to the Social Justice Policy Group to make recommendations on tackling poverty and social disadvantage.
The full report can be viewed on the BCFT website. http://www.bcft.co.uk/Family%20breakdown%20in%20the%20UK.pdf
Re: "The goal of purity is to allow these individuals the best opportunity to grow up in the safest and securest environment possible without the risk of STD’s, unwanted pregnancies, emotional distress and give them the opportunity for family and financial success."
If all that is so, then why are the fundamentalist churches so opposed to sex education and birth control education which could go a long way toward helping achieve those goals. Human nature being what it is, a lot, if not most, young people are going to have sex. My guess is that a better understanding of safe sex practices would have a far greater impact on the problems you cite than "Purity Pledges" which fly in the face of the intelligently designed" drive to reproduce our species.
When we deny people of things, it's makes them crazy. Just look at the comments from employees at the hospital after they were denied the the ability to smoke.
HB “Where’s the tolerance for the Christian viewpoint and the ideals we believe in?”
I’m tolerating your viewpoint right now. You tolerate mine by allowing this discussion. I absolutely support your right to live by your principles and I hope visa-versa. It’s just this is America – so I think I have the right to wade into the public sphere and express my opinion. One of my best friends since 1969 is an evangelical Christian, that may surprise you. I suspect you have no friends who are gay.
HB “When did having sex define what is meant by “growing up”?”
Wow – that’s a big logical leap from what I was saying. “Growing up” is learning how to take responsibility for yourself. I’d be happy to see all teenagers take purity vows…we agree teen-age sex is not healthy. I think we simply disagree on the mechanism to bring that about. Your solution is the traditional scheme whereby the father owns the daughters (sexuality) until she is delivered to her husband, who then “owns” her. My hope for girls is they are supported in making their own healthy choices and by teenagers will be empowered to reserve their own sexuality for a life partner. As you stated, there are many good reasons for this. The modern world does require some autonomy and responsibility to succeed. Although remaining in a traditional community, ala the Amish, can and does work for some. I think the majority of the girls we’re discussing will be member of the modern world and would do best to enter it with some skills in managing their drives and by extention, their lives.
HB “We are working on a boy event that will take place in the summer.”
Now, if you could control the boys…you might have something!
HB “It is the belief of many that by promoting cohabitation and undermining marriage, policy-makers are exposing more children to the perils of family breakdown, reflected in higher levels of crime, anti-social behavior, educational failure and mental and emotional disturbance.”
Men undermine marriage when they are unfaithful. Adults undermine marriage when they divorce. What does that have to do with making sexual purity vows between girls and Dads? This logic is too jumbled for me to think in. So let me just say – I don’t subscribe to one of the underlying tenets of patriarchy – that women’s sexuality must be controlled. I would rather men use their energy to control themselves.
g.coyle..You are one hurt "puppy"
although I never had a father to see me through puberty, I managed to develop enough self respect and knoweledge of the pitfalls of pre-marital sex through the forethought of my Mother. there were frequent temptations and a few close calls and without the excellent sex education that my mother, who out of shame to discuss herself, signed for me to recieve. in those days a parent had to sign for one to be allowed to be taught about these things, I might have succumbed.
g.coyle-AMEN
Right On
HB,
You will notice that I have been absent from this discussion. The reason is, I am tolerant of your position, which I wrote last year in your defense on this very topic.
While you have not directly said so, you seem to believe that I do not have "standards". I do. I am not eloquent(as most already know)but to be brief, my most basic tenet is fairness.
Fairness is why I leave you alone on this issue. Fairness is why I disagree with my "friends" on anonymous comments--actually the absoluteness of such. I believe there are circumstances that do allow for it. Name calling is not one of them. This posting is not really one of them--I agree with Pastor John.
You are passionate about finding right and wrong. I am just as passionate about finding fairness. It is, admittedly, a gray area.(smile)
Mark
Wow, so many varying opinions! I truly respect you Dan for stepping out and doing this for the community. I think it comes down to those who believe and those who don't, you'll never convince a feminist that abortion is wrong, any more than you'll convince PETA that hunters have rights too. We teach our children by example more than anything and the example you are setting for your children is something to be admired and commended Dr. Dan. Keep up the good work.
Gina, your opinion is worth as much an anyone elses here, I'm sorry if anything said offended you. I don't neccessarily agree with you, but I wouldn't try to change how you feel. You have to understand the beliefs of people who believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If you believe, in the end you will answer to the creator as to how you lived your life and how you raised your children. We are given a set of rules to live by (The Torah)and that's what we will answer for. It's black and white for a believer not shades of gray. We have a guide to live by and that's what helps us through life. Without it and a relationship with our creator we would be no different from the rest of the world. I don't believe the "Pledge" is an arranged marriage senario, just wanting the best for our daughters.
I am always amazed by statements such as:
"It's black and white for a believer not shades of gray"
If it is all that clear, how come there are hundreds of different "Christian" denominations with hundreds of subsets of beliefs and practices within those denominations? Oh, and how come almost every one of those hundreds of subsets believes with absolute certainty that their belief system is the ONLY one that is correct?
Do you folks ever step back and look at things from at least ten feet above the horizon to see how illogical this is?
My faith is Black and White as it is mine and mine alone. I never try to push my beliefs on anyone as I don't want any other denomination to do that to me. If you ask me what I believe I'll tell you, otherwise I will not condemn you for your beliefs. I'll be the one to answer for what I've done as will every other denomination. Dr. Dan believes what he is doing what is right and his actions so dictate. Nowhere here did I here him say you are damned to hell or you are wrong if you don't show up with your daughter. As for every denomination goes, Religon is a man made division of spirituality. I believe in the written word of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, man has thrown his 2 cents worth in and twisted religon. Our laws where set up on the 10 commandments, where they not? Easter was a pagan holiday to worship the goddess Ishtar and was incorporated into Christianity along with many other pagan beliefs around the time of Constantine emporer of Rome. I'm sure alot of people will disagree, but don't take my word for it look for yourself. Today's religon can't even agree on the name of the son of our father. "Jesus" there was no J or sound for J in the his time. so how do you get Jesus? My name is Chad I won't respond to Brad. Do you think on Judgement day there will be shades of gray or absolute truth? As far as seeing how illogical it is, If I'm wrong then I'll have lived a moral life, no more no less, what if you're wrong?
I have posted this before but since there are still some new readers, here it is again.
Denomination is inclusive and implies the Christian group is denominated by a particular name but one member of a larger group—the church—to which all denominations belong.
The denominational theory of the church, then, insists that the true church cannot be identified with any single ecclesiastical structure. This was developed by the 17th century Congregationalists at the Westminster Assembly (1642-1649) and articulated several fundamental truths:
o Considering man’s inability to always see the truth clearly, differences of opinion about the outward form of the church are inevitable.
o Even though these differences do not involve fundamentals of the faith, every Christian is obligated to practice what he believes the Bible teaches
o Since no church has a final and full grasp of divine truth, the true Church of Christ can never be fully represented by any single ecclesiastical structure
o The mere fact of separation does not of itself constitute schism; it is possible to be divided at many points and still be united in Christ.
Thus the denominational theory of the church looked for unity in some inward religious experience—and allowed diversity in the outward expression of that personal faith.
HB,
I hate to disagree with you, but I must. There are some fundamental differences between denominations, and there are some denominations who believe theirs is the only true way to heaven.
All roads may lead to Rome, but only one road leads to heaven. Your comment that "every Christian is obligated to pratice what he believes the Bible teaches" is simply wrong and contrary to Biblical truth.
It is exactly this kind of thinking that is shot down, so to speak, in many parts of the Bible, including 1st Corinthians. The Church in Corinth was not always intentionally going against God's commands. In fact, they likely thought a lot of what they were doing was fine. But Paul tells them otherwise. They were not free to practice whatever THEY thought the Bible taught; they were charged with knowing and carrying out the commands of the Scriptures as GOD intended.
I have to say that this is quite an astonishing statement from you.
A question to all, did the apostles celebrate easter, Christmas, Sunday Sabbath, palm Sunday, any of the holidays the Church celebrates today? The Jewish people missed the truth by not accepting the messiah, but keeps the torah( The covenant between him and his people) and the feasts of the fathers of our faith. The church thinks it has replaced Israel as the children of our Father, but has listened to the theological lie that we are no longer under law but under grace. We have abandoned the Feasts and Festivals of our Jewish brothers and sisters and we have missed the truth also. We celebrate the sabbath on Sunday, not Saturday which has been commanded since the days of Moses, we incorporated pagan beliefs into so called Christianity since Constantine blended the religons in @ 300 AD who's right? The son was a jew, he worshiped as a jew and died a jew. The Jews missed his return and are as wrong as the church in thinking that they are correct in there beliefs. The church of today is a religon about "God" not "God's" Religon. The true roots of the church have been hidden and the truth is there if you only look. Don't take the old theology that's been passed down for generations as the truth, look for yourself.
All together now, "Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war."rogtr
That's funny! Point taken.
anonymous,
you are taking the statement in the wrong manner.
The denominational theory was established to deal with the small issues that separated many churches such as Baptism by immersion or sprinkling, musical instruments, what day is the sabbath, etc.
There are fundamentals that the bible is very specific about and every Christian is supposed to follow. These are absoulutes.
That is not what the denominational theory is referring to.
g.coyle,
I am surprised at your comments. I see nothing wrong with the purity ball. The fathers do not control their daughter's sexuality; they are only trying to encourage them to do what is best for their daughters.
G coyle said:
"I find it creepy that a teen-age girl is making sexual-abstinance vows to her Dad. eck. There's something strangely kinky about it."
I find it creepy that you would even think such a thing.
It is not about controlling your daughter; it is about trying to guide them in the right direction just like anything else in life. It is about being a parent. If a parent ignores the sex issue because it is uncomfortable it will lead to much hurt for boys and girls.
Just because they are having purity ball for girls does not mean they believe boys can do as they please. Parents need to guide their sons too. They need to find a way that will work for boys. Girls love to get dressed up and go to dances, so that will be a fun and memorable event for fathers and daughters. It is an event where fathers and daughters can connect and spend time together.
You should read the post from last year’s purity ball. Dr Dan posted the speech it is really good and shows what the event is really about.
Sex is important but to me it is not worth STD’s, unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and all other pains it can cause outside of marriage. Why wouldn't fathers want to protect their daughters from that?
You're wrong about your denominational theory. That's the only way to explain it.
My nieces have participated in this purity ball in the past and I think its great. Its an effective way to possibly prevent a life changing mistake or detour per se regarding education. My nieces are at the age where they could venture either way and think the ball which requires planning and et cetera as if it was a prom per se is an effective way for them to remember their "promise" and when they look at their pictures, their Dad is there with them. We all know promises are sometimes broken but they will definitely remember the preparation leading to this ball and hopefully recall the meaning.
I'll be happy to start a thread on the divisions and demominations in Christianity on my blog.
YES, GCOYLE is Gina Coyle. I heard that the Coyle family and the Shine family deny her existence.
Post a Comment
<< Home