| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
14 Apr 2007 10:40:03 PM |
| Object: |
Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., is a
Washington-based think tank that blatantly states that their research
is conducted in order to "support decisions" about "social policy
problems." Clearly, their report on abstinence programs is timed to
affect funding.
Their findings are flawed and raise questions in two separate areas.
First, the findings about abstinence programs are based on a flawed
design. The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11. Those children were not evaluated until five
years later. The targeted children were too young to absorb the
abstinence message, and there was no follow-up to the original
abstinence message. This basic flaw in the study design invalidates
any findings in the report.
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school. Ninety percent of parents agree with this
message. Abstinence programs teach teens that sex should be reserved
for marriage. Again, 90 percent of parents support this message.
Finally, abstinence programs teach teens that sex involves commitment,
love and intimacy; qualities most likely to be present within
marriage.
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women
for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute, stated, "The left sees no
difference between their message and ours, but there are major
differences. Comprehensive sex education is not values based. Yet, sex
involves values - especially the values of commitment, love and
intimacy. If values are omitted, the teaching implies that casual teen
sex has no lasting consequences as long as the teens use a condom."
Crouse added, "Comprehensive sex education programs teach that casual
sex is 'no big deal.' That myth has caused sexually transmitted
diseases to skyrocket among the nation's teens. That myth has aided in
making drugs for depression the most prescribed medicine for teens.
That myth has increased teen suicide as well as alcohol and drug
abuse. The consequences of casual sex have been disastrous for the
nation's teenagers. Only since the broader implementation of
abstinence programs have we seen a downturn in sexual activity, teen
births and teen abortions. There are now 15 evaluations documenting
the effectiveness of abstinence education. This new study by
Mathematica holds no water in the wake of the overwhelming evidence
that abstinence education produces positive results."
.
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 12:46:45 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> writes:
The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11. Those children were not evaluated until five
years later.
But I thought the whole point was to "get 'em while they're
young." I love the fact that the study found that abstinence-only
education not only isn't more effective than sex ed, it found that
this particular, CWA-recommended line of training (at least,
recommended six years ago) is NO BETTER THAN IGNORANCE.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 07:01:12 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:46:45 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg <elf@drizzle.com>
wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> writes:
The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11. Those children were not evaluated until five
years later.
But I thought the whole point was to "get 'em while they're
young." I love the fact that the study found that abstinence-only
education not only isn't more effective than sex ed, it found that
this particular, CWA-recommended line of training (at least,
recommended six years ago) is NO BETTER THAN IGNORANCE.
Because it's NO DIFFERENT than ignorance. It *IS*, in fact, the
inculcation of ignorance.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 02:07:35 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in news:1176608403.539565.104200
@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
Subject: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed
...."because I disagree with its findings," whine the christers.
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling
aa # 1939
AUTHORITARIANS ARE PERVERTS. Why?
--They consider themselves shepherds.
--They consider the rest of us sheep.
--Shepherds ***** sheep.
--Therefore AUTHORITARIANS ARE PERVERTS.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 08:19:59 AM |
|
|
No life, no sex, know nothing troll "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote
in message news:1176608403.539565.104200@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
<snip fundy whining>
Re: The troll occasionally known as "J Young" opining on abstinence.
Lessee:
* He spends 24/7 trolling under multiple nyms.
* Is particulary active in trolling on Friday and Saturday evenings
* Documented as hating both gays and woman
* Pretty much hates everyone and everything else
Yep, he's an expert on 'abstinence'.
By default, unfortunately for him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Doge of St. Louis" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
17 Apr 2007 10:15:34 PM |
|
|
In article <evt8rg02uu3@enews1.newsguy.com>, "LC" <LC_isnot@this.com>
wrote:
No life, no sex, know nothing troll "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote
in message news:1176608403.539565.104200@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
[...]
Yep, he's an expert on 'abstinence'.
By default, unfortunately for him.
It's an example of Darwinian evolution in action, then, isn't it?
Oh, the irony.....
--
<*> ObQuote: "Ideas, in a free society, are not a crime - and neither can they serve as the justification of a crime". -- Ayn Rand
======================================================================
<*> The_Doge of St. Louis Stage, screen, radio
http://www.pobox.com/~thedoge/ http://www.stageleft.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bretts the Baptist" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
14 Apr 2007 11:59:36 PM |
|
|
On 14 Apr 2007 20:40:03 -0700, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective.
No kidding ... I wonder why.
______________________________________
Bretts the Baptist.
"Among those that are born of women there is not a
greater prophet than Bretts the Baptist." (Luke 7:28)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom S" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 06:52:34 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 04:59:36 GMT, Bretts the Baptist
<bretts1967@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 14 Apr 2007 20:40:03 -0700, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective.
No kidding ... I wonder why.
Because they disagreed with the results??
They were wetting themselves like little puppies in anticipation of
the study supporting their agenda. Then it is released and they get
yet another kick in the teeth.
Tom S.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom S" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 07:08:31 AM |
|
|
On 14 Apr 2007 20:40:03 -0700, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., is a
Washington-based think tank that blatantly states that their research
is conducted in order to "support decisions" about "social policy
problems." Clearly, their report on abstinence programs is timed to
affect funding.
Their findings are flawed and raise questions in two separate areas.
First, the findings about abstinence programs are based on a flawed
design. The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11.
That's when sex education is taught in school.
Those children were not evaluated until five
years later. The targeted children were too young to absorb the
abstinence message,
Kids this age seem to have no problem absorbing lessons about their
sexual being, why would they have problems absorbing lessons on
abstinence?
and there was no follow-up to the original
abstinence message.
Any follow up should have come from the lessons and examples from
their home life.
This basic flaw in the study design invalidates
any findings in the report.
They wish it did.
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school. Ninety percent of parents agree with this
message.
So what.
Abstinence programs teach teens that sex should be reserved
for marriage. Again, 90 percent of parents support this message.
Again, totally irrelevant.
Finally, abstinence programs teach teens that sex involves commitment,
love and intimacy; qualities most likely to be present within
marriage.
Big deal.
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women
for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute, stated, "The left sees no
difference between their message and ours, but there are major
differences. Comprehensive sex education is not values based.
Neither is biology, math, drivers ed, or PE.
Yet, sex
involves values - especially the values of commitment, love and
intimacy.
Who's values? Yours or the kids'
If values are omitted, the teaching implies that casual teen
sex has no lasting consequences as long as the teens use a condom."
Comprehensive programs don't teach that.
Crouse added, "Comprehensive sex education programs teach that casual
sex is 'no big deal.'
Comprehensive programs don't teach that.
That myth has caused sexually transmitted
diseases to skyrocket among the nation's teens.
Numbers please!
That myth has aided in
making drugs for depression the most prescribed medicine for teens.
Hardly.
That myth has increased teen suicide as well as alcohol and drug
abuse.
No correlation at all.
The consequences of casual sex have been disastrous for the
nation's teenagers.
No it hasn't.
Only since the broader implementation of
abstinence programs have we seen a downturn in sexual activity, teen
births and teen abortions.
The downturn (if there has been one) have been due to better
education, AIDS awareness, and better, more readily available
contraception and information about its use..
There are now 15 evaluations documenting
the effectiveness of abstinence education.
And a couple of hundred that document its ineffectiveness.
This new study by
Mathematica holds no water in the wake of the overwhelming evidence
that abstinence education produces positive results."
Keep dreaming sister.
Tom S.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 07:06:32 PM |
|
|
On 14 Apr 2007 20:40:03 -0700, "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com>
wrote:
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school.
Since that's unnatural, it doesn't work.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 02:00:01 AM |
|
|
On 15 Apr., 05:40, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., is a
Washington-based think tank that blatantly states that their research
is conducted in order to "support decisions" about "social policy
problems." Clearly, their report on abstinence programs is timed to
affect funding.
Why on earth are you so obsessed with people's private lives, J Young?
Oh, I know: because it's Saturday night, and you are spending it alone
AGAIN...
You know: just because you aren't getting any doesn't mean that
everyone has to do the same...
Besides, your god created us with our sexuality, why are you opposed
to your god's will?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
14 Apr 2007 10:59:40 PM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 11:40 pm, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., is a
Washington-based think tank that blatantly states that their research
is conducted in order to "support decisions" about "social policy
problems." Clearly, their report on abstinence programs is timed to
affect funding.
Their findings are flawed and raise questions in two separate areas.
First, the findings about abstinence programs are based on a flawed
design. The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11. Those children were not evaluated until five
years later. The targeted children were too young to absorb the
abstinence message, and there was no follow-up to the original
abstinence message. This basic flaw in the study design invalidates
any findings in the report.
Wrong! They are blaming the STUDY, when in fact it was the PROJECT
that failed! The study did what it set out to do.
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school. Ninety percent of parents agree with this
message. Abstinence programs teach teens that sex should be reserved
for marriage. Again, 90 percent of parents support this message.
Finally, abstinence programs teach teens that sex involves commitment,
love and intimacy; qualities most likely to be present within
marriage.
Red herring and fallacy of numbers. Doesn't matter HOW many parents
support the message. IS THE PROGRAM EFFECTIVE? And the answer to
that is "No".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Anlatt the Builder" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 02:00:29 AM |
|
|
On Apr 14, 8:40 pm, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Nothing funnier than J Young quoting something that claims a study is
flawed. J Young quotes more flawed studies than anyone I know. He
clearly wouldn't recognize if a study was valid or not if it bit him
on the toe.
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school. Ninety percent of parents agree with this
message. Abstinence programs teach teens that sex should be reserved
for marriage. Again, 90 percent of parents support this message.
Finally, abstinence programs teach teens that sex involves commitment,
love and intimacy; qualities most likely to be present within
marriage.
And this passage shows just how far off from even knowing what a
"study" is, and what makes it valid, that these people are. Every
statement in this paragraph might be true; 90% of parents may indeed
support these values. But if the program doesn't succeed in
inculcating the stdents with these values in such a way as to create
behavioral changes, than the program is a failure, even if it is
TRYING to teach great things. It's not succeeding.
The Mathematica Policy Research report didn't say that the abstinence-
based programs were trying to teach bad things. Only that they
failed.
Not that I believe for a minute that "90% of parents" think that sex
should be "reserved for marriage." Care to back that one up? Most
people in this country - including the parents you're talking about -
have sex before marriage, live together before getting married, and
then get married. Some religious groups may not like this, but it
happens to be the ordinary pattern of life in the U.S. today, and most
people know that. Where'd you get your 90% figure? From what people
were willing to say aloud in front of their minister and church-going
friends?
Schools can teach the facts of human reproduction. They can teach the
kids how to evaluate their actions in terms of possible consequences.
If, in addition, you want to teach your kids your own personal "sexual
values" - which differ from person to person, and group to group -
then that's what home and church is for.
If the schools were teaching the kids, "You SHOULD have sex before
marriage," or "All of you WILL have sex in high school, don't try to
fight it," then parents would have a valid objection. (I'd object
too!) But if they teach, "This is what will happen if you abstain;
this is what will happen if you have sex of type A or type B or type
C; this is how you can predict and affect the consequences of your
actions," then that's factual knowledge that all kids should have. It
should certainly INCLUDE abstinence (which is not at all a bad
technique for avoiding certain negative outcomes). But if it's LIMITED
to abstinence, that's going to be very bad for the kids who are going
to have sex whether they're taught abstinence or not. And, as studies
show, that's a lot of kids.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 02:15:00 AM |
|
|
On Apr 15, 4:40 am, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Four extraneous words seem to have crept in thetre old chap, so I took
the liberty of correcting it for you.
--
Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil
and General Purpose Igor
The Anti-Theist, BAAWA Lowly Evilmeister and tamer of the Demon Duck
of Doom
Convicted by Earthquack
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 10:49:49 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:40:03 -0700, J Young wrote:
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
<snip>
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women for
America's Beverly LaHaye Institute, stated, "The left sees no difference
between their message and ours, but there are major differences.
Comprehensive sex education is not values based. Yet, sex involves values
- especially the values of commitment, love and intimacy. If values are
omitted, the teaching implies that casual teen sex has no lasting
consequences as long as the teens use a condom."
Public school sex-ed classes would not even be necessary if parents could
be trusted to know, and convey, accurate information to their children.
But fundie parents are experts in denying reality. They prefer to think
that if they don't talk about it, it won't be a problem.
If the fundie parents are so worried about teaching their children
'values' associated with sex-ed, then they can teach them themselves? Is
that asking too fucking much? How about this for a division of labor:
school teaches the biology, parents teach the 'values'. Problem solved!
Crouse added, "Comprehensive sex education programs teach that casual sex
is 'no big deal.' That myth has caused sexually transmitted diseases to
skyrocket among the nation's teens. That myth has aided in making drugs
for depression the most prescribed medicine for teens. That myth has
increased teen suicide as well as alcohol and drug abuse.
Is there any evidence that comprehensive sex ed causes all this, or are
you just blowing smoke out your *****? Before you answer, you may want to
look at some statistics regarding STDs, etc, in European countries were
adolescent sexuality is not treated as some sort of horrible disease.
The consequences
of casual sex have been disastrous for the nation's teenagers. Only since
the broader implementation of abstinence programs have we seen a downturn
in sexual activity, teen births and teen abortions. There are now 15
evaluations documenting the effectiveness of abstinence education. This
new study by Mathematica holds no water in the wake of the overwhelming
evidence that abstinence education produces positive results."
Yes. And snakes talk. And Jesus will return before his disciples have
passed away. And if you wish for something to be true hard enough, it
WILL be true.
--
MarkA
(this space accidentally filled in)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
16 Apr 2007 05:16:08 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 23:49:49 -0400, MarkA <toor@nowhere.com> wrote:
If the fundie parents are so worried about teaching their children
'values' associated with sex-ed, then they can teach them themselves? Is
that asking too fucking much?
Considering that it's mostly Christian girls who are getting pregnant
before marriage, it would appear to be too much to ask.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Debunking Abstinence is Flawed |
15 Apr 2007 10:18:00 AM |
|
|
Typical Christian fanatic twisting and misinterpreting the facts to
promulgate his Christian beliefs. That's religion - not science.
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1176608403.539565.104200@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/12789/MEDIA/education/index.htm
CWA SAYS STUDY DEBUNKING ABSTINENCE IS FLAWED
Washington, D.C. - A just-released report claims that abstinence
programs are ineffective. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., is a
Washington-based think tank that blatantly states that their research
is conducted in order to "support decisions" about "social policy
problems." Clearly, their report on abstinence programs is timed to
affect funding.
Their findings are flawed and raise questions in two separate areas.
First, the findings about abstinence programs are based on a flawed
design. The Mathematica study targeted children who were in abstinence
programs from ages 9-11. Those children were not evaluated until five
years later. The targeted children were too young to absorb the
abstinence message, and there was no follow-up to the original
abstinence message. This basic flaw in the study design invalidates
any findings in the report.
Second, the real issue is the values that are taught in the programs.
Abstinence programs teach teens the value of abstaining from sex at
least through high school. Ninety percent of parents agree with this
message. Abstinence programs teach teens that sex should be reserved
for marriage. Again, 90 percent of parents support this message.
Finally, abstinence programs teach teens that sex involves commitment,
love and intimacy; qualities most likely to be present within
marriage.
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of Concerned Women
for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute, stated, "The left sees no
difference between their message and ours, but there are major
differences. Comprehensive sex education is not values based. Yet, sex
involves values - especially the values of commitment, love and
intimacy. If values are omitted, the teaching implies that casual teen
sex has no lasting consequences as long as the teens use a condom."
Crouse added, "Comprehensive sex education programs teach that casual
sex is 'no big deal.' That myth has caused sexually transmitted
diseases to skyrocket among the nation's teens. That myth has aided in
making drugs for depression the most prescribed medicine for teens.
That myth has increased teen suicide as well as alcohol and drug
abuse. The consequences of casual sex have been disastrous for the
nation's teenagers. Only since the broader implementation of
abstinence programs have we seen a downturn in sexual activity, teen
births and teen abortions. There are now 15 evaluations documenting
the effectiveness of abstinence education. This new study by
Mathematica holds no water in the wake of the overwhelming evidence
that abstinence education produces positive results."
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
