Nice, comprehensive rundown, Turkana. But we all know that abstinence-only ed is not about getting kids not to have sex, it's about making sure that the girls who have sex pay for it, big time. It's about stigmatizing girls again for being sexual while letting the boys skate away. It's the goal of the fundie freaks to put girls back in their place, barefoot and pregnant and second class citizens, held hostage to their uterii.
Oh, and to get bajillions of bucks for their born-again cronies so they can visit the S&M parlors of their choice without being hassled.
Posted by iamcoyote at April 2, 2008 02:14 PMMost faith-based/aum supporters are defectives who can't get laid anyway.
Spreading misery, poverty and death among normal people get's them off.
Scamming billions of dollars is purely a secondary consideration to them.
The broad bipartisan support for this nonsense is shocking. Truly shocking.
Hopefully, our candidates will publicly discuss their policies on this issue.
Good stuff Turkana - thanks!
Just when you think you found the answer to the failed "abstinance only" policy, this happens:
"Ohio police have arrested a man who was caught on tape allegedly having sex with a picnic table.
Art Price Jr., 40, of Bellevue, Ohio, was arrested after a neighbor videotaped him engaged sexually with the metal table, according to a report on FOX19.com.
Price was seen on four separate occasions, always between 10:30 a.m. and noon, having sex with the picnic table, Bellevue Police Capt. Matt Johnson told the TV station.
"The first video we had, he was completely nude," Johnson said, noting the table in question had a hole in the middle intended to hold an umbrella.
Price, a married father of three school-age kids, faces felony counts of public indecency because his house is near an elementary school, according to the report."
A "rising" star of the "inanimate objects only" policy, and he BLOWS it!
Posted by TIKI AL at April 2, 2008 04:13 PMOf course we all hope that sex education will reduce teen pregnancies and STDs. But we focus too much on this when we debate the way it should be conducted. The primary purpose of sex education is not behavior modification. It's educating kids in a basic subject that everyone needs to know about. The test of whether it works should be whether the kids know and understand it. Parents should not have the right to deprive their children of this information.
Posted by denise at April 2, 2008 08:11 PMSomeone wrote a letter to our newspaper advocating abstinence-only because, unlike abstinence-added, it provides a "condom over the heart." Ain't that sweet? So....if a girl or boys waits for sex until they are married, they will be assured that their feelings will be protected? Thank God! It's amazing what blinkered so-called conservatives manage to talk themselves into.
Posted by TLV at April 3, 2008 05:13 AMJeez, this is 2008 and we are still debating sex education like it was the 50's and June Cleaver is doing household chores in her pearls. Over fifty years later we still deny our children the right to sex education.
Posted by Judith at April 3, 2008 08:09 AM