The anti-science left is going to freak about this one. A new study indicates that abstinence training actually works.
So it turns out that children having sex are not like uncontrollable natural disasters. Oh wait, the left actually believes we cause natural disasters while kids having sex are actually uncontrollable.
But a new study shows otherwise.
Sex education classes that focus on encouraging children to remain abstinent can persuade a significant proportion to delay sexual activity, researchers reported Monday in a landmark study that could have major implications for U.S. efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.
Only about a third of sixth- and seventh-graders who completed an abstinence-focused program started having sex within the next two years, researchers found. Nearly half of the students who attended other classes, including ones that combined information about abstinence and contraception, became sexually active.
The findings are the first clear evidence that an abstinence program could work.
“I think we’ve written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence,” said John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who led the federally funded study. “Our study shows this could be one approach that could be used.”
The left has known that abstinence education works but that would likely cause less abortions and we can’t have that.
Expect this researcher to be treated as a pariah in short order. I don’t even know who the guy is but rest assured he just put himself on the administrations enemy list between Sarah Palin and James O’Keefe.
Here’s the hilarious part. Liberals are of course attacking the study. While they admit the eight hour abstinence course delayed sex they are blasting it for having no effect on contraceptive use. But here’s the funny thing – neither does the liberal’s regular sex ed.
The Foundry reports:
In contrast, study found that alternative types of sex ed failed. “Safe sex” programs (which promote contraception only) and “comprehensive sex ed” programs (which teach both abstinence and contraceptive use), had no effect on teen sexual behavior. These programs neither reduced teen sex nor did they increase contraceptive use among teens, which is their major emphasis.
So, in short, the liberals are mad that abstinence training is only teaching children to abstain. And it’s not doing the job that the liberal’s sex ed set out to do which is to increase contraceptive use.
February 2, 2010 at 8:19 pm
"The findings are the first clear evidence that an abstinence program could work."
What? Isn't there thousands of years of evidence that abstinence education works.
February 2, 2010 at 9:58 pm
6th graders? 7th graders? Sexually active within the next two years? Good grief. Hard to imagine that the same people who take issue with abstinence education might have children in this age group, and they'd prefer them to learn about artificial hormone contraceptives and condoms instead of… waiting. You're right: Typical.
February 2, 2010 at 9:58 pm
This only the latest bit of evidence that the whole progressive/libertarian/eugenicist philosophy is in the tank. Neener-neener – and the winner is: faith and reason!
February 2, 2010 at 10:11 pm
I guess liberals use themselves as the basis for everything. They think that because they are promiscuous, then everyone else is the same. So, they want the science to confirm that. My question is how did these people get in a position of authority to form educational policies in the first place?
I wonder if they have enough objectivity to accept the results of this study and change their approach if not shift their paradigm altogether. I don't know if they would be so honest.
Finally, in the spirit of liberalism, I hope they will be true to form and respect the choices of the parents by encouraging private education through vouchers instead of subjecting everyone to the state sponsored indoctrination and character deformation. But whom am I kidding? The only way only of this is to never elect a Democrat in public office ever again.
February 2, 2010 at 10:40 pm
Hey Barbara don't go lumping Libertarians in with progressives and eugenicists. Sure there are some really weird Libertarians but by today's standards many conservatives including the Founding Fathers could be considered Libertarians.
February 2, 2010 at 11:23 pm
"Oh wait, the left actually believes we cause natural disasters while kids having sex are actually uncontrollable."
This made me chuckle. I am going to use that one.
February 2, 2010 at 11:50 pm
I was watching a news channel that shall remain nameless and they talked about this topic. They opened it up to call-ins and Facebook comments and a lot of people kept saying, "I don't think abstinence works…." UM, hello?! The STUDY says it does!!! D'OH!
February 3, 2010 at 2:23 am
This isn't directly on topic, but how does abstinence only education work in public schools? Even though the purpose of sex can be reasoned from natural law without any theology, I can't imagine many schools are teaching it.
Problem is, you can't teach that sex is both just an activity (like sharing an ice cream sundae only a little more personal) and that sex is something that goes to the very purpose of man. Schools have to pick one or the other. And since public schools are generally afraid of touching anything that could possibly be remotely Christian with a 10 foot pole, I can't imagine they're teaching the true meaning of sex.
So I'm going to guess that an abstinence-only program in public schools would teach that sex is just another activity – but don't do it until you're married (or 40, whichever comes first). Without understanding the purpose of sex, abstinence-only education is just a big "DO NOT!" label stuck over sex. And seeing as how I happen to have been a teenager once I know that usually results young people wanting to do it.
I mean, this survey shows that abstinence-only education does marginally better than so-called safe-sex. This is really only good for people who hold the "it's just an activity" worldview – abstinence-only education can be used to delay sex until they're a year or two more mature. But then they'll be old enough to stock up on contraception and go at it like rabbits (in a responsible, caring manner of course).
I think we're fighting over the how-to ("safe-sex" vs "don't do it"), when at that point the battle is already lost – our culture has already robbed sex of all it's meaning and perverted into a purely physical activity. We need to teach people, both adolescents and adults, the true purpose of sex. But I can't see that happening in schools. It's got to start in the family and reform the culture first. Until sex-ed in school is only the tip of the iceberg, with it's base established well ahead of time from the parents at home I can't see how any teaching method will succeed.
I'm not old enough to know how we got from 50 years ago to today, how did sex-ed happen before the sexual revolution?
February 3, 2010 at 11:54 am
From the WaPo article:
"the curriculum tested did not represent most abstinence programs. It did not take a moralistic tone, as many abstinence programs do. Most notably, the sessions encouraged children to delay sex until they are ready, not necessarily until married; did not portray sex outside marriage as never appropriate; and did not disparage condoms."
"the White House is launching a $114 million pregnancy prevention initiative that will fund only programs that have been shown scientifically to work — a program the administration on Monday proposed expanding to $183 million."
"Based on the findings, Obama administration officials said programs like the one evaluated in the study could be eligible for federal funding."
"One of the things that's exciting about this study is that it says we have a new tool to add to our repertoire," said Monica Rodriguez, vice president for education and training at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.
Far from "freaking out" about this particular study, the Obama administration will be happy to fund any program that actually works, as any sane person would.
I was not thrilled with finding out that having a third of 6th and 7th graders engage in sexual activity within the next two years was considered a success, however. That's really the best we can hope for? Ugh.
February 4, 2010 at 2:27 pm
The thing about science, is that one study doesn't negate years of studies that show the opposite is true. Science must be repeatable.
Problem #1 with this study: The reporting of this study said nothing about STD and pregnancy rates among those who engaged in sex from the various groups.
Problem #2 with this study: How was a student's engagement in sexual activity verfied? Just by their word? If there is a stigma attached to something people are more apt to deny something took place. If there's open discussion on a topic, people are more liklye to be open about it. That alone could account for the differences between the groups.
Problem #3 with this study: By and large, actual abstience-only programs are nothing like the program conducted in this study. So it really says nothing about anything real.