Conservatives waste money on abstinence-only ed
No matter how much members of Congress swear they’ll be fiscal conservatives, no matter how many times they promise they’ll be wise stewards of taxpayers’ money, you can always count on them to waste money to please a few of their constituents. So, it can’t come as a great surprise that members of the Senate Finance Committee voted to fund abstinence-only education to the tune of $50 million per year through 2014.
Every Republican on the committee — fiscal conservatives, all — voted for the amendment yesterday. They were joined by two Democrats who also claim to be fiscal conservatives. Yet, here they were, wasting tens of millions of dollars.
Tons of research has shown that abstinence-only education does not work to prevent teen pregnancy. And if research doesn’t persuade you, there is the anecdotal testimony of Bristol Palin, teen mom, who says abstinence doesn’t work for teens. She should know.
A lot of health care subsidies could be covered with that money. Let’s hope wiser heads prevail and strip that money back out of the Senate Finance Committee’s health care bill.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
109 comments Add your comment
jconservative
September 30th, 2009
4:56 pm
If abstinence means no sex then those senators are dreaming.
However, they are not dreaming. They know it does not work, but the 30 second sound bite saying “I voted for abstinence” sounds a lot better than the sound bite saying “He voted for more sex by our teenagers”.
Politics.
Ben
September 30th, 2009
5:09 pm
Tons of research has shown that abstinence-only education does not work to prevent teen pregnancy.
That’s your opinion. Our voting representatives believe that abstinence does work and if you don’t like it work to get them voted out.
Whopper
September 30th, 2009
5:25 pm
“Na-uh!” Is that all you got, Ben. Geez.
Shaneneeee Faneneeeeeee
September 30th, 2009
5:32 pm
Obama is corrupt, plain and simple. Does anyone honestly believe if Sacremento or Dallas were the choices for America for getting the Olympics he would be going to Denmark to try and get the games for those cities? No, I didn’t think so. His buddies, Valerie Jarrett included will benefit from the games being in Chicago, not We the People.
Road Scholar
September 30th, 2009
5:47 pm
Ben: Wasn’t there a line in Forrest Gump that said ” Stupid is, Stupid does”?
SF: Since the time of the Atlanta Olympics, it has taken a trip by the top government official to get approval of their country to host. Now you aren’t like many of the conserve who want to remove the US from world affairs (like quit the UN) except if the possibility of a war is in the offing?
I agree
September 30th, 2009
6:24 pm
Tons of research has shown that abstinence-only education does not work to prevent teen pregnancy.
I agree with you but, “Tons of research”? Tons? Come on Sinthia.
arnold
September 30th, 2009
7:07 pm
It doesn’t take research to know abstinence only doesn’t work. All it takes is memory of your younger years.Sex drives do rage in a young person. It is a fond memory.
The only logical reason i can see for the politicians voting the appropriation is their desire to look good for the voters. It’s too bad they want to make a career from public service. It creates lies and more lies.
Shawny
September 30th, 2009
8:01 pm
The Palin kid is one data point of millions. Yes, we should base our study on that one data point. Nice. Idiotic, actually.
$50 million is a drop in the bucket of what these politicians are wasting. They are wasting money at the Trillion (with a T) level. That is like you or me getting a quarter off of the cost of a Lexus.
If you want to talk about govt waste, we can do that. But to bring up a waste of $50 (and it is by the way, I give you that), because it is a conservative venture that you disagree with, is a waste of a post. Your readers see through this sham. Go to the center for govt waste website and work that one over if you want to get POed. Look up criminals like Murtha and ask why they still have a job and aren’t in jail.
Proud American
September 30th, 2009
8:29 pm
This proves that you idiot liberals only use things that you can twist and try to manipulate to conform to your idiocy.
Sex ed. may not prevent all pregnancies but if it prevents one thats a good thing. The majority of Americans are against government health care but you Liberals try to tellus its a good thing.
YOU LIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Class of '98
September 30th, 2009
8:42 pm
That’s weird. Usually the liberal dogma is that if a government program doesn’t work, MORE money should be spent on it.
Matt the Brave
September 30th, 2009
9:21 pm
You know, even if it may not work, these kids need to know that there is an alternative to giving in and to know what the consequences are for having sex. Does it cost money, yes. Does it mean that we need to stop doing it? No. But we do need to still at least incorporate it into sex ed.
Carter is a Fool
September 30th, 2009
9:37 pm
Could you abstain from writing this claptrap that you pass off as commentary? I know the answer, but can still hope.
Patrick
September 30th, 2009
9:38 pm
The only people who comment on editorials are people that are incapable of forming their own opinions. This person’s entire job is to be “controversial” so you people will read her column and argue and fight. This so called “journalist” doesn’t care if you agree or disagree. She only cares that you read her column so she can keep her job. You people are really a very sad group.
And to clarify, I am commenting on the pathetic losers that comment on editorials, not the editorial itself. There is a difference.
Joan
September 30th, 2009
9:44 pm
I don’t suppose it does any harm to piddle off money on this useless program any more than it does harm to bail out supposedly profit making companies, or build tunnels for turtles in Florida, do any number of idiot research projects this government funds, and of course, while we are at it, why isn’t it a waste of money that Congress appropriates for its personal spending pleasure another $19 billion this year.
Joan
September 30th, 2009
9:46 pm
Or maybe it was $19 million–who knows the difference any more? I mean, a million, a billion, it is all funny money anyway. And I guess it is all Chinese, and maybe that is why we are glorifying communism by lighting up the Empire State building in red and yellow. Some ex presidents must be turning in their graves over that idiot stunt.
stew
September 30th, 2009
10:53 pm
Cynthia, if the 50 million went to free abortions with no questions asked or to illegal aliens (undocumented workers in your language) , you would write an endorsement. Case closed-You lose the argument.
Tax payer funded Public Option, NEVER!
September 30th, 2009
11:41 pm
Get back with us when you want to discuss the dems waste of money, because there’s a hell of a lot more of that.
Chris Salzmann
September 30th, 2009
11:58 pm
Joan September 30th, 2009 9:46 pm SAID: Or maybe it was $19 million–who knows the difference any more? I mean, a million, a billion, it is all funny money anyway. And I guess it is all Chinese, and maybe that is why we are glorifying communism by lighting up the Empire State building in red and yellow. Some ex presidents must be turning in their graves over that idiot stunt.
CHRIS SAID: ROFLMAO. Folks, this is what happens when you listen to the Becks, Hannitys, Limbaughs, etc. without any context whatsoever and take their observations at face value. But then, I don’t think their respective fans have the intelligence to put anything in perspective.
Well, Joan, here’s the context: The lights atop the Empire State building, which is owned by W&H Properties, are often are changed. For example, Italian colors — red, white and green — commemorate Columbus Day, while green, white and orange are displayed for the India Day parade. Please note the fact that this property is PRIVATELY owned.
Just two examples. but you are blaming Barack Obama and the current administration for this travesty??? Take a chill pill, Joan. All that acid and bile is going to give you an ulcer.
JMoore
October 1st, 2009
12:27 am
It especially does not work in the black community.
Dale Duncan
October 1st, 2009
2:17 am
They are living in fantasy land, and they need to stop using taxpayer money for this. Teach abstinence in your churches.
Sunshine
October 1st, 2009
3:42 am
Cynthia, I hate to tell you but true Abstinence DOES work. If you just call it abstinence and don’t practice it, then it does NOT work. Get your facts straight. I suppose you would prefer to spend the
money on Abortions. That is the typical Democratic way of doing things. God is NOT going to be happy
mike
October 1st, 2009
4:54 am
Interesting how this subject always brings out the morons and their idiotic reasoning. Just say no has never worked but it is a good sound bite for those conservatives who insist on blaming others for what ills society.
DeborahinAthens
October 1st, 2009
6:12 am
I would much rather spend $50 million a year on abortions for women and girls that needed or wanted them than for useless “education” for hormone drenched teens. Whether Cynthia cites a “ton” of evidence, or specific cases, it is a proven fact abstinence only education does not work. In one year in my small church, four teenage girls got knocked up. Guess where the dads are? No where to be found. These were “good”, “God-fearing”, white, middle-class, non-drug using stupid girls whose lives will forever be altered by one stupid mistake. I am so tired of males screeching against abortion rights. When you can get pregnant, then you can have a voice. And the BS about life being sacred doesn’t wash, because you are the same A%#holes that screech about killing Muslims or letting people that “make the wrong life decisions” suffer the consequences. The people that do the suffering are the unwanted children brought into the world. If you aren’t born, you don’t suffer. And I do not believe a clump of cells is a person. So don’t come back with that argument, either. You are not a person, with the rights of a person until you suck air.
Greg in Duluth
October 1st, 2009
6:34 am
And maybe then they will receive treatment for their STDs with public option healthcare and cost us even more money
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
7:02 am
Cindy, how much did the Feds waste by allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to approve loans to those who shouldn’t have received them, let alone apply for them? There were even “ninja” loans (no income, no job) floating around. Doubt if that $50 mil for this program will even come close to rivaling the carnage caused by irresponsible goons like Barney Frank.
Oh yeah, what “benefit” did the Feds receive from funding ACORN?
mike
October 1st, 2009
7:02 am
“And if research doesn’t persuade you, there is the anecdotal testimony of Bristol Palin, teen mom, who says abstinence doesn’t work for teens. She should know.”
Sarah Palin also supports teaching kids about contraception at school too.
Sorry to correct Tucker, but she is so dishonest and careless that someone needs to do it.
mike
October 1st, 2009
7:08 am
I went to a school where we got explicit sex education. Guess what? We had a bumch of folks get pregnant too.
Does that mean that the education failed? Should we scrap it?
Say what you want, but if you practice abstinence you will not get pregnant, just like if you use birth control properly, you will not get pregnant.
What is so offensive about teaching both, which is Palin’s policy choice?
mike
October 1st, 2009
7:10 am
the other mike –
“Interesting how this subject always brings out the morons and their idiotic reasoning. Just say no has never worked but it is a good sound bite for those conservatives who insist on blaming others for what ills society.”
How does abstinence education equate to “blaming others”. Your logic is pathetic.
Maybe you are the one who should stop blaming others for society’s ills.
TheOne
October 1st, 2009
7:35 am
1. $50MM is a drop in the bucket compared to what the government already spends or proposes to spend on stupid ventures
2. Abstinence may or may not work. There is a lot more to this issue and many influences impacting it. However, teaching it could have an impact on folks. I also don’t believe there has been “tons” of research on the subject.
3. I suspect if the $50MM were proposed for spending on birth control, Cynthia and the liberals would be all for it.
In the spirit of fairness, there has always been “planned parenthood” education and condom distribution; isn’t it only fair that another approach be utilized as well?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
7:37 am
Would it be worth it if it prevented one child from becoming pregnant? It’s certainly a lofty goal and one that should be pursued in my lecherous opinion. I advise all the young people I come into contact with to enjoy their childhood and try not to grow up too fast. There’ll be plenty of time to engage in adult activity when they have fully matured. Taking the stigma away from self-gratification would go a long way in reducing teen pregnancies. “Good” girls have known all along there’s more than one way to skin a cat and you’re never without a date.
It’s too bad that so many of us still have our own sexual hangups that it has to be taught in school.
Ramzad
October 1st, 2009
7:38 am
Cynthia, please remember that social conservatives are idealogues- people whose views on a range of issues come from the gut. So, it is a stretch of the imagination to expect them to look at research. One has to have an intellectual disposition to become interested in research.
The gut is the same place these people nurture hate and from which they harvest racism, homophobia, sexism, immigrant bashing, abstinence, name calling and all the other Dark Ages approach they bring to government and social policy, and public debate. If you want proof of what I am saying just look at the social conservative view on Global Warming, a topic where the reasearch cup runneth over.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
October 1st, 2009
7:39 am
You Republinazi maggots are the ultimate in hypocrisy! The financial mess we’re in is all attributable to George W. Hitler. As for teen pregnancy, most of you bible-thumping, God-fearing nincompoops didn’t have to worry about getting your dates pregnant since they were male too. You idiots need to shut the hell up and get lost. President Obama is here and he’s going to be here for another 71/2 years.
Eddie
October 1st, 2009
7:44 am
Kids are going to have sex and the only real option is to teach safe sex. Kind of hard to go home to the bible belt and say I just bought $50M worth of condoms so the cycle continues.
clyde
October 1st, 2009
7:44 am
The solution is simple:invent a few moments in time that are more pleasurable than not abstaining.
Tall
October 1st, 2009
7:46 am
Algonquin….
What intellect. Can you develop your thesis a little more?
Ron
October 1st, 2009
7:54 am
abstinence is a black – white issue. Check ANY study you want to and the disparity is wide.
Cynthia obviously doesn’t like it.
Horrible Horace
October 1st, 2009
8:03 am
Cmon Cynthia. How much have the Dems spent on sex-ed only to see teen pregnancy continue? This isnt a conservative or liberal issue, NO! Its a Lack of Parenting issue.
On another note…Obobo makes a terrible President and may well be as non-effective as Carter.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
8:06 am
Horrible Horace
October 1st, 2009
8:03 am
Repeating it will not make it so. Your envy is showing.
Joey
October 1st, 2009
8:16 am
I agree that teaching abstinence only is a waste of time and money. However, if I was charged with identifying and preventing wasteful spending, there are thousands of other subsidies and earmarks that waste much more money which should recieve priority de-funding. I would hope that Cynthia might find higher priorites as well.
Winkasdad29
October 1st, 2009
8:20 am
I believe it’s up to us parents to teach our kids about sex. I don’t have a problem with the abstinence message. We as parents should be teaching our kids about puberty, peer pressure, relationships between girls and boys, and sex. Kids need to have all of the information they can handle in order to make informed choices about sex. They need to know the cause and effect of choosing to have sex or not. Also, some parents need to go to sex ed classes themselves if they’re having trouble talking to their kids.
All this arguing and political posturing exhibited on this blog does nothing to help our kids.
dgroy
October 1st, 2009
8:25 am
Folks, abstinance pertaining to teen age sex is a good thing and achievable if you have two things……1) parents who care, and 2) Children who will listen to those parents who care. Sex is a very strong urge when you’re that young and if it’s unchecked and allowed to do it’s thing it’s very destructive. You’ll never be able to stop teen sex; however, education given to these young people as to how to stop pregnancies would be a better alternative.
Winkasdad29
October 1st, 2009
8:27 am
One other thing. Please stop calling our Chief Executives names. Calling President Bush “George W. Hitler” and President Obama “Obobo” shows a lack of respect for our nation’s past and present Chief Executives. I find it particularly offensive the use of “Hitler”.
Be respectful of the President, regardless of whether you like him or not.
Sho nuff
October 1st, 2009
8:33 am
Algonquin, this is the first Thursday of the month. Wouldn’t you be making better use of your time waiting by the mailbox for your gubment check?
Amazed
October 1st, 2009
8:37 am
Predicting Ms. Tucker’s opinion on any topic is so easy. Simply take anything that is rational, good, traditional, or common sense and choose the opposite.
ck hall
October 1st, 2009
8:38 am
Abstinence is a must in our permissive society. Teach parents how to work with kids and many unwanted pregs. will go away..We need true family values! Spend the $ on parent education..We are approaching the problem backwards..
pd
October 1st, 2009
8:51 am
I am not sure that I even understand what “Abstinence Only” Sex Education is.
What exactly is there to teach? If you don’t have sex, you won’t get a sexually transmitted disease or pregnant?
Do teens not know that? Are there teens who think that they will get pregnant or an std if they don’t have sex?
Why not just give the education in a scientific way? Why not eliminate moral and religious justifications and just explain it matter of factly?
Just state the facts. “If a person has unprotected sex with a carrier of HIV, that person is X likely to contract the disease themselves. If a person was to use a condom they would reduce the likelyhood by X%” for example.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
8:52 am
More about the “money well spent” organization known as ACORN and the “transparent” and “moral barometer” President. Since links are often blocked, I’ve cut and pasted the info. Wasted money, wasted opportunity.
Just about everyone, it seems, is up in arms about ACORN, but the president of the United States apparently is not among them.
Asked about the ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) scandal on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, President Barack Obama said, “Frankly, George, this is not something I’ve followed closely.”
The president conceded that the conduct revealed on those much-seen, hidden-camera videos of ACORN employees “was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated” but he wouldn’t say whether he supported Congress’ recent votes to cut off ACORN’s federal funding.
“This is not the biggest issue facing the country,” Obama told Stephan-opoulos. “It’s not something I’m paying a lot of attention to.”
This from the man who found time in his breakneck schedule of speeches, interviews and TV appearances to condemn rapper Kanye West’s rude behavior during the Video Music Awards.
Obama even said he had not been aware that ACORN “was getting a whole lot of federal money.”
According to various news reports, ACORN has received more than $50 million in federal funds over the past 15 years.
In fairness, Obama’s relative disinterest in the ACORN controversy has been shared by much of the mainstream media.
At our newspapers in Augusta, Waterville and Portland, we began fielding complaints early last week accusing us of hiding the story because of a “liberal bias.” We began scouring our wire services for a report on this story. The Associated Press, which brings us most of our national and world news, appeared unaware of the story. It was midweek before we could find mention of ACORN on the Associated Press news budget.
There is no question that mainstream media blew it when it came to coverage of this controversial topic.
The president appeared on five different news programs on Sunday, and Stephanopoulos was the only interviewer who even mentioned ACORN.
The president’s inattention, however, stands out because of his long association with the group, dating back to his days as a community organizer in Chicago and continuing at least through 2008. According to The Wall Street Journal, his presidential campaign that year paid an ACORN subsidiary called Citizens Consulting Inc. $832,000 “for get-out-the-vote activities in key primary states.”
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
8:56 am
Perhaps Sarkozy was right when he called Obama “Incredibly Naive And Grossly Egotistical”.
I guess he hasn’t seen him with those faux Greek columns and multiple huge teleprompters.
Call it Like It Is
October 1st, 2009
9:02 am
Hey Algonquin J. Calhoun
You sir are a Moron!
Barry the Racist is now in the White House not Bush so stop all the finger pointing and look for that yes we can and that Change the anoited one is suppose to be about!
What an idoit!
Enough Said!
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:05 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
8:56 am
And your envy is showing.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:06 am
Call it Like It Is
October 1st, 2009
9:02 am
As are you.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:08 am
Call it Like It Is
October 1st, 2009
9:02 am
More than enough.
Correction: as is yours (envy).
“As are you” was not referring to idiocy.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:12 am
Cindy, here’s some info you may be interested in, though probably not since it doesn’t support your biased views.
In 2002, the federal and state governments spent an estimated $1.73 billion on a wide variety of contraception promotion and pregnancy prevention programs.1 More than a third of that money ($653 million) was spent specifically to fund contraceptive programs for teens.2
By contrast, programs teaching teens to abstain from sexual activity received only an estimated $144.1 million in the same year. Overall, government spent $12 to promote contraception for every dollar spent to encourage abstinence. In addition, most contraceptive promotion or comprehensive sex-ed curricula contain material that is alarming and offensive to most parents.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:13 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:05 am
You’re right, I am envious of Sarkozy. I wish I would have been the one to call Obama “Incredibly Naive And Grossly Egotistical”.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Nice try at a retort.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:18 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:13 am
Do you find that Obama’s success makes you feel inferior? If only we were all as naive and egotistical. It’s a good combination for getting things done.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:18 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:13 am
Is that a nervous laugh?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:19 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:18 am
And your ignorance is showing.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:20 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:18 am
Actually, I think you know better. Therefore:
And your stupidity is showing.
clyde
October 1st, 2009
9:21 am
Say What??,
And the results were???
What They Are Saying: 10.01.09 | AnnotatedOpinions.com
October 1st, 2009
9:21 am
[...] Conservatives waste money on abstinence-only ed [Atlanta Journal-Constitution] [...]
dw
October 1st, 2009
9:22 am
To DeborahinAthens,
Your ramblings articulate your belief in “irresponsibility” and “no consequences for poor choices”. Just FYI, some people actually take responsibility for their less than optimal choices. You instead choose to cut it up, pith it, burn it, … etc; You are naive to think that these children in utero do not feel pain. You just don’t care. Be honest. But you are right that they don’t feel the pain over and over on a daily basis, day after day after day with an poor excuse for human being. Selfish and irresponsible. Lastly your rambling about when you suck air. So 1 second before you are born, you are nothing in your ideology. Or 1 second before that, and so on. Enjoy your 80 years of irresponsibility and carnage.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:23 am
12 to 1
No, that’s not a baseball score. It’s the amount of money spent by the government to promote the use of contraception ($12) versus the amount of money spent promoting abstinence ($1).
So where is the true waste?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:24 am
clyde
October 1st, 2009
9:21 am
What are you refering to, clyde?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:27 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:20 am
I’ll consider that a compliment, coming from someone that so cavalierly denigrates a man of accomplishment.
pd
October 1st, 2009
9:27 am
” Overall, government spent $12 to promote contraception for every dollar spent to encourage abstinence”
What does this mean? “encourage abstinance”
How does one spend ANY money on encouraging abstinance?
I am not suggesting that its a bad idea to abstain from sex, but what is there to teach?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:31 am
pd
Sorry you missed my point.
If Cindy is saying money promoting abstinense is wasted money, then how is spending 12 times that amount on contraceptive education a good use of taxpayer’s money when teenage pregnancies are rampant? Quite simple, really.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:32 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
9:27 am
Sorry, but I did’t denigrate Sarkozy, a true man of accomplishment.
pd
October 1st, 2009
9:38 am
“then how is spending 12 times that amount on contraceptive education a good use of taxpayer’s money when teenage pregnancies are rampant?”
Well, at least with contraception use, there is something to teach. You can share the statistics of how much condom useage can reduce likelyhood of becoming infected or becoming pregnant. Likewise with contraceptive pills and other devices. There would be some science to teach as well as instruction on the proper way to use these controls.
On the other hand, abstinence only education seems to not have any teachable subjects.
Its like you are trying to decide whether or not you want to go sky diving. One course teaches you about the probabilities of having an accident and teaches you the various types of parachutes and which are most likely to reduce your chance of injury, while the other course is simply a sign on a wall that reads” Don’t Jump!”.
Why would those courses cost the same amount of money?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:44 am
pd
I just don’t get you libs. “Kumbaya” is not the answer to everyting. Here, I’ll try again.
The point of the article is “conservatives” are wasting money though abstinence programs. To support her claim, Cindy cites evidence that teens are still getting pregnant. So it’s okay to spend 12 times that to teach contraception? Don’t forget, teens are still getting pregnant.
We can all cherry pick which programs we consider wasteful, but remember this, if a teenager practices abstinence then there is ZERO chance of her getting pregnant.
q
October 1st, 2009
9:53 am
Abstinense will never stop the fires of desire. Contraseptives will never stop pregnancies 100%. Life always finds a way.
BUT abstinense never spred a disease, and abstinense never caused an unwanted child. Abstinense teaches responsibility, and when you fail, and as humans, we will fail, it is what you do next, and what one may need to do, is be responsible for what we’ve done.
pd
October 1st, 2009
9:55 am
I sort of understand your point that it is wasteful to spend money on sex education if it isn’t impacting lives. I get that.
What I don’t understand is, how can ANY money be spent on “Abstinence Only” education? There is NOTHING to teach.
At least with a comprehensive plan, the teachers have materials, statistics, and science that they can apply. With abstinence only, there is no material, no statistics, and no science. There is absolutely nothing to spend money on.
Whether it works or not is not my point.
What does an “Abstinence Only” educator spend his or her time doing in the classroom after the ten seconds that they take to say that if you don’t have sex, you won’t get an STD or pregnant?
And is there anyone actually dumb enough that would need to hear that?
Call it Like It Is
October 1st, 2009
9:59 am
Hey TnGelding
F U!
pd
October 1st, 2009
10:00 am
“I just don’t get you libs. “Kumbaya” is not the answer to everyting”
And I have no idea what this means either. I am not sure where we are losing the connect here, but I am discussing education. Which means sharing factual information, statistics, and material substance with students. I am not referring to any sort of abstract notion. “Kumbaya”? What?
lovelyliz
October 1st, 2009
10:09 am
When have modern day conervatives and neo-cons ever practiced real fiscal conservatism? They aren’t against government waster, welfare and spending as long as it’s supports them and theirs. States rights only applies when the citizens of the state in question agree with their philospohy. They on support the Constituion and even themn only the parts that support them and theirs.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:20 am
pd
I guess my age is showing with the “Kumbaya” reference.
Nothing to teach? I disagree. I believe many, many young girls are in an environment where abstinence is never addressed. For that matter, they may have never heard of the word. If sex education is going to be promoted in the schools, then why not address the benefits of abstinence? Those dreaded STDs? Won’t happen with abstinence. Trying to promote personal responsibility? Abstinence may help with their self esteem and hygiene. Trying to prepare a child for the future? It’s much easier when you’re in college at age 21 rather than being at home with 3 or 4 kids and little marketable skills.
Abstinence is not the cure all, but if the subject is wasteful spending, then how is spending 1/12th of what is spent on contraception budget truly wasteful. I believe Cindy’s true point is to criticize conservatives for supporting a program she doesn’t support.
JackLeg
October 1st, 2009
10:25 am
Cynthia, get real, 50 million and you are complaining? Why aren’t you complaining about the Obozo spending? Oh that’s right when a liberal wastes 1 trillion dollars and does not even crate 1 job, in fact loses jobs, and you don’t scream and yell bloody murder. But 50 million on something you don’t agree with is a problem? Liberalism is a mental disorder and you are the queen of liberalism…
Wow
October 1st, 2009
10:26 am
Hey, liz, if you had a basic understanding of spelling your viewpoints , and “them and theirs”, would make much more sense.
“conervatives”
“waster”
“as long as it’s supports”
“philospohy”
“They on support…”
“Constituion”
“themn”
“them and theirs.”
Good grief, you’re the poster child for what’s wrong with our public schools.
Grob Hahn
October 1st, 2009
10:27 am
You’re holding up Palin’s daughter? Again? How many ways can you use this kid?
Also, I understand fully why you would not think abstinence programs are worth anything. That has been the experience in your community for decades. For your community and that of your extended Mexican family this sort of program can’t possibly make sense. Your culture is totally different than the one who created the idea of teaching abstinence as a respectable and viable alternative to becoming a slut! I don’t know if your culture even recognizes any problem with sluts in your midst. For you it seems that only the natural call of the wild kind of scenario is not worth preventing in any way. Just go with the flow, ignore the idea that humans are above animals in SO many ways. Abstaining isn’t just about disease prevention, it’s also about moral preservation. Moral preservation is something your community needs MORE of. So whining about a $50M drop in the bucket when billions are being shuttled about only makes this article seem less about waste and more about taking yet another poke at the Palins. Here’s a hint, most Americans don’t take the word of Palin’s daughter seriously BECAUSE she’s a premarital slut!
Grobbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
pd
October 1st, 2009
10:29 am
“If sex education is going to be promoted in the schools, then why not address the benefits of abstinence?”
If you want to talk abotu STDs and pregnancies and mention the very obvious statement that if you don’t engage in sex that none of those statistics would apply, OK, but how does that one statement take enough time to be a teachable subject?
It just seems to be so overtly obvious that an education in it would be wasteful by its very nature.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:30 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
9:32 am
I thuoght “y’all” detested anything French?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:33 am
pd
Fine then, leave out abstinence. I guess the libs will then want to increase funding at abortion clinics or hand out more free condoms at schools. Yeah, that’s the answer.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:34 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:30 am
Oh no, I just love french fries.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:36 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:30 am
By the way, nothing like engaging in a stereotype. You really paint with a broad brush. Care to share other of your true feelings?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:37 am
Call it Like It Is
October 1st, 2009
9:59 am
We’re discussing homosexuality on Jay’s blog today.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:39 am
I love this Newsweek article:
Nobody in their right mind believes the future of the news business involves paper and ink rather than pixels on a screen. We all know where the news business is headed, and what’s more, we’ve known it for at least a decade. So why on earth are people talking about a bailout for newspapers? Why is President Obama saying he’d consider it? Why is Congress holding hearings and considering “The Newspaper Revitalization Act” in a bid to save these ailing old rags with tax breaks and other handouts? It’s like introducing legislation to save horse-drawn carriages, or steam engines, or black-and-white TV. It’s stupid. It’s pointless. It won’t work.
The fact is, all this hysteria has nothing to do with saving the news, or saving jobs. Nor is it about saving democracy, which is what the red-in-the-face newspaper lovers always get themselves huffed about, as if newspapers and democracy were inextricably linked. Democracy existed long before newspapers did, and it will survive without them. And plenty of countries that don’t have democracy do have newspapers. Nor would a bailout help readers. In fact, it would only slow down our shift to the Internet, which is a far better medium for delivering information.
The only beneficiaries of a bailout would be a handful of big newspaper companies that used to be profitable and powerful and now, well, aren’t. Those companies saw the Internet charging toward them like a freight train, and they just stood there on the tracks. They didn’t adapt. Why? Because for decades these companies enjoyed virtual monopolies, and as often happens to monopolists, they got lazy. They invested their resources in protecting their monopolies, using bully tactics to keep new competitors from entering their markets. They dished up an inferior product and failed to believe that anything or anyone could ever take their little gold mines away from them.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:39 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:36 am
Just don’t feel threatened by superiors. They mean you no harm.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:40 am
I do believe that the AJC would be one of the first in a handout line if the libs in Congress actually act on some form of bailout.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:41 am
Here’s another piece from the Newsweek article:
Instead of giving newspapers bailouts, we should be hastening their demise. The weak papers need to die. The strong newspapers need to go into bankruptcy and restructure their businesses with smaller staffs and lower cost structures. Yes, it will be painful. But journalists will find jobs—and they’ll be working in a better, faster medium.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:41 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:39 am
I’ve been trying to get the AJC to discontinue the print edition for years.
pd
October 1st, 2009
10:42 am
“I guess the libs will then want to increase funding at abortion clinics or hand out more free condoms at schools. ”
You are all over the map. All of my questions were in reference to what is abstinence education. You point out several times that avoiding sexual activity will ensure a woman doesn’t get pregnant or anyone get an std. This is quite obvious.
All I am asking is, in Abstinence Education, what does the educator actually spend time doing?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:43 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:34 am
Didn’t you rename them Freedom Fries?
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:43 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:39 am
Not threatened here. I just don’t run in circles with bigots and prejudiced people who feel as though they can “enlighten” all of us with their self proclaimed superior intellect.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:47 am
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:43 am
I certainly hope you’re not referring to me. I know my limitations.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:48 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:43 am
Nope, wrong again. That makes what, the 17th time you’ve been wrong today? Good grief, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Keep trying, keeeeeeep trying.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:48 am
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
10:47 am
Oh no. I was refering to “y’all”.
Say What??
October 1st, 2009
10:50 am
Here’s my favorite line from the Newsweek article:
Chances are they cringe, because the material is so dumbed-down, and because it’s so clear that whoever wrote the article has no real expertise on this topic.
Yep, that pretty much sums up Cindy and Jay.
News Hound
October 1st, 2009
11:12 am
Compelling headlines of the day:
Michelle Obama: It’s a ’sacrifice’ to travel to Europe to pitch for the Olympics. But I’m doing it for the kids. (Riiiiiigghtt)
Millionaire Michael Moore: ‘Capitalism Did Nothing for Me’… (Um, what he said)
POLITICS: Advisers split complicates Obama’s Afghan decision…
43 Troops Have Died Since General Called for Reinforcements…
WHITE HOUSE: OBAMA TO TAKE ‘NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS’ TO REVIEW STRATEGY…
(nothing like a decisive leader)
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
12:20 pm
News Hound
October 1st, 2009
11:12 am
After several years, 8 to be exact, what’s several weeks?
And more would have died if the reinforcements had been sent in.
TheOne
October 1st, 2009
12:38 pm
Algonquin J. Calhoun is a crazy if he thinks that the financial situation we are in is because of Bush. If you ask me, his outward “hatred” of Bush is really due to a secret crush he has on Bush. Come on Algonquin, don’t you think Georgie is cute???
lovelyliz
October 1st, 2009
1:00 pm
When have modern day conservatives and neo-cons ever practiced real fiscal conservatism? They aren’t against government waster, welfare and spending as long as it’s supports them and theirs. States rights only apply when the citizens of the state in question agree with their philosophy. The only parts of the US Constitution they support are those that support them and theirs.
I WAS A MATH MAJOR