Serious topic: teen pregnancy/HIV
Saw this on CNN today, and I just have to comment on what I feel is a horribly irresponsible decision by the Texas Board of Education. They plan to approve 4 new text books for use in sexual education that ONLY promote abstinence. Three of the books make no mention of contraception at all, and one makes a reference to condoms, but nothing more. Abstinence only? Are you Texas morons serious?
Texas has the 2nd highest birth rate in the nation among girls ages 15-19 (70.1 births per 1000 girls), and you don't want to at least put out the idea that sex can be had without the risk of pregnancy or spread of disease? Yeah, abstinence is a nice idea, but is it really practical? Hell no. These whiney conservative groups, who of course are the ones putting pressure on the book publishers to leave out the information on safe sex, go on and on about the moral decay of the country, but at the same time won't support what it takes to prevent the spread of diseases, including HIV. Talk about moral decay!
These books are so horribly retarded that one of them actually says that a good way a teenager can prevent a sexually transmitted disease is to get plenty of rest so he or she can have a clear head about sex and choose abstinence. WTF? Are you serious? Is that ever going to fucking happen? When will people get their heads out of their asses and actually do something useful? What will it take? Aren't the 31,293 cases of AIDS among people ages 13-24 enough of a reason to promote condom use among teens?
I will admit that, yes, abstinence is the only 100% proven way to prevent pregnancy and disease, but to completely avoid discussion of what to do if teens are having sex is just plain stupid and irresponsible. Especially in a state that has only seen it's teenage birth rate drop by 11.2% over a 10 year period between 1990 and 1999 (2nd lowest in the country). Maybe rather than simply touting abstinence, they should take a look at what states like Alaska, Vermont, and California have done, all 3 of which have had a 30%+ drop in teenage births over those 10 years. Hell, they should look at Japan, which has a national birth rate of only 4.3 births per 1000 girls ages 15-19! Something is working in those places, and I'm sure it isn't just a stern warning from religious pundits not to have sex.
I feel that it should be noted that the person that pushed for abstinence-based sexual education curriculum in Texas, was in fact, George W. Bush while he was governor of the state. In this year's State of the Union address, he said that he wanted to push the same agenda nationwide. While the numbers collected by the CDC show that this is on the decline, I can't help but feel they won't decline very rapidly if abstinence becomes a national mandate in sex-ed classes. Currently, the US leads the world in teenage births (48.7 per 1000, ages 15-19), and I can't see that number declining very quickly at all if abstinence is all that is going to be taught to the next generation. As if I didn't already need more help in deciding who to vote for in November.
While I think that abstinence should be taught, I feel very strongly that alone it is not an effective way to teach others how to prevent unwanted pregnancies or the spread of diseases. It is a concept for an ideal world, which sadly we do not live in. Real answers to real problems are what we need, and when 479,067 girls under the age of 20 have babies in one year, only saying "don't have sex" isn't going to work.
Sources:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr49/nvsr49_10.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/youth.pdf
http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/08/05/texas.textbooks.reut/
~~~<=====8
6:12 AM 7/30/04
6:25 AM 7/31/04
6:48 AM 8/1/04
6:36 AM 8/2/04
6:45 AM 8/4/04
6:21 AM 8/5/04
8=====>~~~
Texas has the 2nd highest birth rate in the nation among girls ages 15-19 (70.1 births per 1000 girls), and you don't want to at least put out the idea that sex can be had without the risk of pregnancy or spread of disease? Yeah, abstinence is a nice idea, but is it really practical? Hell no. These whiney conservative groups, who of course are the ones putting pressure on the book publishers to leave out the information on safe sex, go on and on about the moral decay of the country, but at the same time won't support what it takes to prevent the spread of diseases, including HIV. Talk about moral decay!
These books are so horribly retarded that one of them actually says that a good way a teenager can prevent a sexually transmitted disease is to get plenty of rest so he or she can have a clear head about sex and choose abstinence. WTF? Are you serious? Is that ever going to fucking happen? When will people get their heads out of their asses and actually do something useful? What will it take? Aren't the 31,293 cases of AIDS among people ages 13-24 enough of a reason to promote condom use among teens?
I will admit that, yes, abstinence is the only 100% proven way to prevent pregnancy and disease, but to completely avoid discussion of what to do if teens are having sex is just plain stupid and irresponsible. Especially in a state that has only seen it's teenage birth rate drop by 11.2% over a 10 year period between 1990 and 1999 (2nd lowest in the country). Maybe rather than simply touting abstinence, they should take a look at what states like Alaska, Vermont, and California have done, all 3 of which have had a 30%+ drop in teenage births over those 10 years. Hell, they should look at Japan, which has a national birth rate of only 4.3 births per 1000 girls ages 15-19! Something is working in those places, and I'm sure it isn't just a stern warning from religious pundits not to have sex.
I feel that it should be noted that the person that pushed for abstinence-based sexual education curriculum in Texas, was in fact, George W. Bush while he was governor of the state. In this year's State of the Union address, he said that he wanted to push the same agenda nationwide. While the numbers collected by the CDC show that this is on the decline, I can't help but feel they won't decline very rapidly if abstinence becomes a national mandate in sex-ed classes. Currently, the US leads the world in teenage births (48.7 per 1000, ages 15-19), and I can't see that number declining very quickly at all if abstinence is all that is going to be taught to the next generation. As if I didn't already need more help in deciding who to vote for in November.
While I think that abstinence should be taught, I feel very strongly that alone it is not an effective way to teach others how to prevent unwanted pregnancies or the spread of diseases. It is a concept for an ideal world, which sadly we do not live in. Real answers to real problems are what we need, and when 479,067 girls under the age of 20 have babies in one year, only saying "don't have sex" isn't going to work.
Sources:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr49/nvsr49_10.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/youth.pdf
http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/08/05/texas.textbooks.reut/
~~~<=====8
6:12 AM 7/30/04
6:25 AM 7/31/04
6:48 AM 8/1/04
6:36 AM 8/2/04
6:45 AM 8/4/04
6:21 AM 8/5/04
8=====>~~~