Religions > Atheism > "She killed a bunch of kids, and you don't do that in Harris County,"
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
10 Nov 2005 11:08:51 PM |
| Object: |
"She killed a bunch of kids, and you don't do that in Harris County," |
This headline could have easily been about the closing of the local abortion
mill. Maybe Andrea Yates should take her cue from Planned Parenthood; have
the ACLU represent her and claim she was only exercising her "Freedom of
Choice", albeit retroactively.
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2005-11-09T232314Z_01_SPI960173_RTRUKOC_0_US-CRIME-YATES.xml
Texas child-killer Yates will have second trial
HOUSTON (Reuters) - Andrea Yates, the Texas mother who drowned her five
children in 2001, will face a second trial after the state's highest
criminal court refused on Wednesday to reinstate the murder convictions
against her.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld a lower appeals court's ruling
issued in January that overturned jury verdicts against Yates because of
errors in the testimony of an expert witness.
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said he would try Yates
again as soon as possible. "She killed a bunch of kids, and you don't do
that in Harris County," he said.
.
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: The *real* aim of the pro-abortion crowd: consequence-free fucking |
01 Dec 2005 09:34:04 PM |
|
|
lying shitstain IAAH lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 17:26:12 -0800, "S. Maizlich" < >
wrote:
little shitsain IAAH lied:
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:36:37 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
little shitstain IAAH lied:
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:03:32 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
little shitstain IAAH lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 08:25:27 -0800, wrote:
IAAH lied:
On 30 Nov 2005 21:10:57 -0800, "S. Maizlich" < >
wrote:
IAAH lied:
On 30 Nov 2005 20:46:34 -0800, "S. Maizlich" < >
wrote:
Lars Eighner lied again:
In our last episode,
<1133405626.242024.311850@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented S. Maizlich
broadcast on alt.atheism:
Lars Eighner lied:
Pro-choice people are for
sex education. Why would that be if they wanted more abortions?
Haven't you noticed, you dumb fat pillock? The more states have moved
to "comprehensive" sex education in the schools, the higher the number
of abortions!
I haven't notice it because it is just exactly the opposite of
what has happened.
No, it is EXACTLY what did happen: the more "comprehensive" the sex
education, the higher the number of abortions.
Stop *lying*, little lars.
"Comprehensive" sex education leads to more sex by
stupid teenagers, and that leads to more pregnancies and hence more
abortions. "Comprehensive" sex education teaches the moral depravity
that if a girl gets pregnant, she can easily get an abortion - and so
that's exactly what they do.
Liar.
Nope. It's exactly what happened.
Uh huh. Cite? If you don't have one, a simple "I was making ***** up"
will do.
Read any of the literature by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, beginning with
her 1994 Atlantic Monthly article.
This really isn't in serious dispute, of course; you're just taking a
***** in public. *****.
Ah, that. That would be Whitehead's terribly biased and ultimately
wrong attack on sex ed.
No, that would be Whitehead's well-written article based on her careful
analysis of sex education, and the unavoidable conclusion that while
abstinence-only doesn't completely prevent teen sexual activity, it
does more of it than "comprehensive" sex education, which does
precisely ZERO. "Comrehensive" sex education tells teenagers to have
sex. Teenagers shouldn't be having sex. Period.
*****. She cherry-picked her sources
*****. She is an acknowledged expert in the field.
You just don't like the conclusion she reaches, for
ideological reasons.
No, I don't like her conclusions because her research is faulty.
You are lying. You're incompetent to judge her
research, and you've already self-identified as an
ideologically extreme polemical liar.
Oh, that's funny. Untrue, but funny.
No, it's perfectly true. You are *THOROUGHLY* unqualified to judge her
research, which is why you keep citing things that don't refute her
reseach. And you have indeed repeatedly identified yourself as an
ideologically extreme polemical liar.
The fact that her two main sources in that article both say that her
conclusions are not supported by what they told her is refutation
enough.
They're both lying, particularly Kirby: he *wrote* that shitstain
Mother Jones opinion screed, but referred to himself in it in the third
person. It's a wretched, one-page screed, and you're basing your
entire ignorant attack on Whitehead on the ***** of a disgruntled
source who doesn't like how Whitehead wrote her article. Big deal.
Susan Wilson claims the NJ program Whitehead discussed wasn't typical;
Whitehead says it is. I believe Whitehead.
AO education does not work
It does. Not perfectly, but it works. "Comprehensive" sex ed doesn't
work at all. This is established by looking at rates of sex-related
social pathology among teens, *all* of which skyrocketed during the
heyday of "comprehensive" sex ed, but which have declined somewhat
recently as a-o has begun to displace "comprehensive" (about time,
too.)
Let's restore what you can't bear to face
Let's re-snip it because it's ***** and doesn't
address Whitehead's point: so-called "comprehensive"
sex education is a COMPLETE AND UTTER failure.
Oh, let's just put this to bed:
Whitehead's so-called 'study' suffered from the typical strawman
fallacy, as exposed by one of the very people she talked to. Susan
Wilson, Whitehead's primary source in New Jersey for education,
explained that the program Whitehead looked at was not typical
She was wrong about that.
She is the authoritative source for that
Prove it.
Okay, we both know you can't. So *****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
01 Dec 2005 09:36:49 PM |
|
|
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 08:27:50 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich"
<notgenx32@yahoo.com> let us all know that:
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
ad hominem fallacy.
Don
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
01 Dec 2005 11:10:20 PM |
|
|
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work. There is little
evidence that teens who participate in abstinence-only programs
abstain from intercourse longer than others. It is known, however that
when they do become sexually active, teens who received
abstinence-only education often fail to use condoms or other
contraceptives. In fact, 88 percent of students who pledged virginity
in middle school and high school still engage in premarital sex. The
students who break this pledge are less likely to use contraception at
first intercourse, and they have similar rates of sexually transmitted
infections as non-pledgers (Walters, 2005; Bearman and Brueckner,
2001). Meanwhile, students in comprehensive sexuality education
classes do not engage in sexual activity more often or earlier, but do
use contraception and practice safer sex more consistently when they
become sexually active (AGI, 2003a; Jemmott, et al., 1998; Kirby,
1999; Kirby, 2000; NARAL, 1998).
"The U.S. has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the developed
world, and American adolescents are contracting HIV faster than almost
any other demographic group. The teen pregnancy rate in the U.S. is at
least twice that in Canada, England, France, and Sweden, and 10 times
that in the Netherlands. Experts cite restrictions on teens' access to
comprehensive sexuality education, contraception, and condoms in the
U.S., along with the widespread American attitude that a healthy
adolescence should exclude sex. By contrast, the "European approach to
teenage sexual activity, expressed in the form of widespread provision
of confidential and accessible contraceptive services to adolescents,
is . . . a central factor in explaining the more rapid declines in
teenage childbearing in northern and western European countries"
(Singh & Darroch, 2000). California, the only state that has not
accepted federal abstinence-only money, has seen declines in teenage
pregnancy similar to those seen in European countries. Over the last
decade, the teenage pregnancy rate in California has dropped more than
40 percent."
Keep on lyin', Spazzy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 01:01:15 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
But keep trying, shitstain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 06:07:12 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA are untrue, twat. Do try to come up with a source that
isn't immediately discredited next time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 10:47:19 AM |
|
|
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 10:58:25 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong, that's as
strong a refutation as is needed. I'm still waiting for you to provide
something to back up her conclusions now that it's been shown that she
misrepresented her sources to begin with, thus invalidating her
conclusions since she doesn't have the data that she claims she did.
It's quite simple, really. She lied about the data, and her sources
have said that. Thus, she doesn't have those sources anymore. Her
article is incorrect. Now you need to provide some other way of
backing up your claim.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 11:09:00 AM |
|
|
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed. Susan Wilson was a
hostile source from the beginning, you stupid
shitstain. Douglas Kirby has some unspecified beef
with her and took potshots in a sleazy, unreliable,
extremist rag called "Mother Jones". That's not a
refutation of her.
You shiftless lazy *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 11:41:41 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
1. Whitehead used Susan Wilson and Douglas Kirby as her two primary
sources. The information they gave her was essential to her
conclusion.
2. Both Wilson and Kirby say that Whitehead misrepresented what they
gave her and that Whitehead's conclusions are incorrect.
3. Whitehead now has no source to back up her conclusion, while her
two sources both say her conclusion is wrong.
That's as complete a refutation as you'll ever see, but the bonus is
the data from the CDC that absolutely contradicts what Whitehead
claims. Consider that a garnish.
Now your job, if you want to continue to claim that Whitehead is
correct, is to refute the statements made by Wilson and Kirby AND to
show how the data from the CDC is wrong. Get to it, Spazzy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 11:56:08 AM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
Yes, we have, shitstain. Let's review: You have ONE
single-page "Mother Jones" opinion piece by Douglas
Kirby, one of the sources, who inexplicably refers to
himself in the third person. In essence, he says he
was misrepresented. He does NOT indicate with any
precision how he was misrepresented, just claims he
was. He also claims that Susan Wilson said some part
of Whitehead's elaboration of the program SHE, Wilson,
created was "not typical".
One page, with two brief and UNSUBSTANTIATED whines
that give no detail. That, little shitstain, does not
constitute an authoritative refutation.
MEANWHILE, little shitstain, you HAVE NOT READ
Whitehead's article, so YOU don't know what the *****
you're talking about. Not that you ever have, you
lying shitstained extremist ideologue.
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 11:58:20 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:56:08 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
Yes, we have, shitstain.
Ah, your concession is accepted. Now, can you provide another source
to substantiate your claim that comprehensive sex ed is a complete
failure? You'll have to show how the CDC is completely wrong while
you're at it.
Don't bother with that hack Whitehead. Her article is dead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 12:00:03 PM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:56:08 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
Yes, we have, shitstain.
Ah, my concession is accepted.
It is. Thanks.
.
|
|
|
| User: "IAAH" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 12:20:49 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:00:03 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:56:08 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
Yes, we have, shitstain.
Ah, my concession is accepted.
It is. Thanks.
Lookie there, more forgery. We all know that resorting to that is
explicit admission that you have no facts.
But keep it up - I enjoy watching you set fire to whatever credibility
someone else may have thought you had left.
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 12:25:05 PM |
|
|
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:00:03 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:56:08 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
IAAH wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 17:09:00 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men," researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26 per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence) decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation
of Barbara Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written
article, other than "She took me out of context" and
"it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
No, 'fraid not.
Yes, we have, shitstain.
Ah, my concession is accepted.
It is. Thanks.
Lookie there
Yes, lookie there: you're an idiot. Nice job!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 06:04:13 PM |
|
|
S. Maizlich wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the
general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the
various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by
luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men,"
researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior
AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26
per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among
teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive
abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult
validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God
might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence)
decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation of Barbara
Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written article, other than "She
took me out of context" and "it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
Yes, and you lost. Have a nice day.
--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres and the art of projection- part 1
1130732777.897897.129520@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Psychologists call it"leveling." You either have to inflate your own
sense of self-worth
somehow or try and bring others down to you.
1124331927.055772.23...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
My wife and kids would be amused.
But they aren't because they're clinically insane.
"Sneechres"
1121916996.744137.114...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
That's what's called self-evidently insane. You should probably not be
allowed out in public unattended.
"Sneechres"
1414fd53.0411240004.1ac2d...@posting.google.com
LMAO! You are certainly insane.
"Sneechres"
1414fd53.0411240004.1ac2d05f@posting.google.com
your borderline insane viewpoint.
"Sneechres"
1414fd53.0411261502.3b310091@posting.google.com
the two hypocritical and insane points you were making
"Sneechres"
1414fd53.0408131545.6312b268@posting.google.com
if you want to continue to be completely insane...
....Now you, a completely insane moron idiot leftist
"Sneechres"
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
02 Dec 2005 07:09:19 PM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the
general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the
various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by
luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men,"
researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior
AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26
per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among
teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive
abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult
validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God
might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence)
decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation of Barbara
Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written article, other than "She
took me out of context" and "it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
Yes, and
and I demonstrated that the shitstain IAAH lied - he did not come close
to "refuting" (guffaw) Whitehead's well-written, thoughtful, thorough
article. IAAH is a convicted felon, and so are you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
03 Dec 2005 05:20:42 AM |
|
|
S. Maizlich wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the
general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the
various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by
luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men,"
researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior
AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26
per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among
teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive
abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult
validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God
might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males; teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence)
decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation of Barbara
Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written article, other than "She
took me out of context" and "it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
Yes, and
and I demonstrated that the shitstain IAAH lied -
No, you didn't.
he did not come close
to "refuting" (guffaw) Whitehead's well-written, thoughtful, thorough
article. IAAH is a convicted felon, and so are you.
Would you care to explain that bit of fantasy before I contact your ISP,
or after?
--
--sexkitten--
Sneechres and the art of projection- part 3
1130732777.897897.129520@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Psychologists call it"leveling." You either have to inflate your own
sense of self-worth
somehow or try and bring others down to you.
1414fd53.0402042145.2faac5c9@posting.google.com
you're a *****
1414fd53.0301242012.7786001e@posting.google.com
*I* said you were a *****, and you are
1414fd53.0201151612.5d801f91@posting.google.com
I don't own a vibrator,*****.
1414fd53.0312142051.5e760545@posting.google.com
you stupid *****
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "S. Maizlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
03 Dec 2005 10:50:32 AM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the
general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the
various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by
luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men,"
researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonenstein, and Joseph Pleek studied the
relationship between sex education and sexual initiation by
instructional topic. They divided sex education into four content
categories: biological knowledge, birth-control methods, AIDS
education, and "resistance skills" -- how to say "no" to sex.
"In analysis of the full sample," wrote Ku and associates, "prior
AIDS
education and resistance skills are each associated with
significant
decreases in the risk of first intercourse (AIDS education: 26
per cent
reduction; resistance skills: 29 per cent reduction). Significant
increases in the odds ratios were detected for prior
instruction in
birth control (30 per cent increase) or in the biological
aspects of
sex (32 per cent increase)."
Put simply: what worked in postponing sexual activity among
teens, and
its attendant ills, was fear (AIDS awareness) and directive
abstinence
(resistance skills). What accelerated teen sex was adult
validation of
pre-marital carnal knowledge. But for the caveat that fear of God
might
replace fear of AIDS, this is what the Religious Right had always
maintained.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n17_v49/ai_19751435
So: teaching the birds and the bees and birth control methods
increases the chance of first sexual activity among males;
teaching
AIDS awareness (fear) and resistance skills (abstinence)
decreases it.
Of course, everyone already knows this, but hedonism advocates
don't
care.
"Abstinence-only sexuality education doesn't work.
Repeating your empty polemic won't make it fact.
I'm still waiting for you to show in some way how the numbers
from the
CDC and the AMA
I'm still waiting for you to show a stronger refutation of Barbara
Dafoe Whitehead's excellent and well written article, other than "She
took me out of context" and "it wasn't typical".
You lazy shiftless *****.
D'you know, when the sources she used say that she's wrong,
We've already put that to bed.
Yes, and
and I demonstrated that the shitstain IAAH lied -
No, you didn't.
I did, repeatedly. He lied.
he did not come close
to "refuting" (guffaw) Whitehead's well-written, thoughtful, thorough
article. IAAH is a convicted felon, and so are you.
Would you care to explain that bit of fantasy before I contact your ISP,
or after?
What are you going to do?
"Hello, Earthlink? One of your subscribers libeled and
defamed me."
"Hmm...we take that kind of thing very seriously here
at Earthlink. Let's start the complaint process.
What's your name, ma'am?"
"My name is --sexkitten--".
<click>
You stupid, stupid, stupid TWAT.
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Sex education: what works, what doesn't |
04 Dec 2005 08:24:27 AM |
|
|
S. Maizlich wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
--sexkitten-- wrote:
S. Maizlich wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:47:19 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:01:15 GMT, "S. Maizlich"
<s.e.maizlich@hertzburgh.eduu> wrote:
shitstain IAAH reflexively lied:
On 1 Dec 2005 19:36:49 -0800, "S. Maizlich" <notgenx32@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In 1993 -- nearly thirty years after SIECUS first described the
general
theory -- researchers began to disaggregate the impact of the
various
strands of "comprehensive sexuality education." The analyses
were
authored not by partisans of the Christian Right, but by
luminaries of
peer-reviewed medical research journals.
In "Factors Influencing First Intercourse for Teenage Men,"
researchers
Leighton Ku, Freyn Sonen | | | | | | | | | | | | |
