A congressionally commissioned study on abstinence programs concludes that:
"Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex as those who did not."
In fact, the data shows that "those who attended one of the four abstinence classes reviewed reported having similar numbers of sexual partners as those who did not attend the classes. And they first had sex about the same age as other students -- 14.9 years"
We spend almost 200 million dollars a year on these programs.
The Bush conclusion:
Officials said one lesson they learned from the study was that the abstinence message should be reinforced in subsequent years.
my controversial book about a day in my life as Public Defender in the South Bronx is finally available for Kindle and Ipad.
3 comments:
I never trust the press release on a politically charged subject, and the executive summary is usually questionable. The actual report is what matters.
In this case I was left wondering "better than WHAT?" Only the report indicated the comparison. The report indicates that abstinence based approaches had the same (poor) outcomes as traditional sex education approaches. Now everyone's reaction makes sense.
If it doesn't make any difference, support the one favored by your side. Even the dimmest politician can be comfortable with that. And politicians on both sides of this issue are reacting accordingly.
If the report had shown a significant benefit to one or the other approach, then there would be something to worry the politicians. But they are safe. The report says that it doesn't matter what you teach the kids in schools. Their sexual behavior is dominated by other influences.
We did think it was a bad word for a while. I remember learning about it in Sunday School I guess (the Virgin Mary), and then all the boys going around saying, "Are you a virgin?" "Are you a virgin?"
A lot of the little girls said no because the boys made it sound like such a bad thing. But this was 1st grade. No one went out and got laid afterwards. ;)
I'm surprised that liberals, who supposedly object to the government having any say about sexual morals, want the government to take a side in the culture war and instruct kids on how to fornicate most efficiently.
Why the government should be involved at all with instructing kids about sex is something I wonder about. Parents have the duty to teach their children about sexuality. Schools can hardly manage to teach basic academic skills; why we should expect them to succeed in producing kids who make correct decisions about sex is beyond me.
In reality, the left wants to use sex ed to: 1) reduce parental influence over the next generation; 2) promote the notion that traditional morality is bunk and we all should just screw like rabbits.
Anyone who claims not to see the agenda behind state-controlled sex education is either a liar or a fool.
Post a Comment