Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > December > 30 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.US‘Abstinence only’ is a total crock
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The right has long pushed abstinence-only programs as an alternative to sex education, and the Bush administration has funded those programs to the tune of roughly a billion dollars. Yet repeated studies have found the programs just don’t work.
How has the administration responded to that data? With one federally funded study, it simply refused to release the report.
They would rather push what ought to work rather than what does work. They would rather design a program that makes themselves feel better than a data-driven program that actually cuts down on teen pregnancy and teen abortion. There’s something amoral about preserving programs that you know don’t work just to satisfy a political constituency, especially when the failure is measured in damaged teenaged lives.
Here’s the latest study to confirm what previous studies found, reported in the Washington Post:
“Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.
The new analysis of data from a large federal survey found that more than half of youths became sexually active before marriage regardless of whether they had taken a “virginity pledge,” but that the percentage who took precautions against pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases was 10 points lower for pledgers than for non-pledgers.
“Taking a pledge doesn’t seem to make any difference at all in any sexual behavior,” said Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, whose report appears in the January issue of the journal Pediatrics. “But it does seem to make a difference in condom use and other forms of birth control that is quite striking.”
The study is the latest in a series that have raised questions about programs that focus on encouraging abstinence until marriage, including those that specifically ask students to publicly declare their intention to remain virgins. The new analysis, however, goes beyond earlier analyses by focusing on teens who had similar values about sex and other issues before they took a virginity pledge.”
Services »
Comments
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 7:24 AM | Link to this
Is anybody surprised?
By Bud Wiser
December 30, 2008 7:34 AM | Link to this
I suppose they used perfectly good taxpayer money for that survey.
What a crock.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 30, 2008 7:35 AM | Link to this
It’s worse than simply “a crock.” Atrios had it right, yesterday:
“While the fact that virginity pledges and abstinence-only sex ‘ed’ don’t stop teens from having sex is unsurprising, I doubt that even proponents are particularly surprised. They aren’t interested in abstinence, really, they’re interested in making sure “bad girls” get punished for having sex by being subject to the appropriate consequences. So it actually works as designed.”
By spankmonkey
December 30, 2008 7:45 AM | Link to this
How apropo, Doe-eyed Bristol gave birth yesterday, a perfect example of what doesn’t work.
Where’s Wooty’s outrage? or Does the Woot only believe that we’re going to hell as a society because black or brown babies are born out of wedlock.
Uh, ya… taxpayer money was used to study a taxpayer funded program (to the tune of a cool $1,000,000,000,000.00) that has been proven time and time again not to be effective. Yeah, I agree “what a crock”…
“Abstinence only” doesn’t work and never has, yet our own little Quixote’s keep tilting at it because that’s what thier whacked out far right wingnut masters , the evangelicals, tell them to do. That in itself is not such a big deal, until they waste $1,000,000,000,000.00 of borrowed money to do it.
What freakin MORONS…
By Bud Wiser
December 30, 2008 7:49 AM | Link to this
Is your teenager telling you the truth when they say they are aware of the dangers of unprotected sex?
I guess you could say it depends on what the definition of is is.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 30, 2008 7:49 AM | Link to this
“Where’s Wooty’s outrage?”
He saves it up for death-penalty disappointments.
By Road Scholar
December 30, 2008 7:50 AM | Link to this
I asked this question before, and got no responders, so I’ll ask it again: When did it become acceptible for a teenager to get pregnant and have a baby? Is it because the teenager does ot have an abortion? Whether they get an abortion or not is not the question. Where were the parents, and their teaching their children responsibility, their religeous beliefs, and the affects early pregnancy has on their lives? Not having an abortion should not be the”reward” for irresponsible behavior.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 30, 2008 7:52 AM | Link to this
Actually, Wooty’s column today about expanding student loans to Georgians who need ‘em is pretty decent.
By lovelyliz
December 30, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this
Abstinence only as it is being pushed today is a total failure. I thought conservatives were SUPPOSED to be against wasteful, government spending and failed programs.
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this
No Mrs G, Not at all.
What is surprising is that they had to do a study to find this out.
While still in high school my daughter expressed a desire to attend the Catholic teen group at our church. After about 3 weeks, she said she did not want to continue any longer. I ask her why, her response was that a majority of the kids there were the same kids doing drugs, getting drunk and having sex with many partners. They repeatedly attacked her views on social issues when their actions did not match their so called conservative views. Short version, a big load of BS. I said OK and that was that. We still attended Mass, but that was the time when the Catholic Church was being sued by former alter boys who had been raped by priests. The Church seemed far more interested in covering up abuse for years than helping or looking out for children. After that Bishop wanted Kerry voters excommunicated I had enough. I figured I would excommunicate myself from this pack of hypocrites.
I work in medicine, that gives me certain knowledge denied to others. I had a patient who I recognized as a little old Priest from the church I attended. I had his medical record in front of me, and saw as quite a surprise, that he had AIDS. Now I have been in medicine longer than AIDS has been around, I have no judgments to make on any ones life style. But I could not help but wonder how an 85 years old Priest gets AIDS? He had no surgical history at all, no blood transfusions history, remember that I have his entire medical history in front of me. I kept that knowledge to myself, I did not share it with my family. I did have to raise an eyebrow with an inquiring mind though and it probably influenced my decision to leave the catholic Church.
I basically try to live my life as a good person and I no longer need a guy in funny robes to convince me what is the right thing to do. I kept a close eye on my kids when they were at home. I was the strict mom who always tried to know where my kids were and with whom. I never caved when they whined about going to a party that every other mom was letting their kids go to. My response was always, have a party here, I will stay here too. I know I will pay attention to what goes on, I can not attest to how that other parent might act. Anyway, I guess I have done a good job at parenting, no pregnancies or drugs or alcohol. Now that they are out on their own, that is their decision to make. They have a solid base and know they are loved by their parents and a large extended family.
By lovelyliz
December 30, 2008 8:00 AM | Link to this
Kids are being taught to say know, but without any follow through. Children need to learn how to make choices that are right for them and how to stick with it. Instead, we have a bunch of neo-social conservatives who think that just say no and then sticking your head in the sand works.
At least for girls…………..
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 30, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this
“After that Bishop wanted Kerry voters excommunicated I had enough.”
That Bishop, of course, was facilitated by then-Cardinal Ratzinger.
I try to keep an open mind about the RCC—I know they do a lot of good work to fight poverty and provide shelter for those who need it, and they’ve been consistently anti-pre-emptive war.
But they’ve always provided loopholes for those who do support such war, while hypocritically finding the teeny-tiniest pretext to condemn any one of its members who believes that the best public policy is to keep abortion legal in this country.
By Billy
December 30, 2008 8:14 AM | Link to this
Nice, Bud. Two comments posted, two attempts to change the subject. The fact is that abstinence-only does not and will not work. You can’t claim otherwise without being wrong, so you make pointless assertions. Bill Clinton’s semantic gymnastics of 11 years past don’t have any relation to the issue at hand. Your indignation at the study’s being government-funded is also ridiculous. Only a moron would have a problem with paying a few thousand dollars to study something that has cost us a billion…You’re not a moron, are you?
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this
You know what is funny? I still give money to them for the good things they do through out the world. I recognize the fact that in many places Churches are the sole means of help for people. I just do not get the fact that some guys in the middle ages decided that the church needed to inherit all the money, so now no priest can get married or have sex. Kind of goes back to yesterdays discussion of Greed. Celibacy was all about money and not having families to leave your wealth to.
By Joey
December 30, 2008 8:22 AM | Link to this
From FoxNews, other sex studies completed this year:
England’s Sheffield University discovered that males believe it is o.k. to pressure females into having sex. Using alcohol is one of the pressuring aids.
England’s U. of Durham concluded that if you are physically attractive you have a more opportunities to have casual sex than if you are unattractive.
Austria’s Institute for Sexual Education completed a study that showed that most Austrian young males get their sex education from pronography. And surprise, use of pornography gives young males and females a warped understanding of what sex is about.
Indiana’s Kinsey Institute found that use of condoms reduces sexual pleasure for both men and women.
And the Journal of Adolescent Health confirmed once again that 90% of parents want their children to be educated on both contraception and abstinence.
“Perhaps the only somewhat surprising news is that even parents who were Catholic, born-again Christian, or ‘politically very conservative’ largely wanted their children to receive comprehensive sex ed, according to the study.”
Comprehensive sex ed: This means teach that sex is not an obligation, that abstinence is fine, and that if you, both of you, decide to have sex you should use a contraceptive as well as protect yourselves against STDs.
By Bud Wiser
December 30, 2008 8:27 AM | Link to this
No Billy, the moron of which you speak is reflected in your very own mirror
What your simpleton mind could not grasp was:
.a) Just another governmental study, highly funded by taxpayer money, was wasted again on what even the most educationally deficient tool like you should understand, and that is they told us something we not only already knew about our children, but about ourselves as well when we were their age; (be sure to look this highlighted word’s definition now, Billy Bonehead) The intuitively obvious.
b) a simple parody, an attempt to lighten the subject matter at hand, by referring to the salacious side of a former president … a PUN, a JOKE you fool! Is their not one lib in this whole wide universe that cannot understand the concept of HUMOR? Well Billy B., you are no different from the rest of your kind that have no sense of humor.
Dullard.
By GaNative
December 30, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this
Ask Bristol Palin if abstinence works!!!!
By Don Ross
December 30, 2008 8:40 AM | Link to this
Ridiculous…
In 1955, my girl friend and I were enjoying the sweet mysteries of love. I was 17, she was of 15-years.
Now if, in those wrapped tight days, we were not dissuaded, who can possibly believe this silly abstiance is other than a religious ploy to try to foster guilt upon the innocents.
By Taxpayer
December 30, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this
Well, this is just disgusting. All this talk about that you know what word. Why, we never ever had such problems before we started talking about that you know what word. See no evil. Hear no evil. Speak no evil. NO!. Boys were sent off to war and girls were locked away in schools with nuns and when the boys returned from war and the girls graduated from school, they married and babies were magically created and then the cycle of life started over again.
By Elephant man
December 30, 2008 8:44 AM | Link to this
Physical unattractiveness got me through high school without sex. Fortunately in college, alcohol finally broke the spell, so to speak.
By NappyD
December 30, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this
Hopefully there wont’ be a return to the 90’s style Baptist approach I had to put up with: Scare kids to death about STD’s.
Which didn’t work when we found out the #’s were skewed to include the third world African countries. Go figure.
Now where can I sign up to get some of this sex ed $? It’s obviously not working. I have bills to pay here. Come on, W. Hook me up!
By GEP
December 30, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this
I wonder if this “journalist” has taken the time to investigate how Chris Dodd and Barney Frank have used similar tactics to swindle the American taxpayer out of 7.5 trillion dollars by facilitating the sub-prime loan scheme through the banks. Their actions are nothing less than treasonus and both should be in jail. Oh, but wait, their intensions were “moral”, right?
By Jon Miranda
December 30, 2008 8:52 AM | Link to this
Does encouraging kids to have sex work? Yes. With some, yes. Does encouraging kids not to have sex work? With some, yes. Abstinence only will work with some kids. If it works with only 1, then it was successful.
By Voice of Reason
December 30, 2008 8:53 AM | Link to this
GOP is gone makes two great points. First, don’t confuse the Roman Catholic Church with Christianity- they can call themselves whatever they want but they are not the Christian Church (neither are most of the evangelical churches). Secondly, GOP is gone said she kept an eye on her kids and was strict on them- and it actually worked. THAT is the point. Kids who are having sex aren’t being parented (well, not properly anyway). Sorry if that hurts your feelings but it’s true. Lastly, the whole position that abstinence doesn’t work is a result of asking the wrong question. The point is not abstinence. The point is WHY you are abstinent. The motivation for what we do is the important thing. If you take an abstinence pledge because your parents are church going Christians but you personally couldn’t care less, then, you won’t remain abstinent. You pledge because you personally believe it is wrong to have sex with anyone who God does not intend to be your lifelong mate then your motivation is much deeper, stronger and built on personal conviction.
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this
Ah Guilt rears it’s ugly head! Now this is something the Catholic Church excels at.
It brings back the lovely memories of the second sacrament, put a 5 year old in a dark box and tell them they are sinners. No one, and I mean no one, can beat Franciscan nuns from the 60’s in the guilt arena. Memorize this prayer, if you miss a word you are going to hell. I don’t care if you can barely read yet. And if you did not do ANYTHING wrong, I know you are a liar, and you are going to hell. Now get in this dark box and then a sliding door will open and Father will whisper to you, and remember if you get your recited prayer wrong, you are going to hell. So forgive me father for I have sinned. I…… let’s see, I must have done something bad because sister said I did, but I really do not understand this whole thing, I just know I am afraid. OK Father, I will say all those prayers I have memorized but do not understand at all, just please let me out of this scary box.
And don’t get me started on the Sister’s love of public humiliation…..those habits must have been awfully uncomfortable.
By FrankLeeDarling
December 30, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this
All I can think of is “billion dollar babies” by Alice Cooper
By Billy
December 30, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this
Nice, Bud. Two comments posted, two attempts to change the subject. The fact is that abstinence-only does not and will not work. You can’t claim otherwise without being wrong, so you make pointless assertions. Bill Clinton’s semantic gymnastics of 11 years past don’t have any relation to the issue at hand. Your indignation at the study’s being government-funded is also ridiculous. Only a moron would have a problem with paying a few thousand dollars to study something that has cost us a billion…You’re not a moron, are you?
By Emily
December 30, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this
No, Jon, nuh-uh. If abstinence-only education keeps one kid from screwing, at the price of ten other kids who never learn about condoms and end up with STDs, abortions, or babies before they’re ready, then it didn’t work. I’m sorry, but I’m not willing to sacrifice ten lambs for the sake of one.
By Lottie
December 30, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this
I do not believe in abstinance only education. I think it is up the the parents to teach their kids about sex, respect, and love. I am 21 years old. I lost my virginity when I was 17 (which is pretty late compared to most of my friends). I have only had sex with one man on my entire life and we are still together four years after the fact. We use birth control. Two kinds. Do you know why? Because we were taught about sex and pregnancy not only in school, but by our parents. My parents didnt tell me to wait until marraige or anything like that, my parents told me to wait until i was ready and found someone I was comfortable with. And I did; and it worked. The more you want a teenager not to do soemthing the more they want to do it.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this
Bud Wiser
Yes, the study was a waste of taxpayer money.
Yes, only the tooliest of the tools believe abstinence only education is effective.
But do you have any idea how we can stop the government from doing such stupid wasteful things?
I do. I voted for change.
“We want to make sure that, even as we are teaching responsible sexuality and we are teaching abstinence to children, that we are also making sure that they’ve got enough understanding about contraception.”
Barack Obama
And I helped!
By alongcameakalong
December 30, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this
Allright, here’s the deal: For countless ages people have married and started having sex when their bodies matured and became reproductive. Physically and biologically speaking, ages 14 through 21 happen to be reproductive prime-time. Suddenly, less than a hundred years ago, a gaggle of moralistic whackjobs decided that all that f—-ing had to stop until marriage AND a certain age of consent was reached. Now everyone gets their knickers in knots when people (and YES adolescents are people too) listen to the ancient call of nature instead of what some sexually repressed religio-fascist head-cases concocted less than a lifetime ago. Americans never fail to amaze me.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this
To Voice of Reason
I don’t know what church or denomination you belong to (I happen to be Baptist) but the church is NOT a denomination (i.e., Roman Catholic) or even a sub-group of organized denominations (i.e., evangelicals) and it is certainly not a building or great cathedral.
The church is made up of the invisible souls (past and present) of all TRUE believers in Christ as is stated so often and clearly in the Bible.
Not everyone who calls Me Lord, Lord shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Hope that helps in your future discussions.
By Joey
December 30, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this
Some of you appear to be confusing “practicing abstinence” with “teaching that abstinence is the only choice”. Abstinence will absolutely guarantee no pregnancy. It is difficult for me to believe that a person, any person, would actually teach that abstinence is the only option.
That idea is silly because even the lowest IQ teen or adult knows that abstinence is not the only choice. But that does not mean that taking a pledge to abstain is wrong or foolish. It is likely that the teen believes at the time of their pledge that abstinence is the best choice for them.
No one, not even the person who made the decision, can say for certain that making an abstenence pledge did not delay their choice to have sex. It almost certainly delayed the decision for some amount of time.
We are talking about teenagers after all. Teens, they pledge to take care of the puppy if you will buy it for them. They pledge to watch less TV or to play computer games less. They pledge to take the garbage to the street every Thursday. They pledge not to text in the classroom or while doing their homework. They pledge to keep their rooms clean; to wear their seat belts; to not have more than four people in their car; to not drink alcolhol, not use any drugs; to be home by 9:00.
Some of them actually keep some of these pledges. But the ones that do have other motivators than merely their personal pledge.
By gttim
December 30, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
Just say no! Don’t do it!
The best method of preventing unwanted pregnancies is to have lawyers give lectures at schools on divorce or custody cases. Heavy attention should given to custody battles and child support. On child support, it should include lengthy descriptions of the percentage of income what happen if you don’t pay it, along with the percentage of child support that is never collected and what happens to parents who have a hard time collecting it.
Follow that up some serious sex education.
Teenagers will have sex. The human’s sex drive is the strongest drive we have. It the basis of our most primal instinct- reproduce to survive. All of our ancestors share an amazing trait- they managed to stay alive and reproduce. Against all odds they managed to find a mate and have offspring. Those with the strongest drives had children, those without a strong drive, did not. Just saying no, or saying you won’t do it for Jesus, just isn’t going to cut it.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
In 1970 a nun told us that kissing for more than 10 seconds was a mortal sin and that tampons would take our virginity.
In 1972 another nun, same school explained to us how to use a condom, a diaphragm and the pill.
How’s that for mixed messages!
By jeff
December 30, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this
Abstinance only policies will not stop young people from having sex….just like anti-abortion laws will not stop women who want an abortion from having abortions….just like banning gay unions will not stop gay people from falling in love and starting a family. The government should get out of the business of pushing morality and leave that to private households.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this
Well, let’s look on the bright side.
Most kids who take the pledge are probably conservative.
So if they have babies, they will probably grow up to be conservative and can help us take our country back.
Isn’t that what the liberals have been excelling at on their unwed birth rates for the past 50 years?
What a plan!
By jeff
December 30, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this
Abstinance only policies will not stop young people from having sex….just like anti-abortion laws will not stop women who want an abortion from having abortions….just like banning gay unions will not stop gay people from falling in love and starting a family. The government should get out of the business of pushing morality and leave that to private households.
By Copyleft
December 30, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this
The war on sex has about as much chance of success as the war on drugs.
But when has abject, obvious failure ever bothered the moral watchdogs in our society?
By AJC/DNC Management
December 30, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this
Oh good, the left is asking teenagers for the truth about sexual relations.
And are panting over the “answers” they get, yelling at everybody that it is O.K. to put a sock on it and dive in, please.
ew
And of course pinko men are dead set against abstinence only, they already face a uphill battle, ugly liberal hags that won’t give them any and to make matters worse, usually choose another ugly liberal hag to mate up with, so let’s broaden our horizons and take a shot at all those fine looking Conservative southern girls.
I’m sure it won’t be the first time you get laughed at, so why not give it a try, eh?
ew
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this
To Jeff
Underage drinking laws don’t stop 14 year olds from drinking either. Want to drop those too?
To All
By the way folks, in our public schools, do we encourage our kids to make sure they use filters when they smoke cigarettes? After all, cigarettes can kill.
Schools have even been designated smoke free zones. Since they are going to do it anyway, shouldn’t we instead encourage safe smoking? You know, like they used to behind the gym?
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 9:27 AM | Link to this
So now lets get an example of the loving Sister’s idea of behavior modification with young children.
When a young Catholic mother has so many kids she is having trouble coping, getting one more in to catholic schools is a priority. So said child is started in first grade at the tender age of 4.75 years of age. She is cast in to this world of women in huge, dark robes with only a small bit of very shiny face exposed to the light of day. With clickers in hand they start to wield their power over the youngsters. Everyone must stand in unison or the order of the universe will surely come crashing down on our tiny heads and we will be sent to hell. It does not matter that the chairs are so big our feet can not touch the floor, thus making the ability to snap out of your seat with in a second of the clicker going off next to impossible. WE WILL DO THIS UNTIL IT IS DONE TO MY STANDARDS. OK sister, just please stop yelling at us and smacking us with a stick.
Now make note of this fact, never, ever, make the mistake of sticking your thumb in your 4 yr old mouth in front of sister because she is scaring the living sh!t out of you. Boy you have done it now, opened up a whole big can of whoop @ss. Sister will single you out and the show will begin. “If you insist on acting like a baby, then I will help you feel at home” Next thing you know a playpen is brought to the class from the churches nursery and placed front and center. You are deposited in the playpen and left there for the rest of the day, because you are obviously a baby and going to hell. By now you are crying, thus proving the point that Sister is correct, you are a baby, which she gleefully points out to the class at regular intervals.
It was amazing that anyone could survive with an intact psyche. Makes you wonder what had been done to Sister that she was so pi$$ed off about.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this
Headline:
WOODSTOCK, Ga. — In a study released on Monday, experts said that despite all the education, all the tougher laws, we’re still losing teen drivers at an alarming rate. 18-year-old Victoria Heil of Cherokee County is now one of them.
Do they make condoms big enough for cars?
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this
“Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.”
versus
“Most kids who take the pledge are probably conservative”
Combined it becomes
Most kids who take the pledge are probably conservative …and are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.
So conservative kids break vows and have unprotected sex.
I think they’ll have a hard time taking back anything….
By Midori
December 30, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this
Oh good, the left is asking teenagers for the truth about sexual relations.
you never miss an opportunity to try to make this a us vs them issue.
Pathetic.
Just mind boggling pathetic.
By Paul
December 30, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
For conservatives who assert ‘wasteful’ government programs should be eliminated, who measure waste as not meeting the objectives or having objectives that are no longer an issue (like millions spent to have Fed employees tell other Fed employees to save energy by turning lights out when you go home), one would think they’d be at the forefront of calling for shutting down expenditures for this program.
Unless conservative ideology trumps data.
Well, they just may have an ally in Pres-elect Obama, who’s promised a line-by-line review to eliminate wasteful government spending. They should be happy. As long as he doesn’t target abstinence-only.
I kinda like the abstinence-only program I had in high school. Biology class. Had to memorize the failure rates of different birth control methods. In the midst of diagramming the egg/sperm path, at what day is what hormone released, percent swelling of the uterus at what day, etc etc (yeah, high school. Biology was more than putting condoms on cukes). Wasn’t sexy or fun, it was work. But the point was the only surefire prevention method was no sex. The teacher just laid out the stats. No preaching, no moralizing. Just gave the science. In a science class. What a concept.
By Justin
December 30, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this
Pretty sure you meant “immoral” when you wrote “amoral” up there, Mr. Bookman. Big difference…
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this
To Mrs. G.
What’s the matter? Having trouble with a little tongue in cheek this morning?
Maybe if there were more of that instead of the other we wouldn’t be having this problem…… :o)
BTW, on the conservative vs. liberal kids it’s the volume that counts at the voting both. Just trying to encourage that.
By FrankLeeDarling
December 30, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this
Liberal hag? I’ll take Arianna over Ann the man any day.
nothing like teaching a good southern baptist girls the dangers of premarital sex first hand.(with condoms of course)
By GodHatesTrash
December 30, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this
And are panting over the “answers” they get, yelling at everybody that it is O.K. to put a sock on it and dive in, please.
ew
Ever notice how disgusted many RightWingnuts are with sex, especially heterosexual sex?
By spankmonkey
December 30, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this
Of course the Corporal misunderstands the issue, or sees it in a light he finds suitable.
We spend $1,000,000,000,000.00 on a failed social program, and the Corporal equates any talk of change to us encouraging smoking.
Where’s the bible verse that says it’s OK for the progeny of Conservative VP candidates to have babies out of wedlock, while condemning the rest of us libs to hell for wanting to ditch “abstinence only”, even though it has been proven time and time again not to be effective.
Let me put the issue in a different light that maybe the Corporal will better relate to.
How many mega-churches would $1,000,000,000,000.00 build?
I agree, the best “punishment” available would be to not have an abortion.
I also agree on having divorce attorneys come talk to kids about the aspects of loveless and failed marriages with kids involved.
Make sure the boys especially understand that the more “conservative” the area they procreate in, the less likely they will get to be involved in the lives of the children they created if they can’t live with the mother.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this
Off Topic
What a great vent in the AJC I read today …..
*Before the erection (sorry, I meant election - this blog is getting to me this morning) it was Yes we can! but now it is Not so fast!
By Ray
December 30, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this
The Catholic church of today is a holdover from it’s earliest days, cast in a different light. This organization has killed more “non-believers and heretics” than any other religious cult in history. Power and money started it in about 300AD and it hasn’t stopped since. If you think that abuse of little boys is bad in this present day, just think what it must have been in the days when no one questioned priests and Bishops about anything. I am surprised that this church still has a following in other than third world countries.
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this
Something tells me our dear little manager had no problems keeping his vow of abstinence, and is keeping it still. Boy what will power.
And conservative Bristol lets us all know how well that pledge works. I just hope she does not let her future mother in law baby sit.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this
Spankmonkey
Calm down!
You’re going to have a baby! (as we used to say).
By ManhattanX
December 30, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this
Everyone’s comments are fantastically hilarious. I loved reading them. Just one problem: When did an invisible man up in the sky, who had magical sex with a virgin (who confound her ignorant husband into thinking she hadn’t messed around… but to whom she was married, but hadn’t had sex with… explain this one also), and who’s supposed son disappeared for many years just to reappear as the invisible man’s son… and who, according to people who really weren’t there say he walked on water, made water into wine and had an affair with a prostitute so he could show that he forgave people’s sins… please explain to me, how belief in all this allows the Pope to wear silly gold-laced hats and robes and live in opulence while telling people how to live their lives and who they can and cannot have sex with… while millions of people starve from famine, sits quietly by as dictators kill and torture their citizens, catholic drug lords make billions and has no problem when hundreds of thousands die from AIDS every year in countries where condoms are not made available?
How does all this sit with you guys? This talk of church and sex ed is just nonsense. These studies are nonsense. FACT: People are animals. We like to have sex. It’s biological and hormonal. We like it. It feels good. Sometimes we want a baby. Sometimes we don’t. 70% of young people from the age of 14 to 30 have STDs because they don’t like to use rubbers and because - damn - they like to have sex. The will have sex over and over again. And if given a choice between sex and school, they would stay home and have sex.
Religion is BS. Scrap the fairy tales for reality. Once you deal with reality truthfully, you can find more time to have sex. Or do whatever else you want… like read, or write, or paint, or conduct business, or hug your kids, or help an elderly person. Reading about Moses and Abraham and Jesus and Mary or Mohammad is like … well, it’s like wasting your time writing a comment on this BLOG.
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this
You betcha
Ah amm truly Mavericky Mavericky now that ah is free of John McCain and ah am an expert in all things birth control ‘cause ah kin see lots of discarded rubbers not only from Piedmont Park but in it right now. And so, goshdarnit…
Barack Obama is advocating fornication in the streets and spreading the wealth and the sperm.
Mah daughter Bristol Backseet knows abstince and its efficacy.
Mah formerly future now Oxycontin Queen Johnson knows abstincnece and its efficacy.
Abstincence but also is related to health care and the economy you betcha.
Further when ah came to Jawjaw to campaign for Saxbus ah was introduced in Mayretta to Bobby Franklin who bravely and brilliantly authored a bill stating that embryonic stem cells cause metastatic cancer. Bobby Franklin is one of the pre-eminent oncologists in the Country between Big Chicken and Walmart.
And so, but also when elected I will force Congress to pass a law that mandates no oral contraception be sold in any pharmacy. Ah want mah former future mother-in-laws to have a corner on the black market.
But also and and so there would not be 450,000 embryos to discard if there were total abstinence, and cloning would not be looming.
In this economy and further, we must increase the committment to the abstinence program by several billion dollars, in order to hold more Purity Balls, and so besides in order to bolster the economy and best spend federal dollars.
Damn them liberal pinko communists share the wealthfanatics. You betcha.
And Bristol, in her 15 month of jestation says howdy all you snobillies you betcha.
By The BlogFather of Scroll
December 30, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this
Abstinence-only is a total crotch.
By Ray
December 30, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this
GOP,
Bristol is just one of hundreds of thousands of ill-fated teens who make a mistake that they will regret for the rest of their lives. Palin is not to blame anymore than you would be under similar circumstances. We do the best that we can with our children and hope that they will not make the same mistakes that we did. We still kill 1.3 M unborn babies each year in this country and over 90% are killed for “social reasons”, that is for birth control gone awry. This cannot be right, no matter what your abortion stand.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this
To Manhattan Ex
For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. To the one we are the stench of death; to the other, the fragrance of life. II Corinthians
I see for now you have chosen the stench of death. I wish you well.
By Sam
December 30, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this
Amazingly, I actually find myself agreeing with Jay that abstinence only programs don’t work. However, I propose that not only do you PROVIDE contraception, you make it MANDATORY for all under 30 and have no means to provide for a child (i.e. you’re on welfare). Before you collect your monthly welfare checks, you must come in and get monthly depo-provera birth control shots. Come on libs—secretly you like this, you want to control (decrease) the population of the society leeches as much as the conservatives. No more 25 year old mother of 12 kids.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
I have a Serious Question
In our public schools we teach a lot about safety to name just a few:
Crossing the Street
Driving automobiles
Sexual activity
Why are there no courses on how to safely handle firearms, safety in hunting, etc., an activity that is exercised by our youth (especially rural areas and ghettos) on a daily basis?
Hummmmmm ………….
By Taxpayer
December 30, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this
Let’s see how this right-wing conservative logic works to insure their survival. First and foremost, let there be abstinence until one is wed to one’s life-partner. Second, a gay lifestyle must be avoided in order to be accepted into any place other than hell so there’s no safe sex to be found in that direction. That also rules out going to jail and that also means thou shalt not commit a crime punishable by incarceration which rules out doing anything that would result in becoming an enemy combatant as well. Third, we already know that suicide is out of the question. So, what’s left to do until one is wed to one’s life-partner that is acceptable in the eyes of those that would take it on themselves to judge others. Hmmmmm. Oh. Of course. There’s war. Boys shall go off to war where they can grow into men and when they return, the women shall be there anxiously waiting to wed them — especially if it has been a long war. Finally, the time is right for procreation. But, do not act with haste. Stop, talk, plan for tomorrow just do not plan for parenthood. Sleep on it. Be certain that both are prepared for what one makes whether it be one with two heads or a dozen with no bread for thou shalt not abort nary a one and given the wonders of the scourge of all that is science, just about anything that two can produce, as a pair or otherwise, can be given a long, long existence. Otherwise, he shall have no choice but to return to war and she shall be destined to re-join the sisters and think only the purest of thoughts. Thoughts of birds and bees and how utterly incompatible the two are. And so we have existence proof that right-wing conservatives do not need logic to survive. In fact, the less they think, the greater their chances of survival.
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this
Precisely ManhattanX!
That is one of the biggest reasons I am an EX-Catholic, Silly superstitions and power hungry patriarchs. And there is no hell after all. Check out this video on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY-ZrwFwlQg if you have not seen it. Funny and explains just how I feel about it.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this
To GOP is gone
You had better hope (pray) so.
By RW-(the original)
December 30, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this
I’m all for getting rid of government programs that don’t work and this one is a drop in the bucket so to speak, however can we get a little honesty in our “reporting?” The Bush administration can request funding for a program, but it can’t fund them. Funding bills must originate in the House of Representatives and the Democrats have had an iron grip on that body for two years.
I suspect that the timing of this article just happening to coincide with the birth of Bristol and Levy’s son was just another jaded effort by Jay B to get the Palin kids dragged through the mud one more time and it’s obviously working quite well. You libs and your puppetmaster that writes the column should be ashamed.
I’m off to the forest, I’ll catch y’all upstairs at happy hour.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this
Sam
Actually a chemical method to temporarily stop sperm production makes more sense. As they are made fresh every day….and eggs aren’t.
Better to stop the fresh little swimmers than to poison the eggs with excess hormones.
Require men to get a permit to use full strength ejaculate.
By @@
December 30, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this
‘Ya know jay, the main objectives of the women’s movement were:
To secure sexual freedom.
To secure the right to abortion.
To secure equal pay for equal work.
They succeeded in the first two. !?!GREAT!?!
‘Ya just don’t hear that much from Liberated women about the fact that they failed in securing the third.
Talk about “babes” in the woods. Women are so gullible…so naive…so easily led to believe by, not only men, but their own kind as well.
By spankmonkey
December 30, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this
It’s of no surprise, but conservative hypocrisy abounds on this issue.
Where are the local wingnuts? Why aren’t they here RAILING on about a failed SOCIAL PROGRAM to the tune of $1,000,000,000,000.00?
Instead they choose to (finally) maintain an air of brevity, and change the subject.
Why is ok for Bristol Palin to have premarital sex and procreate?
Why is it OK for Levi Johnston to do the same, and then quit school?
Why do we need “Abstinence Only”? Especially since its a failed social program??? Wouldn’t mandatory chastity belts for those under 18 be a more logical, and cost effective, choice?
I’m all for baby momma having to take BC before recieving public funds.
Baby Momma is a huge problem we have to address, and “abstinence only” has proven to be a dismal and costly failure in that arena.
What now?
By AJC/DNC Management
December 30, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this
By FrankLeeDarling December 30, 2008 9:45 AM Liberal hag? I’ll take Arianna over Ann the man any day.
Arianna?!?
Bwahahahaha, that’s the best you can do?
Hahaha.
~~~~~
By Midori December 30, 2008 9:31 AM Oh good, the left is asking teenagers for the truth about sexual relations. you never miss an opportunity to try to make this a us vs them issue.
It is an us versus them issue-
“Teen pregnancy can derail the plans of students with dreams of achieving professional success, and it’s hitting minority communities particularly hard,” said Senator Oblahmasan. “While the country’s overall teen birth rate continues to decline, pregnancies in African American and Latino communities remain inexcusably high.
Apparently, inner city enclaves of dull Oblahmi voters do not know how to install a condom or eat a birth control pill and hopeandchange hasn’t helped them much either.
That’s nice that you are able to giggle over Bristol Palin and I ain’t saying “abstinence only” is perfect by any means, but if you want to get at the root of the problem, and I know you don’t dearie, look within yourself oh wretched pinko.
You ain’t no role model.
ew
~~~~~~
By GodHatesTrash December 30, 2008 9:47 AM Ever notice how disgusted many RightWingnuts are with sex, especially heterosexual sex?
Now’s your chance to explain to us all exactly what is wrong with homosexual sex.
Do tell us, dimwit.
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Ray,
Please do not try to put words, or this case type, in my mouth, er page. I never once blamed Sarah for Bristol pregnancy. I just offered up a well publicized example of the topic of the day, of which said birth is probably the motivator for said topic.
And abortion is and should be a personal decision for a woman. Let’s try making BCP free to all women if they want them. Or how about say, the MAN taking the initiative?
By getalife
December 30, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this
18 year old Bristol had a baby boy named Tripp and now they can celebrate with the baby’s father’s mother with doses of oxy’s.
You can argue the war on drugs is a crock along with abstinence.
The Palins prove that argument.
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this
the Democrats have had an iron grip on that body for two years
that horse is soooooo verrrrry dead! and RW keeps beating it!
still worth a laugh though.
By RealityKing
December 30, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this
Sorry, but it’s crystal clear that the true purpose of this study is to provide progressive ammunition against traditional American values. Whether it’s scientific or not is irrelevant. The important thing is the foregone conclusion that the press needs to push the agenda.
You see the problem here is that all other previous studies found that those pledging abstinence were more likely to delay having sex than non-pledgers. It works! And ouch!! That’s a big thorn in the side of the “do what feels good now” progressive ideals.
So study author Janet E. Rosenbaum, a far-left post-doctoral fellow at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, used the same data from previous studies with her own progressive “statistical methods”. You see Rosenbaum only wanted to compared teens who had taken a virginity pledge with those who had not taken the pledge but were apt to delay having sex. Or at least her “statistical methods”(opinion) of which of those teens that didn’t take the pledge were more likely to abstain. She DID NOT include teenagers who were unlikely to make a promise to abstain. i.e. Progressives
So you see, Rosenbaum’s actual comparison is between her idea of two groups of non progressives, those who pledged and those she thinks wouldn’t have sex even though they didn’t pledge. And oh yeah, did I mention that 80% of those that Rosenbaum used as pledgers say they didn’t pledge at all? In a controlled study no less?? But apparently.., Rosenbaum’s “statistical methods” were able to determine otherwise. What a crock is right!
Now of course teens will be teens.., but only the mindlessly foolish waste tax dollars fighting abstanence programs for teens, especially in the face of so many abortions. Now it really doesn’t take a scientist to see this does it??
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Hey GUYS….
for every Baby Mamma
there is a Baby Daddy…….
By Jake
December 30, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this
Mrs God - The only problem with that is one violator could impregnate a hundred women over a weekend, easily. Better to IQ test all girls at 12 and sterilize those below 120!
By Sam
December 30, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this
Mrs Godzilla, if your chemical method works, all the better. Both men and women on welfare have to have treatment before collecting their checks.
My point is that the libs would have none of this citing “personal liberties” for the leeches who contribute nothing to our society. Typical double standard, provide voluntary contraception, but if they don’t comply, give each of their unwed mothers and children vouchers, WIC cards, etc to the tune of billions paid by the rest of us.
Personally, I find most “liberals” agree with my approach in confidence, it’s just that they don’t want to seem politically incorrect or “hateful”.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this
My flaming Republican girlfriend has a 17 year-old daughter who is drop-dead gorgeous, and she has had her on birth control pills since she was 15!
Guess what? She’s never been pregnant or had an STD…see, even Republicans know it’s a crock cooked up by religious zealots!!
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 10:51 AM | Link to this
Reality King
please provide back up for this
“all other previous studies found that those pledging abstinence were more likely to delay having sex than non-pledgers.”
By Copyleft
December 30, 2008 10:51 AM | Link to this
RealityKing: You skipped over the other finding… that when those abstinence-educated kids DID have sex, they did so unsafely and in ignorance, resulting in a LOT more STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
You may want to rethink your approach, especially since reality isn’t falling into place the way you’d like it.
Corporal: Why would we encourage kids to smoke? Smoking is always harmful; sex (when done right) is beneficial.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this
Copyleft:v Corporal is still wearing HIS abstinence ring…he doesn’t know the benefits of good love-making!!
By @@
December 30, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
Mrs. G makes a good point, fellas.
She reminds me of a poster at Luckovich’s — a left-leaner whose girlfriend? wife? gave birth to a baby boy. We were all very happy for him. I even went so far as to tell him that his leftist views may change now that he served as an example to his children. We ventured into the topic of teenage sex.
His views? Rules would be applied for a daughter, but none for his son. If sex was offered, TAKE full ADVANTAGE of “it”.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this
To Copyleft
1) Of course, we shouldn’t encourage kids to smoke. You miss my humor.
2) And remember when we are talking sexual activity on this thread we are talking about sex among unmarried kids which I believe is (as you say) always harmful and never beneficial either (especially for the young lady who is just being used).
3) Now, what about my question (10:23) about gun safety?
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this
Sam
Leeches?
Please expand on that thought will you.
Just exactly who are societies leeches?
Are unwed fathers included? The old and the poor? The disabled? Who defines the appropriate level of contirbution?
Jake
1 guy, 100 women, 48 hours? Maybe at 16….
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this
Off Topic
Shucks, the USS McKinney was almost sunk !
By mm
December 30, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this
Jay,
It truly is amazing how the wingnuts rail against your columns no matter how much sense they make.
And when they are called out for the stupidity of their posts and realize how ignorant they are, they claim they are joking.
The days of the church running our government are over. Let’s put these hypocrites back in the pulpit where they belong.
Hey wingnuts. Don’t try to save us, save yourselves.
By RW-(the original)
December 30, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this
Mrs G.,
While you’re awaiting backup from RealityKing, please provide backup for this.
that horse is soooooo verrrrry dead! and RW keeps beating it
The “horse” in question is the House of Representatives and it is most assuredly under the full and complete control of Democrats and has been for two years.
I’m walking out the door though, so you have plenty of time to cite the bill passed by the House that stripped funding for this program that Senate Republicans filibustered to have the funding restored or that the President vetoed for the purpose of having this funding restored. Good luck with that!
Later
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this
To mm
We already have.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 30, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this
This seems a popular, if erroneous, notion — that the West is overrun with bug-eyed atheists, freethinking fanatics, and villainous infidels. Where so many pundits and journalists get the idea that Westerners are largely disciples of Darwin and Dawkins is an utter mystery. Certainly they don’t get it from the research. The fact is the United States — the largest, richest and most culturally significant Western nation — is one of the most religious societies in history. Only about 10 percent of Americans claim to be neither spiritual nor religious. Another survey finds a mere 6 percent confess to be atheists or agnostics. Sure, that’s America for you. What about Europe? Again, few persons in so-called “secular” Europe are genuinely irreligious. The latest European Union poll (pdf) finds a mere 18 percent of Europeans say “they do not believe there is a spirit, God, nor life force.” Probably the same percentage as in Muslim countries, though one would be butchered for saying so.-AmSpec
It’s tough out there being a Godless heathen.
But they sure are a noisy little group.
By @@
December 30, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this
And gttim makes a good suggestion as well:
The best method of preventing unwanted pregnancies is to have lawyers give lectures at schools on divorce or custody cases. Heavy attention should given to custody battles and child support. On child support, it should include lengthy descriptions of the percentage of income what happen if you don’t pay it, along with the percentage of child support that is never collected and what happens to parents who have a hard time collecting it.
Teaching consequences.
I’ve always believed that the females should be separated from the males in sex ed. The females should be taught by an assortment of responsible fathers with daughters. The fathers should be honest with the young women about what drove them in their youth. It certainly wasn’t their big brain.
They young men should be taught by pithed off females whose successes in life were curtailed by one of those youthful “hotrodders”.
Yup! I think that would go a long ways towards encouraging abstinence.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this
As the Aussies say: “America got the Puritans, I’m glad we got the criminals!!”
No god? Know peace!!
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this
Abstinence teaching is not just to help prevent pregnancies but is also aimed at the self-esteem and worth of the young people involved.
Obviously, the young lady is the one who usually suffers the most regarding sex outside of marriage.
She is the one who can get pregnant; is the one stuck with lack of commitment; is the one most often “talked about” around school; is the one most often used and then ceremoniously dumped for somone better; and the one most likely to suffer life-long loss of self-esteem.
Get real folks. Sex for these kids is harmful in many, many ways other than just getting pregnant.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this
@@, that is the most cogent, thoughtful thing you have ever posted!
As a single father with joint custody who has NEVER missed a child support payment, I’m proud to say I agree with you 100 percent!!!
By Cherokee
December 30, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this
Corporal @ 10:23. Because every kid crosses the street, every kid drives a car, and everyone will have sex.
Only 25% or so of kids hunt. In some rural areas, where kids are more likely to hunt, the schools do provide instruction in firearm safety.
By spankmonkey
December 30, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this
$1,000,000,000,000.00 spent on a failed social program, and all we can get is defense of the failed social program, and outrage that federal money may have been spent on the study designating it so???
Corporal, in Kansas, where my family’s from, there actually were firearms saftey courses in public school. I’m not sure when it ended, and I didn’t go to school there when it was happening.
This Lib is not anti gun by any measure, sensible measures yes, anti gun no.
Since I’m off on a tangent here… I’ve probably mentioned that Mrs. Spankmonkey is solidly Republican (nobody’s perfect).
Anyway, last year when we married and moved in together, I came across a single shot .410 in her garage, loaded with a shell, and the hammer pulled back, needless to say this elicited much clucking and some stern lecturing.
A month or so passed and I found reason to get something off the upper shelf of our closet. I knocked over and old purse and a holstered .38 rolled out, loaded with hollow points, and the hammer pulled back. It was a cheap 5-shot revolver (Taurus) and has no safety. In other words a jostle away from certain death.
I came to the marriage with a 7 and 9 year old, she has a 15 and 16 year old. And I had them in the house with certain death on the top shelf. (yeah, I’m a dumbass for not knowing, lets get past that)
She should not have been allowed to purchase that gun without a modicum of safety training or knowledge.
Mr. Spankmonkey has had NRA safety training (but doesn’t support the radical elements of the NRA), started shooting at the age of 5-6 with his dad, spent summers and winters at his grandads lake where we hunted fowl, and had a mechanized bluerock thrower for skeet shooting, etc… Never shot wolves from a heli though…
Comments?
By Mrs. Godzilla
December 30, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this
RW
So the House can do it without the senate?
Wow.
By RealityKing
December 30, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this
“Previous studies would compare a mixture of apples and oranges,” Rosenbaum said. “I tried to pull out the apples and compare only the apples to other apples.”
i.e. People with traditional values tend to be like other people with traditional values, even if they pledge to be different from each other. What’s so scientific about this again??
By @@
December 30, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
Absolutely Corporal!
And too many parents fail in teaching their children (especially the girls) self-respect. Absent and/or deadbeat fathers leave the girl’s looking for what they didn’t receive at home.
There can be no self-respect found in adults who seek recourse from politicians or government.
I always taught my daughter that the power is hers, and is not to be sacrificed at the cost of her self-respect.
By spankmonkey
December 30, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this
And Corporal, I don’t see anybody here promoting the notion that we should encourage teens to have sex.
Just that they should be taught the truth:
sex can kill, sex can make babies, if one must have sex (even though it’s best not to) you should protect yourself. If it makes you feel better we can tell them sex will send them to hell, just can’t do that in public school.
By GodHatesTrash
December 30, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this
Duh, it’s good to see you take such a wide stance on sexual identity issues. Just last weekend you were defending a Kennesaw pedophile from the almost as disgusting accusation of being an evangelical youth minister, and that was noble of you, even though he was, a youth minister that is.
But rather than digress, I agree with you, Duh, there is nothing wrong with homosexual sex.
But y’all need not be having sex in public restrooms, or with prostitutes like Jeff Gannon/Guckert, since it’s against the law.
I know, I know, the laws aren’t fair to those of you that like anonymous sex in public places, or don’t mind payin’ a little sumpin’ sumpin’ for a ‘unique’ experience - like, say a diaper fetish.
But if you don’t like the laws, come out of your closet and work to have them changed…
Larry Craig could be the Harvey Milk of your new movement. Milk stood up for people who have homosexual sex that want to call themselves gay. Larry Craig, and obviously many other fine RightWingnuts, took a stand for people who enjoy homosexual sex that don’t want to call themselves gay.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 11:52 AM | Link to this
To Cherokee
But any kid can stumble across firearms in anyone’s home, etc. so that bring it closer to 100 % !!!
To All
Firearms safetyhould be taught as part of every school’s curriculum!
But let’s be honest as to why it is NOTBecause with safety instruction comes fmliarity and an implied sense that it is o.k.. Libs don’t want that.
The same concept is ditto for sex education. With safety instruction comes familiarity and and implied sense that it is o.k..
I am not totally against teaching contraception but it should always be in the context of abstinence until marriage.
And for you father’s out there who find it so easy to find a younger partner (inspite of your oath at the altar) remember before you make that final decision that your daughter WILL find a substitute dad in her boyfriend and that usually involves a higher degree of sexual activity ……….think before you leap !
By getalife
December 30, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
You can’t change human nature kooks.
“Heil Saltsman!
I see the GOP’s devious plan to become the party of southern whites over the age of 50 continues apace.
Wholly unable to confirm this, but I’m told the talk is now that Mike Duncan may have to perform in black face at the upcoming RNC meeting to remain a credible candidate for the job.
—Josh Marshall”
Puff the magic gop white dragon……..
By Just_Me
December 30, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this
Abstinence Only “education” is a dismal failure.
My sons-now young men-have been raised with us telling them to wait-at least until they are adults—however, we accompanied that message with safe sex information….My sons heard every single week, “I don’t want you to have sex, but if you truly feel as if you will DIE unless you do (guess it’s a teenage boy thing), then you’d better “wrap it, bag it, do whatever you have to do.” They got the message.
I also reminded them that now, unlike when I was growing up, sex kills. That one of the ‘better’ accidents to occur would be cured with a shot of penicillin, or result in fatherhood—the worst case scenario is a chronic disease, or HIV/AIDS.
I do know that they are both, to our chagrin, sexually active (one’s in his 20s…the other’s 19), and I do know that they use condoms every time. they are equally worried about getting something fatal.
I have acquaintances (can’t call them friends, too stupid to be friends) that refuse to teach their kids about safe sex. Guess what? One of the girls, 17, is due in Feb….hopefully, she hasn’t contracted anything during conception, eh?
It is irresponsible to think that pushing abstinence only (esp. in schools) is a good idea. The Bush admin pushed it and like most of their agenda, has proven to be a failure.
I found it ironic that Palin, a huge ab-only advocate wound up being a grandma by a pregnant teenager.
Parents need to address this…or, if it will be left up to the schools to do (as we teach so many other subjects), it should be addressed from the public health standpoint-how NOT to pass along contagious illnesses, and how NOT to bring a child into the world.
By addressing it as a health issue (which it is), you can circumvent the whole “is it moral” issue. Bottom line is, when the hormones are raging, few kids are able to say no for too long….let’s at least keep them safe and healthy, shall we?
By Cherokee
December 30, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this
“libs don’t want that”
Nonsense.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this
Let me add another thought here….
I might be old fashioned but so be it.
Most men will probably not admit it, but when dating someone they were always pleased to find a young lady who would put them in their place. Oh, we would moan and groan a little (no pun intended) but in reality this was good because:
It meant she was a girl worth pursuing - perhaps for life.
It took the pressure off so you could just have good fun on dates.
It meant maybe she really was saving it for her husband …. what a thought !
Oh, we would go to school and say I tried as hard as I could guys but ….. and that would get us off the hook.
The frog in the kettle continues …..
By lewis
December 30, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this
These kids who make the pledges do not use birth control,for in their thinking this means they plan to “sin”. Then, if they spontaneously end up having sex, in their minds it was not what they meant to do, thus less “sinful”. And thus they end up exposed to STDs and pregnancy because they used no protection. It is a twisted line of thought, but it is what many think to avoid guilt, and it puts them at risk. The Right do not care that the programs don’t work, they just use the programs as a preaching opportunity about what people ought to do in their view. Practical considerations have little to do with this way of thinking.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
Corporal…marriage is a dying institution and deservedly so! Women are empowered these days…they don’t need a man to “make everything right”…and, usually, a man screws up a lady’s life more than he helps.
You can have your little 1920s fantasy about the “little woman” at home cooking your dinner and darning your socks, but this is 2008/9 and women these days want the same freedoms and choices that men have enjoyed throughout history. That includes sexual freedom.
Remember, the only people who divorce are hetero!!
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
A Parting Shot at Women’s Rights
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/opinion/26fri2.html
*Undermining women’s reproductive rights and access to health care has been a pervasive theme of the outgoing administration. On his first full day in office, President Bush imposed the “global gag rule,” which prohibits taxpayer dollars from going to international family-planning groups that perform abortions using their own funds or that advocate for safe abortion laws.
So it was unsurprising, but still dismaying, that the secretary of health and human services, Michael Leavitt, chose to extend that dismal record at the last minute with yet another awful regulation. A parting gift to the far right, the new regulation aims to hinder women’s access to abortion, contraceptives and the information necessary to make decisions about their own health. What makes it worse is that the policy is wrapped up in a phony claim to safeguard religious freedom.
The law has long allowed doctors and nurses to refuse to participate in an abortion. Mr. Leavitt’s changes elevate the so-called right to refuse beyond reason to an increased number of medical institutions and a broad range of health care workers and services — including abortion referrals, unbiased counseling and provision of emergency contraception, even to rape victims.
The impact will be hardest on poor women who rely on public programs for their health care.
In July, Barack Obama, still a senator at the time, signed a letter to Mr. Leavitt, along with some of his colleagues, urging Mr. Leavitt to scrap an earlier draft of the regulation. It cited a number of problems that were perpetuated in the final version.
The Health and Human Services regulation is due to become effective on Jan. 20, Inauguration Day. By acting right away to suspend its implementation, President-elect Barack Obama and his choice to succeed Mr. Leavitt, Tom Daschle, can block irresponsible changes that threaten people’s rights and defy the federal government’s duty on public health.
They should do so, and promptly follow up with a formal rule-making proceeding to rescind the regulation once and for all. And they can get rid of the gag rule.*
By @@
December 30, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this
The frog in the kettle? Never heard of that before.
A famous experiment was once conducted that involved placing a frog in a kettle of water. If the frog were placed in a pot of boiling water, the frog would immediately jump out so as not to be scalded. Then the frog was placed in the water while it was yet cool. As the frog sat contently in the water, the water was heated one degree at a time. The frog adapted to the gradual changes in temperature until it boiled to death!
Kewl!
By Jim
December 30, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this
It might be a good idea to report all the information in the study so your readers are actually informed. The most important thing to note is teens who pledged were not compared to all other teens, they were only compared to other teens who already were likely to abstain from sex based upon their attitudes about religion, sex, etc. For example, the average age of first intercourse for both groups was 21, compared to 17 for the population as a whole. This alone seems to be a great success, but not when the objective of the study is to discredit a program.
Obviously the researcher identified some key ingredients to a healthier lifestyle. Wouldn’t it make sense to promote these attitudes? Thankfully many teens grow up in households where these values are taught. Why is it wrong to teach these same values to others not as fortunate?
I suspect the pledge program promotes the values which delay pre-marital sex and hopefully result in better relationships once a partner is found.
My question is what is the goal of those who wish to stop these programs?
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this
@ Ray—
I’m happy to see your interest in the subject, but I don’t know where you get your stats or facts. I’d like to encourage you to dip from Contemporary OBGYN published by ACOG, a terrific journal that makes much of its entire content available free on the web, that has been a source of my education for years. It reports all cutting edge developments in OBGYN, and female cancers, sometimes male cancers, and studies from tertiary centers.
Many of the articles can be clearly understood regardless of your background:
http://contemporaryobgyn.modernmedicine.com/
The US abortion rate decreased by 11% between 1994 and 2000, from 24 to 21 abortions each year per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, according to a study conducted by The Alan Guttmacher Institute. However, the rate among economically disadvantaged women—those living below 200% of the poverty level—increased.
The steepest decline in abortion rates occurred among adolescents, particularly those aged 15 to 17. The rate fell from 24 abortions per 1,000 women in 1994 to 14 abortions per 1,000 women in 2000—a decline of 39%. The authors of the study suggest that these numbers indicate that fewer teens are getting pregnant—an outcome that may be attributed to improved contraceptive use or delayed sexual activity.
Economically disadvantaged women accounted for 57% of all women who had abortions in 2000. The authors of the study found that abortion rates decreased as income rose: Among poor women, 44 per 1,000 had an abortion vs. 10 per 1,000 women among the highest-income women. The authors note that the high abortion rate among the former group is a reflection, in part, of their high pregnancy rates and their greater likelihood than the highest-income women to abort their pregnancies.
The study was based on a survey of more than 10,000 women who obtained abortions in 2000 and 2001.
In fact, out of 300 + billion people, there are 6 million who become pregnant in the US per year. Half of all pregnancies are unintended, and of all births, about 1 in 10 newborns have been reported as “unwanted.”
Each year, nearly 1.3 million American women have an abortion to end a pregnancy. This number reflects a declining abortion rate, in part because more women are using emergency contraception to prevent unintended pregnancy in the first days after unprotected sex.
Your citation (from I dunno where or what) that 90% of women (I presume you’re confining your focus to the USA) receive abortions due to “social reasons” is dead wrong. It is also a poorly defined category because it is nebulous to the point of being meaningless.
The concensus of studies from tertiary med centers in the US reveal that between 50-60% of women get abortions after they have been using a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.
Smaller percentages are in the categories:
Inability to support or care for a child. To end an unwanted pregnancy. To prevent the birth of a child with birth defects or severe medical problems. Such defects are often unknown until routine second-trimester tests are done. Pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. Physical or mental conditions that endanger the woman’s health if the pregnancy is continued.
In the United States, 9 out of 10 abortions are performed in the first 12 weeks (first trimester) of pregnancy. The majority of these are done within the first 8 weeks of pregnancy.
About 30% of pregnant teens choose to have an abortion. About 60% of women under age 18 having an abortion have a parent who knows of the abortion; the majority of these parents support their daughters’ decision.6 (In the United States, some states require a parent’s consent for women under the age of 18 before they can have an abortion. In these states, however, a minor has the right to seek a court order allowing an abortion without a parent’s consent.)
The most common reasons that teens and young women choose to have an abortion include:
Awareness that they are not mature enough to have a child. Knowledge that they are financially not able to support or care for a child. Concern that having a baby would change their lives and compromise their (and a child’s) future-many young mothers don’t ever manage to get the education and employment necessary to raise their child above the poverty line.
Of those reasons that you might clasify social, many of them are compelling. We have far too many children raised by children or abandoned by children and placed in foster homes if the grandmother (and less of the time grandfather and grandmother) aren’t available to raise the child.
By Jake
December 30, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this
No comparison to firearm safety. If they’re dumb enough to kill themselves with a firearm, that’s a plus. It’s reproducing another dummy and making society pay for it that’s the crime!
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this
To Truthman
You have it backwards.
They may not be on this thread but there are a lot of women who would disagree with many of your points.
A good Christian husband will treat his wife as the example is given in the Bible …. as Christ does for His church. He puts her on a pedestal, serves her and would die for her.
To @@
Yep. This country (the frog) is being boiled to death one degree at a time and we don’t even feel it.
By CommunistAJC
December 30, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this
JAY BOOKMAN, Since when has a government program worked? NEVER! I’m not defending abstinence programs but seeing that there are b******* children running around all over the country without a daddy is a bit ridiculous. It sounds to me like you are defending out of wedlock births and STD’s. Am I correct? I mean lets look at it this way, morality has bottomed out in this country. People that do wait until marriage to have sex are constantly made fun of. Yet, retards like Brittany Spears are hauling around unloved children who are going to pay a high price later on down the road. I’ve noticed more and more STD prescription drug commercials in the past 5 years than ever before. It’s almost like its cool to have herpes. Also, do you remember Rockdale Countys Syphilis outbreak about 11 years ago? That right there tells me something is very wrong about kids these days.
By Jake
December 30, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this
Mrs god - Okay, call it 10. The point is you’d have to sterilize a whole lot of men before you’d significantly impact the birth rate, whereas each woman you sterilize would reduce it a little. I’ve actually always advocated sterilization as a qualifier for welfare. have all the babies you want, dad or no dad. But if you have to go to the state to provide for your babies, you have to forfeit the right to have any more.
By Class of '98
December 30, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this
Abstinence-only would work much better if it weren’t for people, like those on this blog, that go behind it and tell the kids,
“We know you’re going to have sex anyway, so go ahead, be young, have fun, enjoy yourselves, and use these condoms.”
Half of us are telling them to abstain, and the other half are telling them that they can’t resist their natural urges.
What did you expect them to do?
By williebkind
December 30, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this
Yep the liberals do not want abstinence to work! They want free sex, anywhere, anytime, and with anybody or thing. Of course leaving out the teaching of absolute truths foils the morality of the general public and not just the youth. If you do not have free sex then homosexuals will not have a chance to become normal. Of course you do have to take in consideration the behavior of their parents. Were they not part of the free sex hippy move in the ‘60’s & 70’s? Also, many of these young pregnancies is simply to get government housing and assistance. This gives them the false sense of being adults and capable of independent living. Also liberals like Clinton do not have to rape many women. Liberals must have sex.
By Midori
December 30, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this
Yes, Willie — Liberals “do” like sex.
It’s human nature.
Are you saying that conservatives:
a. don’t like sex, and
b. are not human?
By GodHatesTrash
December 30, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this
Seriously, I wonder if obesity and lower fertility are factoring into the decrease in teen pregnancy rates in the US. There are probably some environmental toxins, like chlorine, as well, impacting the numbers.
Obesity diminishes ovulation (and attractiveness), and there are lots of teens out there that are so fat that sex has become anatomically almost impossible. You have to know where it is to learn how to use it.
I’m sure many of you RightWingnuts can relate…
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this
@ Communist AJC—
I don’t understand statements aimed as epithets because you disagree with someone’s opinion, like the one fantasizing Jay Bookman is promoting STDs or out of wedlock births. He has advocated preventing both in his opinion by arguing for education and awareness.
In fact, the Bush administration spent over a billion dollars promoting a program that has been a clar failure as tracked by every statistical medical study done on it by groups independent of the government, and by the CDC who apply a number of statistical criteria to their studies.
Jay’s opinion was backed by a group that has led the field in tracking which methods of education and birth control work, the Alan Guttmacher Institute.
They are also born out by numerous studies OBGYN Bob Hatcher has conducted from Emory for over 20 years.
The stats to back up education and family planning, precisely what Bush through a non-physician who never should have been at HHS, Mike Levitt who has been a medical disaster are available here:
http://www.guttmacher.org/
A number of phycicians are tracking all of Bush’s initiatives that can be undone by Executive Order and via CFR and we are making recommendations to Tom Daschle very soon after Jan. 20, 2009 and the new Congress convenes on Jan. 6, 2009.
It will be a pleasure watching our recommendations implemented as well as funding for stem cell research initiated.
It is also crucial to stop the diverting of over a billion dollars for a program with no efficacy that does a lot of harm per Bush.
We will do everything possible to see that the recommendations of ACOG, the Guttmacher Institute, and Family Planning groups is implemented as soon as possible.
You’re right that most “government programs” initated by Bush have been total failures and damaged this country immeasurably, but in 21 days in general, and in particular medically, much of the stupidity is going to be reversed.
Obama’s closest friend Eric Whitaker has formidiable credentials to help implement the reversal of Bush’s medically harmful policies, and this will get done.
Whitaker Is Executive Vice President For Strategic Affiliations And Associate Dean For Community-Based Research At The University Of Chicago Medical Center Since October 2007.
Whitaker Served As Director Of The Illinois Department Of Public Health From 2003-2007.
It will be a pleasure to work to divert the billion dollars towards constructive family planning initiatives, and to see the Bush foreclosure on intelligent family planning and science and medicine in general erased.
Outside of pushing money into HIV research intenrationally, Bush has been entirely destructive from a medical point of view.
We’re almost at T-20 No Bush.
By Midori
December 30, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this
HAPPY NEW YEAR, EVERYONE!!!
By CommunistAJC
December 30, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this
Chad Harris, And I wasn’t talking to you. So I could care less about what you think. You can show one statistic all you want and I can show you hundreds of statistics where kids are better off by not fooling around.
Lets look at the pros and cons of having sex verses not having sex:
having sex: pregnancy and possible stds.
not having sex: …………..????? Nothing comes to mind
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this
To Communist AJC
I know what you mean but …..
By not having sex: Better self esteem
By AJC/DNC Management
December 30, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this
By GodHatesTrash December 30, 2008 11:40 AM Larry Craig, and obviously many other fine RightWingnuts, took a stand for people who enjoy homosexual sex that don’t want to call themselves gay.
The way that democrats rampage around gay bashing and hating on homosexuals, can anyone blame Craig for trying to stay in the closet?
By SaveOurRepublic
December 30, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this
First of all, I always question the source of “data” to help better validate it’s legitimacy. For example, “Joey” (above) alluded to the Kinsey Institute, and it’s a fact that Alfred Kinsey was a depraved, pedophile endorsing, quack who’s been lionized by the Left. Also, Europe is more (quasi) socialist leaning than is the U.S., so I take their “data” with grain of salt.
Secondly, I don’t think government schools should be in the business of “sex-education” beyond what’s covered in basic biology. This business of demonstrating the application of a “scumbag” to a cucumber is a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. Morality (at this level) should be taught at home & via Church (if the parents are so inclined). Middle & High school education needs to be largely focused on primary subjects and leave the “sex-ed” to the parents or Church, etc.
Lastly, from a principle(s) prospective, “abstinence only” is far from a crock. Instilling values should be paramount for all parents. However, the practicality of application is greatly tarnished by the ill effects of a society who’s values/morality have greatly declined over the past decades (*by design in my estimation). One only need observe the endless flow of mindless garbarge from “Hollyweird” to understand the rise in societal depravity.
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
A Big Shout out to Rudy Guilliani BBF and Jennine Piro (failed NY Senate Candidate BBF who wire tapped Piro’s husband illegally for Judge Jennine) who pleaded not guilty to tax evasion and public corruption charges yesterday.
Kerik also set up a love shack with Judith Regan using facilities that were funded by New York for 911 repairs.
A big shout out to S&T and AJC/DNC’s close friend Gov. Blago who will name former AG and State Controller Roland Burris to Obama’s Senate seat in a couple hours.
It doesn’t look like Blago is going to be copping a plea in the wake of His Fitzness’ publicity campaign, and obviously Fitzy has released just enough transcript to the Senate Impeachment Committee to get Blago impeached without revealing information from his case.
Of course Reid will try to block Burris.
I applaud Blago for appointing an African American to the Senate because there are no African Americans in the Senate currently.
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this
Religion has absolutely no bearing on how a man treats a woman, or how a woman treats a man, Corporal.
I’m not a sky pray-er, and my flaming Repub girlfriend says I treat her better than anyone she’s ever been with.
I’m not a sky pray-er, but my kids are doing just fine - don’t steal, don’t cheat in school, love their father and mother.
I’m not a sky pray-er, but my ex-wife and I have a good relationship based upon the best interests of the child! I have joint custody and have never missed a child support payment in our 6+ years of separation.
Please leave your antiquated, religious views out of serious debate.
By GodHatesTrash
December 30, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this
I’m sure it’s crowded in there, Duh.
But y’all come out. We won’t think any less of you for it.
(We can’t think any less of you, actually. You RightWingnuts’ penchants for gay sex on the down low and weird sex with prostitutes is the least of what we find disgusting about y’all.)
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
Communist AJC—
The difference in my cites and yours is that mine are medically statistical studies done by OBGYNs who are non-partisan politically, and your hot air is just that.
Fortunately I don’t possess ESP that would let me guess who you’re talking to, and that’s not on my list of priorities.
Refs:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2003). Abortion surveillance-United States, 2000. MMWR, 52(SS–12): 1–32.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fbinducedabortion.html
Facts on American teens’ sexual and reproductive health (2006). In Brief. New York: Alan Guttmacher Institute
Trupin SR, Moreno C (2002). Medical abortion: Overview and management. Medscape General Medicine, 4(1)
Goldberg AB, et al. (2001). Misoprostol and pregnancy. New England Journal of Medicine, 344(1): 3845
By GOP is gone
December 30, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this
Ok all of you holier than thou preachers on this blog, and you know who you are. One question for you. Did you ever have sex prior to your marriage? If so, can the daily I am more righteous than everyone else crappola. That goes for RW, Management and the lot of you. Well, come to think of it Management has probably never found a willing woman, thus his obsession with this blog.
By marko
December 30, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this
If the Virgin Mary Was typical of other jewish maidens of her time, she was married by the the time she was fourteen. Up to that point she was watched like a hawk by her mother. Under those circumstances it’s not unreasonable to expect young people to retain their virginity. Does anyone in their right mind really think that unsupervised teenagers are really going to maintain chastity vows in the land of Sex in the city, Desperate Housewives and Victoria’s Secret. It’s really no great shock that Rush should call his book The Way Things Ought to Be. He can pretend that he’s living in utopian dream world if he so choses. The rest of us however, live in a place called the real world where we make the best choices we can and wish that we had better ones.
By Chad Harris
December 30, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
Yo Yo Yo in the Trailer Trash World:
Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston is on the planet and his birth will net the snowbilly company some bucks.
Unfortunately for People Magazine sales did not increase with Palin on the cover.
Unfortunately grandmamama is headed to federal prison, but the snowbillies can visit with baby money in tow.
People Mag is payin’ Bristol and Bristol Dude about 300 grand for the baby pics.
Who says abstinence education can’t bring happiness and be profitable?
Unlike Angelina and J-Lo this money ain’t goin’ to no charity. This is Palin blood and Palin blood don’t do nothin’ for no charity. Palin blood steals.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this
To Truthman
Sorry, it’s a free country.
To GOP is gone
There are a multitude of errors I have made in my life.
The difference is I don’t try to justify them and seek to help others not make the same mistake……….
By fed up
December 30, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this
Not 5 hours had passed before dr. chad pipes in with his Palin comments……here we go again dr. chad.
By hotlanta
December 30, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this
Palin’s daughter put that myth to rest. What happened to the summer wedding. Fall is gone and winter is around the corner. I don’t wanna get off topic but there was a man that looked like Rosie O’Donnell singing on the World Music Award show last night.
By jewcowboy
December 30, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this
Since when did education harm anyone? I would think being in possession of all the facts would lead to people making a sound choice. When people make choices based on less than the whole truth, mistakes are more probable.
As Nelson Mandela said, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”
Of course I am in Georgia, so maybe that answers my question.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this
CROCK
–noun Slang. a lie; exaggeration; nonsense: The entire story is just a crock.
Sounds like a good definition for the AJC to me ………
By Titus
December 30, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this
A one billion a year tax payer investiment. Right?
By Truthman
December 30, 2008 2:58 PM | Link to this
Jewcowboy…haven’t you noticed W has made stupid chic! Whereas it used to be the province of street toughs and Fonzie wannabees, W has made it OK to be ignorant, to not try to learn something every day…in fact, learning is greatly discouraged by this administration. Remember, W didn’t know there were Shia, Kurds and Sunnis in Iraq (and probably doesn’t care today). He thinks Iranians are Arabs (sorry, soon-to-be ex-Chimperor, they’re Persian).
They proved they don’t like smart people when they gushed over Sarah Failin’ as the vice-idiot, and McCain (fifth from the bottom at the USNA)!!
They proved they don’t like smart people at the Justice Department (torture, illegally firing attorneys, hiring people who “graduated” from Pat Robertson’s “Law of God” school.
They proved they don’t like smart people during the entire Terry Schiavo fiasco.
They don’t like science because it might prove the non-existance of their sky-god.
They want to take us back to the Dark Ages when all the power was consolidated in the Holy Roman Church and the rest of us were stupid, bleating sheeple!!
By jewcowboy
December 30, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this
Truthman,
You are right. I guess I’ve just tried to block that out. Selective amnesia, I suppose. Perhaps we’ll see that begin to change in 20 days and 8 hours.
By pbg40g
December 30, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this
Maybe abstinence-only education as it is being presented doesn’t work. Maybe knowing all of the facts will help teenagers make better decisions. I can’t say for sure.
But I CAN say one thing…there is a 100% chance of avoiding pregnancy, STD transmission, and all the other “negatives” if you abstain from sexual intercourse before marriage.
I know, I know. The sexual drive is a hard thing to deny, and having sex is very pleasurable. But it’s just like a fire. In the right place, it’s great. In the wrong place, it’s a disaster. A fire in the fireplace is warm, relaxing, comforting, and very enjoyable. A fire in the curtains is deadly.
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 3:46 PM | Link to this
The sexual drive for teenage boys is like a runaway freight train or a cocked revolver. It’s up to them to work to control it.
It’s the girls who get harmed the most.
Just my opinion.
By david wayne osedach, san diego/ U.S.A.
December 30, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this
Welcome to 2009!
By Christian Barbarians for Justice
December 30, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this
Mrs. Palin is an outspoken advocate of abstinence only.
Mrs. Palin’s daughter has just given birth out of wedlock.
Just say no doesn’t work for drugs, and it doesn’t work for sex.
It’s a nice sentiment, but so is wishing for world peace.
By Bud Wiser
December 30, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this
GodHatesTrash sure does focus a lot on gay sex, as well as weird practices that often involve barnyard animals, a battery, and toothpaste.
I am sure he is trying to come out, but just does not have the nerve.
By Pogo
December 30, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this
The idea of a Government financed program to encourage sexual abstinence is insane. That is the problem with our country right now; it has come to rely on government programs to correct the things which should have been taken care of by its lazy citizens in their own homes. This is another case of people on both sides of the issue trying to make fodder for their political agenda from something which should be left up to parents. The problem is, there are very few decent parents left and there is a constant barage telling the kids that they should be having sex. It has nothing to do with left or right. It has everything to do with lazy people having children when they aren’t even prepared to take care of their own lives, much less a childs.
By Michelle
December 30, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this
To The Corporal…thank you…I think a few of the points you made were right on.
Why is it that when a guy has sex he’s a “man or stud or cool” but let a girl have sex and she’s a “slut, w*******, or easy”?
This is where education is especially important. Girls (most of the time) don’t see the stigma associated, they just want the acceptance of the boyfriend…they aren’t necessarily looking long term. That is the problem with teenagers! They NEVER think long term!
Kids are going to act impulsively (especially in the heat of the moment or when drugs/alcohol are involved). The more useful information they are given, the more prepared they are to act/not act. The trick is to get them to understand the responsibility piece…not the “fun” part.
As parents, I think we should focus more on the cons of becoming sexually active not the pros…they’ll figure that out all on their own!
I think “abstinence only” has never and will never work. Kids have always and will always find a way to explore their options no matter how much a parent warns them against it!
If parents could just be honest with their kids and discuss the emotional impact, social impact, and possible health impact these actions can/could have, the kids will be much more equipped to handle the pressures associated with sex.
Kids will carry the repercussions of these actions well into their adulthood if they act without being emotionally ready! Guilt and self-respect are just a couple of issues that kids will have to deal with! Heck, there are LOTS of adults who still can’t face these emotions…how do we expect teenagers to cope?!
These kinds of issues should be brought into the teachings about WHY abstinence is important, not just that they should abstain!
I have 2 teenage step-sons. I have tried to instill in them to avoid situations that would allow them the opportunities to be involved in activities that would promote becoming sexually active (drinking, drugs, alone with no parental supervision). And if they are going to be in those situations, to at least make responsible decisions.
Thankfully, I have a 5 year old! They have a constant reminder of what can happen when you are sexually active! And I take EVERY opportunity to remind them of what can happen. I tell them I planned for my child and they can see how overwhelming it can be…imagine how their lives can be changed by not being prepared!!
By Michelle
December 30, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this
To The Corporal…thank you…I think a few of the points you made were right on.
Why is it that when a guy has sex he’s a “man or stud or cool” but let a girl have sex and she’s a “slut, w*******, or easy”?
This is where education is especially important. Girls (most of the time) don’t see the stigma associated, they just want the acceptance of the boyfriend…they aren’t necessarily looking long term. That is the problem with teenagers! They NEVER think long term!
Kids are going to act impulsively (especially in the heat of the moment or when drugs/alcohol are involved). The more useful information they are given, the more prepared they are to act/not act. The trick is to get them to understand the responsibility piece…not the “fun” part.
As parents, I think we should focus more on the cons of becoming sexually active not the pros…they’ll figure that out all on their own!
I think “abstinence only” has never and will never work. Kids have always and will always find a way to explore their options no matter how much a parent warns them against it!
If parents could just be honest with their kids and discuss the emotional impact, social impact, and possible health impact these actions can/could have, the kids will be much more equipped to handle the pressures associated with sex.
Kids will carry the repercussions of these actions well into their adulthood if they act without being emotionally ready! Guilt and self-respect are just a couple of issues that kids will have to deal with! Heck, there are LOTS of adults who still can’t face these emotions…how do we expect teenagers to cope?!
These kinds of issues should be brought into the teachings about WHY abstinence is important, not just that they should abstain!
I have 2 teenage step-sons. I have tried to instill in them to avoid situations that would allow them the opportunities to be involved in activities that would promote becoming sexually active (drinking, drugs, alone with no parental supervision). And if they are going to be in those situations, to at least make responsible decisions.
Thankfully, I have a 5 year old! They have a constant reminder of what can happen when you are sexually active! And I take EVERY opportunity to remind them of what can happen. I tell them I planned for my child and they can see how overwhelming it can be…imagine how their lives can be changed by not being prepared!!
By The Ostrich
December 30, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this
I remember reading a statistic not-so-long-ago that showed that women/teen-agers who abstained from “sex” were 4 times as likely to perform oral or anal sex prior to marriage as their sexually-active counterparts.
Bristol Palin must not have gotten the memo.
By Billy
December 30, 2008 5:09 PM | Link to this
Bud, before you start calling me a moron you should look up the definition of “pun” and the proper usage of the word “their”.
I stand by my previous post (and the accidental repost).
If the study is able to finally get it through conservatives’ thick skulls that this billion-dollar boondoggle for Christian abstinence education companies is ineffective as far as actually keeping kids from making wise sexual choices, then it is worthwhile. If this study frees up that money to actually make science-based education and contraception more readily available then it is well worth the money
By The Corporal
December 30, 2008 5:13 PM | Link to this
To Michelle
Thank you for your comments.
I believe it’s basically our (the men) issue to take responsibilty for in so many ways. Not just teenage sex but adultery, divorce, etc., etc.
Can you imagine if both sexes had exactly the same sex drive.
It wouldn’t be safe to walk the streets.
Hardly is anyway.
By Eric from Mesa
December 30, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this
So does this mean taking the W******* Pledge is a better option?
By Bud Wiser
December 30, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this
I don’t think I called you a moron.
I called you a bonehead.
By SML
December 30, 2008 8:33 PM | Link to this
Chastity works a 100%…
Global aging: the demographic winter is coming.
Aging workforce in the USA. geocities(dot)com/demographic_crash
Louis XIV : Apres moi le deluge.
P.S. Also new website prowomanprolife(dot)org
By Hosea
December 30, 2008 8:46 PM | Link to this
Boy I see alot written on this board but not much in substance. GOP is Gone was the only 1 who sounded halfway truthful when providing us with excruciating detail of a ‘60’s Catholic girl upbringing. She’s obviously still a recovering Catholic. That’s ok, so am I. As far as sex and teenagers; it’s been going on for time immemorial(sp?) and isn’t about to stop because of some stupid government abstinence program. It’s just studied and reported on much more these days with 24X7 news reporting. In my experience, the kids whose parents spent the most time with them and talking to/with them, not AT them; these were the ones who had the least run ins w/ drugs/alcohol/sex/the law….Parents can’t start this when the kid is 12 years old. Making it comfortable for your child to talk to you starts at birth in case anyone was wondering. Kids who don’t get attention at home will go find it elsewhere, good or bad. The act of sex is NOT a religious thing, nor should it be made out to be. Proper, loving teaching by parents trumps contracts and fear mongering religious hacks any day. And NO, Sarah Palin and crew did not do a good job getting this message across to their daughter. She completely messed up; her political career trumped her family’s everyday needs. Just because she continued to screw her husband and have kids and go to a screwball church is not indicative of a successfull parent.
By Michael
January 1, 2009 2:43 AM | Link to this
Not sure why anyone is surprised. Most Marriage pledges dont work either.
By pacman71192
January 1, 2009 10:14 AM | Link to this
In your zeal to cry for tolerance, you libs have become so intolerant. What happened to: “If it saves just one from … it will be worth it all.” What lousy hypocrites you all are. You’re tolerant only of those who are exactly like you and the rest of us be damned. Abortion has done 3 things: 1. It has taken away millions of woud-be taxpayers. 2. It has become an expensive form of birth control. 3. It allows women to be as promiscuous as men and allows men to be philanderers without the dirty laundry.
By Pacman71192
January 1, 2009 11:42 AM | Link to this
Abstinence works every time it’s tried. Condoms don’t. BCPs don’t. IUDs don’t. Nove rings don’t. Yasmin doesn’t. AIDs kills. Herpes lasts for life. Abortion kills. Abortion instills depression, suicidal ideation/tendencies, big money for Planned Parenthood and baby murdering mills.
Just ask my sister-in-law who is 45 and daily laments her “babies” 2 of which she states she “killed by abortion” her words, not mine.
She is a basket case. It’s not right wing/Christian guilt causing it either. It is a disease caused by free love gone bad. She has said in the past that she regrets her free-love lifestyle that she thought was harmless.
Harmless alright. After years of conseling and hospitalizations, she finally has admitted that the root of her depression comes from “aborting my babies.” She often asks, “Why didn’t somebody stop me?” Where are all you compassionate libs out there? Why do I have to live with this day in and day out.
My life is a nightmare thanks to free love and abortion. I love her as my own sister. I will do anything for her but abortion, which was supposed to be a solution to her “little problems”, has ruined her life.
She sleeps all day so we have to stay up with her at night (4 night per week on average) to console her. all the time we’re hoping and praying that this night will have a break through.
So stop with your pious kids will have sex and abortion shoud be safe and legal preaching. My life is a living hell because of that thinking.
And yes, I was a virgin when I got married. My wife, on the otherhand, was not and brought herpes to our marriage. We’ve been married 17 years and I still don’t have it.
Please leave Bristol Palin out of this argument. Let’s talk about Obama, the Messiah instead. Obama will save us from all evil. His emminence will free the world from those of us who believe in absolute ruth. He wiil rise up and free you from those of us who live by true religion as is sated in the book of James in the Bible (it’s still in most our libraries): to support widows and orphans in their distress. God bless our Obamanation
You’re all alike. You jump on a bandwagon going 55 mph in your Prius or Versa just to go nowhere not very fast. Is it just coincidence that our national debt is almost exactly equal to what we have spent on the war on poverty? I hardly think so.
You are so quick to judge. We have sunken to the lowest depravity imaginable in this country when Barney Frank is offended by Rick Warren who has done more for tis country than that creep could ever think of doing. This is a man (if you can call him that) who had a gay prostitution ring run out of his Washington D.C apartment. He is offended? give me a break.