The Republicans, especially President Bush, have been strong suporters of public schools teaching abstinance instead of realy sexual education with information regarding contraceptions. I believe that Palin's teenage daughter's pregnacy is a prime example of abstinance education not working. BTW Palin is a stuanch suppoprter of
during her 2006 gubernatorial race. In an Eagle Forum Alaska questionnaire, Palin gave this response to the following question:
Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
It seems obvious to me that Palin would have taught her children abstinance at home, as well as her kids learning it at shcool. Being surrounded by such strong abstinance support didn't stop her kid from shagging the High School Hockey Star.
The discussion of sex could be overwhelming for some people since you're getting information left and right (sex ed classes, the local pastor, your parent(s)!), and it's hard to choose a "right" side.
That is the ideal way to educated teens about sex. Give them ALL the information and ALL viewpoints, the relgious, the scientific, the parental, etc. Only when given all sides of an argument can make an informed and intelligent chouce. Whether or not the stupid teens will actually make the right choice is up in the wind but at least they were given a chance to make an informed choice. With abstiance only education it's like you're given a puzzle with half of the pieces missing.
That is the ideal way to educated teens about sex. Give them ALL the information and ALL viewpoints, the relgious, the scientific, the parental, etc. Only when given all sides of an argument can make an informed and intelligent chouce. Whether or not the stupid teens will actually make the right choice is up in the wind but at least they were given a chance to make an informed choice. With abstiance only education it's like you're given a puzzle with half of the pieces missing.
That's very true. For once, I agree with you. I hope you don't take this like me conceding on this argument. On this one quote, I agree with you.
Not really. I just don't get why people are makeing such a big deal out of this. We know that she made a stupid decision, ok, the end. But insted people just won't shut up about it, espically when it has nothing to do with them.
Location, for example. Living in a place where no sex education is offered is likely a poor area. This can be the reason?
I'm terribly sorry for not mentioning that the data already accounted for other variable such as location, socioeconomic status, race, gender, and the like.
Safe sex and abstitence classes are quite similar. What part of the safe sex class is it that suppusedbly that makes kids practice safe sex? Ehh telling them "its OK?"
Comprehensive sex ed and abstinence only classes are in fact very different. One says that there's one way of guaranteeing staying STD free with no risk of pregnancies, but since you're mots likely not going to here are some other methods that might help while the other says don't have sex til you're married. There's a reason that kids who live in areas with abstinence only education still think that drinking mountain dew after sex will prevent a pregnancy as well as countless other myths, and that reason is that they don't know any better. Comprehensive sex ed changes that and educates them so they can at least choose to be safe doing something we all know they're probably going to end up doing either way.
jessman thats not what they are doing they are just making a point, teaching people all the view points of sex: abstinence, condoms whatever is gonna work a lot better than just teaching abstinence, since when do teenagers follow the rules anyway? The people who dont want to promote safe sex and just want abstinence need to open their eyes and realize the world is changing, things that didnt happen years ago is happening now, sex isnt as oh whats the word, I'll just go with that sex isnt such a taboo thing and only for married couples its a lot of things. Dont know if this makes sense hope it does.
I saw the statistical discussion on page 3. It's true that they reflect something but can be misleading, so the question is always "what does this really mean?" Not so much "it never means anything".
[quote]Yeah, just look at Lige's post. You can teach all you want, but that'snot going to stop people from doing it, all it's doing is giving them more facts, witch makes them want to go out and do it more.
Statistics have shown no major difference in the amount of sex kids have depending on the sex ed program, just a difference in the amount of teen pregnancies, abortions, and STDs.[/quote]
This pretty much sums it up. And that is why I think abstinence education is not worth...nuts. In fact it's harmful because it blankets the very significant need for sexual education regarding management of risk factors.
---
Now, let's say we were talking about what this sensational bit of gossip means from a political perspective. I'd say not much. The response provides much of a "d'aww" platform for those supporting Palin, and a "I told you so" platform for detractors. Since I'm neutral but against abstinence education, I'll just say that I agree with the title of this thread but nonetheless I'm still curious as to the effect of McCain's bold gambit: a surprise move indicates a certain desperation.
The fact is that Palin is not in a point in her life, having a teen daughter who is pregnant and will need much support in her future, having a child with down syndrome whom I'm sure needs plent of attention and time spent, she is forsaking her family for her own career gains. She's not a good person.
