ChristiansUnite Forums

House Democrats poised to dump abstinence funding

House Democrats are being asked to reconsider their plan to de-fund federal abstinence-only sex education programs. House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman John Dingell (D-Michigan) says he does not plan to extend Title V abstinence-education grants when they expire at the end of June.



Valerie Huber is executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA). She says killing millions of dollars in abstinence funding flies in the face of a new Zogby poll, which shows that the overwhelming majority of American parents support abstinence education when they are informed of how it differs from comprehensive sex education.

"Presently funded abstinence education funding is consistent with what Americans and American parents in particular want taught," Huber asserts. "And if they choose to de-fund Title V," she says, "they're going to be bowing to the wishes of special-interest groups, a vocal minority, rather than responding to the resounding voice of their constituents."

House Democrats who oppose the abstinence education funding say they want to use it instead for comprehensive sex education, which involves teaching students how to use various forms of contraception, including condoms. Huber says Dingell and other Democratic leaders appear beholden to Planned Parenthood and other groups that advocate condom-based sex education.

"The fact that parents overwhelmingly, regardless of their ideological bent, want this form of funding to be presented in the classrooms for their students certainly indicates that the leadership is not listening to voters -- they're listening to someone else," the NAEA executive director notes.

Huber says the National Abstinence Education Association is calling on House Democrats to reauthorize federal funding of abstinence-only sex education programs.

Well of course they do.  Reasons are as follows

current education brings out the idea that sex is OK.  As long as you are protected it is OK.  Well there is a percentage of folks that even with this "education" go unprotected.  And this will end up leading to more pregnancies.  More pregnancies means more children, more people possibly on welfare, a growing lower class, more people for them to plea to for support and generally those that they get their votes from.  Thus continuing to grow in their political base. 
This also means generally an increase in those with HIV and other STD's.  Another base of people which they can plea too and pretend to have their interest in mind.  More funding spent on HIV research and such since the numbers continue to grow.

What does abstinence teaching do?  Teaches a good moral ground to stand on.  People who follow it have no problems with pregnancies, HIV, or other STDs.  The statistics for those look great.  But it puts a cramp on the style of the Left in that they do not have anyone they can "feel" for anymore.

Look at these hypothetical numbers.
100 people trained in our current educational methods.
If we assume 10% would not use current methods and go unprotected
If we assume 10% of that come up with a pregnancy
If we assume another 10% end up with an STD.
What do we get
10 people would not use protection during sex
1 of those 10 would end up pregnant
another 1 of those would get an STD
So 1% would end up pregnant and another 1% would have an STD

So take 100 people with abstinence training
If we assume that 10% would not follow the training
Then 10% of them would not even use protection
Then 10% of them would end up pregnant
Then 10% would end up with an STD
What do we get
10 people would have sex
1 person would have sex without protection
.1 people would end up pregnant
.1 people would end up with an STD
That is .1% would end up pregnant and another .1% would have an STD

I like those odds a whole lot better.