Is America Burning - a Forum To Discuss Issues

All comments welcome, pro or con. Passionate ok, but let's be civil. ...Pertinent comments will be published on this blog. Air your viewpoints.


Skyline - Houston, Texas

Saturday, October 21, 2006


GAO Says Abstinence-Only Education Must Change
By Elizabeth Gettelman
Government Accountability Office rules that abstinence-only education materials must include accurate information on sexually transmitted infections and the effectiveness of condoms.
Teach people about Sexually Transmitted Diseases, the effectiveness of condoms?? How novel!
Some of the links in the above article are no longer valid. Below is an article from a working link:

DANGER: DO NOT ENTER“Infertility, isolation, jealousy, poverty, heartbreak, substance abuse, AIDS, pregnancy, cervical cancer, genital herpes, unstable long-term commitments, depression, embarrassment, meaningless wedding, sexual violence, personal disappointment, suicide, feelings of being used, loss of honesty, loneliness, loss of personal goals, distrust of others, pelvic inflammatory disease, loss of reputation, fear of pregnancy, disappointed parents, loss of self-esteem, leaving high school before graduation…. ALL of them can be eliminated by being abstinent until marriage.” —Choosing the Best PATH
Illustration: Jed Morfit
[People who give advice to young girls about life, love, marriage and -(whisper)- "sex"- may want to pay close attention to the pearls of wisdom quoted above. Please note that "ALL" of life's heartaches, miseries and tragedies "can be eliminated by being abstinent until marriage". You will be delighted to teach your young charges that NO married woman who was a virgin at the time of her nupitals will EVER suffer any of the problems listed above. If anyone is so crass as to point out that some married women actually DO suffer these things, hasten to assure them that by suffering these ills, the woman is confessing to being a non-virgin when wed. After all, the fundies can not be wrong, can they, and they promised..... WA]

By Peter Meredith

Thanks to a well-publicized congressional investigation, we now know that federally funded abstinence curricula are riddled with scientific errors, half-truths, and outright lies. So what are students and taxpayers getting for $170 million a year? If the following lessons are any indication, overwrought metaphors, laughable lists, and a lesson in Russian roulette.

“Hold up a beautiful rose. Talk about the petals and how they add color and fragrance to the rose. Hand the rose to a student, telling that student to pull off a petal and pass it on to another student who also pulls off a petal. Continue passing the rose around until there are no more petals. At the end, hold up the rose. Ask: Of what value is the rose now?… The rose represents someone who participates in casual sex.”—Choosing the Best PATH
[Have you ever noted a girl or woman fit the condition of the rose? Isn't that a rather silly comparison? Is a human devalued simply because of having illicit sexual experience ?
If that is so, why did Jesus forgive the adultress and the prostitute? Apparently He thought these women still had value. WA]

“No matter how strong a condom is, it won’t protect you from a broken heart.” -A.C. Green’s Game Plan
[Is it supposed to? Is that its purpose? I thought it was for contraceptive and disease prevention purposes. Is there anything that will protect you from a broken heart? For that matter, will abstinence protect you from a broken heart? WA]

“The first player spins the cylinder, points the gun to his/her head, and pulls the trigger. He/she has only a one in six chance of being killed. But if one continues to perform this act, the chamber with the bullet will ultimately fall into position, and the game ends as one of the players dies. Relying on condoms is like playing Russian roulette.” —Me, My World, My Future
[Relying on condoms is surer than using nothing --- or relying on human nature to adhere to an abstinence-only plan, which is more likely to fail than a condom. WA]

“Watch what you wear, if you don’t aim to please, don’t aim to tease.”—Sex Respect
[So once again we are back to the "what was she wearing" query in the blame-the-victim scenarios for sexual harassment, abuse, or rape. The advice that if you don't aim to "put out", don't dress temptingly is so stupid. In the first place, provocative dress is a matter of opinion and perception; what is innocuous to one mind may be seductive to another. In the second place, the statement assumes that men are weaklings, helpless in the grip of sexual passion or arousal, that the very sight of an attractive female will drive him so wild with lust that he will be unable to control his urges. Crapola! I refuse to believe that men are so weak willed or weak minded. I will admit that I have seen some modes of dress that I thought were over the top, and males certainly stared, but not a one acted as if the exposure was a "come one, come all and get it" neon sign, nor did a single male erupt into an uncontrollable sexual frenzy! WA]


  • At Tuesday, October 24, 2006 11:54:00 PM , Blogger Lavender Dawn said...

    oh my lord. I don't even remember the sex ed classes in highschool. I was too busy getting laid, I guess. And taking risks by using condoms. And getting sexually harrassed wearing clothes that covered everything.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home