• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Eliminates Abstinence-Only Funding In Budget

obvious Child said:
Say what?

Can you define "proven?"
Click to expand...
It has been proven for centuries that if you do not have sex you will not get pregnant/get a woman pregnant nor will you get a sexually transmitted disease.

Abstinence is the only one-hundred percent effective means of birth control--no one who uses it ever has an unplanned pregnancy.

If you want to argue otherwise, I would suggest taking a refresher course in basic biology.
 
disneydude said:
Wow....finally a President who isn't afraid of education.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm. . . you haven't worked in medicine have you?

It might surprise you to learn how many people aren't really aware that abstinence will prevent pregnancy, or venereal disease. Seriously.
 
Hatuey said:
It is in the interest of the federal government to push for sex education. In the long run it A) reduces the number of people who end up needing medical treatment for STDs and can't afford it(usually minorities) and B) unwanted pregnancies. This is not a states issue. It costs the government more to take care of an unwanted kid that it does to teach kids not to have sex without protection.
Click to expand...

Whether you think it is in their interests or not is not the issue. The issue is where is the power granted to them to intervene.
 
This issue is being confused. Abstinence-ONLY sex education is a failed program and provides no information on STD's or contraceptive use. This limits important information. Abstinence is 100% effective, but that's NOT what we are discussing; we are discussing abstinence-ONLY education. And the fact that abstinence is 100% effective doesn't change the fact that information about STD's and contraceptives is critical for those who do not abstain. And here's something to be aware of:

MrVicchio said:
15 year old males are notoriously bad about condom use.
Click to expand...

And 15 year old males are notoriously bad about controlling their hormones.
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
It is? When was the Constitution amended to allow federal spending on education?
Click to expand...

Why create strawmen? Either way Article 1, Section 8. I'm pretty sure ensuring that the U.S. population has some sort of knowledge about STDs and unwanted pregnancies falls within providing for the welfare of the United States.

When was the Constitution amended to authorize the federal government to pay for health care?
Click to expand...

See above.

The pregnancy must have been wanted, they had sex, didn't they? Weren't they aware of the consequences of the horizontal bop? If she didn't want to get pregnant, why did she have unprotected sex? If he didn't want her knocked up, what was he doing in her?
Click to expand...

So if you have sex and get pregnant then you want the baby? Your reasoning is non-existent. People having unprotected sex stems from a lack of education.

Actually, you should read the Tenth Amendment someday. A state's issue is exactly what education is.
Click to expand...

As long as schools and states keep taking federal funding then yes. Education is a federal issue.

This conclusion is not related to your prior sentence. Also, who said the government (that means taxpayers who know how to not get knocked up) has to finance unwanted kids?Unwanted kids almost always have parents kicking around, and grand-parents that can be dunned for the costs, too. I've no idea why you people think strangers should bear the burden.
Click to expand...

What simpleton strands of thought you have. Whether or not you like it, strangers a.k.a. tax payers DO bear the burden. Thus why it is in the federal government's best interest to stop the problem at the root by ensuring that kids get a proper sex education so that tax payers do not have to pay for their unwanted pregnancies later.
 
MrVicchio said:
15 year old males are notoriously bad about condom use.
Click to expand...

And we will make this better by telling them not to have sex at all. Yeah. Sure. That will fix it. :roll:
 
celticlord said:
It has been proven for centuries that if you do not have sex you will not get pregnant/get a woman pregnant nor will you get a sexually transmitted disease.

Abstinence is the only one-hundred percent effective means of birth control--no one who uses it ever has an unplanned pregnancy.

If you want to argue otherwise, I would suggest taking a refresher course in basic biology.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, you clearly haven't read the thread yet you're tossing out insults like you understand what we are talking about. What I responded to was Mr. V's argument that the programs worked. If you want to argue otherwise, I suggest taking refresher course in English comprehension not to mention statistical methods. The programs do not work. Furthermore, I did agree with him that the concept is largely fool proof (you can get STDs without sex).
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
This issue is being confused. Abstinence-ONLY sex education is a failed program and provides no information on STD's or contraceptive use. This limits important information. Abstinence is 100% effective, but that's NOT what we are discussing; we are discussing abstinence-ONLY education. And the fact that abstinence is 100% effective doesn't change the fact that information about STD's and contraceptives is critical for those who do not abstain.
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, the side that is confusing the two is generally the side that sticks together. Ignorance is a flock of birds? That doesn't quite have a nice ring to it. I pointed out what you said earlier and I was largely ignored.
 
obvious Child said:
Interestingly enough, the side that is confusing the two is generally the side that sticks together. Ignorance is a flock of birds? That doesn't quite have a nice ring to it. I pointed out what you said earlier and I was largely ignored.
Click to expand...

I know you did. I reiterated it in the hope that it might take root. What some folks don't get is that this is not an argument about abstinence, it is an argument about abstinence-ONLY.
 
The reason abstinence education failed is a very simple equation for determining the optimum safety for teenagers dealing with sex. The equation is this: % chance that the method will stop unwanted pregnancy/std *% chance that the person can be convinced to adopt such method in the real world. Abstinence is great in first area but terrible in the second. Condoms are only a tiny bit worse in the first area, and much better in the second.

The real problem with the issue that the abstinence only crowd is more interested in pushing abstinence because of moral beliefs than protecting teenagers. The whole health issue is just an excuse.
 
rathi said:
The reason abstinence education failed is a very simple equation for determining the optimum safety for teenagers dealing with sex. The equation is this: % chance that the method will stop unwanted pregnancy/std *% chance that the person can be convinced to adopt such method in the real world. Abstinence is great in first area but terrible in the second. Condoms are only a tiny bit worse in the first area, and much better in the second.

The real problem with the issue that the abstinence only crowd is more interested in pushing abstinence because of moral beliefs than protecting teenagers. The whole health issue is just an excuse.
Click to expand...

In bold. In my experience, I have not seen this statement to be incorrect, at all.
 
MrVicchio said:
I've always been amazed at people that do not support the one proven method birth control and STD spreading.

OH THAT'S right, because it requires people to use "self restraint" and they get held "responsible" for their actions.

Something the above posters seem to have an allergic reaction to.
Click to expand...

Do you genuinely believe that if kids are taught abstinence and only abstinence, that they will, in fact, be abstinent. Why don't you take a look at...say....Bristol Palin! The daughter of the MOTHER who believes in abstinence only programs. Oh, that worked wonders for her, didn't it?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
 
MrVicchio said:
Hey OC, WHEN practiced, it works 100% of the time.

Enabling adults that push "have sex, use a condom"... you're the reason it fails.
Click to expand...

Please see my post above about BRISTOL PALIN.

Tell us again about how preaching abstinence works. :2wave:
 
Hatuey said:
Why create strawmen? Either way Article 1, Section 8. I'm pretty sure ensuring that the U.S. population has some sort of knowledge about STDs and unwanted pregnancies falls within providing for the welfare of the United States.
.
Click to expand...

I like your reasoning. Have you ever considered applying for SCOTUS? You'd make the perfect liberal judge.
 
MrVicchio said:
I've always been amazed at people that do not support the one proven method birth control and STD spreading.

OH THAT'S right, because it requires people to use "self restraint" and they get held "responsible" for their actions.

Something the above posters seem to have an allergic reaction to.
Click to expand...
Liberals promote irresponsibility.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
With all the societal messages from people like yourself saying "go ahead, just be safe about it?"

I was a virgin till I met my first wife and got married. I had parents that stressed the dangers, while handing me boxes of condoms. Guess what, if they had left it at "just have sex, be safe" I might have made a big mistake.


Abstinence education needs responsible adults/parents not enabling "friends".
Click to expand...

And the bolded part of your comments explains EXACTLY why GOVERNMENT SPENDING of abstinence only policies does not work and should be eliminated.

It belongs with the responsibility of the parents, not the government.
 
MrVicchio said:
Abstinence requires PERSONAL INTEGRITY. Any dog can hump, a mature human knows how to control themselves.
Click to expand...

And how did GOVERNMENT SPENDING on abstinence only education give you that "personal integrity" to control yourself?
 
TheNextEra said:
And how did GOVERNMENT SPENDING on abstinence only education give you that "personal integrity" to control yourself?
Click to expand...
Some kids don't listen to their parents. Duhhhh. Why do we have sex ed in the first place? Do you think maybe their parents might know something about sex?
 
MrVicchio said:
I've always been amazed at people that do not support the one proven method birth control and STD spreading.

OH THAT'S right, because it requires people to use "self restraint" and they get held "responsible" for their actions.

Something the above posters seem to have an allergic reaction to.
Click to expand...

Just thought this would be interesting for you to read. Maybe if you educated yourself about the fact that abstinence only education doesn't work at all then you would change your opinion and we could all be happy. Yes, abstinence is the only 100% way of preventing teenage births and std's but there has been nothing ANYBODY has found that will convince teenagers to do so. So the only alternative is the teach the other options which are 99% efficient. It isn't a shocker that the New England states have the lowest teenage birth rates.

Mississippi now has highest teen birth rate

Mississippi now has the nation’s highest teen birth rate, displacing Texas and New Mexico for that lamentable title, a new federal report says.

Mississippi’s rate was more than 60 percent higher than the national average in 2006, according to new state statistics released Wednesday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The teen birth rate for that year in Texas and New Mexico was more than 50 percent higher.

The three states have large proportions of black and Hispanic teenagers — groups that traditionally have higher birth rates, experts noted.
Click to expand...
 
MrVicchio said:
Once you're 18 I don't give a damn what you do. You're old enough to make the decision and SHOULD be smart enough to decide, and to actually PRACTICE safe sex.


15 year old males are notoriously bad about condom use.
Click to expand...

And how would they KNOW about safe sex is they were ONLY taught abstinence? How would you even know about a condom? Your peers? Well what if your peers also told you that drinking gatorade before hand prevents pregnancy's too? How would your know that wasn't true if nobody of authority ever taught your the difference? You want the gov't to stop teaching sex ed completely and leave it all to the parents? Guess what, nothing is currently stopping ANY parent from teaching their children anything they want about sex but they aren't doing it. What on earth makes you think that they will all of a sudden start just because the gov't cuts it in school? Don't you know the kind of myths and ignorance that was rampant during the 40's about sex? Nobody taught them.
 
American said:
Some kids don't listen to their parents. Duhhhh.
Click to expand...

Then telling people "z0mg just don't have sex" is retarded and counterproductive, because it misleads people about the effectiveness of birth control when they do decide to have sex.

American said:
Why do we have sex ed in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because it's cheaper to pay for sex education than for the government to pay for unwanted kids for 18 years (or longer), including medicaid, public education, food stamps, unemployment, and prison cells.

American said:
Do you think maybe their parents might know something about sex?
Click to expand...

Just because the school teaches you something doesn't mean that your parents can't ALSO teach you something about it, if they are familiar with the subject area.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Then telling people "z0mg just don't have sex" is retarded and counterproductive, because it misleads people about the effectiveness of birth control when they do decide to have sex.
Click to expand...
Huh?


Because it's cheaper to pay for sex education than for the government to pay for unwanted kids for 18 years (or longer), including medicaid, public education, food stamps, unemployment, and prison cells.
Click to expand...
So we don't have many unwanted kids? I wonder what all the hubub over abortion was about for all these years.

Just because the school teaches you something doesn't mean that your parents can't ALSO teach you something about it, if they are familiar with the subject area.
Click to expand...
 
I used to have no opinion on sex education but after reading Vision of the Annointed by Thomas Sowell I'm beginning to think maybe we should end all funding to all sex education altogether. Statistics seem to show that the more schools tell children how not to get pregnant, the more teen pregnancies there are. Kind of like drugs. Really, I'm not sure it's wise for a school to tell anyone how to live; kids hate school, why should they listen to it. Maybe we should leave that kind of stuff to the parents.

That said, sex ed in Virginia gives very mixed messages. "Don't have sex! Wear a condom during sex!"
 
Last edited:
When people argue over whether or not teens are "just going to do it anyway," they're missing the point.

Teenagers do listen to their parents and other trusted adults, as long as these adults treat them respectfully and don't break their trust by hiding information from them.

That being said, the reason that abstinence only education fails at reducing or delaying sexual activity (not to mention pregnancy, abortion, or STDs), is that teens don't listen to state mandated propaganda. Teenagers are smarter than they're given credit for, and know when adults are trying to manipulate them.

Rathi nailed the issue on the head when he said "The real problem with the issue that the abstinence only crowd is more interested in pushing abstinence because of moral beliefs than protecting teenagers. The whole health issue is just an excuse." Teenages know this, and they react by not listening.

Thats why comprehensive sex education (which includes abstinence education) not only reduces the rates of pregnancy, abortion, and STDs, but also is effective in delaying sexual activity.

When teenagers know that the adults around them are being honest with them, they're much more likely to listen.
 
American said:
Liberals promote irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

No question. The Liberal Republican Congress and Liberal President that was Bush pushed such irresponsible programs and funding. It is irresponsible to provide factually untrue information as well as omit vital information to our children to allow them to make good decisions. Their irresponsibility stems from the utter incompetence in the abstinence only programs pushed by the Liberal Republican party in the last decade.

By all means, the liberals in Congress and the White House have passed on their irresponsible nature to the nation's children by funding what amounts to programs of lies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom