Of course abstinence only education doesn’t work. It will never work. Have these people who design this stuff never met a teenager?
The ACLU makes a good point.
“The ACLU has long said that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are ineffective, and what’s worse censor vital information about how to protect against unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases,” said Lorraine Kenny, Public Education Director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “Today’s study makes clear that these programs have no place in our classrooms and should not be funded by taxpayer dollars.”
Yet another failed policy of Conservative Politcs….
Really what does the Republican Party have to hang its hat on over the last 6 years of Republican Presidency..
Other than a lukewarm economy..the promise of the supposed permanent conservative majority has failed to live up to the hype…
Tax cuts, baby. Tax cuts. You got your $600, right? Then we are supposed to shut the fuck up and just let ‘em run this boat hard aground.
F*ck abstinence!
We certainly don’t have a problem with teenage pregnancy, or the ongoing degradation of women to consider…
Give him a condom, and she can go on “Maury” next year, and straighten it out.
Frank, here here. Let’s stone all the divorcees as well!!!
I’m sure of one thing: Whatever you can say about teaching abstinence, practicing abstinence works.
Sure, but to teach abstinence in a vacuum is idiotic.
The article doesn’t just imply that “abstinence only” programs don’t work. It says that it should be 86′d for “programs that work”.
What programs work? Teenage pregnancy is going through the roof, and abortion among young black girls has reached genocidal proportions.
Programs that stress abstinence AND sexual education (ie how to use birth control) work. Everyone who cares to look at reality knows this. And you have any cite for your increase in abortions, because as far as I know the opposite is true.
I know it’s pointless, but read up before you spout hysterical bullsh*t like “genocidal proportions.”
The overall rate of abortions among black teens hasn’t fluctuated more than a percentage point or two since the late 80’s. The overall number per 1,000 has fallen by nearly half since 1990 (from about 223 to 132 or so).
It would still be accurate to say the U.S. has the worst teen pregnancy rate in the industrialized world (nearly double). It would also be correct to point out that the worse a young teen’s economic standing, the more likely she is to get pregnant before reaching 20. I just can’t figure out how the teens in Europe, exposed as they are to such copious amounts of decadent sexual information, manage to make better moral decisions than their abstinence only deluded brethren in the States. Truly it is a mystery.
Teenage pregnancy is going through the roof
Does “going through the roof” mean the same as “steadily declining over the past 15 years”? Because then you would be right on the button, Frank. Try Googling it, or something.
You guys talk like I’m making this up.
Did you two ever hear of a psychological phenomenon called “minimizing”. It comes from domestic violence treatment, and refers to finding a way to make something serious seem like it is really not so serious.
Google it, or something.
Your faux exasperation with me is appalling. There are more babies aborted in the USA in one day, then there have been combat deaths in Iraq, since it started.
You may want abortion to be legal, but its
This got cut off:
You may want abortion to be legal, but its psychological effects are worse on teenagers than on adults
“There are more babies aborted in the USA in one day” should be “in two days”.
Didn’t mean to make it sound worse than it was.
Babies cannot be aborted dipshit.
There are called fetuses or embryos.
An acorn is not an oak.
A single cell is not of equal worth of a 12 year old girl.
Frank, I admire your graciousness in admitting you were wrong about the teen pregnancy issue. It takes a big man. I’m so glad Google can bring us together.
fd10801
I cannot believe what a bastard you are. You are complaining about the abortion rate as you try to prevent kids from learning about birth control. If abortion is murder then YOU are the one that should hang for it.
elspi: So I’m a “dipshit” and a “bastard”, am I? Well, isn’t that marvelous?
I’ve never even heard of you, and you’re calling me names already.
What a bright fellow you are.
calling all toasters: You are a fool. How does it feel to have your point represented by the likes of elspi?
You two seem to be made for each other.
Frank–how does it feel to not have a (fact-based) answer to my point? How does it feel to call someone “a fool” to hide that? How does it feel to have to lump me together with someone making an entirely different point to try and wriggle out, and how does it feel knowing that it hasn’t worked?
Nice one, c.a.t. Bob Dylan could make a good song out of that.
But I can tell you how Frank feels: Frank feels frustrated because people are disagreeing with what he just knows to be true despite the fact that he has no evidence to back it up. Expect much whining, wailing and electronic pouting.
He’s also pissed that people are calling him stupid just because he says things that are stupid.
calling all toasters: Did I associate you with another poster?
Did I give you a smartass answer instead of an honest attempt at dialog?
Did I insult you gratuitously?
Welcome to my world.
I suppose I could be a big man, and apologize.
Or, I could give you the response I get when it happens to me: “Stop whining! Get over it!”
I won’t say that, though: I apologize. It was late, something had gone wrong with the electricity in may apartment, and espi’s gall had pissed me off.
P.S. Is “Frank, I admire your graciousness in admitting you were wrong” a ‘fact – based answer’?
Here
Forgot the Link
“Google it, or something.”
If it’s on the internets it must be true!
geh… it’ll be about how abortions cause breast cancer and schizophrenia and communism next…
Back to the topic, Frank, you dont see the problem with an educational class that treats “the problems with sex” as being moral and not medical? Yes abstinence works 100% of the time, but… well lets just assume, crazy as it may seem, that teenagers might, just might, some crazy how or other, want to have sex in spite of having their principal telling them not to want it. A sex ed class that doesn’t cover the various preventatives is surely not doing these children a lick of good is it?
“What programs work? Teenage pregnancy is going through the roof, and abortion among young black girls has reached genocidal proportions.”
Teen pregnancy is down, way down.
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2004/02/19/index.html
However, it looks like Abstinence Only programs will reverse that trend.
Another fact that you are completely wrong about.
And do you know why you are wrong? Because you are dumb.
CSS: You’re about 4 comments too late.
And do you know why?
Me, neither.
* * *
I believe in any kind of education that gets teens to see the dangers inherent in premarital sex.
How to put a condom on a banana doesn’t seem to fulfill that requirement.
We might try disapproving of it, instead of engaging students in a futile attempt to get them to act responsibly, while they are acting irresponsibly.
Unless, of course, any of you think that adolescent premarital sex is a good thing.
And, also, if indeed teen pregnancy is “way down”, to what level has it dropped?
Below the 90’s level?
Below the 80’s level?
Below the 70’s level?
Below the 60’s level?
Perhaps it is so low, we should have more of it, eh?
When has the disapproval of adults prevented kids from doing stupid things?
Adolescents are going to have sex, Frank. We’re animals. It’s only natural. Perhaps these kids should have all the information made available to them on how they can act as responsibly as possible while engaging their overblown sex drives.
On a different, but related note… you’re old, Frank. Really, really old.
Speaking of “dumb”:
Who said this?
However, it looks like Abstinence Only programs will reverse that trend.
Funny the whole article said this:
and this:
mambochicken: You are obviously speaking from personal experience.
I am aware of a time when teenage pregnancy was considerably lower than it is now. And at that time, sex education was a rarity.
And if you keep calling me “Really, really old”, you may soon find that others feel your disrespect is as repulsive as I think it is.
Is that what they taught you at Franklin and Marshall?
I notice no one is touching this question:
And, also, if indeed teen pregnancy is “way down”, to what level has it dropped?
Below the 90’s level?
Below the 80’s level?
Below the 70’s level?
Below the 60’s level?
The way you guys stand around like Mrs. Grundy awaiting my answers to your questions, it would be only fair, if you answered mine.
Of course, it will probably spoil your argument, and we wouldn’t want truth to get in the way of some fun Frank – bashing, now, would we?
Frank, I respect those who deserve respect. Given our interactions on this blog, you have not given me a single reason to have respect for you. And don’t think that this is merely a matter of politics. My father is a diehard conservative (as is most of his side of the family), and I have the utmost regard for him (and them). Although there are precious few conservatives on this blog that aren’t assholes, there are a couple that I do have respect for. For example, I think that Jay is a reasonable human being.
As for my education, no, F&M didn’t teach me to be disrespectful. I learned there to be an independent, logical thinker. I’m eternally grateful for this aspect of my education, because that’s a major factor that separates me from the likes of you.
mambochicken: Respect for your elders is something someone, somewhere should have taught you.
The fact that you haven’t learned it reflects on you, not me.
And, please, don’t bring your father into this. I’m sure if I were sitting with him in his living room, and you said things such as you have said to me in the past, you would regret it then.
So don’t blame your bad manners on me. That’s really bad form. You’re not a teenager, are you?
Again, Frank… I don’t believe in the whole “respect for your elders” idea. I believe in “respect for people who demonstrate that they are worthy of respect.” Funny enough, that gets us back into my ability to think for myself, and not to just acquiesce to what I’m told. You should try it sometime, it’s quite liberating.
Seriously, what about being older than me grants you this privilege? It’s a ridiculous moral code. You know, Charles Manson is older than me… should I respect him? How about Castro? Or maybe Larry Flynt?
Maybe you should think about the veracity of this moral construct you adhere to and whether it’s good to follow it. Personally, I think it’s a bunch of shit.
And I think my dad would come to the same conclusions about you as I have. This is something that transcends generational and political barriers, Frank. You’re an ass, and anyone with half a brain can recognize it.
Now quit whining and being the morality police, lest I remind you of your disrespectful conduct towards me.
And, also, if indeed teen pregnancy is “way down”, to what level has it dropped?
Below the 90’s level?
Below the 80’s level?
Below the 70’s level?
Below the 60’s level?
Good information isn’t difficult to find:
• Between 1988 and 2000, teenage pregnancy rates declined in every state and in the
District of Columbia.
• By 2002, the teenage abortion rate had dropped by 50% from its peak in 1988.
Follow the link for lots more. But here’s one caveat: You won’t be able to compare teen pregnancy rates to any year prior to 1973.
Think about it.
Duh, gee, Quaker, lemme guess, could that be because so many pregnancies were terminated by abortions? {Thanks to Roe v. Wade}
Huh? Huh?
Did I get it right?
Now,think about this: Without running back to Guttmacher, what is the connection between these three things:
1) The number of teenagers of each age within the cohort;
2) The number of pregnancies per person; and
3) The number of abortions per person
??
Finally, why do you suppose you can’t find teenage pregnancy statistics prior to 1973?
By 2002, the teenage abortion rate had dropped by 50% from its peak in 1988
So, basically, whatever the rate was in 1988, when it was its highest, it is now one – half that.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think that’s what it says in Table 2.5, page 10.
It says there were 488,941 abortions in 1988; and 432,808 abortions in 2002.
It seems that the rate may be a meaningless statistic.
Correct me if I’m wrong…
mambochicken23: I have a question for you, and I hope you won’t try to answer it here. Just answer it for yourself.
Is there anyone (in the real world) that you deal with regularly (not Manson or Castro, unless you correspond with them), that you treat disrepectfuly because they don’t “deserve your respect”?
The reason I don’t need, or want to know your answer, is because we owe everyone respect because of who we are, not because of who they are.
If you think it bothers me that you might “remind me of my disrespectful conduct towards you”, here’s my eMail — fd10801@gmail.com, because I don’t want any grief from Oliver about derailing the thread, which only happened because I happened to be “old”, “really, really old”, and you somehow felt it relevant to point that out.
In your typical reasoned fashion, you will link to the entire thread, rather than “cherry picking” only my comments, won’t you?
If you don’t take advantage of my offer, it will be because you know that you started this. It will only be because people who say, “I only respect people who deserve my respect”, are just rationalizing their bad manners.
The reason why I respond to disrespect with disrespect is because I didn’t come here to take shit from you, or anybody else.
You, on the other hand, feel that is your responsibility to dole out respect, as you see fit.
What a fine world this would be, if every one thought as you do!
A quick reminder: Life isn’t “Star Trek”, and you’re not “Spock” or “Data” or “Seven of Nine”.
Finally, why do you suppose you can’t find teenage pregnancy statistics prior to 1973?
C’mon, you can figure it out. You almost had it: prior to 1973, pregnancies terminated by abortion weren’t reported!
I may be wrong, but I don’t think that’s what it says in Table 2.5, page 10.
It says there were 488,941 abortions in 1988; and 432,808 abortions in 2002.
Well, there’s rate and there’s count. I thought this discussion was about the former. ‘Scuse me if I misunderstood.
Correct me if I’m wrong…
OK. You’re wrong. You’re reading the “Births” column, not the “Abortions” column. The number of abortions fell from 408,000 to 222,000.
I read the right column, and gave it the wrong name…
The births have barely changed, so whatever has been about “teen pregnancy” hasn’t worked!
My point from the beginning referred to the comment in the article that Abstinence “doesn’t work”, and “they” should be using “Programs that work”.
Further, “kids just don’t behave” is BS…
Kids have misbehaved since prehistory.
The teen pregnancy rate started going up in the late 60’s.
Frank, just wondering: do you assume you’re older than most people and follow that assumption by expecting that most people should ‘respect their elders’ because it is fundamental to your moral lexicon and therefore should be fundamental in everyone’s moral lexicon?
The teen pregnancy rate started going up in the late 60’s.
And started declining again in the 1990s. The rate is now at a historic low. What on earth could possibly explain such a thing?
Without any evidence whatever, I’ll take a guess: the rate began to decline as baby boom generation women aged out of their childbearing years. Just looking at the numbers, I’d guess that the shift might be generational.
Side note: the state with the highest proportion of abortions to total teen pregnancies is New Jersey. Why is that?
The births have barely changed, so whatever has been about “teen pregnancy” hasn’t worked!
And you’re still wrong. The number of births hasn’t changed much, but not all pregnancies result in births. For that, you have to take into account pregnancies that are ended by abortion, miscarriage and stillbirth. That number has declined by nearly 50 percent.
the rate began to decline as baby boom generation women aged out of their childbearing years.
D’oh! I’m a stupy-head! We’re talking teen pregnancies, not all pregnancies!
(Boomers have a reputation for clinging to their youth, but last I heard, they haven’t found a way to stop time altogether.)
So, the bottom line is, whatever effect any activities — in school or elsewhere — have had on the rate of teen illegitimacy, those activities have not been negatively affected by Abstinence or Abstinence Only Programs.
Abstinence Only seems to be no more, or less, effective than anything else.
That’s, of course, assuming you don’t believe the statement from the Heritage FDN guy that there have been numerous studies that indicate that Abstinence Only does work.
* * *
And, yes, Squirrel, as crazy as it may sound to you, and your moral relativist liberal friends, I do believe that some things are right, and some things are wrong; and they always are.
Not when I choose them to be, but always.
Does that mean I always do the right thing or never do the wrong thing? No. It means that when I do something wrong, I can identify it as wrong — not situationally so, or relativistically so, but wrong.
I know, I know, you may never have heard that said before, or you may think I’m just an “old fogey”, but I have lived both ways, and I have chosen the way I like, and the way that works for me.
What’s interesting is how you can be a moral relativist, and be dogmatic at the same time.
And, incidentally, I am not suggesting either that you should respect your elders, and let them treat you like crap, or that only “elders” should be respected.
I don’t even believe I have the right to determine who should be respected. I don’t take any shit from anybody in real life, just like I don’t in this blog, but I don’t choose who to respect.
I respect everybody. If you disrespect me right now, I will zing you right back, and if I am tempted to hold a grudge, I might hold a grudge.
But if I see the the fact that that hurts me as much as, or more than, it hurts you, soon enough; then the next time I address you it will be as if nothing ever happened.
Unless, you happen to be as foolish as some others on this Blog have been, and remind me of the last time you disrespected me, like I’m your doormat, or something.
That’s the point here. There’s a certain amount of flaming that goes on here. Given the fact that are lots of liberals here, and only a few conservatives, so naturally the conservatives take a lot of guff. Given that I post a lot, I take a lot of guff.
But I see two things happening here that I don’t see on other blogs. One is, liberals, for the most part, are much meaner, and harsher in their flaming of conservatives, than conservatives are in their flaming of liberals on conservative blogs.
And, secondly, people say things to me, on this blog, hiding behind their keyboards, that they would never say to my face.
And that’s something that I have almost never seen on any blog, done by anyone to anyone else.
People say some unbelievable stuff – “George Bush is a chimp”; “Why doesn’t Cheney just die”, “Why doesn’t somebody hang this anti – Israel politician?”, or “Kill this or that Liberal politician?”, but the personal stuff people say about me, especially when it come from out of the blue, is beyond astonishing.
Two quick examples:
Here’s a guy, elspi, who to the best of mu knowledge, has never even posted here before: Here are two of his comments, minutes apart:
Babies cannot be aborted dipshit.
fd10801: I cannot believe what a bastard you are.
Get my drift?
“Given that I post a lot, I take a lot of guff.”
Maybe it’s actually because you post a lot of idiotic nonsense. Case in point, your entire rant about how you’re just an innocent victim of viscious left-wingers. Seriously, look at your first post in this thread:
You followed these pithy contributions to the debate with this statement:
You go from the non-sensical to the utterly untrue — and easily disproven — in two posts and then wonder why people think you’re an old idiot crank with way, way too much time on his hands.
frameone: He shows up just in time to insult me — how unlike you.
You’re the only person I know who thinks “idiot” is a punctuation mark.
But you know what?
You’re right again.
I’m sure this has been pointed out, but does Frank have nothing else going on in his life but OW’s blog? He’s everywhere here. All times of day, too.
“CSS: You’re about 4 comments too late.
And do you know why?”
Why I’m four comments too late?
(Joke)
Actually, I thought I was the first to post a link to actual statistics on the subjects.
As for why it is dropping, comprehensive enducation, the one that includes the use of condoms, seems to be helping.
On the other hand…
Here’s a study of several abstinence only sex education programs.
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/stateevaluations/index.htm
Six of the five-year studios checked changes in short term sexual behavior, half did nothing, 2 made it worse, (or better if you are into teen sex), and 1 showed mixed results.
None, that’s right, none showed less sexual behavior.
In fact, those people who hand out the silver promise rings admit they have a failure rate of 89%. (Saw that on a TV show show I can’t link to it.) If something has a 89% failure rate, it shouldn’t be used as a primary tool, and especially not an only tool. Hell, it shouldn’t even be used as a backup.
“We don’t expect you to stay abstinence until marriage because a lot of people don’t get married until they are 30, or older. What we are going to do is give you the facts about sex, pregnancies, STDs, etc. We will also give you the tools and training to minimize the negative outcomes. Abstinence may be the only 100% successful tool to avoid these, but people who use abstinence only are 89% likely to fail. On the other hand, condoms used correctly have a 99% success rate. Which would you rather learn about?”
“You’re right again.”
I am indeed frank.
None, that’s right, none showed less sexual behavior.
I never said they did. With me so far?
However, the success rate with typical use is 86%
Which would you rather practice?
See, condoms when effectively, consistently, and responsibly used have a 99% success rate.
Abstinence, when effectively, consistently, and responsibly used, has a 100% success rate.
And you don’t have to worry about your conscience, the objectification of women, or all that fumbling in the dark.
But doing the right thing is so difficult.
And, there’s always Maury.
But, yes, frameone, you’re right. Whatever you say.
um, i believe you said it frank. Just confirming.
frameone: Um, you’re predictable and boring. How about a “rhetoric makeover”, or something — anything.
God, you’re tedious!
“See, condoms when effectively, consistently, and responsibly used have a 99% success rate.
Abstinence, when effectively, consistently, and responsibly used, has a 100% success rate.”
I actually think I might know what Frank’s talking about. I think that he’s arguing that in an ideal world, teens wouldn’t have premarital sex at all, contraception or no. Additionally, by disapproving of overt teen sexual behavior (rather than “promoting” it by discussing contraception/STD prevention), adults may be performing the most moral of actions. “Moral” in that the action itself is pure, even though the results from said action may be less than desirable. Am I right?
I disagree with you, Frank, but I see and appreciate your argument if this is what you’re trying to say.
rather than “promoting” it by discussing contraception/STD prevention
Thanks, but a small quibble. I am not of the opinion that discussing contraception or STD prevention “promotes” teen sex (unless, of course, you imply when doing so that all that is wrong about teen sex is that you might have an unwanted child or contract an STD.
There used to be a taped talk by a retired Naval Doctor — a woman — going around on either the Christian networks, or EWTN, I forget which.
But she talked about the personal ethical, emotional, and, yes, moral (in a nonreligious sense) price to be paid.
She also spoke of the permanence / incurability of certain STD’s, and their effect on later pregnancies.
It was very impressive in its lack of religious content while it hit several important notes with the adolescent mind.
The most memorable point? (I’m paraphrasing) “When you have sex with someone, you’re having sex with every girl he’s ever been with, and every guy the girls were ever with”.