Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

White House may seek funding for abstinence-only education

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
snowdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:02 AM
Original message
White House may seek funding for abstinence-only education
Sorry if this is a repost but I missed it. I wonder if this is a trial balloon?
Drats. I will put my two cents worth into the WH website!!




http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/12/white-house-may-seek-funding-for-abstinence-only-education/

May 12, 2009
White House may seek funding for abstinence-only education

Posted: 12:46 PM ET

From CNN's Lauren Kornreich

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Although President Obama cut funding for abstinence-only sex education from his new budget, a White House official said Tuesday that some programs could eventually receive government money.

"The President is deeply committed to reducing levels of teen pregnancy and believes that parents, families, communities, and the government must come together to address this issue," a White House official told CNN contributor David Brody. "The budget increases overall funding for teenage pregnancy prevention, which may include education on abstinence, and supports programs based on research."

The official told Brody that 75 percent of funding for teen pregnancy prevention will go towards programs that are proven to lower rates, and that some abstinence-only education could qualify.

The official added that the rest of the funds will be directed to "promising, but not yet proven" programs which have given "some indication" of effectiveness in preventing teen pregnancy. "Those programs would have to agree to participate in a rigorous evaluation, and abstinence-only programs could qualify," said the aide.

The president's budget, unveiled last week, eliminated funding for Community-Based Abstinence Education," but allocated millions of dollars to "community-based and faith-based efforts to reduce teen pregnancy using evidence-based and promising models."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Happyhippychick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. Wow! It's possible that funding might go to a program some day? This is NEWS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asphalt.jungle Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. exactly
Edited on Fri May-15-09 09:15 AM by asphalt.jungle
if an official had said that about some progressive cause there would be hell to pay. he basically said, "yeah it's possible that abstinence only education could get money in the future, anything that works could get money." what he didn't say was he was laughing on the inside at the thought of abstinence only education being proven to work EVER.

they made an article out of that bullshit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Yes, this IS news when the WH touts this out given at these programs are failures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. how many times does it have to be proven, abstinence-only doesn't work
it actually increases teen pregnancy rates
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Exactly
In a time of deep budget cuts, why put money into something that doesn't work?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. Notice the wording of this announcement. It only applies to "proven" programs...
If no abstinence programs are working, then they won't get money. But the White House cannot discriminate against abstinence programs per say.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrToast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Yep, Obama is being very fair...
He's telling the abstinence only crowd that if they can prove that it works, it can qualify for funding.

The ball is in their court.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. The Proof Is In The Pudding
In order words, how do they determine, when abstinence only, overall, does work? Wasn't there a thread here on DU yesterday that said teen births are skyrocketing? I understand the president trying to broaden the tent but some ideas aren't to me, viable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. Most teenagers are stupid when it involves sex.
Edited on Fri May-15-09 10:01 AM by LiberalFighter
They rely on their friends for information. And where do their friends get the information?

How many believe they won't get pregnant:

The first time they have sex?

When they are standing up?

If they use a douche?

While having sex in a hot tub?

If they jump up and down immediately after sex?

If they both keep their underwear on?

Taking 20 aspirins after sex?

If they are on top of the boy when having sex?

If they sneeze after sex?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
4. But he's not limiting it to JUST abstinence only.....
... as the article makes clear.

"The President is deeply committed to reducing levels of teen pregnancy and believes that parents, families, communities, and the government must come together to address this issue," a White House official told CNN contributor David Brody. "The budget increases overall funding for teenage pregnancy prevention, which may include education on abstinence, and supports programs based on research."

The official told Brody that 75 percent of funding for teen pregnancy prevention will go toward programs that are proven to lower rates, and that some abstinence-only education could qualify.


There is a BIG difference in funding existing programs that will help reduce teen pregnancy and limiting funding to ONLY organizations that promote abstinence only, as some in the GOP might like to do. The President is interested in programs that work ... and in SOME communities, particularly those who's faith principles are already established, abstinence only programs could be effective.

And to anyone who wants to cry outrage over the apparent mixing of church and state .... if you're complaining about this re: a matter that could help reduce the number of unplanned teen pregnancies, may I humbly suggest that you re-read the original intent of the separation between church and state. ;)

Your thread title is a bit misleading IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
snowdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Hi . I am against funding for abst. only programs and hope
Edited on Fri May-15-09 10:59 AM by snowdays
no funding goes to these programs --that do not work.
Can we have a discussion without you threatening me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Hahahahaha... threatening?
Enjoy your earnest 'discussion' of this possibility that may someday perhaps maybe happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
11. These may be family planning, more informative, but less confrontational name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-15-09 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-23-09 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
17. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC