I somehow missed this in the Washington Post article about Henry Waxman's report on misleading and false statements in abstinence-only programs:
Congress first allocated money for abstinence-only programs in 1999, setting aside $80 million in grants, which go to a variety of religious, civic and medical organizations. To be eligible, groups must limit discussion of contraception to failure rates.
Wow. I didn't know it was actually written into the eligibility criteria that they could not mention condoms at all except to convince students that they don't work. No wonder the use of condoms has gone down so dramatically among sexually active teenagers where abstinence-only programs are taught. Are these people insane? Seriously, how does a sane human being support such an obviously dangerous idea?
- Log in to post comments
for fire safety, do they limit coverage of fire extinguishers to failure rates?
You ask: Are these people insane?
Yes. They are.
Not insane. They just don't care about what happens to kids. It's more important to them to perpetuate their flawed vision of scoiety than it is to actually help people. In their minds, kids who have sex are evil and deserve whatever punishment 'the lord' dishes out.
Seriously, how does a sane human being support such an obviously dangerous idea?
Your use of the word "sane" presupposes
facts entirely not in evidence, Ed.
I tried Telling a girl once i didnt like condoms cause then i cant feel anything and she replied
Good Now we are even
Hmm. Ok, I say, "Here's the failure rate for abstinence only. Now, here's the failure rates for condoms, sponges, diaphragms, pills, IUDs, and Norplant. You do the math."
Where do I put in my grant application?
Not insane, just the blindness of a true faith mindset. You have already pointed out that they seem woefully ignorant of the data that exists concerning abstinence vs. contraception (when some of them are not twisting it). I think that they simply ignore all evidence contrary to their views that abstinence is the best solution. Bringing up the fact that not all young people will abstain doesn't matter to them. Their answer is still "They need to abstain!" It's like a talisman to ward off evil or something. "Just abstain! All you need to do is abstain!" Nothing else matters to them. If a young person gets an STD or gets pregnant the response is "See, they should have abstained". Its religious/cultural fluff over substance/research and that is what we are fighting. It simply does not matter if contraception is better than nothing because that dilutes the religious message. There can be no compromise on a religious point.
Last night I had a discussion with my dad about this and I told him about how much better Europe was doing in this area than we are. His response was simply "I doubt that very much. I doubt that very much." He repeated that two more times. Just like holding a cross out to ward off evil. Faith over results.
Being pro life (and pro choice), I once worked for an alternatives to abortion group just off a MO college campus. We had sexually active girls coming in for free pregnancy tests, and we'd push adoption if they tested positive. If they tested negative, you were not even allowed to MENTION contraceptives! OK, so you know this girl is sexually active, going to remain active, not using contraceptives, and probably considering abortion when (not if) she got pregnant!
And they called the organization pro-life? I left eventually out of disgust!
Being pro life (and pro choice), I once worked for an alternatives to abortion group just off a MO college campus. We had sexually active girls coming in for free pregnancy tests, and we'd push adoption if they tested positive. If they tested negative, you were not even allowed to MENTION contraceptives! OK, so you know this girl is sexually active, going to remain active, not using contraceptives, and probably considering abortion when (not if) she got pregnant!
Astonishing, isn't it? If you're anti-abortion, you should be vehemently PRO contraception. Being against both is far more cognitive dissonance than I can imagine trying to bear.
Ed:
Astonishing, isn't it? If you're anti-abortion, you should be vehemently PRO contraception. Being against both is far more cognitive dissonance than I can imagine trying to bear.
Problem is, the Jeebus People who push the line of "sex bad, condoms bad, abortion real bad" are not operating on a wavelength that allows for little things like facts and/or common sense to creep into their worldview. Like most people who think that the weird image that popped up in their grilled cheese sandwich is the Virgin Mary trying to send them a sign, there's only one way to interpret the "facts", and it isn't one involving thinking.