abstinence only education increases teen sex

[acludem]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6894568/

Here's the latest study.

acludem

 

[musicman]

There is a growing feeling among our board libs that playing cute little word games is perfectly alright as long as it bolsters one's point. My unabashed dictionary defines this as, "lying".

Acludem - you title your post, "Abstinence only education increases teen sex". That's disingenuous and you know it. You ought to be ashamed. Would you have us believe that abstinence education should have turned the tide by now? How long has it been in effect? Remember, liberal education had a decades-long head start - abetted in no small part by your beloved, America-hating ACLU. Our disintegrating culture continues to scream "SEX!" at our children round-the clock. And, the "unbiased" "experts" from your "unbiased" site - they couldn't work "despite the money George Bush has wasted" into the conversation fast enough, could they?

You make me tired all over.

 

[manu1959]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6894568/

Here's the latest study.

acludem

i love teen sex.......unfortunatley i am 45

 

[acludem]

Did you read the article????? I'm only quoting what was in the article.

Try responding directly to what the article says instead of leveling disingenuous personal attacks on me and on liberals in general. The article does not saying anything about George W. Bush. The university that produced it is in....Texas! It was commissioned by the Texas Department of Health and performed by researchers at Texas A&M University.

acludem

 

[musicman]

Did you read the article????? I'm only quoting what was in the article.

Try responding directly to what the article says instead of leveling disingenuous personal attacks on me and on liberals in general. The article does not saying anything about George W. Bush. The university that produced it is in....Texas! It was commissioned by the Texas Department of Health and performed by researchers at Texas A&M University.

acludem

Did YOU read the article? It mentioned abstinence as a major plank in GEORGE W. BUSH's education reform campaign. The participants were careful to point out that it wasn't having much of an effect (they did manage a weak, "the jury is still out"; my - that was big of them) in spite of the LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY BEING SPENT. It's a typical MSNBC hatchet piece.

But, YOU took it the extra mile with your deliberately disingenuous thread title. My remarks about liberals in general - and you in particular - stand. You do nothing for your already precarious credibility by playing sneaky little word games.

 

[acludem]

I quoted the title of the article almost verbatim. The only thing I added was "only". Perhaps I was wrong in doing so. The article specifically states that teens had sex more often after having taken the Bush-style abstinence based classes. That's what the researcher stated. One of Texas A&M's biggest benefactors in Tom DeLay, not exactly known as a Liberal. The study proves that abstinence only education doesn't work.

acludem

 

[musicman]

The article specifically states that teens had sex more often after having taken the Bush-style abstinence based classes.

acludem

As the great American philospher, Mark Twain, said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Dishonest people with an ax to grind can make the numbers say anything that suits a charlatan's agenda. 'Fess up, Acludem - you're busted. It wasn't even a good try.

 

[Hobbit]

Let's go over a few facts, shall we?

Fact 1: Anyone who's done science fair should see holes in this study. Their methods of collecting data are not listed. Outside circumstances that could have affected results are also not listed. Without these things given, dozens of things could have been distorted. Their before data could be taken from church groups and honors classes with their after data being taken from the football team and the cheerleaders. If they didn't enforce a diverse sample, there could be dozens of unintended distortions. There could also be outside factors such as role models in modern media entertainment glorifying sex. This throws off their data quite a bit.

Fact 2: Sex among teens was strikingly low until universities started bringing sex out of the closet. Personally, I think sex is a private activity that should be kept in the closet, however, universities saw it differently. They began talking about sex using programs based on the studies of Alfred Kinsey, who founded the Kinsey institute. All sex education programs in high schools...EVER...are based on his research. His research, however, is highly flawed. The guy was a zoologist, for starters, and specialized in "gall wasps." He never studied anything about human behavior in school. Well, one day he decided he was a sex studier and came up with a questionnaire to gather data. This questionnaire was highly offensive with a lot of "X-rated" questions, unheard of in the 1950s. Most people refused to even read this thing, much less provide answers, so he got answers from those who would answer it. Most of his data came from prostitutes and convicted sex offenders. He then posted his study using this sample as an example of, say, a typical neighborhood. This lead to inflated statistics saying things like, "Over 95% of men have [deviant sexual] desires," "10% of the general population is gay," how young people were becoming sexually active, how many people were having sex outside of marriage, and many other things. Using this bogus study, he started propogating his beliefs, which included an utter rejection of any religion and that humans were sexual "from womb to tomb," through the Kinsey Institute, which still recieves tax dollars today. All of these false statistics and bogus findings are still used in every sex education program that does not teach abstinence. Sex ed, especially in elementary schools, is offensive and wrong.

Fact 3: Parents have been the only force keeping sexuality in check, despite what is practically pornography being shown in schools (no lie, Playboy funded and helped produce most of Kinsey's sex ed materials). If you don't believe me, go to Jamaica. In Jamaica, they have all these sex ed programs, but many children lack a strong father figure due to the laid back (often weed-smoking) culture. Because of this, kids learn everything about sex from entertainment and school sex ed programs. In Jamaica, it's not uncommon to find a pregnant 12-year old.

Now, go shove your study.

 

[acludem]

This is an article about the study, not the study itself. Anyone who's taken basic English should know that. I haven't read the study, I only saw this article and thought it would be fodder for an interesting discussion.

acludem

 

[Said1]

Personally, I think abstinence education should start long before highschool, with students that (hopefully) aren't sexually active yet.

 

[Hobbit]

This is an article about the study, not the study itself. Anyone who's taken basic English should know that. I haven't read the study, I only saw this article and thought it would be fodder for an interesting discussion.

acludem

That's the problem with the article. There's no link to the study whatsoever and no effort to show its accuracy, and I don't take stock in ANY study that I can't see for myself. For all I know, they could be making this up. I've seen lots of points "proven" by studies that were later shown to be false.

 

[musicman]

What's even worse is that - even if we assume that the study is factually correct (certainly not a given) - it draws ludicrous (and ideologically convenient) conclusions.

Assertion A - President Bush's absinence education policies are now in effect in Texas.

Assertion B - Teen sex is increasing.

Therfore, A caused B.

This is insanity. Abstinence education is a noble beginning, but let's never forget - liberals have been running this culture for a long time. Repairing the damage isn't going to happen overnight.

The dishonesty inherent in slanted stories like this makes me want to scream.

 

[Said1]

That's the problem with the article. There's no link to the study whatsoever and no effort to show its accuracy, and I don't take stock in ANY study that I can't see for myself. For all I know, they could be making this up. I've seen lots of points "proven" by studies that were later shown to be false.

I think someone failed Critical Thinking 101.

 

[Hobbit]

I think someone failed Critical Thinking 101.

The teacher always called me Adolf.

 

[Said1]

The teacher always called me Adolf.

I don't get it. That's twice today.