If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you experience difficulties logging in, (i.e. Incorrect Password) please click the forgot password link (http://www.hannity.com/forum/login.php?do=lostpw) on the login error screen to have a new password sent to you. If all else fails, register again.
This is going to send liberals and those who don't like traditional morality (aka liberals and just guys looking to get willing teenage girls aka pedophiles ) into hysteria.
Girls are going to have sex anyway they say! (but they double that rate when the government gets involved *cough *cough*)
It prevents AIDS! (It sure doesn't prevent the poverty and misery of single mothers)
So why don't we just say what's really going on, in the liberal male minds who protest the most:
"Hey, if we teach traditional morality, I won't be able to exploit stupid women who think "free sex" frees them, instead of freeing me of any responsibility if I get them pregnant! Same reason I'm for abortion! Who cares if they increase their risk of stroke and cancer with birth control. Who cares if they stress their bodies with pregnancy before they are ready for it. I don't care. That's just part of being a women right! All I care about is having my fun!
Same reason I was against the Vietnam war (because I was supposedly against killing) but was all for Roe v. Wade. I don't care about anyone else. It's all about me and having a good time!"
Cue the liberals saying I'm painting with a broad brush, while Planned Parenthood continues to be caught not obeying the law when it comes to reporting older men statutorily and just plain raping underage girls; and stats after stats testify to the fact that not teaching abstinence increases teen pregnancy.
Cue the liberals bringing up Bristol Palin to try and derail the subject. We can't discuss the real subject, it gets too close to our real agenda!
And you know how you can tell it's all true? How NUTS liberals go when you bring this up. Anytime liberals go NUTS and protest too much over something, you know what's going on, is we are getting too close to the heart of the matter and THEY DON'T LIKE IT ONE BIT.
I would just like to add............ teaching boys abstinence and respect never hurts either. As the mother of 3 young men, we have this conversation often!
__________________
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. -Thomas Jefferson
Um, it helps if you read the actual research article and not some blogger's failed attempt to blog on a news article ON the actual study (which makes it a tertiary account of the original!).
Here's an excerpt from the actual article:
Quote:
... The unexpected sexual health outcomes are unlikely to be attributable to the sex education within the programme, because this was a relatively small and variably delivered component and because of the lack of previous evidence for harms arising from sex education.1 Another possibility arises from the potential effects of targeting young people deemed to be at risk. Previous studies suggest that some interventions targeting people at risk can expose participants to the influence of new peers who are more supportive of or more engaged in behaviours associated with risk, thereby spreading risk.10 11 12 13 Whereas the Carrera programme targeted young people in deprived areas, the YPDP aimed to bring together young people deemed to be at risk of teenage pregnancy, substance misuse, and school exclusion. This was not the case in comparison sites, where youth work did not generally target in this way and where pupil referral units targeted only on the basis of young people’s exclusion from school. Our evaluation of the process did not aim to examine the plausibility of this pathway but did find a few cases of participants experiencing bullying during their participation and a few parents who suggested that bringing together badly behaved children might spread misbehaviour.
Bolding (mine): The sexual education component is minor in the YPDP program, so it is unlikely the cause of increased sexual promiscuity of teens CHOSEN (teens were RECRUITED from "danger" areas to attend this program! This wasn't a RANDOM trial, and this fact throws some of the implications on the whole population into doubt) for attendance of the program.
Underlining (mine): Peers matter. This is why sexual promiscuity of teenagers is almost fully dependent on their peers rather than their sexual education. Education on contraception, however, is more likely to influence whether or not teenagers use contraception during sex.
Um, it helps if you read the actual research article and not some blogger's failed attempt to blog on a news article ON the actual study (which makes it a tertiary account of the original!).
Bolding (mine): The sexual education component is minor in the YPDP program, so it is unlikely the cause of increased sexual promiscuity of teens CHOSEN (teens were RECRUITED from "danger" areas to attend this program! This wasn't a RANDOM trial, and this fact throws some of the implications on the whole population into doubt) for attendance of the program.
Underlining (mine): Peers matter. This is why sexual promiscuity of teenagers is almost fully dependent on their peers rather than their sexual education. Education on contraception, however, is more likely to influence whether or not teenagers use contraception during sex.
next
__________________
Quote:
There's two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages..
Location: No living man am I! You look upon a woman!
Posts: 18,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintville
Has the same thing happened in America? Because you do know the article was referring to Britain.
Did you READ the entire article? Obviously not.
Quote:
The British government is not wholly to blame. Apparently it was modeling itself on a New York based program that also claimed that by having the government prepare girls to have commitment-free sex, it had reduced teen pregnancies. That seems to have been, to put it nicely, a lie:
Location: No living man am I! You look upon a woman!
Posts: 18,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyclouds
Um, it helps if you read the actual research article and not some blogger's failed attempt to blog on a news article ON the actual study (which makes it a tertiary account of the original!).
Bolding (mine): The sexual education component is minor in the YPDP program, so it is unlikely the cause of increased sexual promiscuity of teens CHOSEN (teens were RECRUITED from "danger" areas to attend this program! This wasn't a RANDOM trial, and this fact throws some of the implications on the whole population into doubt) for attendance of the program.
Underlining (mine): Peers matter. This is why sexual promiscuity of teenagers is almost fully dependent on their peers rather than their sexual education. Education on contraception, however, is more likely to influence whether or not teenagers use contraception during sex.
In other words let's do the usual stereotypical blaming of poverty blah blah blah and do the usual cover your ass, that the program itself can't be to blame, Nooooooooooooooooooo, it's just that everywhere it's tried, pregnancy goes up WHICH IS WHAT THE BLOGGER NOTICED.
And it's not allowed that we notice the OBVIOUS. (Like I've always said, liberals always try to fight against the obvious) After all they listed the stats but told us, we can't draw the obvious conclusions from it.
Typical.
Quote:
A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving.
The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.
But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the programme, at a cost of £2,500 each, were ’significantly’ more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programmes who were not given contraception and sex advice.
A total of 16 per cent of those on the Young People’s Development Programme conceived compared with just 6 per cent in other programmes.
NEXT!
Last edited by samurai7; July 8th, 2009 at 1:09 pm.
Location: No living man am I! You look upon a woman!
Posts: 18,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat
I would just like to add............ teaching boys abstinence and respect never hurts either. As the mother of 3 young men, we have this conversation often!
Surprise! Teaching teen girls how to have sex doubles pregnancy rate
) into hysteria.
next
Linear Mode
