Rick Perry explains how "abstinence only" works

[dblack]

Rick Perry Has a George Bush Moment - YouTube

Texas has the third highest teen pregnancy rate in the country.

I'm not defending Perry, he's a Liberal in Conservative clothing but he's right. If you don't stick your "cocktis erectus" in a girl, she can't get pregnant. What part of that is wrong? None of it.

But hey that doesn't matter, they're gonna' fuck anyway, so just give em condoms and/or access to abortions. Great idea.

Rick Perry Has a George Bush Moment - YouTube

Texas has the third highest teen pregnancy rate in the country.

Simple truth, the only 100% effective way to prevent a pregnancy is not have sex. Why do some people hate medical facts? When did Democrats become the anti doctor party?

Abstinence works. What's so hard to understand.

What's so hard to understand (apparently) is that this was not what Perry was asked about. He was asked about the effectiveness of teaching abstinence as the exclusive form of birth control. That's a complicated question to answer, so he tried to dodge it by pretending it was about whether abstinence works. Of course abstinence works. No one disputes that. The issue is whether teaching kids abstinence as the primary means of birth control - especially while ignoring other options - really prevents unwanted teen pregnancies.

The ugly thing here is that Perry is dodging the question by playing the 'dimwit demagogue' schtick. And it seems to work.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It is impossible for teens to be in the dark thees days. None of them can feign ignorance because the school nurse did not show them how to use a rubber and what they are for. One hour of Cartoon network after 9PM gives them a pretty good idea. Honestly, I think impulsive behavior that teens are known to have is responsible more then anything else.

Yep, and no one has a way to stop that.

There is also the lack of understanding of how serious STD's are.

It would be nice if we could scare kids enough that they were more careful, but kids tend to think the other guy is going to pay the price.

 

[NGSamson]

Yep, and no one has a way to stop that.

There is also the lack of understanding of how serious STD's are.

It would be nice if we could scare kids enough that they were more careful, but kids tend to think the other guy is going to pay the price.

All except for me. I never thought that way. Here in Houston we have one of the biggest planned parenthood centers. It sits in a community that is having a hell of a time with this issue. Even they cant educate enough, or provide enough services to put a dent in the problem.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is also the lack of understanding of how serious STD's are.

It would be nice if we could scare kids enough that they were more careful, but kids tend to think the other guy is going to pay the price.

All except for me. I never thought that way. Here in Houston we have one of the biggest planned parenthood centers. It sits in a community that is having a hell of a time with this issue. Even they cant educate enough, or provide enough services to put a dent in the problem.

They obviously need to spend more money.

 

[NGSamson]

It would be nice if we could scare kids enough that they were more careful, but kids tend to think the other guy is going to pay the price.

All except for me. I never thought that way. Here in Houston we have one of the biggest planned parenthood centers. It sits in a community that is having a hell of a time with this issue. Even they cant educate enough, or provide enough services to put a dent in the problem.

They obviously need to spend more money.

They do. Plenty. It was a big deal when they opened it, and has done little good.

 

[Zona]

Abstinence only is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and STDs

In theory anyway.

Yup...ask Bristol.

Horny teens fuck...its what they do and relying of abstinence only as a form of safe sex is just fucking Palin (crazy).

 

[NGSamson]

Abstinence only is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and STDs

In theory anyway.

Yup...ask Bristol.

Horny teens fuck...its what they do and relying of abstinence only as a form of safe sex is just fucking Palin (crazy).

If they are fucking they are not practicing abstinence. Sex ed did not help much either did it ?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Abstinence only is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and STDs

In theory anyway.

Yup...ask Bristol.

Horny teens fuck...its what they do and relying of abstinence only as a form of safe sex is just fucking Palin (crazy).

If they are fucking they are not practicing abstinence. Sex ed did not help much either did it ?

 

[Zona]

Abstinence works. What's so hard to understand.

As the father of a teenaged daughter you can bet your ass that's my mantra.

Remember when you were a teen. Sex wasnt that important to you was it.

 

[Zona]

Abstinence only is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and STDs

In theory anyway.

Yup...ask Bristol.

Horny teens fuck...its what they do and relying of abstinence only as a form of safe sex is just fucking Palin (crazy).

If they are fucking they are not practicing abstinence. Sex ed did not help much either did it ?

Bristol was taught abstinance only. How did that work out? Sex ed indeed.

 

[NGSamson]

When the wee wee go's into the hoo hoo, stuf that makes babies comes out . You have a pretty good idea of how that works from fifth grade science class. At best, Bristle's kid was the result of the drug store not being open, but most birth control most likely wasn't even a thought. Ignorance is a stupid argument. No teenager can honestly say they did not know.

 

[Missourian]

A new study published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine Monday showed that young teens given an abstinence-only message were significantly more likely to delay having sex than those receiving more comprehensive sex education.

The research is gaining attention since it’s the first rigorously conducted study demonstrating that an abstinence-only program can be effective.

“This is really game-changing research, because it provides the first strong evidence that abstinence-only education can help very young teens delay sex,” says Bill Albert, chief program officer for that National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, a nonpartisan organization. “The menu of proven options just got larger, and that’s good news.”

And the target age group of the report was 12.



Abstinence-only study could alter sex-education landscape - CSMonitor.com



>>>>

Yes....and?

Did you bother to read the results?

In the group receiving abstinence-only education, 33 percent began having sex over the next two years, compared with 47 percent of those in the control group. Among the other groups, 52 percent of those taught only about safe sex became sexually active within two years, as did 42 percent of those in the comprehensive program.​

This scientific study found that abstinence-only education produced the best long term results.

But, as we all know, only 6% of Liberals acknowledge scientific studies that contradict their ideology.

 

[WorldWatcher]

A new study published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine Monday showed that young teens given an abstinence-only message were significantly more likely to delay having sex than those receiving more comprehensive sex education.

The research is gaining attention since it’s the first rigorously conducted study demonstrating that an abstinence-only program can be effective.

“This is really game-changing research, because it provides the first strong evidence that abstinence-only education can help very young teens delay sex,” says Bill Albert, chief program officer for that National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, a nonpartisan organization. “The menu of proven options just got larger, and that’s good news.”

And the target age group of the report was 12.



Abstinence-only study could alter sex-education landscape - CSMonitor.com



>>>>

Yes....and?

Did you bother to read the results?

In the group receiving abstinence-only education, 33 percent began having sex over the next two years, compared with 47 percent of those in the control group. Among the other groups, 52 percent of those taught only about safe sex became sexually active within two years, as did 42 percent of those in the comprehensive program.​

Did I read that? Yes.

I also read this...

"For one thing, the targeted population – with an average age of 12 – was quite young. And for another, the abstinence program was carefully designed to try to avoid pitfalls others have encountered. It counseled children to delay sex “until they are ready” rather than until marriage, avoided a moralistic tone, and was careful not to disparage condom use, and to help children get rid of misconceptions about contraceptives if the subject came up during discussion."​

And this that shows that teen pregnancy rose under funding pushes under the Bush administration...

“This is not the kind of program that the federal government has been funding,” says Heather Boonstra, a senior public policy associate at the Guttmacher Institute, referring to the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs that thrived under the Bush administration.

Last week, the Guttmacher Institute released data showing that after a decade-long decline, America’s teen-pregnancy rate rose 3 percent in 2006. Ms. Boonstra is among those who believe some of that uptick may be due to the reliance on abstinence-only programs.​

This scientific study found that abstinence-only education produced the best long term results.

No it didn't.

It showed that this modified program, which as the author of the report says, does not meet current federal guidelines to qualify for federal funding and does not disparage the use of condoms. Had a positive impact on a small sample group selected group for a period of 24 months. That's 12 year old going to 14, that is not "best long term results", it's a limited sample for a relatively short time.

"Best long term results" would be measured across socioeconomic strata, multiple races, multiple education levels of the supporting family, multiple religious backgrounds for the family, and over the long term (from say age 12 to 20).

But, as we all know, only 6% of Liberals acknowledge scientific studies that contradict their ideology.

Good thing I'm not a liberal and also know how to read the source material directly like reading the study not just a media report of the study.

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med -- Efficacy of a Theory-Based Abstinence-Only Intervention Over 24 Months: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Young Adolescents, February 2010, Jemmott et al. 164 (2): 152

This does not appear to be the type of "abstinence only" education that some believe it is. It doesn't identify abstinence to marriage it advocates until they are ready, it does not present a moralistic view of abstinence only - it is neutral, and did not stress "inadequacies" of condoms.


>>>>

 

[Missourian]

Yes, I know all that, we discussed it here at length when the study first came out.

But, the point is that abstinence-only approach was the basis of the study.

Can we improve on that?

I certainly hope so.

But IMO, this basis appears to be the most likely to produce the desired result.