Originally posted by Dan Nixon:So while a focus on abstainence was not studied, we can say a focus on safe sex largely FAILED in this population..
Studies have certainly been done on Bush's Texas experiment, in which the state has an official abstinence-only curriculum. One result: Texas has moved to #1 in the nation in teen birth rates since the policy was adopted.
In addtion, the CDC stats you reference also show that half of the decrease in teen pregnancies are due to increased contraceptive use.
Quote: I certainly think safe sex education has a place but a renewed emphasis on abstainence (as opposed to saying as an afterthought "BTW, not having sex is best") IMO seems a reasonable thing to try. Sounds like some facts being taught were incorrect but that is fixable
The problem is the abstinence-only curriculum seems to go well beyond simply stating abstinence is best. For example, we've all heard how the textbook companies were lobbied to change their definition of marriage from "two people" to "a man and a woman." I don't want to get into that debate, but does it sound like something one would change if he was just looking to introduce a simple, fact-based abstinence curriculum?
Also, as you state, some of the "facts" used in the curriculum are ridiculous. Does all this sound like a well-thought-out plan, worth $270M of your tax dollars?
