Permissive Sex Ed Linked to Higher Pregnancy, Abortion Rates.

And bile comes forth. Can you speak without insult? Or are you just a paid shill for trolling message boards and forums? Because I have seen an obvious pattern among a few members here and you fit the profile perfectly.


But, this lack of witty dialogue is beneath you and I. Would you care to have an open and honest debate with me sometime, one void of denigrations and insult?

Consider it a challenge.

 

You are wrong.

Parenting is the only thing that keeps kids from having sex.
No amount of education, be it "abstinence only" or based on science and fact will encourage or slow a kid's tendencies.

Stack "abstinence only" up with "rhythm method", "first time" and "withdrawal" as the four largest causes of unplanned pregnancy.

Teach your kids to say "no" and teach them the real world consequences of doing otherwise.

 

WRONG!!!!!!

If that were true womens' "junk" would quit working when they got old and the only time we would have interest is when a woman is fertile.

Neither of those things is true so....

WRONG!!!!!

 

Speak up. The crickets are deafening me.

 

Sorry you can "hear" crickets....that's odd.

I did not insult you, you think disagreeing with you is an insult....I don't care.

You dished out the insults with no compunction...typical.......

 

i never told my three daughters to say no, I've never censored them from sexually explicit materials, they took sex ed, and know to take precautions...we've always told them the choice was theirs to make when they felt it was right for them...all three are in their twenties and I'm still not a granddad

 

Then we're thrown right back into..we don't really know how many pregnancies REALLY take place in places like NYC, because abortion is common, and they aren't required to report.

Besides which, as has already been pointed out multiple times, the studies show that the rate is the same after the abstinence programs as before. As usualy, pro-abortionists are using made up numbers, and creating a false "cause" for an issue that existed before.

 

It's just plain stupid to think that telling your kids, "Don't have sex" will work...it doesn't. It hasn't.

Maybe there are some kids who listen but most don't and I have the history of the world to back it up.....

 

Really. Do you tell your children not to drink? That's stupid as well, by the same measure. Do you tell your children not to do drugs? Equally stupid. Do you tell them to eat properly, to avoid sugary foods, and to get plenty of sleep? What an idiot! You should be telling them, "Hon, I know you're going to drink, so here is some excedrin for the hangover."

Progressives won't because they think of chidlren in sexual terms, and promote depraved lifestyles. Long and short of it.

 

You have not answered my challenge. Will you debate with me, openly and honestly, without denigration or insult?

 

Seriously?

The charts clearly show that in states with "abstinence only" education the pregnancy rates are higher than in states that offer other forms of education.

And your response is that the states with lower birth rates must be fudging the data?

SERIOUSLY?

Does that presumption include Utah?

There are more abortions in places where legal abortions are more easily obtained. DUH!

In states like Kansas and Alabama where abortions cannot easily be legally obtained the abortion rates are lower because women who would, if they could, can't.

 

Allie, you notice the link on "Gemini Frye's" Signature to "Stormfront"? Do you know what "Stormfront" is?

 

And? Is there a point to your observation?

 

In other news, if we weren't meant to be gluttons, our digestive tracts would only accept a limited amount of food per day, and we'd never have any desire to overeat.

 

We know, you view children as future sexual partners for someone...therefore it's important to get them in the right frame of mind, young. Get them their shots, their contraceptives, get them used to the idea.

Meanwhile, all that "research" that you base your belief that children are sexual creatures came from:

"Kinsey’s research was based on fraud. Yet, this "Patron Saint of Sex,"
(Esquire) who launched "the first wave of the sexual revolution" is, said
sexologist Morton Hunt (and more recently, Dr. Ruth), the giant on whose
shoulders all sex researchers since his time have stood. WebMD reports that
“Ruth Westheimer, PhD” regularly pays “some type of homage to famed
1950s sex researcher Alfred C. Kinsey, PhD.” saying “we are taught that if
you stand on the shoulders of giants, you can see farther."3

"By allegedly proving that Americans were sexual buccaneers pretending to be
sexually chaste, meant “cultural values surrounding sex needed revision." 4"

"Kinsey lectured to medical groups nationwide, and by the hundreds of thousands to overwhelming crowds... university youth who came to worship at the feet of the new sexuality guru. These were our future leaders, writers, entertainers, doctors, lawyers, politicians, prosecutors, and the like. Christie Hefner reported that in the 1960s the Playboy Foundation became the major research sponsor of the Masters and Johnson Institute and made the initial grant to establish an Office of Research Services of the Sex Information and Education."

"In 1971, Playboy, according to Hefner junior, "awarded a grant to
establish a pilot program at the University of Minnesota" with the aim of
"changing the attitudes of men and women medical students."7 Why bring
rotten research into the medical community? Because, said Hefner, "today's
medical students and practicing physicians perpetuate arbitrary judgments
about normal and abnormal sexuality... [and] are ignorant of the variety of
possible human sexual expression." This was corrected by the infusion of
pornography money into the medical community."

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/Rotten Research.pdf

 

Seriously?

The charts clearly show that in states with "abstinence only" education the pregnancy rates are higher than in states that offer other forms of education.

And your response is that the states with lower birth rates must be fudging the data?I made a couple of points. One, which is pointed out in the OP, is that those states had a higher BIRTH RATE before the abstinence only programs. So how it can be attributed to the programs, I dunno. The second is that they have a higher BIRTH RATE because they have a lower ABORTION RATE. This is like the fourth or fifth time, SINCE the OP, that I've made these same points and still they're being ignored, and still the same ridiculous questions are being asked. READ THE OP.

The birth rate has been decreasing among women 15-19 steadily since 1960. In fact, down more than 50% over that period. The birthrate decreased in all but 3 states from 2009-2010 with the biggest decreases in Arizona and Rhode Island. There is no statistical evidence anywhere that demonstrates that "abstinence only" does anything more than breed ignorance and children.

AND

People were teaching "abstinence only" long before wing nuts came up with the term. they were teaching it at home and in churches in 1960 when the teenage birth rate was more than double what it is now. Since 1908 New York has spent more than 14 million dollars on such programs. The effects?

"In 2006, the Journal of Adolescent Health published a comprehensive survey of all peer-reviewed, and some non-peer-reviewed, studies of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs and concluded that such programs are not effective in changing teens’ sexual behaviors. A 2007 study mandated by Congress reached the same conclusion, finding that:

None of the individual programs had statistically significant impacts on the rate of sexual abstinence.
Programs did not affect the age at which sexually experienced youth first engaged in sexual intercourse.
There was no difference between students who had attended Title V-funded abstinence-only-until-marriage programs (“abstinence group&#8221 and students who received “only the usual services available in the absence of these programs” (“control group&#8221 in the number of sexual partners with whom they had sex.
There was no difference between abstinence and control group youth regarding condom usage.
There was no difference between abstinence and control group youth in their expectations to abstain from sex until marriage.
Programs had no impact on the number of reported pregnancies, births or sexually transmitted infections."


SERIOUSLY?

Does that presumption include Utah?

There are more abortions in places where legal abortions are more easily obtained. DUH! But..I thought abortion and free contraceptives for all was supposed to reduce the number of abortions performed? Hence the OP...that just doesn't happen. Free contraception, sex ed in the schools, and abortion on demand seems to increase the numbers of abortions and unplanned pregnancies. Go figure!

How is is that you suppose that abortion reduces the number of abortions? (Your words not mine)
And...The decrease in teen pregnancy starting in the early 60's coincides with the legal availability of birth control pills in this country. Go figure that.

In states like Kansas and Alabama where abortions cannot easily be legally obtained the abortion rates are lower because women who would, if they could, can't.

The point?

Scientifically you haven't a clue about what you are speaking.
Sociologically, you're living with Donna Reed and the Beaver.
Statistically, you don't have an understanding of the numbers and their meaning.

Pointed enough for you?

- - - Updated - - -

There is a difference between enjoying a meal and compulsive eating just as there is a difference between enjoying sex and being driven by it.

 

You are a sick and perverted individual.

Project much?

 

For the love of mike, make your point.

 

BTW, again, I think the Social Cons pretty much lost this argument, not on the data (which goes against them).....

but by the 2008 Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, who did "everything right"...."traditional Christian values" and "abstinence-only" for sex......and still ended up "Granny" Palin.

And the fact....the Right APPLAUDED Bristol for "not having an abortion", but oddly forgot to give her a hard time about being "a loose woman" or "indoctrinated by sex-ed teachers" or whatever b.s. they'd fling at a girl from a Democratic or liberal family.

 

I do understand science, which is why I know that all this posturing, and our current "sex ed programs" and the fad of considering children as "sexual" is based on junk science that was fed to us in the 1960s-1970s by the PORN industry and FRAUDULENT STUDIES by Alfred Kinsey.

"A Few Sample Case Studies
The following briefly are a spectrum of contemporary federal reports
and/or findings that use fraudulent and criminal Kinseyan data and disciples
as authorities for the nation's legal and public policy decisions. Chapters 8
and 9 document the effects of these fraud in more detail.
1. 1969 U.S. INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH (NIMH) "TASK FORCE ON
HOMOSEXUALITY" Kinsey's co-author and Institute Director, Dr. Paul Gebhard
as well as Dr. John Money (a contributor to The Journal Of Paedophilia) typified
the "fourteen experts" on human sexuality whose formal report cited Kinsey's data
as authority to urge nationwide legalization of homosexuality.8
2. 1969 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DOE) and the U.S. PUBLIC
HEALTH SERVICE (PHS) Almost all DoE and PHS reports post 1969 which
address human sexuality cite to Kinsey and/or his disciples as their key authorities
3. 1974 U.S. CONGRESS CREATES "STATUS OFFENDER" LEGISLATION. This
well intentioned legislation made it illegal to place minors in protective custody
unless they were committing "adult" crimes, hence opening the floodgates to child
prostitution and child pornography. The view of children as wholly autonomous
and as not requiring some kind of protective intervention by the state reflects a
dramatic shift from the evolution to traditional American views of child care to the
Kinseyan view of the child as unharmed by broad freedom and license.
4. 1977-1985 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DO J) "THE NATIONAL
SURVEY OF CRIME SEVERITY" (SET PRECEDENT FOR FEDERAL
SENTENCING GUIDELINES, CIRCA 1990's): In his academic scholarship,
Principal Investigator, Marvin Wolfgang, former member of the President's
Commission on Pornography and Obscenity (1970) cites Kinsey and his colleagues
for sexual authority, the Commissioners having been trained at the Kinsey Institute
during a "sexuality" site visit. The Kinsey model is reflected above in the NSCS
sentencing guidelines. By excluding child rape or other forms of serious child abuse
as crimes, the authors mischievously directed judges and juries nationwide into
dismissals of child sex crimes, and into leniency and paroles for violent crimes
against children, inevitably also trivializing violent sex crimes against women and
legitimizing sundry other Kinseyan pansexual standards.
5. 1986 NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, (NRC) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF
SCIENCES on 'TEENAGE SEX.' When he was Secretary of Education, William
Bennett pointed out that the report of the NRC (apparently chartered by Congress hence an authoritative arm of the federal government) called for condoms in schools
despite the data that disproved this as a solution to early sexual activity. A review of
this NRC report finds Kinsey’s pansexual philosophy and disciples extensively cited
as authority.
6. 1989 NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, (NRC) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF
SCIENCES: "AIDS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR AND INTRAVENOUS DRUG USE."
Kinsey's former chief researcher, John Gagnon is part of the research team. The
report fully cites to Kinsey and his disciples as sexual authority, suggesting that
while Kinsey did outstanding work, these data are not too useable since they were
derived largely from white, college males. This false claim about the nature of the
fraud serves many purposes, among which, a) it intimates that the deviancy data are
understated rather than overstated, hence b) it allows continued, even fuller use of
the data. Were the NRC to admit that the data reflect prisoners, sex offenders,
homosexual males, boy prostitutes, thieves, hold-up men and feeble-minded
subjects, Kinsey's data would be used to define abnormal males, by definition. After
claiming it's flaws, the authors deify and continue to cite Kinsey as authority,
finding homosexuality and other nontraditional sex to be normal
7. 1989 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, JUVENILE JUSTICE (Do J) "REPORT
TO THE NATION ON CRIME AND JUSTICE." This DoJ report on crime purges
the 1986 Attorney General's Commission report on Pornography that found massive
crimes of child abuse and child pornography. Hence, the crime report "to the nation"
does not list child pornography as a crime. Moreover, the AG's Pornography
Commission testimony from the former director of SIECUS and Planned
Parenthood, as well as Kinsey colleagues C.A. Tripp, John Money and others would
have significantly impacted the Commission's findings.
8. 1989 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, JUVENILE JUSTICE AND
DELINQUENCY PREVENTION (OJJDP) "THE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF
MISSING CHILDREN." Three months prior to the following HHS Youth Suicide
Report, among other unsubstantiated Kinseyan claims, the OJJDP researchers said
the "data" found religious and parental "harassment" of biologically homosexual
children to be responsible for child runaways, prostitutes and suicides. Finkehor et.
al., have long cited Kinsey and his disciples as scientific authority and this OJJDP
report reflects the author's continued reliance on the Kinsey "model" of
homosexuality, prostitution, pornography and the like.
9. 1989 ADAMHA: ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE, MENTAL HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION IN ADAMHA NEWS "The Most Forgotten Teens" builds on
the Kinseyan authority, blaming children's emotional problems 'not on the many
causal factors which often lead youths into homosexual conduct, but on social
hostility to homosexuality. The article ignores the extant data on adult or older
juvenile sex abuse, etc., as precipitating many harmful responses, including
homosexual acting-out. 10. 1989 U.S. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (HHS)" THE SECRETARY'S
TASK FORCE ON YOUTH SUICIDE." This report cites Dr Kinsey and his
disciples as sexual authorities to disregard any environmental factors triggering
homosexual conduct, claiming a biological imperative and blaming parents,
churches and traditional American values as causing the suicides of "gay youth"
11. 1991 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) "HOMOSEXUALITY AND
PERSONNEL SECURITY." The author, Theodore Sarbin cites as his human
sexuality authorities, Kinsey and his disciples, including Dr John Money and Verne
Bullough, self-identified pedophile editor of The Journal of Paedophilia Hence,
Sarbin disengenuously concludes that "no empirical data have been developed to
support any connection between homosexuality and security" (p 31)
The above eleven are a few of similar reports that sway or direct current
laws and public policies on human sexuality. Now, just briefly let’s look at
several other recent research gems on children: First, the cyberporn data on
parental assault, next the alleged “decline” in child sex abuse and the
harmlessness of pornography for children and finally a “well being” report
that says children are safer today than in the days of Ozzie and Harriet."

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/Rotten Research.pdf

Put your zealous posturing aside for a moment and answer a simple question..do you know who developed our sex ed programs, and what data they used to craft them? Do you know who funded them?

I know you don't. None of you hysterics do.

 

What a bunch of hyperbolic , desperate sounding, confused, lies about another poster which isn't the topic....

Abortion is still legal:

 

Re-bait your hook, you're not getting many takers.

 

Yup, Palin, screwed her not-yet-husband like a rabbit throughout college (no "aspirin between her knees" for this chick ).....but she must've had good sex education because she didn't get pregnant....she owes the absence some possible embarrassment to sex education...


I find it hard to believe that some people think the less kids know about sex the less likely they are to get pregnant.....

 

What a load of inarticulate garbage.

Time for the ignore button.

 

your problem is you think kids are stupid...I never tell my kids what not to do, I give my kids guidance and inform them of the potential dangers and consequences of their actions, they made they're own choices and not surprisingly make the correct choice...treat them like mindless children and they'll rebel and make the wrong choice out of defiance/independence, treat them with respect and they'll respond accordingly...

sex is normal, teenage sex is normal, pregnancy is normal, none of those are depraved it's simple natural biology..what's twisted/depraved is attaching standards of morality to normal behaviour...what is abnormal behaviour is perverse social pressure for chastity...