• 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!

Teen pregnancy and disease rates rose sharply during Bush years, agency finds

This idiotic all or nothing position so many people seem to be on baffles my mind and leads me to believe its nothing but pure, pathetic, hyper partisan politics as people try to score political points.

I found this earlier today:

The AGI analysis concluded that approximately one-quarter of the decline in teenage pregnancy in the United States between 1988 and 1995 was due to increased abstinence. (The proportion of all teenagers who had ever had sex decreased slightly, but nonsignificantly, during this period, from 53% to 51%.) Approximately three-quarters of the drop resulted from changes in the behavior of sexually experienced teens. (The pregnancy rate among this group had fallen 7%, from 211 per 1,000 to 197.)

Teen Pregnancy: Trends And Lessons Learned
 
Are you really scared of being honest with your child?

How does what I am stating equate to being scared of being honest with my kids?

I told my daughter how I lost my virginity, my regrets in regards to it, and my hopes for her life. However, I've also said that if she chooses to have sex (and realistically, that choice is in her hands), that I hope she chooses to use protection (although I've also told her that condoms cannot protect her from several STDs such as HPV and HSV1 & HSV2). I've shared with her the risks, issues, and other problems with having sex in high school (i.e., expect any guy you have sex with to immediately tell all of his friends). But, I don't see sex as evil, so I don't particularly expect her to wait until marriage. Nor do I see "abstinence only" messages as particularly realistic or in-touch with the average teenager's mentality.

This is great stuff; but again it begs the question how this relates to you inferring that I claim that "sex is not okay" or that I am "really scared of being honest with my kids?"

As a parent, we all start out with; sex should only be done when we are adults and preferably with someone you will spend the rest of your life with in a committed relationship do we not?
 
hmmmm:

Unmarried childbearing. Even though teen childbearing overall has declined steeply over the last half-century, the proportion of all teen births that are nonmarital has increased equally dramatically, from 13% in 1950 to 79% in 2000 (see chart). Two factors are at play. The first is that marriage in the teen years, which was not uncommon in the 1950s, has by now become quite rare. (By the mid-1990s, the typical age of first marriage in the United States had risen to just over 25 for women and 27 for men.) The second is that this trend has extended to pregnant teens as well: In contrast to the days of the "shotgun marriage," very few teens who become pregnant nowadays marry before their baby is born.

Teen Pregnancy: Trends And Lessons Learned

Four out of every five babies born at Parkland Hospital in Dallas do not have a father listed on the birth certificate.

The problem is far more involved than just when people get married.
 
Four out of every five babies born at Parkland Hospital in Dallas do not have a father listed on the birth certificate.

I would like to know the educational levels of these women. And that still doesn't change that the trend seems to be fewer teens getting pregnant.
 
p.s. my mom got pregnant with me in 1966, went to a home for unwed mothers in Kansas City, and gave me up for adoption.

Apparently, the culture was pretty sexual back in those days.

THAT is a sad story. :shock:

It begs for more information now; did you ever get to meet your mom? Did you resent her? If when you found her, have you reconciled your issues with her giving you up and did she try to explain the reasons for what she did?
 
Four out of every five babies born at Parkland Hospital in Dallas do not have a father listed on the birth certificate.

I would like to know the educational levels of these women. And that still doesn't change that the trend seems to be fewer teens getting pregnant.

This is a valid question and I believe plays a significant role in unwed/unwanted pregnancies.

But lest we wander way off the topic, it certainly has NOTHING to do with Bush and his message of "abstinence" does it?
 
This is a valid question and I believe plays a significant role in unwed/unwanted pregnancies.

But lest we wander way off the topic, it certainly has NOTHING to do with Bush and his message of "abstinence" does it?

I think having a either or stance on this subject is just silly and when Bush talks about abstinence only education he is lying threw his teeth and merely pandering to an extreme minority for votes.
 
I found this earlier today:

Which kind of backs up what I'm saying. The different forms of information appeals to different people.

My, personal...PERSONAL mind you...view in regards to sex education. Its not to have teenagers not have sex. That's not the GOAL in my mind.

The GOAL is to not have people getting pregnant when they are not in a position to take care of a kid or get STD's. I think getting kids to not have sex while they're still immature teenagers is a good thing in most cases, but I think its secondary to the main goal above. Notice however I said people not just teens...sex education isn't JUST about them while they're teens.

For some kids, that goal will best be reached by teaching them the fact that abstinence is the only sure fire way not to have either of those things happen. To teach them, truthfully and honestly rather than focusing on only the most extreme cases trumped up hugely, the consequences that sex can cause at their age and later in life.

For other kids, that goal will best be reached by teaching them how to have protected sex and the proper ways of doing so while dispelling some of the myths about other forms of "safe" sex (like pulling out, or doing it right before/after a period, etc).

I think by focusing just on ONE or the OTHER you're going to end up missing out on kids that you could've previously succeeded with in regards to the goal I stated above. To me, doing that because of POLITICS is a low, low act.
 
I think having a either or stance on this subject is just silly and when Bush talks about abstinence only education he is lying threw his teeth and merely pandering to an extreme minority for votes.

When did Bush argue for an "abstinence ONLY" education? Do you have a link or some substance on this one?
 
Which kind of backs up what I'm saying. The different forms of information appeals to different people.

There is more then one way to skin a cat;)

What works for one child might not work for another so I totally agree with a multifaceted approach with educators and parents actually paying attention.
 
When did Bush argue for an "abstinence ONLY" education? Do you have a link or some substance on this one?

Just from a quick google:

President Bush has consistently supported the view that sex education should teach “abstinence only” and not include information on other ways to avoid sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy.[1] White House Spokesperson Ari Fleischer has asserted that “abstinence is more than sound science, it’s a sound practice . . . . [A]bstinence has a proven track record of working.”[2]

In pushing an “abstinence only” agenda, however, the Bush Administration has consistently distorted the scientific evidence about what works in sex education. Administration officials have never acknowledged that abstinence-only programs have not been proven to reduce sexual activity, teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease.[3] Instead, HHS has changed performance measures for abstinence-only education to make the programs appear successful, censored information on effective sex education programs, and appointed to a key panel an abstinence-only proponent with dubious credentials.

Politics & Science - Investigating the State of Science Under the Bush Administration
 
Give a teenage girl a baby for a week or so to take care of. Also make them wear a fat suit complete with stretch marks, saggy boobs, and milk squirting out at random times.


Problem solved.
 
Give a teenage girl a baby for a week or so to take care of. Also make them wear a fat suit complete with stretch marks, saggy boobs, and milk squirting out at random times.


Problem solved.

Reminds me of when we had to take care of a hard boiled egg for a full week during classes in school. Had to take it everywhere, even football practice.

I was damned glad to get rid of that egg. Not sure if it promoted abstinence, or abortion.
 
Which kind of backs up what I'm saying. The different forms of information appeals to different people.

My, personal...PERSONAL mind you...view in regards to sex education. Its not to have teenagers not have sex. That's not the GOAL in my mind.

The GOAL is to not have people getting pregnant when they are not in a position to take care of a kid or get STD's. I think getting kids to not have sex while they're still immature teenagers is a good thing in most cases, but I think its secondary to the main goal above. Notice however I said people not just teens...sex education isn't JUST about them while they're teens.

For some kids, that goal will best be reached by teaching them the fact that abstinence is the only sure fire way not to have either of those things happen. To teach them, truthfully and honestly rather than focusing on only the most extreme cases trumped up hugely, the consequences that sex can cause at their age and later in life.

For other kids, that goal will best be reached by teaching them how to have protected sex and the proper ways of doing so while dispelling some of the myths about other forms of "safe" sex (like pulling out, or doing it right before/after a period, etc).

I think by focusing just on ONE or the OTHER you're going to end up missing out on kids that you could've previously succeeded with in regards to the goal I stated above. To me, doing that because of POLITICS is a low, low act.

How bout just teaching every single child that abstinance works best, but if you decide to have sex, this is what you do, and these are the consequences. There's no need to segregate.

And, BTW, how does an educator decide who should sit in what class??? :confused:
 
How bout just teaching every single child that abstinance works best, but if you decide to have sex, this is what you do, and these are the consequences. There's no need to segregate.

And, BTW, how does an educator decide who should sit in what class??? :confused:

Psst, that's what I'm talking about. Don't JUST teach abstinence only education, and don't JUST focus on condoms and the right ways to have sex and encouraging people to experiment and find their sexuality while never saying anything about abstinence because its not realitsic to think kids won't have sex.

Teach BOTH. Promote abstinence, promote it as being the SAFEST choice, encourage kids to go that route, and teach the problems and issues that can come about through sexual conduct....but also teach them the proper ways to be safe for WHEN they eventually begin to have sexual encounters, dispell the myths about alternative ways to have "safe sex" (such as pulling out). Don't just do one while not doing, or paying just lip service, to the other. Do BOTH.
 
Agree with Zyphilin...as long as we also teach them that condoms (and the pill, and everything else) has a notable failure rate. (Ie, "safe sex" will never be entirely safe.)
 
as an evil conservative I advised my son he must remain abstinate until he marries the woman of his dreams because she deserves it

in the mean time when he gets the urges I told him to ride the hershey highway bareback :thumbs: Who loves ya Baby
 
THAT is a sad story. :shock:

It begs for more information now; did you ever get to meet your mom? Did you resent her? If when you found her, have you reconciled your issues with her giving you up and did she try to explain the reasons for what she did?

it's not really a sad story, I was adopted by a childless couple who had tried for several years to have children, and couldn't. I only know about my bio-mom from the non-identifying documents associated with the adoption, I've never met her. For all intents and purposes, my adoptive parents ARE my parents.
 
Last edited:
Four out of every five babies born at Parkland Hospital in Dallas do not have a father listed on the birth certificate.

The problem is far more involved than just when people get married.

One issue that I've seen, often, is that many of these teenage girls are impregnated by men who are much older (5+ years) and are the victims of what is ostensibly statutory rape. That's probably a significant contributor to not listing the name of the father. The other issue is that these girls tend to come from homes with low educational attainment, with high levels of conflict and dysfunction, in areas of high poverty. So, we are talking about a specific subsection of society.

From Wikipedia, but this research is very consistent across the board:

[edit] Age discrepancy in relationships
According to the Family Research Council, studies in the US indicate that age discrepancy between the teenage girls and the men who impregnate them is an important contributing factor. Teenage girls in relationships with older boys, and in particular with adult men, are more likely to become pregnant than teenage girls in relationships with boys their own age. They are also more likely to carry the baby to term rather than have an abortion. A review of California's 1990 vital statistics found that men older than high school age fathered 77 percent of all births to high school-aged girls (ages 16–18), and 51 percent of births to junior high school-aged girls (15 and younger). Men over age 25 fathered twice as many children of teenage mothers than boys under age 18, and men over age 20 fathered five times as many children of junior high school-aged girls as did junior high school-aged boys. A 1992 Washington state study of 535 adolescent mothers found that 62 percent of the mothers had a history of being raped or sexual molested by men whose ages averaged 27 years. This study found that, compared with nonabused mothers, abused adolescent mothers initiated sex earlier, had sex with much older partners, and engaged in riskier, more frequent, and promiscuous sex. Studies by the Population Reference Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics found that about two-thirds of children born to teenage girls in the United States are fathered by adult men age 20 or older.[31]
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teenage_pregnancy]Teenage pregnancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

HUGE ISSUE, and we never talk about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom