Miers supported ban on most abortions

[strandinthewind]

Miers supported ban on most abortions

Supreme Court nominee pledged to support pro-life group in 1989

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment banning abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother, according to material given to the Senate on Tuesday.

As a candidate for the Dallas city council, Miers also signaled support for the overall agenda of Texans United for Life -- agreeing she would support legislation restricting abortions if the Supreme Court ruled that states could ban abortions and would participate in "pro-life rallies and special events."

Miers made her views known in a candidate questionnaire the White House submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is expected to hold hearings on her Supreme Court nomination next month. The one-page questionnaire was filled out, but unsigned, although the Bush administration affirmed its authenticity.

Qualifications questioned

The document surfaced as the White House struggled to reassure conservatives who have been critical of Miers' appointment, depicting her as a crony of President Bush who lacks the background or qualifications to sit on the high court.

There was fresh evidence of trouble for Miers during the day, when Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, issued a statement saying, "My top questions are: does she have a consistent and well-grounded conservative judicial philosophy and what objective evidence is there of it from her life's work?"

Miers, 60, meanwhile, continued meeting privately with senators during the day, part of a round of courtesy calls that precede the opening of confirmation hearings.

"With her conservative judicial philosophy, she understands that judges must not legislate from the bench," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the conservative American Center for Law and Justice and a Miers supporter. "And while she may hold personal views that underscore the value of human life, it would be wrong for those views to be used against her in the confirmation process."

The 1989 questionnaire was designed to gauge candidates' views on the drive to ban most abortions, either by constitutional amendment or by state law in the event the Supreme Court overturned a 1973 ruling that established abortion rights.

"If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature," asked an April 1989 questionnaire sent out by the Texans United for Life group.

Miers checked "yes" to that question, and all of the group's questions, including whether she would oppose the use of public moneys for abortions and whether she would use her influence to keep "pro-abortion" people off city health boards and commissions.

The swing vote

The abortion issue hangs over Miers' nomination much as it did over the appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts earlier this year. The situations are different, however -- Roberts replaced the late William Rehnquist, who voted to overturn the 1973 abortion ruling. Miers would succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has voted to uphold it.

"A candidate taking a political position in the course of a campaign is different from the role of a judge making a ruling in the judicial process." said Jim Dyke, a White House spokesman.

Miers' nomination has been met with skepticism from some conservatives, who say she has little by way of a record to establish her views on abortion, affirmative action and other issues. The Texans United for Life questionnaire is additional evidence of how Miers feels about abortion, with some of her supporters assuring conservatives that they believe she would overturn the Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade ruling.

Miers also bought a $150 ticket to a Texans United for Life dinner in 1989 and took a leadership role in trying to get the American Bar Association to reconsider its abortion-rights position in 1993.

'Nobody can speak for me on Roe v. Wade'

Senators say Miers has insisted that she has not given anyone any assurances that she would overturn Roe v. Wade if given the chance.

"She said nobody knows my views on Roe v. Wade. Nobody can speak for me on Roe v. Wade," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, on Monday, referring to the case that guaranteed women's constitutional right to an abortion, setting a legal precedent that abortion foes have been trying to overturn ever since.

In the questionnaire that she turned in the Judiciary Committee, Miers answered "no" to questions asking whether anyone during the nomination process discussed specific cases or legal issues with her to get an assurance on her positions. She also answered "no" to whether she told anyone how she might rule if confirmed.

The questionnaire also reveals that the White House was considering Miers for its first Supreme Court nomination along with now-Chief Justice John Roberts.

"When Justice Sandra Day O'Connor first announced her desire to retire, I was asked whether my name should be considered," she said in the questionnaire. "I indicated at that time that I did not want to be considered."

Miers said she then led the staff search that ended in Roberts' nomination. But she said her role was more passive after Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died.

"At some point I understand that individuals at the White House began considering me," she wrote. During four meetings with Deputy White House Counsel William Kelley, Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Bush, Miers said she "realized that my name was under consideration."

Bush offered her the position over dinner October 2 and she accepted, she wrote.

Miers also revealed that her law license was suspended in the District of Columbia earlier this year for non-payment of bar dues. "I immediately sent the dues to remedy the delinquency," she wrote. "The non-payment was not intentioned, and I corrected the situation upon receiving the letter."

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/18/miers.ap/index.html
_____________________________________________________________

What a cow.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Just saw this on the news.

[DavidMn]

Interesting. Thank you for sharing this information.:nod:

[dissention]

Anyone who doesn't think The Corpse Bride of TGIFriday's is going to be confirmed is a dolt.

[strandinthewind]

Anyone who doesn't think The Corpse Bride of TGIFriday's is going to be confirmed is a dolt.

Simialarly, anyone who does not see through the BS moaning from the likes of Sow Coulter is a dolt. The far Christian right is salivating over this nominee because they know she is against the right of privacy.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Simialarly, anyone who does not see through the BS moaning from the likes of Sow Coulter is a dolt. The far Christian right is salivating over this nominee because they know she is against the right of privacy.

IF I HEAR THIS ONE MORE TIME I AM GOING TO SCREAM! SHUT UP ALREADY!

It is more than moaning. We are outraged that the President would be so arrogant as to nominate this completely unqualified individual to the USSC!

[ShangriLaTroubl]

IF I HEAR THIS ONE MORE TIME I AM GOING TO SCREAM! SHUT UP ALREADY!

It is more than moaning. We are outraged that the President would be so arrogant as to nominate this completely unqualified individual to the USSC!


:lol: That was a very funny blowup, thanks! I enjoyed it

[strandinthewind]

:lol: That was a very funny blowup, thanks! I enjoyed it

I know - it should be followed up with - "who will fulfill every single one of our goals about eliminating the right to privacy - but we really are just mad as hell she has no Ivy League education" :rolleyes:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

:lol: That was a very funny blowup, thanks! I enjoyed it

It's one of the only things that really bug me! Finally there is some sort of common ground between conservatives and liberals...but liberals won't have it! How dare any one question my sincerity in opposing Miers' nomination.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I know - it should be followed up with - "who will fulfill every single one of our goals about eliminating the right to privacy - but we really are just mad as hell she has no Ivy League education" :rolleyes:

Well that is a good start...









move on...

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Hey I just got a new DNC email today :

Republicans have become so incompetent, so out of control and so unbelievably corrupt that no amount of spin can cover it up. The fact is, we're witnessing a dramatic reversal in national politics. If we seize this opportunity, we can change history.

Everyone can see what Republican Leader Tom Delay did when he wanted more Republicans in Congress. He's been indicted for laundering more than $170,000 in corporate money to gerrymander six Congressional seats away from Democrats.

That's what the Republican money-for-influence machine is about -- special interest money to fund Republican officials who will make sure that contributors get a return on their investment.

We do things differently. So let's prove it. Tom DeLay is set to be arraigned in a Texas court on Friday -- let's raise twice the amount he's accused of laundering, and let's do it in grassroots donations.

Show America that ordinary people have the power to raise $2 for every $1 Tom Delay can launder. Make a contribution and fight Republican corruption:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

The corruption in Washington has gotten so bad that even Republicans can't stomach Republicans any longer. One GOP Congressman told Howard Fineman of Newsweek that the Republican leadership "has become ossified and hopelessly out of touch ... They only care about one thing, hanging onto their own power. I'm not ready to take them on, at least not yet, not unless I have to!"

He may not be ready to take on the corrupt Republican leadership -- but we are.

Wishing won't drive them out of office -- but strong Democratic candidates and a ground operation in every single state will. It's up to each of us to be a part of the alternative to failed Republican leadership. That's why the Democratic Party needs your financial support right now for our all-out candidate recruitment and organizing drive:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

There is a wave of change coming, and Republicans are battling against frustration from average voters and disappointment from their fringe extremist base.

The only limits on our potential are the number of strong Democratic candidates who step forward to run in key contests, and our ability to turn out the vote in every single precinct in America. Your dollars build something that hasn't existed in decades -- a Democratic organizing and communications infrastructure in every state.

Part of my job is to make sure that we have those candidates and that truly national organization in place. Our strength -- to potential candidates and to voters -- is that our promise of change is backed up by millions of committed people like you who will do whatever it takes to carry Democrats to victory.

Please make a contribution now to show that ordinary people have the power to drive Democratic victory:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

Republicans are having serious problems convincing people to run for office defending the GOP's incompetence, corruption and cronyism. The Washington Post reports serious worries in the Republican establishment over their recruitment failures.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is growing -- our slate of solid candidates continues to expand, and our 50-state strategy of putting organizers in every state continues to attract top talent everywhere.

With a serious push now -- in enough time to build a powerful party structure that will last beyond a single election cycle -- we can reshape the electoral landscape in 2006 and beyond.

Let's hit $340,000 by Friday:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

The future begins today -- America can do better, and the Democratic Party is the vehicle for change.

Here at Democratic Headquarters, everyone knows that you -- not special interests -- are in the driver's seat.

Thank you,

Tom McMahon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

P.S. -- A group of donors committed to a broad fundraising base has committed to matching every dollar raised between now and October 21. Every dollar contributed today will be matched -- so, doubling Tom DeLay's dirty money actually means quadrupling it to more than half a million dollars. This is a fantastic time to make a donation -- be part of the action by clicking here: http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

[heyjupiter678]

It's one of the only things that really bug me! Finally there is some sort of common ground between conservatives and liberals...but liberals won't have it! How dare any one question my sincerity in opposing Miers' nomination.
I think it's hilarious that you keep referring to Jason as a liberal just because he disagrees with you.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

If we seize this opportunity, we can change history.

:shocked: :lol:

What would I do if there were no liberals?

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I think it's hilarious that you keep referring to Jason as a liberal just because he disagrees with you.

I don't think I did...:confused:

[dissention]

Hey I just got a new DNC email today :

Republicans have become so incompetent, so out of control and so unbelievably corrupt that no amount of spin can cover it up. The fact is, we're witnessing a dramatic reversal in national politics. If we seize this opportunity, we can change history.

Everyone can see what Republican Leader Tom Delay did when he wanted more Republicans in Congress. He's been indicted for laundering more than $170,000 in corporate money to gerrymander six Congressional seats away from Democrats.

That's what the Republican money-for-influence machine is about -- special interest money to fund Republican officials who will make sure that contributors get a return on their investment.

We do things differently. So let's prove it. Tom DeLay is set to be arraigned in a Texas court on Friday -- let's raise twice the amount he's accused of laundering, and let's do it in grassroots donations.

Show America that ordinary people have the power to raise $2 for every $1 Tom Delay can launder. Make a contribution and fight Republican corruption:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

The corruption in Washington has gotten so bad that even Republicans can't stomach Republicans any longer. One GOP Congressman told Howard Fineman of Newsweek that the Republican leadership "has become ossified and hopelessly out of touch ... They only care about one thing, hanging onto their own power. I'm not ready to take them on, at least not yet, not unless I have to!"

He may not be ready to take on the corrupt Republican leadership -- but we are.

Wishing won't drive them out of office -- but strong Democratic candidates and a ground operation in every single state will. It's up to each of us to be a part of the alternative to failed Republican leadership. That's why the Democratic Party needs your financial support right now for our all-out candidate recruitment and organizing drive:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

There is a wave of change coming, and Republicans are battling against frustration from average voters and disappointment from their fringe extremist base.

The only limits on our potential are the number of strong Democratic candidates who step forward to run in key contests, and our ability to turn out the vote in every single precinct in America. Your dollars build something that hasn't existed in decades -- a Democratic organizing and communications infrastructure in every state.

Part of my job is to make sure that we have those candidates and that truly national organization in place. Our strength -- to potential candidates and to voters -- is that our promise of change is backed up by millions of committed people like you who will do whatever it takes to carry Democrats to victory.

Please make a contribution now to show that ordinary people have the power to drive Democratic victory:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

Republicans are having serious problems convincing people to run for office defending the GOP's incompetence, corruption and cronyism. The Washington Post reports serious worries in the Republican establishment over their recruitment failures.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is growing -- our slate of solid candidates continues to expand, and our 50-state strategy of putting organizers in every state continues to attract top talent everywhere.

With a serious push now -- in enough time to build a powerful party structure that will last beyond a single election cycle -- we can reshape the electoral landscape in 2006 and beyond.

Let's hit $340,000 by Friday:

http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

The future begins today -- America can do better, and the Democratic Party is the vehicle for change.

Here at Democratic Headquarters, everyone knows that you -- not special interests -- are in the driver's seat.

Thank you,

Tom McMahon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

P.S. -- A group of donors committed to a broad fundraising base has committed to matching every dollar raised between now and October 21. Every dollar contributed today will be matched -- so, doubling Tom DeLay's dirty money actually means quadrupling it to more than half a million dollars. This is a fantastic time to make a donation -- be part of the action by clicking here: http://www.democrats.org/doubledelay

So, basically, they're panhandling for money? I already got called three times in the past week, asking me to donate money as a sign of solidarity, and I told them that once they grow backbones and become a liberal party once again to call me back.

[dissention]

:shocked: :lol:

What would I do if there were no liberals?

Probably slip your boots on in the morning, march into position, and shout "Sieg heil!"

[ShangriLaTroubl]

So, basically, they're panhandling for money? I already got called three times in the past week, asking me to donate money as a sign of solidarity, and I told them that once they grow backbones and become a liberal party once again to call me back.

Well of course...they don't send out mailings for fun! They have to add the donation thing in there...and apparently it's working quite well for them!

Chris

[strandinthewind]

So, basically, they're panhandling for money? I already got called three times in the past week, asking me to donate money as a sign of solidarity, and I told them that once they grow backbones and become a liberal party once again to call me back.

Abortion will never go away because it is the backbone of fundraising for both parties. As are other issues like W and Hillary.

[dissention]

Abortion will never go away because it is the backbone of fundraising for both parties. As are other issues like W and Hillary.

I said that last year and was dismissed for my crazy talk. The abortion issue performs better for them than Toby Keith.

[strandinthewind]

I said that last year and was dismissed for my crazy talk. The abortion issue performs better for them than Toby Keith.

I did not dismiss you :eek:

Though you have been naughty and a spanking would suffice :p

[JazmenFlowers]

Abortion should always remain a choice for the involved parties. Making it illegal will lead to dirty docs performing horrible procedures on women or women performing their own. It is not the government's place to decide these issues. This issue chaps my ass.

Watch the first installment of If These Walls Could Talk.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Abortion should always remain a choice for the involved parties. Making it illegal will lead to dirty docs performing horrible procedures on women or women performing their own. It is not the government's place to decide these issues. This issue chaps my ass.

Watch the first installment of If These Walls Could Talk.

This is just as insane as the Clintonian statement about making abortion "safe, legal and rare." The most effective way to make something "rare" is make it ILLEGAL.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Probably slip your boots on in the morning, march into position, and shout "Sieg heil!"

No...WE are fascists Josh. You guys are the Communist/Nazis! Get with it dear!:laugh:

[heyjupiter678]

The most effective way to make something "rare" is make it ILLEGAL. What about underage drinking? ;)

[JazmenFlowers]

This is just as insane as the Clintonian statement about making abortion "safe, legal and rare." The most effective way to make something "rare" is make it ILLEGAL.
I don't see the similarities b/w my statement and the one you quote. And I don't think my statement is insane, by the way.

[estranged4life]

I said that last year and was dismissed for my crazy talk. The abortion issue performs better for them than Toby Keith.

I cannot allow you to rip on a fine Oklahoman like Toby Keith...



That's MY job to do!!! Y'all are lucky to not have to see this mental beany-weenie pea-brain sheep f**ker on TV on a near hourly basis. as us Okies have to.

[JazmenFlowers]

I cannot allow you to rip on a fine Oklahoman like Toby Keith...



That MY job to do!!! Y'all are lucky to not have to see this mental beany-weenie pea-brain sheep f**ker on TV on a near hourly basis. as us Okies have to.

lol - I hate TK.

[dissention]

What about underage drinking? ;)

Bless your heart, I'm blowing you kisses right now. I hope you can catch them. :laugh:

[estranged4life]

lol - I hate TK.

"Angry American" however is not one of 'em (If Toby "Mulle-mulle-mullet" Keith & Natalie "Lubbock dirt-bowl moo cow" Maines were to die this moment I would dance a jig.)

Anytime ya see something a Democratic related happening in this state sho'nuff you'll see that Booner Gooner nutsack along side getting his "shag mulletted head" on the screen.

TK Dude, Ya should hog the camera with that gargantuant head that is yet so damn empty....Makes ya look even more an asshole than ya already are.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

What about underage drinking? ;)

Drinking alcohol and killing a child...hmmm...

I never said I was perfect. :p

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Bless your heart, I'm blowing you kisses right now. I hope you can catch them. :laugh:

I think she was talking about me...





:o

[JazmenFlowers]

Drinking alcohol and killing a child...hmmm...

I never said I was perfect. :p
she isn't equating the two she is pointing out how making something illegal doesn't necessarilly make it rare or cease taking place.

[strandinthewind]

she isn't equating the two she is pointing out how making something illegal doesn't necessarilly make it rare or cease taking place.

I thought she was talking about the Bush twins' underage drinking and bar brawling :laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

she isn't equating the two she is pointing out how making something illegal doesn't necessarilly make it rare or cease taking place.

But let's say that underaged drinking was legal. Would you not agree that there would be MORE of it taking place?

[wondergirl9847]

The most effective way to make something "rare" is make it ILLEGAL.

When people want something, they will try to get it NO MATTER WHAT. Some people broke into our house in July 1992 (around 5PM) while my mom and I were in our backyard. They wanted stuff to sell for drug money. If people want cigs, booze, if women want abortions, even if these things all became illegal, doesn't matter, folks will get them.

I like "Shoulda Been a Cowboy" and "Wish I Didn't Know Now", which are pre-Patriotic TK. LOL

[Brwn_eyes0511]

When people want something, they will try to get it NO MATTER WHAT. Some people broke into our house in July 1992 (around 5PM) while my mom and I were in our backyard. They wanted stuff to sell for drug money. If people want cigs, booze, if women want abortions, even if these things all became illegal, doesn't matter, folks will get them.

But, like I said above, do you not agree that when things are made illegal there is a decrease in the action...whatever it may be.

[wondergirl9847]

Drugs, underage drinking, driving while intoxicated, murder, stealing, etc. all of these things are illegal, but it's rampant in this country. I don't think making abortion illegal will stop women from getting them. I'm afraid everyone is right in that people who shouldn't be giving abortions (greedy b*stards) will end up killing women. :(

I don't like abortion any more than you do, but people need to make their own choices in this life. Good AND bad and live with the consequences.

[SuzeQuze]

Drugs, underage drinking, driving while intoxicated, murder, stealing, etc. all of these things are illegal, but it's rampant in this country. I don't think making abortion illegal will stop women from getting them. I'm afraid everyone is right in that people who shouldn't be giving abortions (greedy b*stards) will end up killing women. :(

I don't like abortion any more than you do, but people need to make their own choices in this life. Good AND bad and live with the consequences.

:cheers: Well said! This is a very tough issue which I think should be dealt with by the individuals involved and the gov't should stay the hell out of it.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Drugs, underage drinking, driving while intoxicated, murder, stealing, etc. all of these things are illegal, but it's rampant in this country. I don't think making abortion illegal will stop women from getting them. I'm afraid everyone is right in that people who shouldn't be giving abortions (greedy b*stards) will end up killing women. :(

I don't like abortion any more than you do, but people need to make their own choices in this life. Good AND bad and live with the consequences.

You are still missing my point. YES all of these things do happen, but do you not agree that if they were made legal that they would happen EVEN MORE? So the same can be said when you flip the situation around.

[Mari]

Will they happen even more if it's legal? Nope, they won't. Abortion is legal in the Netherlands. The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.

[strandinthewind]

They are legal here as well and the rate is pretty steady and has even declined - so I fail to see how making it any more legal would make it rise :shrug:

Also, the problem with America is the far religious right cannot abide any sex ed. anywhere at anytime other than abstinence which is ineffective. A significant number of younger people simply do not know the avenues of birth control out there and that results in some 14 year old getting knocked up in the back seat of a car, which is relatively easy to prevent.

I mean how many people here never had intercourse much less other sex acts prior to marriage. I suggest that number is very small. So, until America gets over its judgemental attitude towards sex, unwanted prenancies will happen more than they should. For the life of me, I will never understand why anyone give's a rat's a$$ if I want to take home girls and screw all night or some other wild sex act. It is my business and mine alone. Yet, the coffers of the Church's would not be filled if no hate was preached :rolleyes:

[SuzeQuze]

That would require paying attention to research and not marching in lockstep with a religious ideology. Abstinence programs, according to the statistics, do not work because more teens become pregnant/contract STDs than teens who attend a real sex ed program. Abstinence programs put teens at risk.

Why not do some research on abortion statistics and see if legality actually has an impact on the number of abortions? That may be tough to do since there are likely no reliable numbers when it is illegal. At any rate, it is the woman who should be able to make the choice about her own body and life. If you abhor abortion so much adobt the unwanted babies yourself.

[GateandGarden]

Will they happen even more if it's legal? Nope, they won't. Abortion is legal in the Netherlands. The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.Good point.

[skcin]

But let's say that underaged drinking was legal. Would you not agree that there would be MORE of it taking place?

If underage drinking were legal, then there wouldn't be a "legal" age & it wouldn't be underage, now would it? ;)



Will they happen even more if it's legal? Nope, they won't. Abortion is legal in the Netherlands. The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.

Thank you Mari! :wavey:

[stargazer99]

Also, the problem with America is the far religious right cannot abide any sex ed. anywhere at anytime other than abstinence which is ineffective. A significant number of younger people simply do not know the avenues of birth control out there and that results in some 14 year old getting knocked up in the back seat of a car, which is relatively easy to prevent.

I mean how many people here never had intercourse much less other sex acts prior to marriage. I suggest that number is very small. So, until America gets over its judgemental attitude towards sex, unwanted prenancies will happen more than they should. For the life of me, I will never understand why anyone give's a rat's a$$ if I want to take home girls and screw all night or some other wild sex act. It is my business and mine alone. Yet, the coffers of the Church's would not be filled if no hate was preached :rolleyes:

Not to mention that many of the mandated "abstinence only" classes give students erroneous information... such as condoms fail to protect against HIV, touching another person's genitals can cause pregnancy, and that HIV can be spread through sweat and tears. :eek:

On the other hand, California, which has mandated HIV/AIDS education and comprehensive, accurate sex education curriculum, has seen a 40% drop in teen pregnancy.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Not to mention that many of the mandated "abstinence only" classes give students erroneous information... such as condoms fail to protect against HIV, touching another person's genitals can cause pregnancy, and that HIV can be spread through sweat and tears. :eek:


Oh that is just a lie!

[heyjupiter678]

Oh that is just a lie!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26623-2004Dec1.html

Some Abstinence Programs Mislead Teens, Report Says

By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 2, 2004; Page A01

Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.

Those and other assertions are examples of the "false, misleading, or distorted information" in the programs' teaching materials, said the analysis, released yesterday, which reviewed the curricula of more than a dozen projects aimed at preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

In providing nearly $170 million next year to fund groups that teach abstinence only, the Bush administration, with backing from the Republican Congress, is investing heavily in a just-say-no strategy for teenagers and sex. But youngsters taking the courses frequently receive medically inaccurate or misleading information, often in direct contradiction to the findings of government scientists, said the report, by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), a critic of the administration who has long argued for comprehensive sex education.

Several million children ages 9 to 18 have participated in the more than 100 federal abstinence programs since the efforts began in 1999. Waxman's staff reviewed the 13 most commonly used curricula -- those used by at least five programs apiece.

The report concluded that two of the curricula were accurate but the 11 others, used by 69 organizations in 25 states, contain unproved claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods regarding reproductive health, gender traits and when life begins. In some cases, Waxman said in an interview, the factual issues were limited to occasional misinterpretations of publicly available data; in others, the materials pervasively presented subjective opinions as scientific fact.

Among the misconceptions cited by Waxman's investigators:

• A 43-day-old fetus is a "thinking person."

• HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.

• Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse.

One curriculum, called "Me, My World, My Future," teaches that women who have an abortion "are more prone to suicide" and that as many as 10 percent of them become sterile. This contradicts the 2001 edition of a standard obstetrics textbook that says fertility is not affected by elective abortion, the Waxman report said.

"I have no objection talking about abstinence as a surefire way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases," Waxman said. "I don't think we ought to lie to our children about science. Something is seriously wrong when federal tax dollars are being used to mislead kids about basic health facts."

When used properly and consistently, condoms fail to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) less than 3 percent of the time, federal researchers say, and it is not known how many gay teenagers are HIV-positive. The assertion regarding gay teenagers may be a misinterpretation of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found that 59 percent of HIV-infected males ages 13 to 19 contracted the virus through homosexual relations.

Joe. S. McIlhaney Jr., who runs the Medical Institute for Sexual Health, which developed much of the material that was surveyed, said he is "saddened" that Waxman chose to "blast" well-intentioned abstinence educators when there is much the two sides could agree on.

McIlhaney acknowledged that his group, which publishes "Sexual Health Today" instruction manuals, made a mistake in describing the relationship between a rare type of infection caused by chlamydia bacteria and heart failure. Chlamydia also causes a common type of sexually transmitted infection, but that is not linked to heart disease. But McIlhaney said Waxman misinterpreted a slide that warns young people about the possibility of pregnancy without intercourse. McIlhaney said the slide accurately describes a real, though small, risk of pregnancy in mutual masturbation.

Congress first allocated money for abstinence-only programs in 1999, setting aside $80 million in grants, which go to a variety of religious, civic and medical organizations. To be eligible, groups must limit discussion of contraception to failure rates.

President Bush has enthusiastically backed the movement, proposing to spend $270 million on abstinence projects in 2005. Congress reduced that to about $168 million, bringing total abstinence funding to nearly $900 million over five years. It does not appear that the abstinence-only curricula are being taught in the Washington area.

Waxman and other liberal sex-education proponents argue that adolescents who take abstinence-only programs are ill-equipped to protect themselves if they become sexually active. According to the latest CDC data, 61 percent of graduating high school seniors have had sex.

Supporters of the abstinence approach, also called abstinence until marriage, counter that teaching young people about "safer sex" is an invitation to have sex.

Alma Golden, deputy assistant secretary for population affairs in the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement that Waxman's report is a political document that does a "disservice to our children." Speaking as a pediatrician, Golden said, she knows "abstaining from sex is the most effective means of preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, STDs and preventing pregnancy."

Nonpartisan researchers have been unable to document measurable benefits of the abstinence-only model. Columbia University researchers found that although teenagers who take "virginity pledges" may wait longer to initiate sexual activity, 88 percent eventually have premarital sex.

Bill Smith, vice president of public policy at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, a comprehensive sex education group that also receives federal funding, said the Waxman report underscored the need for closer monitoring of what he called the "shame-based, fear-based, medically inaccurate messages" being disseminated with tax money. He said the danger of abstinence education lies in the omission of useful medical information.

Some course materials cited in Waxman's report present as scientific fact notions about a man's need for "admiration" and "sexual fulfillment" compared with a woman's need for "financial support." One book in the "Choosing Best" series tells the story of a knight who married a village maiden instead of the princess because the princess offered so many tips on slaying the local dragon. "Moral of the story," notes the popular text: "Occasional suggestions and assistance may be alright, but too much of it will lessen a man's confidence or even turn him away from his princess."

[dissention]

Oh that is just a lie!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26623-2004Dec1.html
Some Abstinence Programs Mislead Teens, Report Says
By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 2, 2004; Page A01

Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.

Those and other assertions are examples of the "false, misleading, or distorted information" in the programs' teaching materials, said the analysis, released yesterday, which reviewed the curricula of more than a dozen projects aimed at preventing teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

In providing nearly $170 million next year to fund groups that teach abstinence only, the Bush administration, with backing from the Republican Congress, is investing heavily in a just-say-no strategy for teenagers and sex. But youngsters taking the courses frequently receive medically inaccurate or misleading information, often in direct contradiction to the findings of government scientists, said the report, by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), a critic of the administration who has long argued for comprehensive sex education.

Several million children ages 9 to 18 have participated in the more than 100 federal abstinence programs since the efforts began in 1999. Waxman's staff reviewed the 13 most commonly used curricula -- those used by at least five programs apiece.

The report concluded that two of the curricula were accurate but the 11 others, used by 69 organizations in 25 states, contain unproved claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods regarding reproductive health, gender traits and when life begins. In some cases, Waxman said in an interview, the factual issues were limited to occasional misinterpretations of publicly available data; in others, the materials pervasively presented subjective opinions as scientific fact.

Among the misconceptions cited by Waxman's investigators:

• A 43-day-old fetus is a "thinking person."

• HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears.

• Condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission as often as 31 percent of the time in heterosexual intercourse.

One curriculum, called "Me, My World, My Future," teaches that women who have an abortion "are more prone to suicide" and that as many as 10 percent of them become sterile. This contradicts the 2001 edition of a standard obstetrics textbook that says fertility is not affected by elective abortion, the Waxman report said.

"I have no objection talking about abstinence as a surefire way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases," Waxman said. "I don't think we ought to lie to our children about science. Something is seriously wrong when federal tax dollars are being used to mislead kids about basic health facts."

When used properly and consistently, condoms fail to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) less than 3 percent of the time, federal researchers say, and it is not known how many gay teenagers are HIV-positive. The assertion regarding gay teenagers may be a misinterpretation of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found that 59 percent of HIV-infected males ages 13 to 19 contracted the virus through homosexual relations.

[dissention]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26623-2004Dec1.html

Some Abstinence Programs Mislead Teens, Report Says


Dammit, you beat me to the punch, Mikki. :laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

SOME


And I can assure you it is not the majority. Very misleading...

[dissention]

And I can assure you it is not the majority. Very misleading...

Yeah, because you've attended the majority of abstinence-only programs in this country to be able to assure us with your firsthand knowledge. :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

Not to mention that many of the mandated "abstinence only" classes give students erroneous information... such as condoms fail to protect against HIV, touching another person's genitals can cause pregnancy, and that HIV can be spread through sweat and tears. :eek:

On the other hand, California, which has mandated HIV/AIDS education and comprehensive, accurate sex education curriculum, has seen a 40% drop in teen pregnancy.

All that liberal talk is fine and dandy for those heathen California movie people - but here in the God Fearin' rest of the country - we don't go for fu*king out of wedlock and our stats prove it :rolleyes: Now, excuse me while I call my wife and lie to her about where I am this evening so I can pick up my favorite hooker on Airline Hwy. - I know them all as I HAVE SIIIIINNNEEDDDDDD :rolleyes:

[SuzeQuze]

SOME


And I can assure you it is not the majority. Very misleading...

WHERE is YOUR data?

[Brwn_eyes0511]

The Effectiveness of Abstinence Education Programs in Reducing Sexual Activity Among Youth

April 8, 2002

Teenage sexual activity is a major problem confronting the nation and has led to a rising incidence of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), emotional and psychological injuries, and out-of-wedlock childbearing. Abstinence education programs for youth have been proven to be effective in reducing early sexual activity. Abstinence programs also can provide the foundation for personal responsibility and enduring marital commitment. Therefore, they are vitally important to efforts aimed at reducing out-of-wedlock childbearing among young adult women, improving child well-being, and increasing adult happiness over the long term.

Washington policymakers should be aware of the consequences of early sexual activity, the undesirable contents of conventional "safe sex" education programs, and the findings of the professional literature concerning the effectiveness of genuine abstinence programs. In particular, policymakers should understand that:

Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including incurable viral infections, have reached epidemic proportions. Annually, 3 million teenagers contract STDs; STDs afflict roughly one in four teens who are sexually active.
Early sexual activity has multiple negative consequences for young people. Research shows that young people who become sexually active are not only vulnerable to STDs, but also likely to experience emotional and psychological injuries, subsequent marital difficulties, and involvement in other high-risk behaviors.
Conventional "safe sex" programs (sometimes erroneously called "abstinence plus" programs) place little or no emphasis on encouraging young people to abstain from early sexual activity. Instead, such programs strongly promote condom use and implicitly condone sexual activity among teens. Nearly all such programs contain material and messages that would be alarming and offensive to the overwhelming majority of parents.
Despite claims to the contrary, there are 10 scientific evaluations showing that real abstinence programs can be highly effective in reducing early sexual activity. Moreover, real abstinence education is a fairly young field; thus, the number of evaluations of abstinence programs at present is somewhat limited. In the near future, many additional evaluations that demonstrate the effectiveness of abstinence education will become available.

Consequences of Early Sexual Activity
Young people who become sexually active enter an arena of high-risk behavior that leads to physical and emotional damage. Each year, influenced by a combination of a youthful assumption of invincibility and a lack of guidance (or misguidance and misleading information), millions of teens ignore those risks and suffer the consequences.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases
The nation is experiencing an epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases that is steadily expanding. In the 1960s, the beginning of the "sexual revolution," the dominant diseases related to sexual activity were syphilis and gonorrhea. Today, there are more than 20 widespread STDs, infecting an average of more than 15 million individuals each year.1 Two-thirds of all STDs occur in people who are 25 years of age or younger.2 Each year, 3 million teens contract an STD; overall, one-fourth of sexually active teens have been afflicted.3

There is no cure for sexually transmitted viral diseases such as the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and herpes, which take their toll on people throughout life. Other common viral STDs are the Human Papillomavirus (HPV)--the leading viral STD, with 5.5 million cases reported each year,4 and the cause of nearly all cases of cervical cancer that kill approximately 4,800 women per year5 --and Chlamydia trachomatis, which is associated with pelvic inflammatory disease that scars the fallopian tubes and is the fastest growing cause of infertility.

Significantly, research shows that condom use offers relatively little protection (from "zero" to "some") for herpes and no protection from the deadly HPV. A review of the scientific literature reveals that, on average, condoms failed to prevent the transmission of the HIV virus--which causes the immune deficiency syndrome known as AIDS--between 15 percent and 31 percent of the time.6 It should not be surprising, therefore, that while condom use has increased over the past 25 years, the spread of STDs has likewise continued to rise.7

Emotional and Psychological Injury
Young people who become sexually active are vulnerable to emotional and psychological injury as well as to physical diseases. Many young girls report experiencing regret or guilt after their initial sexual experience. In the words of one psychiatrist who recalls the effects of her own sexual experimentation in her teens, "The longest-standing, deepest wound I gave myself was heartfelt; that sick, used feeling of having given a precious part of myself--my soul--to so many and for nothing, still aches. I never imagined I'd pay so dearly and for so long."8

Sexually active youth often live with anxiety about the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy or contracting a devastating STD. Those who do become infected with a disease suffer emotional as well as physical effects. Fears regarding the course the disease are coupled with a loss of self-esteem and self-confidence. In a survey by the Medical Institute for Sexual Health, 80 percent of those who had herpes said that they felt "less confident" and "less desirable sexually."9

In addition, early sexual activity can negatively affect the ability of young people to form stable and healthy relationships in a later marriage. Sexual relationships among teenagers are fleeting and unstable, and broken intimate relationships can have serious long-term developmental effects. A series of broken intimate relationships can undermine an individual's capacity to enter into a committed, loving marital relationship. In general, individuals who engage in premarital sexual activity are 50 percent more likely to divorce later in life than those who do not.10 Divorce, in turn, leads to sharp reductions in adult happiness and child well-being.

Marital relationships that follow early sexual activity can also suffer from the emotional impact of infertility resulting from an STD infection, ranging from a sense of guilt to depression. In the words of one gynecologist and fertility specialist, "Infertility is so devastating, it often disorients my patients to life itself. This is more than shock or even depression. It impacts every level of their lives, including their marriage."11

Correlation Between Sexual Activity and Other High-Risk Behaviors
Research from a variety of sources indicates a correlation between sexual activity among adolescents and teens and the likelihood of engaging in other high-risk behaviors, such as tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drug use.

A study reported in Pediatrics magazine found that sexually active boys aged 12 through 16 are four times more likely to smoke and six times more likely to use alcohol than are those who describe themselves as virgins. Among girls in this same age cohort, those who are sexually active are seven times more likely to smoke and 10 times more likely to use marijuana than are those who are virgins.12 The report describes sexual activity as a "significant associate of other health-endangering behaviors" and notes an increasing recognition of the interrelation of risk behaviors. Research by the Alan Guttmacher Institute likewise finds a correlation between risk behaviors among adolescents and sexual activity; for example, teenagers who use alcohol, tobacco, and/or marijuana regularly are more likely to be sexually active.13

Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing
Today, one child in three is born out of wedlock. Only 14 percent of these births occur to women under the age of 18. Most occur to women in their early twenties.14 Thus, giving birth control to teens in high school through safe-sex programs will have little effect on out-of-wedlock childbearing.

Nearly half of the mothers who give birth outside marriage are cohabiting with the child's father at the time of birth.15 These fathers, like the mothers, are typically in their early twenties. Out-of-wedlock childbearing is, thus, not the result of teenagers' lack of knowledge about birth control or a lack of availability of birth control. Rather, it is part of a crisis in the relationships of young adult men and women. Out-of-wedlock childbearing, in most cases, occurs because young adult men and women are unable to develop committed, loving marital relationships. Abstinence programs, therefore, which focus on developing loving and enduring relationships and preparation for successful marriages, are an essential first step in reducing future levels of out-of-wedlock births.

The Silent Scandal: Promoting Teen Sex
With millions of dollars in sex-education programs at stake, it is not surprising that the groups that have previously dominated the arena have taken action to block the growing movement to abstinence-only education. Such organizations, including the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SEICUS), Planned Parenthood, and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL), have been prime supporters of "safe-sex" programs for youth, which entail guidance on the use of condoms and other means of contraception while giving a condescending nod to abstinence. Clearly, the caveat that says "and if you do engage in sex, this is how you should do it" substantially weakens an admonition against early non-marital sexual activity.

Not only do such programs, by their very nature, minimize the abstinence component of sex education, but many of these programs also implicitly encourage sexual activity among the youths they teach. Guidelines developed by SEICUS, for example, include teaching children aged five through eight about masturbation and teaching youths aged 9 through 12 about alternative sexual activities such as mutual masturbation, "outercourse," and oral sex.16 In addition, the SEICUS guidelines suggest informing youths aged 16 through 18 that sexual activity can include bathing or showering together as well as oral, vaginal, or anal intercourse, and that they can use erotic photographs, movies, or literature to enhance their sexual fantasies when alone or with a partner. Not only do such activities carry their own risks for youth, but they are also likely to increase the incidence of sexual intercourse.

In recent years, parental support for real abstinence education has grown. Because of this, many traditional safe-sex programs now take to calling themselves "abstinence plus" or "abstinence-based" education. In reality, there is little abstinence training in "abstinence-based" education. Instead, these programs are thinly disguised efforts to promote condom use. The actual content of most "abstinence plus" curricula would be alarming to most parents. For example, such programs typically have condom use exercises in which middle school students practice unrolling condoms on cucumbers or dildoes.17

Effective Abstinence Programs
Critics of abstinence education often assert that while abstinence education that exclusively promotes abstaining from premarital sex is a good idea in theory, there is no evidence that such education can actually reduce sexual activity among young people. Such criticism is erroneous. There are currently 10 scientific evaluations (described below) that demonstrate the effectiveness of abstinence programs in altering sexual behavior.18 Each of the programs evaluated is a real abstinence (or what is conventionally termed an "abstinence only") program; that is, the program does not provide contraceptives or encourage their use.

The abstinence programs and their evaluations are as follows:

Virginity Pledge Programs. An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association by Dr. Michael Resnick and others entitled "Protecting Adolescents From Harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health" shows that "abstinence pledge" programs are dramatically effective in reducing sexual activity among teenagers in grades 7 through 12.19 Based on a large national sample of adolescents, the study concludes that "Adolescents who reported having taken a pledge to remain a virgin were at significantly lower risk of early age of sexual debut."20
In fact, the study found that participating in an abstinence program and taking a formal pledge of virginity were by far the most significant factors in a youth's delaying early sexual activity. The study compared students who had taken a formal pledge of virginity with students who had not taken a pledge but were otherwise identical in terms of race, income, school performance, degree of religiousness, and other social and demographic factors. Based on this analysis, the authors discovered that the level of sexual activity among students who had taken a formal pledge of virginity was one-fourth the level of that of their counterparts who had not taken a pledge. Overall, nearly 16 percent of girls and 10 percent of boys were found to have taken a virginity pledge.

Not Me, Not Now. Not Me, Not Now is a community-wide abstinence intervention targeted to 9- to 14-year-olds in Monroe County, New York, which includes the city of Rochester. The Not Me, Not Now program devised a mass communications strategy to promote the abstinence message through paid TV and radio advertising, billboards, posters distributed in schools, educational materials for parents, an interactive Web site, and educational sessions in school and community settings. The program sought to communicate five themes: raising awareness of the problem of teen pregnancy, increasing an understanding of the negative consequences of teen pregnancy, developing resistance to peer pressure, promoting parent-child communication, and promoting abstinence among teens.
Not Me, Not Now was effective in reaching early teen listeners, with some 95 percent of the target audience within the county reporting that they had seen a Not Me, Not Now ad. During the intervention period, the program achieved a statistically significant positive shift in attitudes among pre-teens and early teens in the county. The sexual activity rate of 15-year-olds across the county (as reported in the Youth Risk Behavior Survey21 ) dropped by a statistically significant amount from 46.6 percent to 31.6 percent during the intervention period. Finally, the pregnancy rate for girls aged 15 through 17 in Monroe County fell by a statistically significant amount, from 63.4 pregnancies per 1,000 girls to 49.5 pregnancies per 1,000. The teen pregnancy rate fell more rapidly in Monroe County than in comparison counties and in upstate New York in general, and the difference in the rate of decrease was statistically significant.22

Operation Keepsake. Operation Keepsake is an abstinence program for 12- and 13-year-old children in Cleveland, Ohio. Some 77 percent of the children in the program were black or Hispanic. An evaluation of the program in 2001, involving a sample of over 800 students, found that "Operation Keepsake had a clear and sustainable impact on...abstinence beliefs." The evaluation showed that the program reduced the rate of onset of sexual activity (loss of virginity) by roughly two-thirds relative to comparable students in control schools who did not participate in the program. In addition, the program reduced by about one-fifth the rate of current sexual activity among those with prior sexual experience.23


Abstinence by Choice. Abstinence by Choice operates in 20 schools in the Little Rock area of Arkansas. The program targets 7th, 8th, and 9th grade students and reaches about 4,000 youths each year. A recent evaluation, involving a sample of nearly 1,000 students, shows that the program has been highly effective in changing the attitudes that are directly linked to early sexual activity. Moreover, the program reduced the sexual activity rates of girls by approximately 40 percent (from 10.2 percent to 5.9 percent) and the rate for boys by approximately 30 percent (from 22.8 percent to 15.8 percent) when compared with similar students who had not been exposed to the program. (The sexual activity rate of students in the program was compared with the rate of sexual activity among control students in the same grade in the same schools prior to the commencement of the program.)24


Virginity Pledge Movement. A 2001 evaluation of the effectiveness of the virginity pledge movement using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health finds that virginity pledge programs are highly effective in helping adolescents to delay sexual activity. According to the authors of the study:
Adolescents who pledge, controlling for all of the usual characteristics of adolescents and their social contexts that are associated with the transition to sex, are much less likely than adolescents who do not pledge, to have intercourse. The delay effect is substantial and robust. Pledging delays intercourse for a long time.25
The study, based on a sample of more than 5,000 students, concludes that taking a virginity pledge reduces by one-third the probability that an adolescent will begin sexual activity compared with other adolescents of the same gender and age, after controlling for a host of other factors linked to sexual activity rates such as physical maturity, parental disapproval of sexual activity, school achievement, and race. When taking a virginity pledge is combined with strong parental disapproval of sexual activity, the probability of initiation of sexual activity is reduced by 75 percent or more.


Teen Aid and Sex Respect. An evaluation of the Teen Aid and Sex Respect abstinence programs in three school districts in Utah showed that both programs were effective among the students who were at the greatest risk of initiating sexual activity. Approximately 7,000 high school and middle school students participated in the evaluation. To determine the effects of the programs, students in schools with the abstinence programs were compared with students in similar control schools within the same school district. Statistical adjustments were applied to further control for any initial differences between program participants and control students. The programs together were shown to reduce the rate of initiation of sexual activity among at-risk high school students by over a third when compared with a control group of similar students who were not exposed to the program.26 Statistically significant changes in behavior were not found among junior high students.

When high school and junior high school students were examined together, Sex Respect was shown to reduce the rate of initiation of sexual activity among at-risk students by 25 percent when compared with a control group of similar students who were not exposed to the program. Teen Aid was found to reduce the initiation of sex activity by some 17 percent. A third non-abstinence program, Values and Choices, which offered non-directive or value-free instruction in sex education and decision-making, was found to have no impact on sexual behavior.


Family Accountability Communicating Teen Sexuality (FACTS). An evaluation performed for the national Title XX abstinence program examined the effectiveness of the Family Accountability Communicating Teen Sexuality abstinence program in reducing teen sexual activity. The evaluation assessed the FACTS program by comparing a sample of students who participated in the program with a group of comparable students in separate control schools who did not participate in the program. The experimental and control students together comprised a sample of 308 students. The evaluation found the FACTS program to be highly effective in delaying the onset of sexual activity. Students who participated in the program were 30 percent to 50 percent less likely to commence sexual activity than were those who did not participate.27


Postponing Sexual Involvement (PSI). Postponing Sexual Involvement was an abstinence program developed by Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, and provided to low-income 8th grade students. A study published in Family Planning Perspectives, based on a sample of 536 low-income students, showed that the PSI program was effective in altering sexual behavior.28 A comparison of the program participants with a control population of comparable low-income minority students who did not participate showed that PSI reduced the rate of initiation of sexual activity during the 8th grade by some 60 percent for boys and over 95 percent for girls.29 As the study explained:
The program had a pronounced effect on the behavior of both boys and girls who had not been sexually involved before the program.... By the end of eighth grade, boys who had not had the program were more than three times as likely to have begun having sex as were boys who had the program.... Girls who had not had the program were as much as 15 times more likely to have begun having sex as were girls who had had the program.30
The effects of the program lasted into the next school year even though no additional sessions were provided. By the end of the 9th grade, boys and girls who had participated in PSI were still some 35 percent less likely to have commenced sexual activity than were those who had not participated in the abstinence program.31


Project Taking Charge. Project Taking Charge is a six-week abstinence curriculum delivered in home economics classes during the school year. It was designed for use in low-income communities with high rates of teen pregnancy. The curriculum contains these elements: self-development; basic information about sexual biology (anatomy, physiology, and pregnancy); vocational goal-setting; family communication; and values instruction on the importance of delaying sexual activity until marriage. The effect of the program has been evaluated in two sites: Wilmington, Delaware, and West Point, Mississippi. The evaluation was based on a small sample of 91 adolescents. Control and experimental groups were created by randomly assigning classrooms to either receive or not receive the program. The students were assessed immediately before and after the program and through a six-month follow-up.

In the six-month follow-up, Project Taking Charge was shown to have had a statistically significant effect in increasing adolescents' knowledge of the problems associated with teen pregnancy, the problems of sexually transmitted diseases, and reproductive biology. The program was also shown to reduce the rate of onset of sexual activity by 50 percent relative to the students in the control group, although the authors urge caution in the interpretation of these numbers due to the small size of the evaluation sample.32


Teen Aid Family Life Education Project. The Teen Aid Family Life Education Project is a widely used abstinence education program for high school and junior high students. An evaluation of the effectiveness of Teen Aid, involving a sample of over 1,300 students, was performed in 21 schools in California, Idaho, Oregon, Mississippi, Utah, and Washington. The Teen Aid program was shown to have a statistically significant effect in reducing the rate of initiation of sexual activity (loss of virginity) among high-risk high school students, compared with similar students in control schools. Among at-risk high school students who participated in the program, the rate of initiation of sexual activity was cut by more than one-fourth, from 37 percent to 27 percent. A similar pattern of reduction was found among at-risk junior high school students, but the effects did not achieve statistical significance. The program did not have statistically significant effects among lower-risk students.33

Conclusion
Real abstinence education is essential to reducing out-of-wedlock childbearing, preventing sexually transmitted diseases, and improving emotional and physical well-being among the nation's youth. True abstinence education programs help young people to develop an understanding of commitment, fidelity, and intimacy that will serve them well as the foundations of healthy marital life in the future.

Abstinence education programs have repeatedly been shown to be effective in reducing sexual activity among their participants. However, funding for the evaluation of abstinence education programs until very recently has ranged from meager to nonexistent. Currently, the number of adequately funded evaluations of abstinence education is increasing. At present, there are several promising new evaluations nearing completion. As each year passes, it can be expected that the number of evaluations showing that abstinence education does significantly reduce sexual activity will grow steadily.

Abstinence education is a nascent and developing field. Substantial funding for abstinence education became available only within the past few years. As abstinence programs develop and become more broadly available, future evaluations will enable the programs to hone and increase their effectiveness.


http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1533.cfm

[dissention]

WHERE is YOUR data?

Here's some:

Teen sex increased after abstinence program
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6894568/

ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION
http://www.siecus.org/pubs/fact/fact0001.html

To date, six studies of abstinence-only programs have been published. None of these studies found consistent and significant program effects on delaying the onset of intercourse, and at least one study provided strong evidence that the program did not delay the onset of intercourse. Thus, the weight of evidence indicates that these abstinence-only programs do not delay the onset of intercourse. 10

A study of 7,326 seventh and eighth graders in California who participated in an abstinence-only program found that the program did not have a measurable impact upon either sexual or contraceptive behaviors. 11

Nearly two-thirds of teenagers think teaching "Just Say No" is an ineffective deterrent to teenage sexual activity. 12

The National Institutes of Health's Consensus Panel on AIDS said in February 1997 that the abstinence-only approach to sexuality education "places policy in direct conflict with science and ignores overwhelming evidence that other programs (are) effective. 13

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Here's some:

Teen sex increased after abstinence program
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6894568/

ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION
http://www.siecus.org/pubs/fact/fact0001.html

To date, six studies of abstinence-only programs have been published. None of these studies found consistent and significant program effects on delaying the onset of intercourse, and at least one study provided strong evidence that the program did not delay the onset of intercourse. Thus, the weight of evidence indicates that these abstinence-only programs do not delay the onset of intercourse. 10

A study of 7,326 seventh and eighth graders in California who participated in an abstinence-only program found that the program did not have a measurable impact upon either sexual or contraceptive behaviors. 11

Nearly two-thirds of teenagers think teaching "Just Say No" is an ineffective deterrent to teenage sexual activity. 12

The National Institutes of Health's Consensus Panel on AIDS said in February 1997 that the abstinence-only approach to sexuality education "places policy in direct conflict with science and ignores overwhelming evidence that other programs (are) effective. 13

What are we going to cook today? I know BOOKS!

[dissention]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1533.cfm

In the words of your idol, there you go again. :rolleyes:

[JazmenFlowers]

notice the gap in time. your data seems a little outdated.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Abstinence programs reduce teen pregnancy at least 40%, Heritage Foundation says
Apr 19, 2004
By Mark Kelly
Baptist Press
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Programs like True Love Waits, which challenge young people to abstain from sexual activity until marriage, dramatically reduce the rate of out-of-wedlock births, according to a new study released by the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.

Young women who take a virginity pledge are at least 40 percent less likely to have a child out of wedlock and 12 times more likely to be virgins when they marry, compared to young women who do not make such a pledge, the study revealed.

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health tracked young people from junior high to young adulthood, beginning in 1994, a year after LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention launched its True Love Waits emphasis. The study tracked the effects of virginity pledges on teens' actual sexual behavior.

The study concluded that public abstinence pledges made by teenagers still had an effect six years later. Pledgers are less likely to initiate sex and more likely to marry.

SIGNIFICANT SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The study's findings about out-of-wedlock births have very significant social implications, said Kirk Johnson, a senior policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation.

"Some 1.35 million children are born out of wedlock annually, representing roughly one-third of all births in the United States," he said. "Children raised by single parents are seven times more likely to live in poverty than are children raised in intact homes, and they are much more likely to be dependent on welfare programs and to suffer from a wide range of other social maladies."

When the findings were adjusted for differences in race, income, family structure, religiosity and other background conditions, the rate of out-of-wedlock births dropped 50 percent -- 29 percent of young women who had not made an abstinence pledge had a child out of wedlock, contrasted with only about 14 percent of young women who had made a pledge.

"Young people who make deliberate public pledges to remain virgins are likely to substantially delay the initiation of sexual activity, have fewer sexual partners and are more likely to marry," Johnson said. "These behaviors, in turn, are likely to lead to lower rates of out-of-wedlock childbearing. The current findings strongly suggest that abstinence education programs that clearly encourage young people to delay sexual activity can, potentially, have a large positive effect on youth behaviors and life outcomes."

The study's findings reinforce the conclusions of nine other research projects on the effectiveness of teenage abstinence pledges.

Syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher argues that secular critics of abstinence programs point to findings that indicate most pledgers do eventually have premarital sex and have only slightly lower rates of sexually transmitted diseases. But they minimize the social good accomplished by the programs and ignore the emotional costs of premarital teen sex.

MEETING BOTH EMOTIONAL AND PHYSICAL NEEDS

"True abstinence education programs are uniquely suited to meeting both the emotional and the physical needs of America's youth, in sharp contrast to the 'safe sex' or 'comprehensive sex education' curricula that often permeate America's public school classrooms," Johnson said. "In general, these sex-ed curricula fail to provide a message to delay sexual activity, fail to deal adequately with the long-term emotional and moral aspects of sexuality, and fail to explain that sexual activity should be linked to love, commitment and intimacy."

An earlier set of findings from the project, released in 2001, concluded that teens who make abstinence pledges delay having sex a year and a half longer on average than those who do not pledge abstinence.

That study noted the delay effect is "substantial and almost impossible to erase." The pledge works, the study suggested, because it creates an "identity movement" or "moral community" that provides peer support for the teen.

That study also confirmed research that showed adults, especially parents, play a vital role in helping even older teens delay sexual activity. Delayed one-on-one dating and clearly expressed disapproval of premarital sex from adults greatly empowered teens to sustain their sexually purity pledges. Because True Love Waits campaigns typically are conducted in a church setting, teenagers are supported in their pledges by parents as well as a community of caring adults and peers.

Programs like True Love Waits, the study concludes, teach that human sexual relationships are mainly emotional and moral -- not merely physical -- in nature and that abstaining from premarital sex as a teenager is a critical step toward having a healthy, loving relationship in marriage as an adult.
--30--
Frequently asked questions about True Love Waits:
http://www.lifeway.com/lwc/article_main_page/0%2C1703%2CA%253D153415%2526M%253D150027%2C00.html.
The Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org) is a research institute that uses social science research to formulate and promote conservative public policies.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

notice the gap in time. your data seems a little outdated.
Oops...not so outdated...see above.

[dissention]

Abstinence programs reduce teen pregnancy at least 40%, Heritage Foundation says


Heritage Foundation? :laugh:

[dissention]

notice the gap in time. your data seems a little outdated.

He's getting his information from the Heritage Foundation. They could have published it yesterday and it wouldn't be credible.

[JazmenFlowers]

Abstinence programs reduce teen pregnancy at least 40%, Heritage Foundation says
Apr 19, 2004
By Mark Kelly
Baptist Press
better - but all these articles really don't mean anything to me. if anything untrue is circulated in one class, that's enough

[JazmenFlowers]

Oops...not so outdated...see above.
oops nothing

you hadn't posted the 2004 article when I responded to your 2002 article.

this article is by the Baptist something or other - ehh...BS if you ask me - of course they back what you say. they also back a zillion other things that they don't practice (and I was raised Baptist)

[dissention]

better -

He's getting his information from the Heritage Foundation.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

He's getting his information from the Heritage Foundation.

Joshy, I love you, BUT LAY OFF OF IT ALREADY! ;)

[JazmenFlowers]

He's getting his information from the Heritage Foundation.
oh I know - and don't buy it - I just feel like playing

[stargazer99]

Oh that is just a lie!

Many others already beat me to it, I see, but here's a little data I pulled together .....


Center for Law and Social Policy's "To Have and To Hold: Congressional Vows on Marriage and Sex

http://www.clasp.org/publications/have_and_hold.pdf

[excerpt]

The federal law stipulates eight points that define what can and cannot be taught in an abstinence-unless-married education program5(see sidebar on next page). Broadly, the funds are for programs that teach that abstinence is the only correct sexual behavior outside of marriage. A program using these funds may not teach about other methods of effective contraception or how to use contraceptives to avoid sexually transmitted diseases, even in preparation for marriage. The eight-point definition does not require that funded abstinence programs must be medically accurate. Nor is there a legislated mechanism for federal review of curricula utilized by local programs. As shown by Congressman Henry Waxman’s (D-CA) recent review of the 13 most utilized curricula, this makes it more likely that federal dollars are used to fund medical inaccuracies (and other inappropriate messages).6In fact, the Waxman report found that 11 of the 13 curricula contained inaccuracies and misleading information. For example, one curriculum conveyed that HIV could be transmitted through tears and sweat. Another erroneously teaches a pregnancy occurs one out of every seven times that a couple uses condoms; yet another falsely asserts that 5-10 percent of women who have legal abortions will become sterile.


News articles regarding Rep. Waxman's report on inaccuracies in 11 of the 13 most popular "abstinence only" education programs:

Some Abstinence Programs Mislead Teens, Report Says

By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 2, 2004; Page A01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26623-2004Dec1?language=printer

[excerpt]

Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.



http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1273

http://www.siecus.org/policy/PUpdates/pdate0143.html#WAX

Rep. Waxman's report on inaccruacies:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf

[stargazer99]

SOME


And I can assure you it is not the majority. Very misleading...

Aside from a CONGRESSIONAL REPORT, if you do a simple Google search, you will find many, many more.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Aside from a CONGRESSIONAL REPORT, if you do a simple Google search, you will find many, many more.

Google is my best friend dear. That and Lexis-Nexis.

And I have already searched both.

[dissention]

Joshy, I love you, BUT LAY OFF OF IT ALREADY! ;)

Post a credible source for once and maybe I will. But you're incapable of doing so.

[dissention]

Google is my best friend dear. That and Lexis-Nexis.

And I have already searched both.

And the best you could come up with was garbage from the Heritage Foundation? :shocked:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Post a credible source for once and maybe I will. But you're incapable of doing so.
This coming from you Ms. Huffington!

[stargazer99]

All that liberal talk is fine and dandy for those heathen California movie people - but here in the God Fearin' rest of the country - we don't go for fu*king out of wedlock and our stats prove it :rolleyes: Now, excuse me while I call my wife and lie to her about where I am this evening so I can pick up my favorite hooker on Airline Hwy. - I know them all as I HAVE SIIIIINNNEEDDDDDD :rolleyes:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Now ain't that the truth! Of course, you better watch out... lest you be labeled a liar like myself!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

And the best you could come up with was garbage from the Heritage Foundation? :shocked:

It's what I chose to post...Regardless of whether you find it accurate or not.

[stargazer99]

Google is my best friend dear. That and Lexis-Nexis.

And I have already searched both.

Then obviously, you didn't type in the right search....

Perhaps you used your standard "biased data to back up my claims" search and, therefore, came back with nada!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Now ain't that the truth! Of course, you better watch out... lest you be labeled a liar like myself!

Oh blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Look, I support these programs because I feel they do a lot of good. But you know, we had NO sex education AT ALL when I went to High School. I suppose that is one of the reasons I have been sort of...well....naughty!

[dissention]

This coming from you Ms. Huffington!

Arianna Huffington links to credible sources and then gives her input based on those stories. Don't confuse her blog postings with her links to credible news sites.

[stargazer99]

Oh blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Good argument! :thumbsup:

[JazmenFlowers]

Oh blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Look, I support these programs because I feel they do a lot of good. But you know, we had NO sex education AT ALL when I went to High School. I suppose that is one of the reasons I have been sort of...well....naughty!
well that explains a lot

[dissention]

It's what I chose to post...Regardless of whether you find it accurate or not.

It's just a good thing that you don't want to be taken seriously.

[dissention]

Oh blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Winning argument.

Look, I support these programs because I feel they do a lot of good. But you know, we had NO sex education AT ALL when I went to High School. I suppose that is one of the reasons I have been sort of...well....naughty!

Ah, yes, it's not your fault that you poke around, it's the fault of those in the public school system who didn't provide you with the proper sex education. ;)

[dissention]

It's what I chose to post...Regardless of whether you find it accurate or not.

You chose to post it because no credible sources backed up your assertions, so you had to resort to that old conservative "think tank"; it's pretty easy to see.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Arianna Huffington links to credible sources and then gives her input based on those stories. Don't confuse her blog postings with her links to credible news sites.

So I suppose you don't mind me "drudging it up" sometimes?

[dissention]

So I suppose you don't mind me "drudging it up" sometimes?

That man is simply a joke and he doesn't classify anything he posts as "opinion."

That man is also piggish and has quite an odor to him. Personally, I think it's because he doesn't brush his teeth. His breath was kicking in Boston last summer when I had the misfortune of standing next to him for a moment.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Winning argument.

When you hear the same stuff over and over...



Ah, yes, it's not your fault that you poke around, it's the fault of those in the public school system who didn't provide you with the proper sex education. ;)

Well really when you think abou it...why DOES sex education have to be provided in schools. Shouldn't that be something that is personal between the child and his/her parent. If they are going to teach abstinence programs in school it doesn't mean that kids won't learn about condoms and other "safe sex" tips from mom, dad, friends, or hell even the TV.

I just don't think that school is a great place to promote sex education. It just seems TOO encouraging to me.

Example 1. ME. We had NO sex education courses in my HS. Yet somehow I was still aware of condoms and such...And the people with whom I graduated with must have also been aware, because there were no pregnant girls that graduated with me.

[JazmenFlowers]

That man is simply a joke and he doesn't classify anything he posts as "opinion."

That man is also piggish and has quite an odor to him. Personally, I think it's because he doesn't brush his teeth. His breath was kicking in Boston last summer when I had the misfortune of standing next to him for a moment.
kicking? he deserves a blackbelt from what I've heard.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

That man is simply a joke and he doesn't classify anything he posts as "opinion."

That man is also piggish and has quite an odor to him. Personally, I think it's because he doesn't brush his teeth. His breath was kicking in Boston last summer when I had the misfortune of standing next to him for a moment.

Maybe he knew there were going to be a lot of liberals around and he wanted to make you guys feel at home.

[JazmenFlowers]

When you hear the same stuff over and over...





Well really when you think abou it...why DOES sex education have to be provided in schools. Shouldn't that be something that is personal between the child and his/her parent. If they are going to teach abstinence programs in school it doesn't mean that kids won't learn about condoms and other "safe sex" tips from mom, dad, friends, or hell even the TV.

I just don't think that school is a great place to promote sex education. It just seems TOO encouraging to me.

Example 1. ME. We had NO sex education courses in my HS. Yet somehow I was still aware of condoms and such...And the people with whom I graduated with must have also been aware, because there were no pregnant girls that graduated with me.
you're kinda loosing focus here

[Brwn_eyes0511]

you're kinda loosing focus here

No actually I am not. :shrug:

[JazmenFlowers]

Maybe he knew there were going to be a lot of liberals around and he wanted to make you guys feel at home.
I guess in the same way "A" is so welcome at Texas Chainsaw Massacre premieres/parties/openings.







Yeah, think on it...

[Brwn_eyes0511]

That man is simply a joke and he doesn't classify anything he posts as "opinion."

That man is also piggish and has quite an odor to him. Personally, I think it's because he doesn't brush his teeth. His breath was kicking in Boston last summer when I had the misfortune of standing next to him for a moment.

<img src="http://www.anncoulter.com/photos/annddrudge.jpg">

Must be why Ann is standing so far away from him...

[dissention]

kicking? he deserves a blackbelt from what I've heard.

Honey, I had half a mind to slip him a twenty so that he could mosey on down to CVS for some oral hygiene supplies. Rembrandt is your friend, baby.

[JazmenFlowers]

No actually I am not. :shrug:
:lol: yeah, actually, you are...

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I guess in the same way "A" is so welcome at Texas Chainsaw Massacre premieres/parties/openings.







Yeah, think on it...

I thought there was only one opening? Well two if you count the new 2003 "sucky" version?

[strandinthewind]

He's getting his information from the Heritage Foundation.

and this surprises you why :shrug: :laugh:

Yep - telling teens not to have sex really works :laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

:lol: yeah, actually, you are...

no actually I...

Well, this would just go on and on! :lol:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

and this surprises you why :shrug: :laugh:

Yep - telling teens not to have sex really works :laugh:

It's better than ENCOURAGING IT....right!?!

Look here is my point. Personally I don't feel that ANY sex education needs to be given in schools (Another reason to get rid of public schools). It needs to be up to the parents. BUT...if they are going to give the youth any information, I think it should be to simply just NOT HAVE SEX! Do you not agree that that is the best way to remain sexually safe?

[stargazer99]

How could I have ever forgotten this little nugget! I first saw this on The Daily Show several months ago.

The link is complete with the video footage. Enjoy!

(Edit: The clip is long, and contains the whole interview... the discussion below starts at about 10:35 into the clip)

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2004/12/05.html#a950

Bill Frist doesn't know if sweat and tears spread HIV!

Stephanopoulos interviews Bill Frist/ Video Clip

Bill Frist says 15% of condoms fail which is false. From the Waxman Report: When used properly and consistently, condoms fail to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) less than 3 percent of the time, federal researchers say, and it is not known how many gay teenagers are HIV-positive.

He implies that he wants to change the retirement age for social security, and it took George repeatedly asking him if sweat and tears caused the spread of HIV.

Gerorge: You're a doctor. Do you think tears and sweat can transmit HIV"
Frist; I don't know...I can tell you..
Gerorge: You don't know?
Frist; I can tell you things like,like..condoms..
Gerorge: You believe that tears and sweat might be able to transmit aids?

===========================
Here's an actual transcript:

--BEGIN TRANSCRIPT--

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) Okay, let me switch to another subject. There was a bit of an uproar in Washington this week about this issue of these abstinence programs that are funded by the Federal government, the funding has doubled over the last four years but there was a report by the minority staff at the House Government Affairs Committee that showed that 11 of 13 of these programs are giving out false information. I want to show some of the claims they identified in the curricula. One of them was, one of the programs taught that "The actual ability of condoms to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, even if the product is intact, is not definitively known." Another, "The popular claim that condoms help prevent the spread of STDs is not supported by the data." A third suggested that tears and sweat could transmit HIV and AIDS. Now, you're a doctor. Do you believe that tears and sweat can transmit HIV?


SENATOR BILL FRIST

I don't know. I can tell you ...

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) You don't know?

SENATOR BILL FRIST

I can tell you things like, like ...

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) Well, wait, let me stop you, you don't know that, you believe that tears and sweat might be able to transmit AIDS?

SENATOR BILL FRIST

Yeah, no, I can tell you that HIV is not very transmissible as an element like, compared to smallpox, compared to the flu.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) No, let's talk. I want to talk about all of it.


SENATOR BILL FRIST

But about, about condoms, for example. We know there's about a 15 percent failure rate. You know, this is a deadly virus and you know it is directly transmissible with a relatively high degree of infectivity by, by sexual relations. If there's a 15 percent failure rate in, in condoms ...

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) But this was suggesting that they don't work even if the condom is intact.

SENATOR BILL FRIST

Oh, I know. But, but let me just say because the whole, the whole success, if you look in Africa today where as you know 28 million people are infected today is on this ABC, abstinence which is sort of the initial thrust itself which is the only way to prevent, only way to prevent.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) Only surefire way.

SENATOR BILL FRIST

That's right. Only surefire. Very hard culturally in lots of approaches. Being faithful. Again, one partner and in certain cultures that is very hard and, then third, condoms. If you take out just condoms and say that is the answer with the 15 percent failure rate with a highly infective virus through
sexual relations ...

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) These are suggesting that they're really never the answer.

SENATOR BILL FRIST

No, well, clearly. I'm telling you that the proposal that the Federal government supports is officially this A, B, C approach, we put $15 billion into this, what I would regard as one of the great moral and public health tragedies of the last 100 years, probably HIV/AIDS.


GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) But do you think these abstinence programs should be reviewed and that they should be required to give out scientifically accurate information?


SENATOR BILL FRIST

Oh, I think of course they should be reviewed, I mean, and that's in part our responsibility to make sure that all of these programs are reviewed but whether it's abstinence or whether it's condoms or whether it is better education on the infectivity of how washing hands in terms of the flu, all of these are public health challenges that we need in terms of better education, yes, the government has a role, especially if we're gonna be ...


GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) Let me just, I wanted to move to another subject, let me just clear this up, though. Do you or do you not believe that tears and sweat can transmit HIV?


SENATOR BILL FRIST

It would be very hard. It would be very hard for tears and sweat, I mean, you can get virus in tears and sweat but in terms of the degree of infecting somebody, it would be very hard.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS

(Off Camera) Okay, let me turn to one final subject, steroids...

[dissention]

It's better than ENCOURAGING IT....right!?!

Look here is my point. Personally I don't feel that ANY sex education needs to be given in schools (Another reason to get rid of public schools). It needs to be up to the parents. BUT...if they are going to give the youth any information, I think it should be to simply just NOT HAVE SEX! Do you not agree that that is the best way to remain sexually safe?

If they want to teach how to stay sexually safe, they need to teach just that and not abstinence. They should not be foisting unrealistic "teachings" onto curious teenagers in place of useful information on how to remain safe through the use of contraceptives.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

If they want to teach how to stay sexually safe, they need to teach just that and not abstinence. They should not be foisting unrealistic "teachings" onto curious teenagers in place of useful information on how to remain safe through the use of contraceptives.

But they shouldn't be teaching ANY of it in our schools.

[dissention]

But they shouldn't be teaching ANY of it in our schools.

Says you. :woohoo:

[strandinthewind]

If they want to teach how to stay sexually safe, they need to teach just that and not abstinence. They should not be foisting unrealistic "teachings" onto curious teenagers in place of useful information on how to remain safe through the use of contraceptives.

Exactly :nod:

I get that abstinence is the only 100% way not to get a STD or preggers. But, not to tell kids, who history demonstrates are going to have sex, about what to do if they hawve sex is inhumane and tantamount to enabling murder these days. And, I think this should be taught in a biology class and in a straight forward manner - this is clearly in the realm of bilology. So many kids get little to no information from their parents and/or their parents are horrible examples for them.

[estranged4life]

made me go picture hunting, this one is self-explanatory if ya ask me (Poor Shrub has a stub!!!)

<div align=center>
<img src="http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/E/b/gop_paging_dr_freud.jpg">
</div>

[dissention]

made me go picture hunting, this one is self-explanatory if ya ask me (Poor Shrub has a stub!!!)

<div align=center>
<img src="http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/E/b/gop_paging_dr_freud.jpg">
</div>

Ha!

O'Leilly was on The Daily Show last night and Jon Stewart kicked his ass.

O'Lielly: You liberals add insult to injury.

Stewart: Yes, we do, but you guys add the injury.

:laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Says you. :woohoo:

That is just my opinion, however I know a lot of other parents who feel that it is a subject that doesn't belong in the school systems because it inadvertently promotes adolescent sex.

Look, I'm just going to back off of this one. Because I understand both sides of this issue. And also I understand the AIDS epidimic, not just in America, but the entire world. Which is why I have been such a staunch supporter of such charitable organizations like Debt AIDS Trade Afria (DATA), and Catholic Relief Services.

So...I'm going to quietly exit. :o :wavey:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Ha!

O'Leilly was on The Daily Show last night and Jon Stewart kicked his ass.

O'Lielly: You liberals add insult to injury.

Stewart: Yes, we do, but you guys add the injury.

:laugh:

That's because he is no Ann when it comes to confrontation...

"SHUT UP!" (to Al Franken) and although we all were feeling his pain, he just lets his emotions get involved, which is hard not to do.

[estranged4life]

Ha!

O'Leilly was on The Daily Show last night and Jon Stewart kicked his ass.

O'Lielly: You liberals add insult to injury.

Stewart: Yes, we do, but you guys add the injury.

:laugh:

I'd like to shove his own head up his ass so he can wear himself as a hat! (Another candidate it Hannity followed by Rev.Flawed-well)

Brian "Ah, Those f**kin' liberal Ledgies have made me see the light" j.

[estranged4life]

sexual education in biology in High School (Biology is mandatory for all Oklahoma High School students) and I didnt hear anyone complain about it like they do now (we're talking the late 1980's)

[dissention]

That is just my opinion, however I know a lot of other parents who feel that it is a subject that doesn't belong in the school systems because it inadvertently promotes adolescent sex.

I find it silly that you're blaming school systems for promoting the innate sexual urges that teenagers have. The idea that we should have no sexual education in schools, especially nowadays, to help teens practice the sex that they're going to have anyway in the safest possible manner is just absurd to me.

Look, I'm just going to back off of this one. Because I understand both sides of this issue. And also I understand the AIDS epidimic, not just in America, but the entire world. Which is why I have been such a staunch supporter of such charitable organizations like Debt AIDS Trade Afria (DATA), and Catholic Relief Services.

I sincerely hope you aren't comparing the spread of HIV and AIDS in American teens with that of those in Africa. One of my best friends died of AIDS and I can't even entertain the idea of not giving teenagers the information on how to practice sex safely in order to avoid getting such a heinous disease. Should they abstain from sex altogether? That's not for me to say, though it is the best possible way to avoid getting diseases. But to *only* promote abstinence without giving them the necessary information on how to have safe sex if they're going to partake in it is irresponsible and unrealistic.

[strandinthewind]

. . . But to *only* promote abstinence without giving them the necessary information on how to have safe sex if they're going to partake in it is irresponsible and unrealistic.


The PTA thanks you Mary Joe - now let's go kick Imogene's a$$ :xoxo: :xoxo:

[dissention]

The PTA thanks you Mary Joe - now let's go kick Imogene's a$$ :xoxo: :xoxo:

:lol:

I can't wait for that show on DVD early next year.

[strandinthewind]

Senators demand more information from Miers

Response to questionnaire described as 'incomplete to insulting'

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The senators in charge of Harriet Miers' confirmation are demanding more information from her before hearings begin, one describing the Supreme Court nominee's answers so far as "incomplete to insulting."

Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, and senior Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont agreed Wednesday to begin Miers' hearings on Nov. 7, but also jointly sent a letter to the White House counsel asking her to more fully answer a questionnaire she turned in Tuesday.

The two senators also plan to ask the White House to provide information about Miers' work for President Bush, something the White House has said previously it will not do. "A number of Republicans have asked for non-privileged information," Specter said at a news conference.

Miers returned a 57-page questionnaire to the Senate answering questions about her legal career and background and such issues as how she would deal with court cases involving the Bush administration if confirmed as the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Specter and Leahy said both Republicans and Democrats on the committee felt she did not tell them enough.

"The comments I have heard range from incomplete to insulting," Leahy said.

"Senator Leahy and I took a look at it and agreed that it was insufficient," Specter said.

Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said the White House appreciated the timing of the hearings, had received the senators' letter and would respond soon.

Perino said of Miers: "From the first day when she was nominated, she told Senator Specter that she had years of files to go through and she would work to finish the questionnaire as soon as possible, but she would likely have to send follow-ups to provide additional information."

The senators said an official request for "non-privileged" information from the White House would come after they saw Miers' response to their new questions.

Among other things, they want her to explain more about her temporary Washington, D.C., bar suspension for nonpayment of dues and for her to double-check that she submitted all of her litigated work to the committee.

"The committee has, for example, identified additional cases not included in your original response," they said.

More specifics sought
Specter and Leahy also want her to explain specifically how she would handle cases dealing with the Bush administration, where she now serves in the important legal post of White House counsel. In her questionnaire response, Miers said she would comply with the "spirit and letter of the law ... the Code of Conduct for United States Judges and other applicable requirements."

Specter and Leahy responded: "We are aware of the statutes and codes that generally govern these matters, but recusal decisions of Supreme Court justices are more complicated because they are not subject to further review. The committee would like you to address the issues specific to your situation."

The two committee leaders want the answers from Miers before Wednesday, Oct. 26, another bump in the road for the 60-year-old White House counsel. "I think it's been a chaotic process, very candidly," Specter said.

Bush picked Miers, whose private law practice consisted almost entirely of representing corporate clients, to be O'Connor's replacement three weeks ago. Many Republicans had hoped Bush would pick a prominent conservative with a record on abortion and other issues.

While no Senate Republicans have publicly opposed her nomination, the reaction among the chamber's conservatives has been mostly tepid.

Abortion ban backed
Democrats who support abortion rights also are beginning to question Miers after the revelation that she pledged unflagging opposition to abortion as a candidate for the Dallas City Council in 1989. She backed a constitutional amendment to ban the procedure in most cases and promised to appear at "pro-life rallies and special events."

O'Connor has cast the pivotal vote in a string of 5-4 rulings in recent years that sustained abortion rights, upheld affirmative action and limited the application of the death penalty.

Specter refused to guarantee when a vote would occur.

"There is a keen interest in many quarters on concluding before Thanksgiving, and that's a fine target if it can be accomplished," he said. "But we're going to do it right. We're not going to do it fast."

Democrats and Republicans have refused to give up their rights to hold up Miers' confirmation vote in committee, which was done for now-Chief Justice John Roberts, Leahy said. That means that her committee vote could come as late as two weeks after the completion of the hearings.

"I think that's appropriate," Leahy said. "This is not a John Roberts where we've had a whole lot of material -- still not as much as I would have liked -- but a whole lot of material, the August recess time to go through it, and a person of a different nature."

Senators have yet to get the confidential FBI background report on Miers, Specter said, and the American Bar Association rating of her suitability to serve as a justice will probably be finished right before hearings begin.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/19/miers.nomination.ap/index.html

[Brwn_eyes0511]

The PTA thanks you Mary Joe - now let's go kick Imogene's a$$ :xoxo: :xoxo:

You Designing Women freak! haha :lol:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

:lol:

I can't wait for that show on DVD early next year.

OHHH is it really!? Gotta phone call to make....

[SuzeQuze]

well that explains a lot

No kidding. In my school the Health teacher showed students how to put a condom on using a banana!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I find it silly that you're blaming school systems for promoting the innate sexual urges that teenagers have. The idea that we should have no sexual education in schools, especially nowadays, to help teens practice the sex that they're going to have anyway in the safest possible manner is just absurd to me.



I sincerely hope you aren't comparing the spread of HIV and AIDS in American teens with that of those in Africa. One of my best friends died of AIDS and I can't even entertain the idea of not giving teenagers the information on how to practice sex safely in order to avoid getting such a heinous disease. Should they abstain from sex altogether? That's not for me to say, though it is the best possible way to avoid getting diseases. But to *only* promote abstinence without giving them the necessary information on how to have safe sex if they're going to partake in it is irresponsible and unrealistic.

No I'm not comparing! I'm just saying that I am well aware of the AIDS epidemic and that is why I support those organizations both financially and vocally.

[dissention]

No kidding. In my school the Health teacher showed students how to put a condom on using a banana!

Mine, too. :laugh: We used to have "health fairs" every year before Christmas. In place of classes all day long, we'd move from room to room to hear speakers and receive flyers, pamphlets, books, condoms; all kinds of stuff.

[SuzeQuze]

That is just my opinion, however I know a lot of other parents who feel that it is a subject that doesn't belong in the school systems because it inadvertently promotes adolescent sex.

Look, I'm just going to back off of this one. Because I understand both sides of this issue. And also I understand the AIDS epidimic, not just in America, but the entire world. Which is why I have been such a staunch supporter of such charitable organizations like Debt AIDS Trade Afria (DATA), and Catholic Relief Services.

So...I'm going to quietly exit. :o :wavey:

Sex ed does NOT "promote" adolescent sex. It just offers important information that kids need to know. I think kids should always be discouraged from having sex, they're too immature and they have more important things to focus on. But they really have to know how to protect themselves if they want to be stupid. :laugh:

[SuzeQuze]

Mine, too. :laugh: We used to have "health fairs" every year before Christmas. In place of classes all day long, we'd move from room to room to hear speakers and receive flyers, pamphlets, books, condoms; all kinds of stuff.

Our sex ed began in 5th grade when they separated the boys from the girls and explained the sex organs and such. They left out the obvious part that the penis and vagina have to actually come in contact with one another. But that was inferred by the graphic images of their anatomy and description of the sperms' travels. :laugh:

Just before this my Mom took out a library book for me that explained stuff. Parents, I think that is a good way to go. It wasn't as embarassing as my mom saying, "When a man and woman really love each other..." :rolleyes: