The final analysis?
The number of states refusing federal money for "abstinence-only" sex education programs, according to the Washington Post, jumped sharply in the past year as evidence mounted that the approach is ineffective.
The North Carolina Piedmont Triad's top go-to source for News
A service of the News & Record, Greensboro, North Carolina
« Student charged with nativity attack | Main | Not sure what to make of this »
The number of states refusing federal money for "abstinence-only" sex education programs, according to the Washington Post, jumped sharply in the past year as evidence mounted that the approach is ineffective.
Due to recent automated spamming attacks on our blogs, we are temporarily requiring commenters to authenticate themselves via TypeKey® before posting comments to any News & Record blog in order to prevent denials of service. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
good. why aren't the states handing out free condoms?
"as evidence mounted" is just journalistic shorthand (you know, you have to remain impartial - even on sicence!) for "the approch is ******** ineffective already".
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fssexcur.htm
Posted on December 17, 2007 10:35 PM
good. why aren't the states handing out free condoms?
"as evidence mounted" is just journalistic shorthand (you know, you have to remain impartial - even on science!) for "the approach is ***** ineffective already".
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fssexcur.htm
Posted on December 17, 2007 10:38 PM
I could have predicted this trend - and, as a biblically orented Christian, I am all for abstinence. But abstinence is something that comes out of a context of godly thinking and commitment - AND parents and churches that seek to build that reality into their youths' decision making. To expect secular young people, who are constantly sexually sitmulated by their cultural context, is naive at best.
On the other hand, to just throw condoms at vulnerable, sexually-active young people is merely fanning the fire: it's OK - anything you want to do - whether it's morally or psychologically safe or not - JUST WEAR A CONDOM!
Yeah!
To stimulate more interest in premarital sex and to say that it's perfectly fine, is to abdicate moral repsonsibility - AND to stimulate MORE sexual activity in the process - a losing battle.
What is needed is godly, Christian education. Until that is a widespread reality in our nation, we will continue to grasp at condom straws, and hope vainly) that youngsters will actually use them. Condoms, even though they may be partially effective in preventing pregnancies, are very much a NON-SOLUTION in the long term. The real damage cannot only be assessed in whether they get AIDS or have babies and abotions; but in how many divorces occur because of the "habit" of multiple partners, and the children that psychological and social victims thereof.
American secular-humanist culture has gone headlong over the precipice of societal decay and pain - all because we have ignored God's life-giving Word and substituted our own stupid opinions.
"There is a way that SEEMETH right unto a man, but the ends thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25
Posted on January 3, 2008 8:32 PM