Abstinence approach gets unlikely ally

[MarkInLA]

Source: Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON -- In the 1990s, amid a growing culture war over the role of religion and morality in public policy, Republicans used their congressional majorities to crank up funding for programs that encouraged teens to abstain from sex until marriage.

But now, though Democrats have taken control of Congress, abstinence-only programs are surviving attempts to shut them down. And they could even get an increase with the aid of an unlikely ally: House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.), one of the old liberal lions.

"We're expecting funding to be pretty comparable to what it was in the past," said Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Assn. "Those who oppose abstinence education are probably more surprised than I am."

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sex14oct14,0,7576036.story?coll=la-home-center

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Why am I not surprised?

Perhaps our local schools can have the professional abstinence liars come it and tell the kids to not bother with condoms again.

[FreakinDJ]

2. Condom talk was outlawed or defunded

worked great for AIDs awareness councilors speaking to prostitutes who's only means of support was to work the streets.

I'm sure they all became nuns

[Akoto]

3. I don't think it's bad to encourage abstinence, BUT ...

I don't think it should come in a religious context, and it should not be at the expense of genuine sex education. Young people need to learn about things like contraception/protection, STDs, and just how the whole process works. I found that aspect of biology really interesting while in school, and learning about in detail never drove me to go out and have wild sex.

[niyad]

4. the trouble is, the abstinence only programs are religiously driven, based on lies, contain NO

actual reproductive education, and have been shown not to work at all.

[shenmue]

7. 80 percent of U.S. kids become sexually active before they finish high school

I understand your point, and I'd like to sympathize, but I think it's a little too late for that now. Peer pressure and the simple fact of all these people going through puberty means we can't afford to just pretend nothing is going to happen.

[Akoto]

9. Perhaps I was unclear ...

I'm advocating complete and total sex education in school, just as I had (and I'm 22, so it wasn't all that long ago). I just don't think it's a bad idea to also tack on 'abstinence can be a good idea because of XYZ health reasons, so you may want to consider waiting until you're really ready.'

[Warren Stupidity]

15. But that is not what they tack on.

They tack on a lot of deliberate bullshit. What should be included as part of the social skills health education is 'coping with peer pressure skills', 'making informed and considered choices skills', and non-judgemental and completely confidential consuling services. Oh and anonymous confidential access to condoms and birth control services. But as a society we are not mature enough to actually deal with social issues with any sort of rational effective approach. Instead everything is reduced to Just Say No.

[Warren Stupidity]

14. You've been sucked into their hideous bullshit.

The focus of these brainwashing sessions is to convince the kids that all other mechanisms of birth control and STD-prevention are useless. It is abstinence advocacy, and it is complete crap. Teen agers are sexually active. That is simply a biological fact. Programs that try to convince the horomonally challenged that they should not use birth control and condoms are criminally negligent frauds.

Abstinence misinformation is dangerous.

"Young adults who take virginity pledges as adolescents are as likely to be infected with sexually transmitted diseases as those who do not take virginity pledges, Yale and Columbia University researchers report in the March 18 issue of Journal of Adolescent Health.

The virginity pledges may even encourage higher risk sexual behavior among young adults, say study authors Hannah Br�ckner, assistant professor of sociology at Yale University and Peter Bearman, professor of sociology at Columbia University.

"We were surprised by the findings," said Br�ckner. "Pledgers have fewer sex partners than non-pledgers, they start having sex later, and they marry earlier, so they should have lower STD rates, but they don't."

One reason is that sexually active pledgers were less likely to use condoms at first sex than non-pledgers. Because most pledgers are sexually active (88 percent of the pledgers), lower rates of condom use increases STD risk. Br�eckner and Bearman also note that pledgers were less likely to seek and obtain STD-related health care, possibly because of increased stigmatization or misperception of infection risk among pledgers. Because pledgers are less likely to be diagnosed and treated for STD infections, they may be more likely to have those infections for longer periods than non-pledgers."
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/21438.php

[marshall]

16. The Joycelyn Elders approach

I say bring back Clinton's Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders' approach--masturbation and abstinence from sexual relations.

[Skittles]

25. correct

abstinence should be PART of sex education, not in PLACE of it

[shenmue]

5. Yeah, because people never do things they shouldn't

:crazy:

:dunce:

:sarcasm:

And teenagers have so much self-control! :nuke: Who the hell are these people, seriously? Does the word 'marriage' (as in 'abstinence until') even mean anything when you're in junior high and high school?!

:puke:

Make no mistake. This is solely an attempt to bring Protestant indoctrination into the schools. It's all philosophization about the 'sanctity' of marriage (now there's a religious term for you). It has nothing to do with science or the likelihood of behaviors among young people. Not to forget that all the campaigns blame young women for 'tempting' the young men. :eyes: Not kidding. Listen to shitty religious radio sometime, if you can stand it, and you'll hear this drivel constantly.

"Just don't bother doing anything" means nothing when we are already dealing with epidemics of teen pregnancy and disease, you asshats!

I hate these idiots. :grr:

[valerief]

6. Can we have a congressional and presidential whore abstinence program?

Imagine a Congress and President who weren't whores for industry leaders.

[shenmue]

8. Ka-ping!

:crazy:

[BearSquirrel2]

10. This I understand ...

The Wiretapping stuff I don't understand. This stuff I do. Sex education is controlled primarily by the states. The only thing national Democrats would get by taking this issue up is are campaign ads stating that Democrats are encouraging your kids to have sex.

These issues are best tackled by appointing sensible commissioners to good practices into effect. "Abstinence Only" will be with us for a while. And so will increased pregnancy/STD rates. This is something that has to be fought state by state.

[Bitwit1234]

11. So if bush thinks this is a good idea how come

he and his family don't take that advice. During high school it if rumored he got Margie Scholenger (sp) pregnant. Instead of an abortion she was beaten up and she had a miscarriage. Then in the 70's (think that was the area) he got a high class call girl pregnant and he then paid for an abortion. The call girl wont' admit the pregnancy and abortion but it is on record.

[physioex]

12. Right....

These rules only apply to the poor. The rich can afford to send their women to Mexico for an abortion....

[rodeodance]

13. "he wants to steer his panel away from the highly charged terrain of moral issues."

......Expectations that a Democratic-controlled Congress would gut abstinence-only education rose this spring after a major federally funded study concluded that such programs do not appear to have any effect on sexual abstinence among youth, nor on age of sexual initiation or number of sex partners.

But the oldest abstinence program won a reprieve last month. And a companion program may get a significant funding increase. The reason: Led by Obey, some Democrats are suddenly protecting the programs.

Obey is supporting abstinence-only education, saying he wants to steer his panel away from the highly charged terrain of moral issues.

And by increasing funding for such programs, he is also making a political calculation that he can pick up some Republican support for much bigger health and social welfare programs that the White House wants to cut.

[Tesha]

17. Remind me again what the difference between the parties is? (NT)

[sendero]

18. Kids don't buy this bullsh*t...

.. as studies have amply shown. It's a waste of time and money.

Once again, Dems are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

[noonwitch]

19. Parents have to be involved in their children's school

Attend school board meetings, make themselves heard not just on this topic, but on all. Why do you think that the right gets their way on these matters? They get the people all riled up, they attend school meetings and push their views unopposed.

I grew up in the 70s, in a conservative community. My public schools had meetings on weeknights before sex ed (at least elementary school sex ed), and showed the parents all the curriculum materials and discussed with them what was going to be discussed with the kids. Some parents chose to keep their kids out of school those days.

In junior high and high school, it was different. In jr. high, sex ed was part of science class, and stuck to the science (the only way to deal with it with that age group). In high school, it was part of health class. It was pretty comprehensive, and covered vd, pregnancy, condoms (although this was pre-AIDS)-everything short of abortion.

[napi21]

20. I would not have a problem if they added abstinence to the other

options. I think it's important to teach kids about all their options, and teach them young enough to matter. It's the abstinence ONLY idea that I object to.

[cmkramer]

21. I agree with you

In fact, that pretty much describes my sex education class. Basically they told us that abstinence was the best way not to get pregnant or get STDs but then they also told us about the various birth control options.

[rebecca_herman]

23. Mine too

I graduated high school a few years ago and I had pretty similar sex ed. Learned about stds, all methods of birth control, that abstinence was the only way to fully prevent pregnancy and stds, and about making wise decisions/how to deel with peer pressure.

I don't think there's anything wrong with encouraging underage kids to delay sexual activity as long as they are given complete information on disease and pregnancy prevention. Actually, the sex ed pretty much solidified my earlier decision that I didn't feel ready to deal with these possible consequences and would wait til I was older.

[ProudDad]

22. Obey is not the Obey of Old? (n/t)

[Solon]

24. Its shit like this that pisses me off so badly, Democrats, who should know better, supporting...

stupid stuff like "abstinence only" education, just so they can placate a group of people who were jealous of folks getting it on in High School and they couldn't get a date for the Prom, and now they want to spread that misery around. The fact that this type of "education" and I'm using that word loosely, doesn't work, and is a waste of time, just makes Democrats like Obey look even stupider.