Bush to piss away $131 million on his failed ridiculous "just say no to sex" plan
Harry Hope
From The Associated Press, 11/25/04:
http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-second-term-abstinence,0,7350894.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
Bush Seeks Money for Abstinence Education
By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON --
President Bush's re-election insures that more federal money will flow
to abstinence education that precludes discussion of birth control,
even as the administration awaits evidence that the approach gets kids
to refrain from sex.
Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence
programs in a $388 billion spending bill, an increase of $30 million
but about $100 million less than Bush requested.
Meanwhile, a national evaluation of abstinence programs has been
delayed, with a final report not expected until 2006.
Ten state evaluations, compiled by a group that opposes
abstinence-only education, showed little change in teens' behavior
since the start of abstinence programs in 1997.
_________________________________________________________
Yup. This is the world we live in, folks. The cretins have taken over.
Harry
Foxtrot
>http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-second-term-abstinence,0,7350894.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
>
>Bush Seeks Money for Abstinence Education
>President Bush's re-election insures that more federal money will flow
>to abstinence education that precludes discussion of birth control,
>even as the administration awaits evidence that the approach gets kids
>to refrain from sex.
>
>Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence
>programs in a $388 billion spending bill, an increase of $30 million
>but about $100 million less than Bush requested.
>Ten state evaluations, compiled by a group that opposes
>abstinence-only education, showed little change in teens' behavior
>since the start of abstinence programs in 1997.
>
>_________________________________________________________
>
>Yup. This is the world we live in, folks. The cretins have taken over.
It says these programs started in 1997, Hole. So isn't
BJ to blame?
Yeah, it's a waste of money and not the responsibility of
the federal government. But it's a lot better than what
libs want to do in schools--hand out condoms and tell
children that cornholing each other is an acceptable
"alternate lifestyle".
Schools should teach children the concept of shame
like they did in the past.
hank
A majority of Americans voted for Bush...
so that means you are calling the majority of Americans cretins....
why dont you just move to Canada..you American hater?
love
hank
..........................................
!Harry Hope
wrote:
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Warren Stupidity
Better by what measure? Failure rate? STD infection rate? Pregnancy
rate? Or is this simply your opinion unsubstantiated by any actual facts
and motivated in part by your blatant homophobia?
>
> Schools should teach children the concept of shame
> like they did in the past.
>
Wrong. As has been demonstrated in many other modern industrial
democracies, open honest non-judgemental sex/health education coupled
with access to contraceptive and barrier devices are the best practices
with respect to unwanted pregnancy (and consequent abortions) and std
avoidance.
There is nothing wrong with advocating abstinence. What is wrong is
thinking that abstinence by itself is an effective method. It isn't, it
has to be accompanied by education on how to have safe and responsible
sex. Here is a shocking thought: give people all the information about a
subject and then let them make their own informed decisions about how to
act. I thought that was the sort of policy you hypocritical rightards
were supposed to believe in.
"STD rate same for teens who pledge abstinence Mar. 10, 2004
Provided by: Associated Press
Written by: JASON STRAZIUSO
PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- Teens who pledge to remain virgins until marriage
have the same rates of sexually transmitted diseases as those who don't
pledge abstinence, according to a study that examined the sex lives of
12,000 adolescents.
Those who make a public pledge to abstain until marriage delay sex, have
fewer sex partners and get married earlier, according to the data,
gathered from adolescents ages 12 to 18 who were questioned again six
years later. But the two groups' STD rates were statistically similar.
The problem, the study found, is that those virginity "pledgers" are
much less likely to use condoms. "
Hmmmmm......
"U.S. teenagers have higher STD rates than teenagers in other developed
countries—for example, England, Canada, France and Sweden—because they
have more sexual partners and probably lower levels of condom use."
"Five countries have teenage pregnancy rates of 70 or more per 1,000 per
year—Belarus, Bulgaria, Romania, the Russian Federation and the United
States."
Guess which country inthis study had the lowest rate? OK, that's a tough
one for you so I'll give you a hint: Sweden.
Here go look at chart a and chart b on this page:
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
Notice just how screwed up we are?
Maybe the focus should be to get condom use to be universal instead of
trying to shame the hormones out of our young'n, huh faux?
" Countries with low levels of adolescent pregnancy, childbearing and
STDs are characterized by societal acceptance of adolescent sexual
relationships, combined with comprehensive and balanced information
about sexuality and clear expectations about commitment and prevention
of pregnancy and STDs within these relationships.
• Easy access to contraceptives and other reproductive health services
contributes to better contraceptive use and, in turn, low teenage
pregnancy rates."
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
--
==
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we."
GW Bush, President by appointment 2001-2004.
The Washington NeoClowns can't even get their clown
shoes on right, and there is no wrong way to do that.
==
Mark Roddy
"Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event like a
new Pearl Harbor."
-- Project for a New American Century,
-- the neocon cabal's blueprint for world empire.
http://www.newamericancentury.org
Wexford
> Harry Hope <riv...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-second-term-abstinence,0,7350894.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
> >
> >Bush Seeks Money for Abstinence Education
>
> >President Bush's re-election insures that more federal money will flow
> >to abstinence education that precludes discussion of birth control,
> >even as the administration awaits evidence that the approach gets kids
> >to refrain from sex.
> >
> >Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence
> >programs in a $388 billion spending bill, an increase of $30 million
> >but about $100 million less than Bush requested.
>
> >Ten state evaluations, compiled by a group that opposes
> >abstinence-only education, showed little change in teens' behavior
> >since the start of abstinence programs in 1997.
> >
> >_________________________________________________________
> >
> >Yup. This is the world we live in, folks. The cretins have taken over.
>
> It says these programs started in 1997, Hole. So isn't
> BJ to blame?
Those were probably state, not federal, programs, but if they were
even partially funded by the feds the republican congress was to
blame, not the Clinton administration. Congress is more into state
grants than pigs are into their trough. I see you've neatly neglected
to mention that GW asked for $100 million more than Congress actually
appropriated. By the way, the teaching of abstinence was always part
of the sex education programs supported by the feds. What's new is the
rightard twist that makes exhortations to abstinence the central
feature of the progam. Worse, sexual instruction takes the Dr. Laura
line -- nothing is safe except abstinence. Condoms can't be
relied-upon, birth control pills have side effects and don't
necessarily protect 100%, pregnancy or disease or both can occur no
matter what you do. All that teaching does is convince hormone enraged
teeagers that if they do it, it doesn't matter whether they use
condoms, take pills or whatever. They KNOW abstinence will keep them
clean and free from pregnancy, now they'll be told nonsense that
rubbers and pills are unreliable and dangerous.
>
> Yeah, it's a waste of money and not the responsibility of
> the federal government. But it's a lot better than what
> libs want to do in schools--hand out condoms and tell
> children that cornholing each other is an acceptable
> "alternate lifestyle".
Yeah, and Pugs want to tell kids that storks bring babies. Teaching
abstinence is utterly worthless. Even feeble programs that will direct
some kids to clinics where they can get birth control information and
pills and condoms are better than nothing.
>
> Schools should teach children the concept of shame
> like they did in the past.
When -- at what time -- did schools ever do that? I went to high
school before the sexual revolution of the 60s and while they were
basically silent on the subject of human sexuality, they never taught
shame. That was for parents and their children, and the communities in
which they lived.
Wexford
Michael Ejercito
> http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-second-term-abstinence,0,7350894.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines
>
> Bush Seeks Money for Abstinence Education
>
> By MARK SHERMAN
> Associated Press Writer
>
> WASHINGTON --
>
> President Bush's re-election insures that more federal money will flow
> to abstinence education that precludes discussion of birth control,
> even as the administration awaits evidence that the approach gets kids
> to refrain from sex.
Michael
Foxtrot
>Foxtrot wrote:
>> Yeah, it's a waste of money and not the responsibility of
>> the federal government. But it's a lot better than what
>> libs want to do in schools--hand out condoms and tell
>> children that cornholing each other is an acceptable
>> "alternate lifestyle".
>
>Better by what measure? Failure rate? STD infection rate? Pregnancy
>rate? Or is this simply your opinion unsubstantiated by any actual facts
>and motivated in part by your blatant homophobia?
Just an anecdotal observation. Forty years ago boys
were told to keep their dicks in their pants. Girls were
taught to use aspirin for birth control--put it between
their knees and hold it there. Teen pregnancy and the
illegitimacy rate were far less back then.
But probably the single biggest reason that the
illegitimacy rate shot up is AFDC. Teen girls know that
if they get knocked up, the government will reward
them with food stamps, a monthly check and a place
to live.
>> Schools should teach children the concept of shame
>> like they did in the past.
>>
>Wrong. As has been demonstrated in many other modern industrial
>democracies, open honest non-judgemental sex/health education coupled
>with access to contraceptive and barrier devices are the best practices
>with respect to unwanted pregnancy (and consequent abortions) and std
>avoidance.
The NON-judgemental part is the problem, Stupidly.
Kids are taught that they can do whatever they want,
so of course they're more likely to do stupid things.
Sheesh you libs are dumb.
>Guess which country inthis study had the lowest rate? OK, that's a tough
> one for you so I'll give you a hint: Sweden.
>
>Here go look at chart a and chart b on this page:
>http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
>• Easy access to contraceptives and other reproductive health services
>contributes to better contraceptive use and, in turn, low teenage
>pregnancy rates."
>http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
A quick web search finds that this organization is led by
a woman who ran an offshoot of Planned Parenthood,
and was marketing the "morning after" abortion pill. It's
self-serving of that crowd to encourage teens to screw
around, doncha think?
Foxtrot
>>>>>> Foxtrot writes:
> Foxtrot> Just an anecdotal observation. Forty years ago boys
> Foxtrot> were told to keep their dicks in their pants. Girls were
> Foxtrot> taught to use aspirin for birth control--put it between
> Foxtrot> their knees and hold it there. Teen pregnancy and the
> Foxtrot> illegitimacy rate were far less back then.
>
>I am not sure about the 60s, but it is a fact that teen
>pregnancy was higher in the 50s than any decade since (in
>the US that is).
People got married at younger ages back then. What's
the percentage of out-of-wedlock births then and now?
> Foxtrot> But probably the single biggest reason that the
> Foxtrot> illegitimacy rate shot up is AFDC. Teen girls know that
> Foxtrot> if they get knocked up, the government will reward
> Foxtrot> them with food stamps, a monthly check and a place
> Foxtrot> to live.
>
>Possible, but you have the burden of proof.
Isn't it obvious to you that rewarding irresponsible
behavior causes more irresponsible behavior?
When it comes to proof, Dems like LBJ that pushed for
these handout programs should have been forced to
prove that they would *not* cause irresponsible behavior.
But back in those days, Dems had far too much power,
and implemented their dumb ideas largely unchecked.
Wexford
No, Hank, he's saying the cretins run the government. Don't like
freedom of speech, you Unamerican fascist theocrat? Move to Iran.
You'll love it there.
Wexford
Steven Litvintchouk
ah...@no-spam-panix.com wrote:
> I am not sure about the 60s, but it is a fact that teen
> pregnancy was higher in the 50s than any decade since (in
> the US that is).
Cite?
This I had not heard about.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
Mike Wilcox
Steven Litvintchouk wrote:
>
>
> ah...@no-spam-panix.com wrote:
>
>> I am not sure about the 60s, but it is a fact that teen
>> pregnancy was higher in the 50s than any decade since (in
>> the US that is).
>
>
> Cite?
>
> This I had not heard about.
>
>
Turns out the 1950's were pretty randy, even in Kansas ;~)
http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us/hci/teenpreg/teenpreg.html#table7
"Since the 1950's the rate of live births to mothers 15-19 years of age
in Kansas has declined 31.7 percent from 76.3 live births per 1,000
population in 1950 to 52.1 in 1995"
Eris
Battle Creek, Mi, not know for their liberal leanings, in a red county
as it were, ditched Abstinence only, as the teen pregnancy soared.
Maybe we should listen to the sociologists and not the religiously
challenged.
JPMorg
"Foxtrot" <fox...@null.com> wrote in message
news:34ncq0trjdcamm3k0...@4ax.com...
This is why it's important to point out the failures of abstinence-only
programs:
Approximately 40,000 new HIV infections occur each year in the United
States, about 70 percent among men and 30 percent among women. Of these
newly infected people, half are younger than 25 years of age
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/aidsstat.htm
The CDC breaks its infection stats down into pediatric (under 13) and
adolescent/adult.
That's 20,000 new infections annually for 14-24 year olds.
Would you rather waste some money on preventative measures or waste it on
the long-term medical costs of the teen who might contract the virus?
(besides, as another poster asked, when did schools ever "teach shame"?)
Morgs
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~nomo1521/