Three Cheers for George Bush!!!

[Talk2BigSteve]

As you are no doubt aware, George W. Bush has made Abstinence-Only Sex Education training a cornerstone of his administration. He even reaffirmed his faith in this program during his State of the Union address.

Abstinence-Only Sex education is pretty much what it says. It focuses exclusively on warning kids to not have sex before marriage. There is little focus on the nuts and bolts of various forms of sex and how to protect yourself. Basically it's drilled into the kids heads that sex is bad and you shouldn't do it until you're married.

Unless of course you can't legally get married... ever. In that case, it's suggested you just kill yourself.
Heh.

Of course, nearly every independent study has shown that Abstinence-Only Sex Education doesn't work. It's all just a bunch of BS, plain and simple.

Kids love their hoo-hoos and hee-hees and want nothing more than to rub them against one another.

Over and over and over again.

With this in mind, a study released this week literally made me laugh out loud.

The study of 12,000 adolescents by Yale and Columbia University researchers showed that those who had been through the Bush favored "Abstinence-Only" program and pledged to not have sex before marriage were far more likely to contract an STD before they graduated high school than those enrolled in a standard fact-based sex-eductation program.

It also showed that those "Abstinence-Only" kids were six times more likely to engage in oral sex.

No F'ing [censored], right?

But here my friends is the f'ing kicker:

Among virgin boys, those "abstinence-only" kids who took the pledge were *FOUR TIMES* more likely to have ANAL SEX!!!

HA HA HA HA HA!!!

FOUR TIMES more likely that the regular sex-ed kids. WOW! That's not just a little bit more likely... That's A LOT. How can this be?

Could it be that George W Bush's beloved "Abstinence-Only" sex education program is leading young male pledges to "bite the pillow" and cross on over to "the dark side"???

Three Cheers for President Bush!

Here is the USA Today article Sex Education (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-03-18-sex-study_x.htm)

Big Steve /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
As you are no doubt aware, George W. Bush has made Abstinence-Only Sex Education training a cornerstone of his administration. He even reaffirmed his faith in this program during his State of the Union address.

Abstinence-Only Sex education is pretty much what it says. It focuses exclusively on warning kids to not have sex before marriage. There is little focus on the nuts and bolts of various forms of sex and how to protect yourself. Basically it's drilled into the kids heads that sex is bad and you shouldn't do it until you're married.

Unless of course you can't legally get married... ever. In that case, it's suggested you just kill yourself.
Heh.

Of course, nearly every independent study has shown that Abstinence-Only Sex Education doesn't work. It's all just a bunch of BS, plain and simple.

Kids love their hoo-hoos and hee-hees and want nothing more than to rub them against one another.

Over and over and over again.

With this in mind, a study released this week literally made me laugh out loud.

The study of 12,000 adolescents by Yale and Columbia University researchers showed that those who had been through the Bush favored "Abstinence-Only" program and pledged to not have sex before marriage were far more likely to contract an STD before they graduated high school than those enrolled in a standard fact-based sex-eductation program.

It also showed that those "Abstinence-Only" kids were six times more likely to engage in oral sex.

No F'ing [censored], right?

But here my friends is the f'ing kicker:

Among virgin boys, those "abstinence-only" kids who took the pledge were *FOUR TIMES* more likely to have ANAL SEX!!!

HA HA HA HA HA!!!

FOUR TIMES more likely that the regular sex-ed kids. WOW! That's not just a little bit more likely... That's A LOT. How can this be?

Could it be that George W Bush's beloved "Abstinence-Only" sex education program is leading young male pledges to "bite the pillow" and cross on over to "the dark side"???

Three Cheers for President Bush!

Here is the USA Today article Sex Education (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-03-18-sex-study_x.htm)

Big Steve /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you should search around a little before posting.

[Talk2BigSteve]

LOL maybe I deleted it from OOT before I posted it here in its proper place.

Big Steve /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL maybe I deleted it from OOT before I posted it here in its proper place.

Big Steve /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

What I was trying to say is that this has already been discussed in here. On further reflection though, the crowd in here likes nothing better than beating the same dead horses, so post away.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

Could it be that George W Bush's beloved "Abstinence-Only" sex education program is leading young male pledges to "bite the pillow" and cross on over to "the dark side"???

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I went to a catholic elementary school. Teaching strict abstinence only teaches kids how to rebel. It doesn't change kids sexuality. That being said, I love catholic school girls. They are freaks and yet it seems to me that they don't cheat anywhere near the amount of average people. That of course is just my experience and you can easily claim small sample set. Still, the rebellion hypothesis is a strong one imo.


EDIT: is bush promoting abstinence only and refusing to teach safe sex?

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
As you are no doubt aware, George W. Bush has made Abstinence-Only Sex Education training a cornerstone of his administration.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did he now? And I thought spreading freedom and democracy, growing the economy, and raising the standards of education were cornerstones to his admin. Silly me.

[TransientR]

Abstinence works as well for teenagers as it does for Catholic Priests /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Frank

[bholdr]

"EDIT: is bush promoting abstinence only and refusing to teach safe sex?"

yes. Bush does not think that teaching high school age students about condoms is a good idea. this is arguably bush's most out of touch and stupid belief.

i can't think of anything more off base and dangerous for the youth in this country than the fedral gov refusing to help educate kids on condom use.

Total F'kin Moron. (bush, of course, not you, wacki)

[BCPVP]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm615.cfm

[xadrez]

[ QUOTE ]

Did he now? And I thought spreading freedom and democracy, growing the economy, and raising the standards of education were cornerstones to his admin. Silly me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Republican Talking Points: Where Sarcasm Becomes Reality!

[zaxx19]

Democratic Talking points...

Where elections are lost..consistently out of touch.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Democratic Talking points...

Where elections are lost..consistently out of touch.

[/ QUOTE ]

I prefer:

Democratic Talking Points: Where hysteria becomes reality. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Trainwreck]

I thought that meant that the 4x anal was that they fubu'd a girl in their back door draw.

LOL!

In any case I had heard that all last week and was equally amused, the stupidity express or what some call the BUSH administration, is an endless supplier of laughs.

>TW<

[tek]

I've heard abstinence only works for Trekkies and guys who play gameboy, etc. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm615.cfm

[/ QUOTE ]

While Waxman portrays increases in abstinence education as excessive, his attacks blithely ignore the fact that government funding for contraception-based sex education far outweighs the spending for abstinence education. In 2002 alone, the government spent $12 promoting contraception and condom use for every $1 it spent to encourage teens to abstain from sexual activity.

Wow, it looks like many people have spun this story very hard.

[adios]

Unless someone says a ratio of 12-1 isn't enough in promoting contracetpion.

[wacki]

If these graphs are anywhere near correct, I don't think they have much of a case.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/images/78700955.gif

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/images/6664645.gif

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/images/79482223.gif

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/images/17800480.gif

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/images/60467679.gif