Gardner Pushed for $110 Million in Abstinence-Only Education Funding


Colorado U.S. Senate candidate Cory Gardner co-sponsored an abstinence-only federal grant program, which included a requirement that, in courses for teenagers, grant recipients include information about the benefits of refraining from sexual activity until marriage.

It also required education about sexual abstinence as the “optimal sexual health behavior for youth.” Gardner’s stance on abstinence-only sex education has received scant attention on the campaign trail in one of the country’s most competitive and important races.

Gardner’s bill mandating the $110 million program, known as the Abstinence Education Reallocation Act, was introduced on Valentine’s Day 2012, the same day Democrats introduced the Real Education for Healthy Youth Act, which aimed to “expand comprehensive sex education programs in schools and ensure that federal funds are spent on effective, age-appropriate, medically accurate programs.”

Gardner’s bill provided funds for “teaching the skills and benefits of sexual abstinence as the optimal sexual health behavior for youth; and teaching the benefits of refraining from non-marital sexual activity, the advantage of reserving sexual activity for marriage, and the foundational components of a healthy relationship.”

Gardner has apparently not commented publicly on the bill and an email to his office seeking comment was not returned.

Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-IL), co-sponsor of the Abstinence Education Reallocation Act, said he was concerned, as a parent, about his children contracting sexually transmitted diseases.

“This caught my attention because as a father, with two of my four kids in their late teens, I want them to avoid such risks,” he said, according to a report in The Hill. His solution was more federal funding for “risk avoidance education,” also referred to as abstinence education.

A survey by Advocates for Youth found that 70 percent of Americans oppose education programs focusing only on abstinence until marriage.

Social issues have played a prominent role in Colorado’s Senate contest, but the debate has skirted sexual education, focusing instead on birth control and abortion issues.

Gardner’s Democratic opponent, Sen. Mark Udall, has issued a steady stream of attacks on Gardner’s past and current support for “personhood” legislation at the federal level. Udall has also highlighted Gardner’s longstanding opposition to abortion during his political career.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • fiona64

    If he was really that concerned about his kids getting STDs, he would want them to have *comprehensive* prevention education, including use of prophylactics, etc. Telling them “just don’t do it” doesn’t help.

    “Abstinence-only” education is a giant failure. http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1195

    • Cactus_Wren

      I like to call it “ignorance-only sex education”.

    • Katarina

      Hi fiona, I think we share a lot of the same views and I’ve seen many articles you’ve posted on. Is there any way to contact you? Skype?

      • fiona64

        I prefer to keep that information to myself. It’s nothing personal; I’ve had a stalker.

        • Katarina

          well how about making a skype account just for the occasion. I promise I’m not a stalker lol. I just want to ask some things based on what you wrote but I don’t want it to be public.

          • fiona64

            Like I said, it’s nothing personal. I respectfully decline.

          • Katarina

            alright well, I’ll write you an email and sometime soon and you can set up an anonymous email account. The reason I want to talk is because I’ve also been a victim and something you said earlier struck a real chord with me and I’m trying to get over what’s happened to me and I thought maybe you could help

  • JPL

    As a parent who just went through reviewing sex education I much prefer the so called abstinence education material for the following reasons:
    1. The programs covered contraceptives and their limitations vs comprehensive ones that focused on condoms only and only Be Proud Be Responsible had a facilitators note that said don’t “bash condoms or provide information on failure rates”
    2. It is proven that the longer kids delay having sex the better off they are and as the write states I prefer my kids receive the optimal message when it comes to sex. Kids try and achieve to the bar that is set for them – set it high
    3. I would really say that the abstinence education was the more comprehensive program of the two types it focused on the whole kid and providing life skills vs lessons on how to incorporate condoms into teen sex – more like a how to
    4. After looking at both I felt the abstinence program would educate my kids with all the data for them to make an informed decision when the times comes for them to have sex and also the information when they are ready to choose the contraception that is best for them and there partner.

    Lastly I went to look at the survey and the writer is quoting a survey from 1996 & 1999 and does not give you the questions that were asked. Also, on both sides of the debate the programs that I reviewed were not even written by then.

    • night porter

      Abstinence only education has been proven to be a failure.

      • JPL

        The latest studies show a different picture than that – they show that abstinence education does work – check out this story from CNN that shows how it does work and those who received comprehensive sex where more likely than those who receive nothing to have sex. http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/02/abstinence.study/

        • fiona64

          Oh, sweetie. You are about to be hoist on your own petard. From *your link*:

          The study, published in the current issue of the Archives of
          Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, indicated that about one-third of
          the preteens and their young teen classmates who received an eight-hour abstinence lesson had sexual intercourse within two years of the class.

          By comparison, more than half of the students who were taught about safe sex and condom use reported having intercourse by the two-year mark, andmore than 40 percent of students who received either an eight- or 12-hour lesson incorporating both abstinence education and safe sex reported having sex at two years.

          In other words, abstinence education doesn’t stop kids from having sex; it just means that they are having sex without all of the information they need. The other cohort is having sex at an only slightly higher rate, and with a far greater comprehension of what they’re doing.

          Oh, and this, ibid.:

          The study’s authors — John B. Jemmott III, Loretta S. Jemmott and
          Geoffrey T. Fong — cautioned that abstinence programs are not an
          effective long-term solution.

          And this, ibid:

          Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, said that in his opinion, the
          abstinence program does not go far enough toward helping youths who are
          sexually active make informed choices about contraception. He would
          like to see federal funding for programs aimed at abstinence and safe
          sex.

          • JPL

            Fiona – how many kids do you have? I have three kids a pre-teen so I’m very interested in this topic. I also have high standards for my kids and believe kids will do there best to achieve those standards. While some of them may not achieve the “optimal” choice they can strive for that outcome. The program that I voted for was one that strived for the “optimal” outcome along with hope for those who miss that mark. They did educate about contraception much better than Be Proud Be Responsible which was awful. I even saw one Jammott program that said taking a shower with your partner was a green light activity, really? Last time I took a shower with my wife it lead to other things – how about you and your partner? I have found research on both sides and I also noticed that the Jammott’s business seems to be selling sex ed programs all our comprehensive except one so I would think they would say that makes financial sense

          • fiona64

            Not that this is any of your business, but I have a son; he is 28. He received comprehensive and *practical* sex education in school and at home. He was told about *all* of his choices. His father and I taught him how to use condoms so that he would be prepared when he felt ready to have sex.

            He has not gotten anyone pregnant, so apparently it worked.

            And I still don’t see your link to the alleged “abstinence program” that provides full information.

          • JPL

            I agree that we need to give the kids all the information but when I see compressive programs stating don’t bash condoms or give their effectiveness rate they are not giving kids the information they need. Heck condoms only protect from STD’s that spread via bodily filled or inside. They don’t protect against those on the outside. Also, they only protect if they are used correctly and before any contact. I also saw one program with green light activity like taking a shower with your partner. When I reviewed the Abstinence centered material they talk about more than sex, they talk about goals, how to deal with peer pressure and yes they even discussed contraception all of them in fact. They gave the effectiveness of each along with the pros and cons – which matched up with CDC even. I think that you should really take a look at the new abstinence centered material and not the outdated stuff that SEICUS and them throw out there every time from the 1990’s

          • fiona64

            I don’t have to look at it because I KNOW IT’S CRAP.

            I’m going home now to set up for trick-or-treat.

            Maybe I’ll give out condoms just to piss you off. Heh.

          • JPL

            Happy Halloween and I’m glad I live on the east coast so my kids can get candy.

          • August M

            People like you should always use condoms.

          • HeilMary1

            People like you probably are always sex offenders.

          • fiona64

            People like you should MYOB about the sex lives of normal folk.

          • Arekushieru

            You never apply the same arguments to your OWN side. That’s hypocrisy. So sorry.

            The optimal outcome. Um, they may have promoted it that way, but the only one that achieved it was the comp sex ed programs. I would think you would base your vote on actual vs theoretical outcome, given how you talk so much about research.

            Um, do you not understand what the term green light activity means?

            Finally, even if abstinence only sex ed did provide the optimal choice, I still wouldn’t take it, because it achieves that by telling young boys and girls that female sexuality is icky while male sexuality is uncontrollable and entitles men to sex whenever they feel like it.

          • JPL

            I’m basing my vote on actual results and actually reviewing the materials – how are you basing your comments? Which programs have you reviewed?

            In one of the programs it listed green light, yellow light and red light activities to do with your partner. Green light means it is okay and one of those is taking a shower with your partner. I don’t know about you but if I take a shower with my partner it is not going to stop at the shower.

            Please provide examples of this as I did not see anything saying female sexuality is icky – it does talk about boys and there hormones but does not portray them as sex fiends.

            Please provide I’m researching to make the best decision with my vote for the SHAC. However, most of the comments are just generalizations with little fact behind them

          • fiona64

            it does talk about boys and there hormones but does not portray them as sex fiends.

            … said the guy who claimed that “boys only want a high-five in the locker room.

            However, most of the comments are just generalizations with little fact behind them

            That’s rich, coming from you. I proved that the two citations you provided did not say what you claimed they did … with information directly from the cites. I and others have provided you with reams of evidence that your claims on the effectiveness of abstinence-only education are false.

            And what do you do? Continue to refuse to provide links to the actual programs, and wave away any evidence that you don’t like.

            You’re kind of laughable at this point.

        • HeilMary1

          The only reason why I didn’t get a boyfriend until age 30 was because my abstinence-only childbirth-ruined mom disfigured me as her abstinence-forever excuse and it took me several years to save up for enough plastic surgery. Forced abstinence REALLY SUCKS.

    • Jason Salzman

      a fair point about the survey. i’ll see if i can find more info.

    • Nessie

      In addition to ignoring scientific evidence concerning contraception, pregnancy, and STD’s; abstinence-only programs almost always promote outdated gender roles and homophobia. If you think such attitudes are the “better” choice, than you are a bigoted idiot.

      • JPL

        I see that you subscribe to the Saul Alinsky school – if you can’t beat them make a point and then call names. The programs that I reviewed have are medically accurate one even has a board. Which program do you think is homophobic?

        • fiona64

          The programs that I reviewed have are medically accurate one even has a board.

          Stormfront has a board. Is there a point to that?

          Please provide a citation for this “medically accurate, abstinence-only education.” I would love to see it.

          • JPL

            Sure we looked at materials from Choosing the Best, Best Friends, WAIT Training, along with ETR and Select Media. All of these had published research – however once I started to look at the research I noticed that most of the research for ETR was done by Doug Kirby who is on staff at ETR and Media Select research was done by the author. While the other programs where independent researchers. Also, based on the materials they state medically accurate and one of the abstinence centered materials sent me a letter from HHS stating that their materials where medically accurate. Is that enough citation for you on that?

          • fiona64

            Is that enough citation for you on that?

            No, actually, it isn’t. Saying some names does not mean you’ve given a citation. I guess I should have specified that I would like to see links.

            When I say “I would like to see …” something, it is because I would actually like to see it.

            I can understand why you wouldn’t want to use something developed by someone who actually cared about comprehensive sex ed, though, like the late Doug Kirby. http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/blogs-main/advocates-blog/2104-doug-kirby-a-true-advocate-for-youth-

            When I say “I would like to see …” something, it is because I would actually like to see it.

            Also, based on the materials they state medically accurate and one of
            the abstinence centered materials sent me a letter from HHS stating that
            their materials where medically accurate

            Because no one has ever faked anything, in the history of the world, especially not when they want you to buy something that has already been proven NOT to work. Like an abstinence education program.

          • Arekushieru

            No. Sorry. Just because they state that they’re medically accurate doesn’t mean they are. It goes back to the same argument you used against Doug Kirby. Talk about hypocrisy. They support abstinence-only sex ed, so of COURSE they’re going to say it’s medically accurate, that is….

            Also, perhaps there is a reason why these are INDEPENDENT researchers and not published? HMM.

          • JPL

            Does the HHS under the current administration sending a letter to confirm the medical accuracy of the program count?

            I’m not sure about your independent researchers and not published mean as all programs that I’m looking at have research that has been published and these are national programs.

          • fiona64

            WHERE ARE THE LINKS TO THESE PROGRAMS? WHY DO YOU REFUSE TO PROVIDE THEM?

        • Nessie

          In the United States, nearly all Abstinance-Only Classes are influenced by Conservitive Christian dogma: sex is only for marriage, and marriage is only for a man with a woman.
          Some people deserve to be called names-people who value outdated, harmful superstion over facts.

          • JPL

            The last I checked basically the supreme court ruled that marriage is between two people and the programs I reviewed did not mention a man and women – but a lifelong monogamous relationship between two people. Also, Nessie how many kids do you have?

          • fiona64

            Also, Nessie how many kids do you have?

            Why does this matter to you? Do you think only people with children should be allowed to worry about children being taught the kind of scientifically inaccurate, unadulterated *bullshit* which has been proven to fail that you are promoting here?

            I don’t know about anyone else, but I prefer our children to be intelligent and well-informed, not ignorant. I was deliberately kept socially naive by my parents, and they did me no goddamned favors whatsoever. I did not know how to make reasonable decisions in relationships. All they ever told me was “don’t do it,” not “here is some information you can use.” Had it not been for the comprehensive sex education I got in school, I would have known NOTHING and it still wasn’t enough. Because part of comprehensive sex ed nowadays that wasn’t addressed was warning signs of dating violence — and that information could have saved me the regular beatings I got from the “nice Catholic boy” to whom I got engaged at age 18.

            It you want your kids to be stupid, rock on. If you want them not to know how to make their own decisions and have adequate, accurate information on which to base those decisions, rock on.

            I feel sorry for them.

          • JPL

            I believe that parents are the best people to chose what is best for their kids because they have a vested interest versus those that don’t have kids. You keep quoting one study from many years ago on some programs that nobody has heard of – so please give me citation of things that are inaccurate.

            I agree that I want my kids intelligent and well informed and that is why when we looked at programs we choose an abstinence centered program that gave kids a lot of information and promoting abstinence as the best approach to avoid STD’s and unwanted pregnancies. The comprehensive programs that we looked like seemed like commercials for condoms with not as much information given.

            I’m sorry that your parents did you a disservice and had to deal with dating violence but that seems more like an issue between you and your parents. I know when I was in school (1980’s) there was very little sex education and I received nothing from home. However, again I would challenge you to look at some of the current abstinence centered material as I think you would be surprised at what it does cover regarding unhealthy relationships.

            I’m not promoting a one time or just say no message — what I have found going through the process for my sons school is that the current abstinence centered education is more holistic than those of the comprehensive and give the kids a whole lot of information.

            Bottom line how well a parent interacts with there kids the better information they will have

          • fiona64

            Sorry, dumbfuck, but 2007 is not “many years ago.”

            I believe that parents are the best people to chose what is best for
            their kids because they have a vested interest versus those that don’t
            have kids.

            Then you are an idiot, because we ALL have a vested interest in having an educated, informed populace.

            Do you want MORE links on how abstinence education does not work? Rock on. Here are 259K sources. https://www.google.com/search?q=abstinence+education+failure&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

          • JPL

            LOL I must be winning

            My kids are very well informed and educated. They are also being taught to be responsible for themselves and there actions. Personal responsibility something that is very lacking in our society these days.

            I looked at that link and saw a lot of the results were from the seizes advocates for youth, etc and one article I looked at was an op-ed piece I also replaced your search with AE works – I got 870K sources.

            What is wrong with programs that teach kids about peer pressure and how to avoid them, how to handle difficult situations, educates them on contraception, lets know the reality of STDs and teen pregnancy? Again I’m reviewing 6 programs and this is what I see in those 3 abstinence centered programs – to me it seems that if a teen went through one of those they would be more then equipped to have sex when they are ready.

          • fiona64

            ::head desk:;

            I pity your kids, who are going to enter the real world and be woefully unprepared.

          • fiona64

            I want to address this separately:

            I believe that parents are the best people to chose what is best for their kids

            Do you now? 100 percent, across the board?

            Because some parents believe what is best for their kids is to beat the crap out of them.

            And some parents believe what is best for their kids is to “homeschool” them with the result that the kids are illiterate. http://www.salon.com/2012/03/15/homeschooled_and_illiterate/

            And some parents (in the FLDS, for example) believe what is best for their kids is to throw their boys out of the house and marry off their 13-year-old daughters to 90-year-old men.

            Your idea that parents always know what’s best falls flat on its face from the get-go, because parents don’t get an instruction manual. Just because your gonads work doesn’t mean that you are going to be a good parent. Period.

          • JPL

            I agree there are some extremes out there on both sides but I do believe that 80-90% of parents want what is best for their kids

            With regards to homeschool I have both conservative friends and very liberal friends that homeschool and I must say there kids seem to be very bright and intelligent. I don’t disagree that homeschool just like public school can raise illiterate children. Not sure why are discussing homeschool though.

            Trust me I know kids don’t come with an instruction manual really wish they did because all three of mine or so different but my hope is teach them to be well informed adults looking at both sides of a debate and make a decision. I will also teach them to take responsibility for their actions.

          • fiona64

            Not sure why are discussing homeschool though

            Why else would you be looking at these programs if not to implement them in your homeschool?

            80-90% of parents want what is best for their kids

            That sound you heard was my point whizzing over your head. The people who do all of the things I listed (and worse)? THINK THEY ARE DOING WHAT IS BEST FOR THEIR KIDS.

          • Jennifer Starr

            The comprehensive programs that we looked like seemed like commercials for condoms with not as much information given.

            We went over every method of BC in the class I took. The pill, the sponge, spermicides, IUDs–and yes, condoms. We even practiced putting them on cucumbers, a fact which made Pat Robertson apoplectic at the time.

          • JPL

            The abstinence centered programs I looked at do discuss each of those methods of birth control with the exception of the sponge (I guess it was not spongy worthy). They do not demonstrate how to use condoms though. – So basically with the facts you chose to abstain.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, with the facts. My mother also provided me with a copy of “Our Bodies, Ourselves”–I’m not even sure if that’s being published anymore, but it was very informational.

          • JPL

            That is what myself and our committee was looking for the facts and we believe that some of the abstinence centered gave better facts and some had questions to open dialogue with parents.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Example of better facts?

          • fiona64

            Heh. I once sat around with a group of 20-something women (I was in my early 30s at that point) showing them how to use condoms, because they had no idea. We put them on everything from cucumbers to russet potatoes, because one of them said “But my boyfriend says condoms are too small for him and so he doesn’t want to wear one.”

            It was amazing how much misinformation these young women had … and guess what they all had in common? Abstinence-based “sex education.”

            Also, when I was in high school we had a Planned Parenthood speaker come out to talk sex education. She started with “abstinence is the surest way to avoid pregnancy, but in case you cannot or are not abstaining,” let’s move down the list. She talked about the pill, IUDs, diaphragms (the sponge wasn’t a thing yet), spermicide, condoms … and showed how all of them were used with anatomical cut-away models.

            We were all juniors and seniors in high school except for one sophomore in the class. Her dad had a shit-fit about how PP and the health class instructor were “putting ideas in kids’ heads” and he did not want her in the class that day (It was an opt-in).

            Care to guess whose daughter was walking around campus pregnant the next year?

          • HeilMary1

            At Archbishop Wood High in Warminster, PA, most of my classmates were preggers by graduation.

          • Nessie

            I have no kids, but I have taken Sex Education classes. Abstinance-Only programs come across as stupid and preachy to most teenagers, and don’t prepare them for the reality of sexual relationships.
            The average number of sexual partners for an American today is four over the course of a lifetime. Life isn’t a fairy tale: most relationships don’t last a lifetime, and programs that preach monagamy over science and self-respect only increase the potential for heartache.

          • JPL

            As someone who has just reviewed a ton of sex ed materials I did not find any of them to be preachy on either side. Also this study from the University of Iowa shows that teen girls who had sex had a 47% divorce rate after 10 years

            Also, as a father of a little girl and a guy who knew all the lines I want her to know how to know what a line is and how to avoid those I was a very promiscuous teen and there was no benefit from that time.

            Lastly I saw an Oprah show on this subject a few years ago (my wife made me watch it) it was 2 teens who were ready for sex and they were interviewing them and the question was asked how long they would be together and they both answered forever. Then Oprah asked a question “how long is forever” the girl said well until we die and the boy said 3 or 6 months who knows. This is the issue they are navigating this territory with two different mind sets. Girls want romance and forever love. While guys just want to be able to get a high five in the locker room

          • HeilMary1

            Wish I was good looking enough for teen sex, because then I could brag about being divorced instead of being a despised lonely old maid with a library of humiliating rejections, even after $100,000 in plastic surgery! The first relationship truth I learned is that looks are EVERYTHING to men. Commitment-phobic men are simply holding out for their dream centerfolds. Gorgeous women have no problem finding committed men, especially among picky playboys. If commitment is your goal, you should be pushing extreme makeovers instead of bible blather.

          • fiona64

            Girls want romance and forever love. While guys just want to be able to get a high five in the locker room

            Gosh, I’m so glad that you don’t subscribe to any gender-based stereotypes. /snark

          • Jennifer Starr

            When I was a teen I heard an abstinence-only speaker in youth group, telling me that my virginity was ‘the most precious thing I owned’ and that ‘good girls’ saved themselves for marriage. Most of us ended up snickering and I remember feeling very insulted by the whole thing. But it was the comprehensive sex-ed that I had in school that persuaded me that I wasn’t ready yet, and how to protect myself when I was.

          • JPL

            What do you consider compressive sex?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Compressive?

          • JPL

            LOL spell check (I’m not a good speller that is why I’m an accountant) How do you define comprehensive sex

          • Jennifer Starr

            Facts, abstinence stressed, but birth control discussed–and not only in the context of ‘it doesn’t work’. Why we do wish that teens would abstain, the fact is some of them won’t. They need to know how to obtain and use birth control. They also need to learn about STDs, the facts and the symptoms. Discussions about dating, peer pressure, students encouraged to ask questions, even the embarrassing ones, and have frank discussions. No crap about modesty, purity, your virginity being ‘the most valuable thing you own’, used tape, chewed gum–most kids smell it out as BS and it reeks of shaming. I remember the youth group lady telling us that you can have the ‘best sex’ if you’re both virgins on your wedding night–she got upset when I asked how it could be the best if no one knows what they’re doing.

          • JPL

            I would have to say that you and I are very close on what should be taught. The programs that we are looking at do educate on the top birth control methods. One program has a chart detailing the top birth control methods there effectiveness protecting from pregnancy and protection from STD’s. Example would be condoms have 15% failure rate and most effective at protecting from HIV and other bodily fluid STD’s. But does not offer protection for skin to skin (non-genital). Also it says to be effective it has to be used consistently and correctly, The program has a lot of discussion regarding contraception where the kids can ask those tough question and then the teacher can answer them.

            I did not see any where about purity and stuff. I did not see anything about chewed gum. I don’t really see anything about shaming even in the notes for the teacher it states be sensitive that some may have had sex and to give them a positive experience. I see lessons on how to develop lasting relationship, compatibility, self esteem and respect and goal setting.

            Lastly I would agree about the wedding night sex. My wife and I waited until our wedding night. We were both in our 30’s and were not virgins. However, we made that decision to focus on our relationship. The wedding night was awkward however eve since has been a wonderful journey.

            Thank you for finally giving me a definition it seems that we might all be on the same page once we strip away a lot of the BS that people say without reviewing the actual programs they are referring to.

          • JPL

            One clarification the reason my wife and I chose to wait had nothing to do with religious reason (I had only attend church a handful of times). It was choice she had made and one that I respected.

          • HeilMary1

            My Catholic neighbor waited also, and her groom took her to a gay dive and slept on the floor on their honeymoon because she was the wrong gender for him. Took her 10 years and a trip to Rome to get her NEVER-CONSUMMATED marriage annulled.

          • JPL

            So because she waited till marriage she married a gay guy and why is that the fault of waiting? Sounds like she need more teaching on relationship building. Also, was she not involved in planning the honeymoon. Also, what does it matter that she was Catholic – why not baptist or something else

          • fiona64

            Why am I not surprised that the entire point went over your head?

            Clue: there are gay bars *everywhere.* It has nothing to do with “honeymoon planning.”

            I was engaged at one point to a man who was a closeted transwoman (she is now post-surgical and very happy). At the time that our engagement was ended, I was devastated. When I found out the real reason, I was hurt that she didn’t think she could tell me. People are in the closet for a lot of reasons, and “relationship building” doesn’t change that.

            Nice job dismissing the reality of HM’s neighbor’s life, though.

          • Jennifer Starr

            In our class, the questions could be asked anonymously–meaning that students would write it out on identical pieces of paper that would be passed to the front and put in a hat. And yes, condoms need to be used correctly in order to be effective. They should be taught how to put it on–that no, two will not work better than one–in fact that increases the chance that it will break, and also that they don’t last forever. That trusty condom that many a teenage boy keeps in his wallet just in case? It might not be any good once he finally gets the chance to use it. Many conservative parents have disagreements with their kids learning these things,(preserving innocence is a phrase you generally hear) and many of them view any discussion of safe sex as encouragement to go out and do it.

          • JPL

            I really like your anonymous question asking and will suggest this be part of the class. I’m not as much in agreement on the condom demonstration and that seems like the only place we disagree. The one program we are leaning towards does talk about condom in the wallet and other ways they lose effectiveness.

            As some one who leans a little conservative (surprise I bet – However, I have voted democrat, independent and republican). I understand this view point to a point. I understand when some have tried to push sex education to younger grades. To me a good time is towards the end of 6th grade beginning of 7th grade for boys and a little earlier for the girls. I know boys better (as my son is in this age group versus my little girl who is only 4). Boys go through puberty later than girls and it usually starts around age 12 some earlier and some later (girls are earlier is my understanding). Prior to puberty boys have very little interest in girls versus after puberty where they are now interested in them. Having started the talk with my son a lot of it does not make sense to him as he has no reference point. I know that once he goes through a lot of what I said and he will go through will make a lot more sense.

          • JPL

            Not sure what happened to my earlier response to this post. I’m going to suggest that we use anonymous question hat – that is a great way for kids to be able to ask questions. I also believe that you should always give kids and people all the facts on both sides so they can make an informed decision.

            The only area that I would see where we disagree would be in condom demonstration. Also, the program that seems to be rising to the top through discussion like this and others does discuss how condoms can break down in the wallet and some other things you stated.

            Regarding the conservative parents comments (I’m center right person I vote for both Dems, Rep and Ind) I believe that make sure that you have age approiate (?) information for the audience and not one size fits all. I think you can start introducing some of the topics in middle school and getting into more detail in either late middle school or early high school (again depending on the audience). Talking to pre-puberty kids about how to put on condom is a little much in my opinion as the kids that I know have no clue about the opposite sex. Introducing them to much early I can understand that issue. However, once they get through puberty it is a whole different ball game and the kids need a message like something we seem to be discussing here.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, I did read your first response–not sure what happened to it either. Disqus is somewhat glitchy today. I appreciate you reposting this.

          • fiona64

            The only area that I would see where we disagree would be in condom demonstration.

            And why do you not want your children to learn how condoms work?

            Also, the program that seems to be rising to the top through discussion
            like this and others does discuss how condoms can break down in the
            wallet

            Yes, they do … but you don’t want your kids to know anything but “this means condoms don’t work” instead of “don’t lug one around for *years.*”

          • fiona64

            Comprehensive sex-ed, dude, not “comprehensive sex.”

            Comprehensive sex-ed can be found in the programs you are rejecting. Just a pro-tip.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Girls want romance and forever love. While guys just want to be able to get a high five in the locker room

            Stereotype much?

          • JPL

            I’m repeating what was stated on Oprah.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I understand that–Oprah was not one of the things I watched on a regular basis. But you do realize that it is a stereotype.

        • HeilMary1

          Any womb-trafficking propaganda from the Catholic Church.

        • fiona64

          Which program do you think is homophobic?

          I challenge you to go back and read the article I linked to re: Valerie Huber of “Choosing the Best,” and her donations in support of Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill, as well as her ties to the known hate groups Focus on the Family and Family Research Council. That would be a good start.

          • JPL

            Did not find Valerie Huber as part of Choosing the Best it seems she is executive director of the NAEA.

            Just because people don’t agree with gay marriage you call them a hate group that is pretty strong just because you disagree with someone.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Just because people don’t agree with gay marriage you call them a hate group that is pretty strong just because you disagree with someone.

            If they support Uganda’s ‘Kill the Gays’ bill I can. And yes, the FRC is listed as a hate group.

          • fiona64

            Now you’re being a deliberate dumbfuck … and I am out of patience with you. The FRC and FoF are *known hate groups.* The SPLC has called them out on this. It is a whole lot more than “don’t agree with gay marriage,” and you know it.

            And if you’re too stupid to understand that Valerie Huber *founded* “Choose the Best,” I suggest that you take issue with your piss-poor education.

            In case you can’t tell, the gloves are off now. I’m done even being remotely polite to you.

          • JPL

            This will be my last response to you as I’m not going to continue a debating your misinformation. I mean a quick google search on Valerie Huber would show she heads up NAEA and was from Ohio. Choosing the best does not list the founder – however, a quick look on their website shows they are from Atlanta, GA. I asked the person I’m working with at choosing the best who they were founded by and he informed me it Bruce Cook. Also, asked him if Valerie Huber had any involvement with them and he said no. So i’m not sure where your getting your information nor do I care because Jennifer was very helpful in providing useful information.

          • fiona64

            Shorter JPL: “Some dude down at the pub told me something else, so you’re wrong, big meanie-head woman.”

          • JPL

            LOL – nice language. One last comment on your post. Please get your facts correct if one were to do a simple google search on Valerie Huber you would find that she lives in Ohio and heads up the NAEA. Prior to that she was the title V director for Ohio. I check with the person I’m working with at choosing the best and it was founded by Bruce Cook and is in Atlanta. I asked if Valerie Huber had anything to do with it and he said no. You may want to up date your talking points -

          • fiona64

            More tone policing and backpedaling. You’re just pissed off at having your “programs” called out because they’re nonsense … and with hard evidence as to why.

            Go crawl back under your rock.

    • fiona64

      Um, sweetie? Comprehensive sex ed talks about a lot more than condoms.

      It is proven that the longer kids delay having sex the better off they are

      Citation needed.

      After looking at both I felt the abstinence program would educate my
      kids with all the data for them to make an informed decision when the
      times comes for them to have sex

      Yeah, because “just say no” really gives them all of the information they need.
      http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/409-the-truth-about-abstinence-only-programs
      You need to educate yourself. Here is a good place to start:

      • JPL

        here is just one study http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3030194?uid=3739616&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104933379077 but it is pretty much accepted that the younger a teen (or child) starts to have sex the more partners they will have which leads to an increase in the potential for catching a STD or becoming/getting someone pregnant. Brookings institute did a study that showed that if you finished high school, had a full time job and waited till you where 21 to getting married and have kids your chances of being middle class where 72%.

        I must say that reading through that advocates for youth was a good piece of fiction. Condoms are only as effective as the person using them – correctly, consistent and teenagers are not three things I would put together. I personally know of three couples who each have a surprise kid. Even the CDC has come out and said it is the least effective. http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/PDF/Contraceptive_methods_508.pdf

        I looked at Be Proud Be Responsible that had a facilitators note “Don’t “Bash” condoms or provide information on failure rates. Talk about educating the kids – don’t give them the information they need – I wonder why maybe they would make the right decision.

        Lastly I looked up doug kirby who your link references and he works for the publisher of a lot of comp sex ed programs – so I seriously doubt he would come out against his product – science for money

        • HeilMary1

          BC pills are nearly 100% effective and they treat acne too!

          • JPL

            actually they have a 9% failure rate per the CDC – Also, they don’t protect from any STD’s

          • fiona64

            Also, they don’t protect from any STD’s

            Well, no duh. BCPs do not protect against STDs … but condoms do, and you keep pretending otherwise.

            Dude, just stop it.

          • JPL

            Really stop it why kids lives or at stake. The only way condoms are effective for only those STD’s that are transmitted by bodily fluids and that part of the skin protected by the condom all other genital area is not protected. To be effective the teen has to use them consistently and correctly each time – that does not describe my teen. Should the teens rub genitals and one is affected they can then affect the other one.

          • fiona64

            I am NOT going to stop providing accurate information. You are the one who needs to stop it.

          • HeilMary1

            NFP has an 80% failure rate, and the pill only fails if it’s thrown up, skipped or taken with some antibiotics. It works best if taken at the same time every day — somewhat like accutane. I noticed that my face would get oilier if the pill was taken at delayed intervals.

        • fiona64

          You know, you are now being deliberately obtuse. Condoms are the sole contraceptive method for *preventing STDs.* Jesus wept. You argue that because they have a known failure rate as contraception that they should not be used?

          Do you know what else has a known failure rate? The bullshit abstinence education that you’re promoting.

          And you clearly do not understand the article you cited; it is specific to urban minority youth and it talks about the issues surrounding *availability of comprehensive sex ed and access to contraception,* and how the lack of both in urban poor neighborhoods tends to lead to the things you list.

          Jesus Christ, dude. At least *try* to be intellectually honest.

          • JPL

            I think I’m the one being intellectually honest here. Have you ever wondered why our current health message says say no to drugs, don’t drink but go have sex with a condom. Seems that we are mixed up. I believe in giving the kids the correct information which I have only seen from the abstinence centered material

          • HeilMary1

            How about those abstinence-only Magdalene Laundries in Ireland? — no wonder the miserably abstinent Irish turned to alcohol!

          • fiona64

            Alcohol and drugs can cause physical damage to bodies and brains that are not done growing. Having safe sex *prevents* physical damage to bodies and brains that are not done growing.

            Jesus wept, dude. Are you *really* this dumb?

          • nvrbl

            You are comparing sex to drug and alcohol abuse?

          • JPL

            Yes, they are all risk behaviors for teens and can cause long term issues

          • nvrbl

            Sex is a natural part of life. It is wrong to make your kids think that sex is bad or shameful. You may want to encourage them to wait to have sex until marriage if that is what you think they should do but you are doing them a disservice if you are shaming them.

          • fiona64

            I wish I could upvote this more than once. JPL here seems to think that his kids will be virgins forever and thus don’t need any information.

          • fiona64

            And yet you claim to have been a great big stud out screwing everything that moved. Maybe YOU are the one with issues, eh, and not those of us who are promoting comprehensive sex education?

        • Arekushieru

          Failure to address the comment. Abstinence sex-ed doesn’t stop a teenager from having sex any earlier, it just prevents them from accessing accurate, necessary and timely information when they DO decide to have sex.

          Also, let’s talk about abstinence-only ed practitioners promoting information on the failure rates of abstinence. As in ACTUAL use, which, when looked on a state by state basis, has a far higher failure rate than any other form of contraception.

          Probably the reason you claim that Be Proud, Be Responsible doesn’t provide information on condoms or failure rates is because YOU disagree with the accurate information they provide on condoms and failure rates.

          Also, just because Doug Kirby works for a publisher of a lot of comp sex ed programs doesn’t mean the information he provides is inaccurate. A bias does NOT mean something is wrong. If it did, every promoter of abstinence-only sex ed would be wrong. DARN, eh?

          Oh, and scientists would quickly run out of funding for research and development if they didn’t work for money like every other Joe Schmoe on the planet. Or do you just have a problem with those icky promoters of comp sex ed?

          • JPL

            Actually the programs that I’m looking at do show that they do delay sexual debut. Please let me know what you think is not accurate information from these programs as I want to make sure that I have accurate information however I just see everyone say they are not accurate without any details.

            If a person practice abstinence there is no failure rate so it is 100% safe – just saying.

            No I don’t disagree with the information on condoms that the abstinence centered material gives. It states that condoms when used correctly have a 18% failure rate and provide protection from most STD’s but not all. The comp sex ed says to not bash condoms or give out failure rates I was shocked. I’m just dealing with the facts of the 6 programs that we reviewed.

            I use to date this girl who worked for a DC research center and they could prove anything for their customers – Like a Burger King Whopper has less fat than Chinese food. So yes I know researchers can prove anything that is why I prefer the independent. Heck one program researcher was a board member of her local planned parenthood

          • fiona64

            And yet you have somehow managed not to provide us actual links to any of these alleged programs. Why is that?

          • JPL

            What links would you like me to provide you? If I could post a picture of the facilitators note from Be Proud on the condom I would because I was shocked that it was out there in book talk about keeping kids in the dark

          • fiona64

            Jesus Christ, dude. Really? How many times do I have to ask the same thing?

            At least once more, I guess.

            I want to see a link to the *programs themselves* that you claim are “comprehensive abstinence education.”

            Is it that hard to understand?

          • JPL
          • fiona64

            Wow. Five requests later, he manages to come through. Back in a moment.

          • JPL

            I’m sorry that I’m not always around my computer as I said earlier I have three kids and I love spending time with them

          • fiona64

            You had time to write multi-paragraph word salad, but you didn’t have time to cough up the links?

            Nice story, bro.

          • fiona64

            Re: Choosing the Best:

            I think we’ll just start with Valerie Huber, shall we? After all, she’s the leader of the “National Abstinence Education Association,” which endorses this “just say no” program.
            http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2007/04/09/abstaining-from-ethics-while-imposing-morality/
            Quote:

            Abstinence-only programs she ran in Ohio contained “false or misleading information about abortion, contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases” so stated a study done by Case Western Reserve University Department of Public Health. According to Hypothetically Speaking, a bio of Huber states: “[her] program is still in its infancy, giving Valerie theunique opportunity to develop and fine-tune it. Valerie is infusing her Christian beliefs into this program.”

            It’s just that some people’s beliefs, Christian and otherwise, start
            with truth telling and respect for freedom of religion; they believe
            that is what kids should be taught and how government should be run. Huber is not a public health expert, but an outraged mom who started a program after her son’s health teacher advised kids to use condoms if they were having sex. She parlayed her outrage into an abstinence-only program and was then appointed to a state job in the Ohio Department of Health by former Gov. Bob Taft (R-OH).

            As the supervisor of the Ohio Department of Health’s abstinence-only program, Huber attempted to secure a state contract for a company she was involved in. She was suspended by the department in 2006 when she was found guilty of ethics violations. Huber was represented by an attorney with ties to the Ohio Republican
            Party and the heir to the corrupt Taft regime, failed gubernatorial
            candidate Ken Blackwell, as reported in the Ohio newspaper, the Gay People’s Chronicle.
            —-
            So, amongst other things, we can dispense with your assertion that these “courses” are not religious in nature.

            And, of course, there is that little problem of ethics violations. But hey, it’s all good, right?

          • JPL

            Thank you for the information it seems that the only program you really can’t find an issue with is Choosing the Best I think that might be one our SHAC should focus more on. I’m not sure what this Valerie Huber has to do with anything on choosing the best

          • fiona64

            You don’t know what the FOUNDER OF THE PROGRAM has to do with it?

            Jesus Christ.

          • fiona64

            Re: WAIT training:

            Let’s look at Joneen Mackenzie, the founder of this organization, shall we?

            http://www.coloradoindependent.com/65011/colorado-abstinence-program-with-ties-to-anti-gay-groups-ugandan-pastor-receives-millions-in-federal-funds

            Quote:

            WAIT was one of several U.S. organizations that promoted Martin
            Ssempa, the outspoken Ugandan pastor supporting the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in Uganda. The bill has become known as the Kill the Gays Bill, as one of its provisions is the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality.”

            WAIT also gave some of its federal money during the 2007-08 fiscal year to the Rocky Mountain Family Council— an affiliate of the anti-gay Family Research Council and Focus on the
            Family — to conduct its marriage mentorship training events statewide.

            The year before it started receiving federal funding, WAIT Training
            was cited by a Congressional report in 2004 for using taxpayer money to spread misinformation about the spread of HIV/AIDS.

            The group was singled out in the 2004 Waxman Report (pdf),
            requested by U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., for distributing
            educational materials that erroneously suggested that HIV could be
            transmitted through tears and sweat. Waxman requested the report on the cusp of federal support doubling for “abstinence only” education to $170 million in fiscal year 2005.

            —–
            Well, that’s two down …

          • fiona64

            Best Friends seems to teach shunning more than anything else. ::shrug:: And that’s despite its failures to succeed at what it claims to do. And of course, let us not forget that founder Elayne Bennett’s husband is right-wing “drug czar” William Bennett.

            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/jul/25/teenagers-shunning-losers-in-drug-war/


            That’s three for three dismissed for bias and/or disseminating inaccurate information, JPL.

            But you rock on with thinking this stuff is the best way to teach your kids.

          • fiona64

            Seriously, you dismiss “Be Proud, Be Responsible” and ETR because they deal with the *reality* that young people are not going to remain virgins forever and should have information in hand on preventing disease and unwanted pregnancy, but you advocate for the utter bullshit that I just took apart in mere seconds with Google searches.

            Wow.

            I’m guessing you won’t be doing much to teach your kids critical thinking, since you don’t know how to apply it — at least, from what I can tell.

            Did it never occur to you to look into the founders of the programs that you claim to support the way you claim to have done with ETR? Wow.

          • night porter

            Hehe.

            It was all too good to be true.

          • fiona64

            At least I understand now why he was so reluctant to provide the links … he didn’t want us to see the kind of bee-ess (is that okay, Stacey-the-intern?) that he’s promoting.

          • Arekushieru

            It’s pretty much what I thought, Fiona. Projection, as usual.

          • nvrbl

            Kids who have abstinence only education may delay sexual activity but they are far less likely to use safe sex methods or contraceptives. The teen pregnancy rates are highest in the bible belt where they teach abstinence only.

    • fiona64

      PS: I provided this link earlier, but I’m guessing you didn’t look at it. http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1195

      Quote: “At present, there does not exist any strong evidence that any
      abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to
      abstinence, or reduces the number of sexual partners. In addition, there
      is strong evidence from multiple randomized trials demonstrating that
      some abstinence programs chosen for evaluation because they were
      believed to be promising actually had no impact on teen sexual
      behavior.”

      And in case you don’t bother to read the abstract, you should know that the programs chosen for evaluation were hand-picked to show positive results … and still failed.

      • JPL

        I just read the article from SEICUS, talk about slanted “four handpicked to show effectiveness” I then looked at the programs and I have not come across one of those programs. I’m looking at the top programs that do seem to have INDEPENDENT Research behind them not something researched by the author or publishers. I looked into SEICUS and found out Hugh Hefner gave them the money to start and how closely they are aligned to planned parenthood. Seems like there is business model being built here.

        • fiona64

          You don’t get it, do you? The studies were handpicked on the belief that they would SUCCEED and they still FAILED.

          Christ on a bicycle, dude; pull your head out of the sand, or your arse … or something.

          • JPL

            Please show me where these studies were “hand picked to succeed” other than what seicus states. I reviewed the Mathematica study and did not see any where that the study stated that they were hand picked because they had the best chance to succeed. Hell I never even heard of those programs during my research.

            I think my head is out how about yours? You seem to be quoting out of date studies and does not seem you have reviewed any of the programs that are out there.

            Everyone keeps saying they are inaccurate and more but give no citations as you would say

          • fiona64

            I’m sorry that you can’t fucking read and understand a statement of methodology, but your illiteracy is not my fault.

            Thanks for demonstrating once again that those who are the first to rush to homeschool their kids (because why else would you be looking at “numerous” abstinence only programs) are the LAST people who should do so.

            The citations on why these programs are inaccurate and *failing* have been provided to you repeatedly. I’m not doing it again.

          • JPL

            I see that based on this and other comments you have had to resort to name calling which I take as a compliment as it means my points are correct!

            You may not remember but I’m looking at 3 abstinence centered programs along with 3 comprehensive sex programs. The abstinence centered are the ones the educate the best on the contraception providing pro and cons of each and protection from diseases

            I have had generalities and nothing specific like what I have provided.

          • fiona64

            And YOU may not remember, but I asked for actual citations of those programs so that I could look at them and not have to take your marital-rape-apologist (and yes, that’s what you just did above) word for it and could see for myself.

            Your points are not now, nor have they yet been correct. One of the many choice you do NOT get to make for me is what words I will use.

            You can take your tone-trolling and shove it … along with the gaslighting bullshit of “you’re calling me names so I’m right.” What are you, 12 years old?

          • August M

            And bullshit artist Fiona is only 8 years old, sigh.

          • Nessie

            The real bullshit artist is you, August. Get a life.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Kind of lame, Augie–but then again, so are you.

          • HeilMary1

            NFP is marriage-ruining BS by pedophile priests. Are you a pedophile priest?

          • fiona64

            Don’t you have a wife to go beat, Auggie?

          • JPL

            It is surprising that within this discussion you continue to repeat things like not giving you the links to the programs which I did and you couldn’t even get that right – saying some valerie huber was the founder of choosing the best some guy bruce cook was.

            Based on your responses you tried to read Saul Alinisky’s Rules for Radicals I would suggest that you try and read it again. Good luck

          • fiona64

            And I suggest that you GFY. Your detective skills *suck.* Valerie Huber is in charge of that hot mess, and she’s a grifter. But if you want your kids to be totally ignorant about life, you go ahead. After, all, “father knows best.” Heh.

          • JPL

            LOL – you are so clueless and I suggest you do a little work. You should even try calling the organization and ask who the founder is – The way that persist on stating that huber is the founder and in charge of choosing the best shows just how ignorant you are

            Here are some links http://www.onecentsolution.org/about/bruce-cook/

            http://www.choosingthebest.com/index.php/newsroom/2-uncategorised/65-bruce-e-cook-bio

          • fiona64

            You’re just pissed because you’ve been proven wrong by me and others.

            Suck it up, buttercup.

          • JPL

            Where have you proven me wrong – heck you continue to contend that valerie huber is the founder and runs choosing the best and I have proven this wrong each time but you continue with your lie

          • fiona64

            I’m not doing your homework for you again, JPL. Just go back and re-read. Hell, I proved you wrong with your own *sources.*

          • fiona64

            I asked five goddamned times before you provided the links.

            You do not get to gaslight me, loser.

          • JPL

            What links are you asking for?

            And why the need for such colorful language having a tough week?

          • fiona64

            More gaslighting and tone policing.

            You know what kind of man gaslights women and tells them how they’re permitted to speak?

            An abuser.

          • JPL

            Really –

            Again what links are you asking for?

          • fiona64

            I asked for the links to your programs five times. You finally provided them after five requests. Are you really this stupid?

            Quit with the gaslighting and tone-policing. And yes, every time you remark on what words I choose to use, you are tone policing.

          • JPL

            Thank you for showing your true colors I have read the stuff here and it is generalization. As I stated I’m looking at this as part of SHAC (Sex ed and health committee) for the school. I have not found in citations on the programs that I have been looking at failing just generalization mainly from biassed sources with a few non-bias spots. I never realized that something like sex education would be so political until I started down this path.

            I’m sorry that you had such a rough up bringing and so much heart ache starting with your parents and then your boyfriend but it seems that you are taking out a lot of anger and other issues on sex education.

            Do you work for an organization that promotes one these programs or teach ?

          • fiona64

            Do you work for an organization that promotes one these programs or teach ?

            No, I don’t. WTF is your problem?

            As I stated I’m looking at this as part of SHAC (Sex ed and health committee)

            You stated no such thing; you stated that “as a parent of young children” you were looking at the materials.

            I’m sorry that you had such a rough up bringing and so much heart ache
            starting with your parents and then your boyfriend but it seems that you
            are taking out a lot of anger and other issues on sex education.

            Can it. The person I am angry at is YOU. Don’t try to make this about anything else, because it isn’t.

            What you’re trying now is called *gaslighting.* It’s something abusers do. Look it up on your own time.

          • night porter

            He sounds like a passive aggressive abuser.

          • fiona64

            He keeps giving more and more evidence for such. He keeps claiming that he’s not coming back here, but he does so for the sole purpose of gaslighting and other abusive behaviors. He is now claiming that I don’t know how to evaluate sources for bias, which is pure projection.

            I just hope his wife and kids have a safe escape plan for the day when she gets sick of his shit, because I guarantee it’s coming.

          • night porter

            Yep. And he is pulling the whole “crazy cat lady” schtick. What a loser.

          • fiona64

            He has all of the earmarks of a serial abuser. And he just cannot handle being a) wrong or b) not having the last word … especially from a mere woman.

            I’m betting his wife (if what he said is true) was holding off on sex for religious reasons and now that she’s childed and will have a harder time leaving he’s got her right where he wants her. He wants his kids to be just as naive … because it makes it harder for victims to leave if they don’t have enough information about what abuse looks like.

            I am not exaggerating when I say I worry about the safety of his wife and children.

          • fiona64

            And, of course, anyone who stands up to his absolute bullshit must needs be dismissed as a “crazy cat lady” … just like he wanted to dismiss me as being “bitter.” Because you can ignore people who are just “crazy” or “bitter,” of course.

            Well, sucks to be him, because I’m neither. He may get away with being an abusive douchecanoe at home, but I’m not the unfortunate Mrs. JPL and that dog don’t hunt with me.

    • Dez

      Umm. abstinence only education doesn’t work. Most teens have sex when they are ready whether they are married or not. Personally my mother taught me to have sex when I am ready and not be pressured into it. She also said it was safer to wait for marriage, but that she knew my brother and I would not wait like her and my father didn’t wait either. She knew it was hypocritical to teach abstinence only when they weren’t abstinent. We were taught to use protection every time and that there is potential consequences like STIs, pregnancy, and hurt feelings. My parents have been married for over 30 years and had just my brother and I. I had sex before marriage at 19 and no children or STIs and I am also married for over a year. Teaching me these tools help me have a healthy sex life without having any hang-ups about sex.

      • JPL

        Dez I have three kids one is a preteen so that is why I’m so interested in this topic. I applauded your parents, I wish I could say the same for mine. My mother had 5 husbands and STD’s. That is what she taught me and my brothers. I can personally tell you that track did not work out so well for myself and lot of others I know. Luckily for you that you never had to face any of the consequences of sex. I have had a few close calls to the point of my girlfriend telling me maybe I should move to another state to live with my dad since she thought she was pregnant. I found that once a relationship moved to sex our relationship seemed to start dying. When I was in my early 30’s I met a lady who said no. We dated and because we did not have sex we built a great relationship and got married. We have now been married for over 14 years and have great sex. I don’t want my kids to go through what I went through and reviewing these programs as someone who has seen both sides on the coin personally I know which is better in my opinion

        • HeilMary1

          Then there is the other side: anti-sex fanatics disfiguring girls to make them abstinent BY DEFAULT.

        • nvrbl

          You are not doing your kids any favors. They have a right to full and accurate information about sex and how their bodies work and how to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STD’s .
          They may wait until marriage or not but it is abusive to make them ashamed of their sexuality.

          • fiona64

            I wish I could upvote this more than once.

          • JPL

            I agree with what you are saying above and that is why I got involved in helping select a sex ed program and why I’m looking at a lot of news articles trying to figure out the best approach. Through my research I found that the Abstinence centered programs seem to do that better with accurate information (and that comes from HHS).

          • Arekushieru

            No links to prove your citations?

          • JPL

            The letter is an actual letter from the HHS stating they needed to make a couple of minor changes. Example of one of these changes was there video stated that someone gets an STD every 11 seconds the HHS stated it is now closer to 6 seconds I believe

          • fiona64

            The letter is an actual letter from the HHS stating they needed to make a couple of minor changes.

            Oh. So, first it was a letter saying the information was medically accurate and now it’s a letter saying they need to make changes.

            Don’t trip over yourself while you backpedal …

        • Dez

          My parents were realists and knew like them, their children will [possibly have sex before marriage and the did not want to take the risk like you with your children, that we would get STIs or pregnant. They gave my brother and I the tools to make the best decisions. My parents trusted my brother and I. I wish you would trust your children as well. They are married 30 years and had premarital sex. They had just two wanted and planned children and used birth control to plan it out. Sorry but only you are responsible for your actions. You were given accurate sexual education, but ignored that. You choose to have sex knowing the consequences and went ahead with it. You choose to be in a relationship with a person that does not communicate well. You can not monitor your children’s actions 24/7, just give them the tools to make the best decisions and teach them unlike you to accept the consequences of your actions if you engage in sex. If they do not wnant to accept possible consequences then they should not have sex. Simple if you trust your children. Seems like you should have taken more responsibility with birth control with your girlfriend, not have sex, or wait until you know you want to have children with your partner. Sorry but you are the exception. You did not know if you are sexually compatible with your future spouse and luckily you were. Your plan will just have your children marry young so they can have sex and more likely marry someone that they have no sexual compatibility with because they did not want to disappoint you. Is your children happiness important to you enough that you can teach them accurate sexual education and trust the are careful out there unlike you? Just because you were irresponsible does not mean they will be. When you children have sex they will not be prepared and will like likely get a STI or get pregnant because they were only taught abstinence and not how to use contraceptives along with it if they choose to have sex. I’ve known people who haven’t had sex education and they are called parents at 18 unlike me at the same age that got sex education and no kids. Just because I had the knowledge did not mean I would go out to have sex. I had the tools beforehand when and if I decide to have sex like with drivers ed. You wouldn’t let your children drive before passing drivers ed? I hope your children are smart enough to search Google for sexual education so they do not end up making your mistakes.

          • JPL

            My story was more to point out that I have experience on both sides of this coin. I also agree that a person should be responsible for their own action.

            Secondly if you would read what Jennifer and I discussed or ask questions like what do I mean about abstinence education you would find out that I believe in giving my kids all the information in sex education. I’m not a fan of condom demonstration and I believe that that message should emphasis abstinence.

            Sexual compatibility that is a new one. If you have good communication you should be able to discuss this without having to try it out, I guess that is like a test drive and if you don’t like the sex you just move on. That sounds very shallow. What about love and working at a relationship?

          • Dez

            How else are students suppose to learn how to use condoms properly without demonstrating it to them? It’s like teaching kids to drive by reading only the drivers ed book and never practicing driving. That makes no sense at all. Again how do you know what you like if you have never done anything? That makes no sense again. Actions speaks louder than words. A person that never had sex could say they are into spanking, but when they actually do it in a sexual encounter, they may not like it. You can’t know what you like until you experienced it. You should know that part of a loving relationship is sexual compatibility. You might not equate sex and love as important in a loving relationship but many people do.
            We express our love through actions like sex and being compatible is a key part of that. There are some people who only like to have sex once a month. What happens to a virgin person that likes to have sex more than once a week is married to the former person? Would you suggest the person that likes sex once a month to have more sex even though they do not want too or the person that likes to have sex more than once a week be forced to a couple times a month. That does not sound like a healthy relationship and resentment will ensue.

          • JPL

            I really interested in this sexual compatibility issue. I have been married over 14 years and as stated before neither of us where virgins but decided not to have sex prior to our wedding night. I will also say that I have spent time studying the topic of sex in a marriage since I’m married.

            Yes, sex is a key part of love and a successful marriage. However, the latest research indicates that women receive the greatest sexual satisfaction after being with their partner for 15 years (I’m almost there :-). However, love is just not sex it is so much more than an emotion it is an actual verb a to do. It is being there and holding them when their mother pass away or picking them up when they are down. Sharing the good and the bad things – it is about doing life together.

            Regarding what you like and dislike – there are some things that both of liked when we first got married and now they don’t feel good. Due to child birth and some other issues my wife has different sensitivities then she did prior to child birth. There are things that based on our trust of one another that has been built up over the years we have tried some we like, some she does and some we don’t. We then either add them into our martial bliss or we don’t based on how we both feel. Part of the marriage discovery is figuring out what each person likes and dislikes. There is also an ebb and flow. Just because she liked something last week does not mean she will like this week.

            So what happens if you decide you are sexually compatible prior to getting married and then after the birth of a child her sexual desires change and you are no longer compatible – would you leave her because you are no longer compatible? Or because you love her figure a way to be compatible?

            Your comment about frequency has me laughing as this is an every changing target for us. Your desires for frequency changes with different stages of life. Also, the spouse with the active libido may decline while the low libido increases thus changing frequencies. So communicating with your spouse will help you navigate these waters and come up with a plan. Currently I have the hight libido and would prefer sex 4-6 times a week my wife is happy with 1-2 times per week so we actually talk about and compromise at 3 times a week. Usually the extra time is all for me but she does it because she loves me – I know there will be a time when that will reverse and I will have to increase. We also went through times when it was better for only 2 times a week. I don’t resent her nor does she resent me because I don’t force her to do anything that is the action of love.

            So how much weight should be given to sexual compatibility when trying to figure out if this is a long term relationship? If you truly loved the person would you just walk away because after a few sexual encounters you decide that well they have everything except I just don’t like how the sex is? While sex is part of what makes a successful relationship it does not define it. Also, as research points out sex gets better the longer the relationship is together.

            Bottom line sexual compatibility sounds like a lot of bs to try and have sex with someone prior to committing long term to them – kinda like the line “if you love me then you will” – well if you truly love some one then you figure out how to be compatible.

          • Dez

            All you wrote does not answer my question. How would a couple that does not have sexual experience know what they want regarding sex and what happens if it completely different? Communication can only go so far. No partner should be emotionally forced to do something sexually to please their partner nor shall a partner go without because their partner does not want sex. Sex is an important part of any relationship like love and trust. Again you assume that people who have no sexual experience will suddenly have the same sexual appetites. That is not always the case. Words are great, but action speaks louder. Now you are just being naïve. Being married does not suddenly make your sex life great. No matter how much love their is does not make sex any better. Would you do something sexual for your wife even though you aren’t into at all or it makes you uncomfortable? What if one partner is into cos play and the other isn’t? What if one partner likes have group sex? These are questions you need to answer before getting married and it would be stupid not to sleep with your future spouse. This is why we have dating and living together before getting married. Your strategy usually ends up in divorce because the people end up getting married just to have sex instead of for love and commitment. When they discover they have different sexual appetites, the marriage suffers. Unlike you I want my relationship with my husband to last. We made sure we were compatible regarding sex, children, and finances besides living together before getting married. Marriage is a serious thing. It should not be jumped into just because you want to have sex. Your magical thinking that marriage suddenly makes everything okay is ridiculous and a formula for divorce.

          • JPL

            Couples who wait until they are married to have sex usually figure out what they both like together. Also research shows that those who wait have better sex, stability and satisfaction. There are many studies on this topic

            http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20101227/theres-benefits-in-delaying-sex-until-marriage

            That sorta goes against your point does it not?

            So what will do when you and your husband are no longer sexually compatible? What would you have done if you and your husband were not sexually compatible?

            I agree that no partner should be forced to do anything against there will.

            Yes, if my wife wanted to try something that did not involve others then yes I would try it for her.

            Also, so the only way to know if your spouse is into group sex is to sleep with them – just how do you get that answer? Would you not find out more information by asking the question are you into group sex?

            So the only way that you and your husband could figure out you were compatible in children and finances was living together – that is funny we were able to have discussion to figure these issue out prior to getting married with our words.

            One last study that shows that those who live together prior to marriage have higher divorce rates, less satisfaction.

            http://health.howstuffworks.com/relationships/advice/living-together-before-marriage1.htm

      • Katarina

        Hi Dez,

        I’ve read a lot of your posts and I would love to talk with you. Is there any we could talk on skype or you could give me your email?

    • HeilMary1

      My abstinence education told me nothing about childbirth’s frequent deadly, disfiguring and bankrupting complications. It never mentioned that NFP always fails because women ovulate 2 & 3 times per month, and fed-up husbands like my dad go to hookers instead.

      • JPL

        I’m sorry if you had a bad child birthing experience but that is not a frequent occurrence in the US. I don’t think either type really goes into depth of child birth.

        Ovulate 2 or 3 times per month – I wish that were true. My wife and I dealt with fertility issues after the birth of our son and I learned a lot about cycles.

        I’m sorry that your family had issues but that was not due to abstinence education because in marriage the answer should be yes.

        • HeilMary1

          I’ve never been pregnant, thanks not only to my childbirth bladder and bowel-injured mom disfiguring me as her permanent holy Catholic abstinence excuse but also thanks to the effective pill. The U.S. now ranks 60th in maternal safety, and should rank 100th if the CDC included delayed childbirth deaths. Most deaths occur after the hospital and from pregnancy-caused cancers, organ failures, autoimmune diseases and sepsis. Most women do ovulate more than once per month, which is why NFP always fails, and also explains why twins and chimera singletons occur.

        • fiona64

          because in marriage the answer should be yes.

          Why am I a) not surprised that you failed to understand HM’s post and b) that you think that a marriage license means automatic consent from one’s partner every single time?

          • August M

            You are not surprised because you are a bigot.

          • Arekushieru

            How does bigotry have anything to do with being anti-marital rape?

          • fiona64

            Auggie thinks that a marriage license is like a pink slip on an automobile; you can do anything you want to something you own, after all …

          • fiona64

            I am pretty sure that “August” is Christine Smith’s latest sock puppet.

          • HeilMary1

            You’re the pro-dead mothers, pro-pedophile priests bigot here.

          • fiona64

            Yes, Auggie, I am bigoted against rape apologists.

          • JPL

            So how many times are you going to repost in marriage the answer should be yes – Did you not like that I agreed with you 3 days ago that sex without consent is rape – including marriage.

            I bet you were the capital of your debate team back in school

          • Arekushieru

            Um, you responded to Fiona’s ORIGINAL post on this subject, which means BEFORE she mentioned it all the other times. If you were really that mad about it, it would have been better if you had wrote this in response to the more RECENT comments she made regarding this, dontcha think?

            Besides, when the point keeps flying over your head….

          • fiona64

            I bet you were the capital of your debate team back in school

            Capital? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I think you mean captain.

            (I can kind of see the spittle on your chin because of your ire … you might want to calm down some.)

            One of the many choices you don’t get to make for me is how often I re-quote your marital rape apologia.

            I wasn’t the captain, BTW, but I have one helluva lot of trophies for it.

        • fiona64

          I’m sorry if you had a bad child birthing experience but that is not a frequent occurrence in the US.

          Aside from the fact that that is NOT what HM said … you’re 100 percent incorrect.

          The maternal mortality rate in the US is rising; we are currently #60 in the world, on a par with Afghanistan. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maternal-deaths-in-childbirth-rise-in-the-us/2014/05/02/abf7df96-d229-11e3-9e25-188ebe1fa93b_story.html

          And that’s aside from the tact that my knowledge about life-threatening pregnancy complications is *primary.* I nearly died from hyperemesis gravidarum. When the complication happens to you, the chances suddenly become 100 percent.

          Dude, you really have a lot to learn.

          • HeilMary1

            Thank you!

          • Arekushieru

            Oh, my god, Fiona, I didn’t know that that was what you experienced during pregnancy! THIS is why I HATE, absolutely HATE, it when people tell women to stop ‘complaining’ about a ‘little morning sickness’. FFS. I am SO sorry you went through something like that.

          • fiona64

            Yep. While I feel very sorry for the Duchess of Cambridge, who is now experiencing it with her *second* pregnancy like she did with the first, at least awareness of how serious hyperemesis gravidarum can be is being raised.

          • night porter

            And it’s obvious that she was pressured into it. It’s her “job” after all – to produce heirs.

          • fiona64

            Yep. The “heir and a spare” is a thing, you know …

        • nvrbl

          About 400 women die a year from pregnancy complications in the US. Thousands more are left with lifelong medical problems as a result of their pregnancies.
          The maternal mortality rate in Texas has quadrupled in the last fifteen years. Texas has responded to this health crises by closing women’s clinics and making healthcare less accessible for low income women, the population most at risk for maternal mortality.. Some counties have maternal mortality rates worse than third world countries.

        • Jennifer Starr

          because in marriage the answer should be yes.

          That is possibly one of the most offensive things I’ve ever read on here.

          • JPL

            In what sense? Sex in marriage is a good thing for couples and those couples who have a good sex life have a good long marriage

          • Jennifer Starr

            Sex in marriage is a good thing for couples and those couples who have a good sex life have a good long marriage

            As long as they both consent. A marriage certificate does not imply consent each time, nor should it. If a woman does not want to have sex and her husband forces her, that is rape.

          • JPL

            I agree whole heartily with you. I’m trying to remember what that comment was in response to – but yes sex without consent is rape.

          • fiona64

            You *misread* HM’s comment and assumed she was talking about childbirth (which she was not). She was talking about the physical abuse that she experienced by a mother determined to make her abstinent. You said “I’m sorry that your family had issues but that was not due to abstinence education because in marriage the answer should be yes.

            You dismissed the facts of her abuse with a fake apology and then proceeded to give a green light to marital rape.

            Seek counseling for whatever the hell is wrong with you, dude.

            PS: If you don’t remember what you responded to, here’s a little pro-tip: scroll through the damn comments until you find it.

          • HeilMary1

            Thanks!

          • fiona64

            I believe it was around 1978 or so that the law started to recognize that there could be rape within marriage.

            Yep. The case was Oregon v. Rideout, and took place in my hometown. http://law.jrank.org/pages/24501/Oregon-v-Rideout-Significance.html

          • fiona64

            Sex in marriage is a good thing for couples and those couples who have a good sex life have a good long marriage

            Which is not the same as because in marriage the answer should be yes.

            You just excused marital rape, buddy. And that is NOT okay. Sometimes the answer in marriage is “No, I don’t feel well.” Or “No, I’m tired.” Or “No, I have an illness that makes it painful.” Or any number of other reasons why the answer is not always yes.

            Now, on top of pitying your kids, I pity your wife.

          • August M

            Pity only yourself, and always use a condom, always. As for happily married people on NFP, never, I repeat, never, use a condom.

          • Arekushieru

            Why should she pity herself when she understands that marital rape is WRONG? Also, condoms are not as effective as other forms of birth control. The ONLY thing they do that other forms of birth control don’t is protect against STIs.

          • lady_black

            Neither do happily married people with an IUD, tubal ligation, vasectomy, or any other highly effective birth control method.

          • HeilMary1

            So mother killer you has no problem with unwanted dead wives predictably murdered by dangerous pregnancies, cheated-on brood mares suffering smelly obstetric incontinence, and neglected litters of impoverished kids being medically and sexually trafficked? My parents were miserable on the NFP scam, and they took it out on me. Wish they aborted me instead. NFP idiots have the most intersex gay “surprise” offspring, thanks to “out-of-cycle” fertilization anomalies.

          • fiona64

            Yes, I’m sure that many people will take family planning advice from an illiterate on the internet such as yourself. Ho hum.

          • August M

            Oh gosh.

          • Arekushieru

            So dismissive of marital rape, huh?

      • August M

        NFP is great if the woman is intelligent and aware of her fetility cycle.

        • Arekushieru

          Um, most fertility cycles are hard to predict. Also, again, it leaves contraception up to the woman. That’s anti-woman (misogyny) and bigotry, btw.

          • JPL

            If a women does not believe in NFP then yes it is anti-women. However, please explain how this is anti-women if the women is all for it and that is the method she prefers?

          • Arekushieru

            Again, go back and re-read what I said. Leaving it up to the woman, is a LOT different than saying that a woman chose/didn’t choose it for herself.

        • lady_black

          Sounds too much like work, dude. I don’t HAVE to “be aware of my fetility (sic) cycle.” I have about a thousand more important things to do than become fixated upon my menstrual cycles. You fetishists need to keep your failures to yourselves.

        • HeilMary1

          NFP is mother-killing, husband-outsourcing fraud by pedophile priests. Since women ovulate 2 and 3 times per month and semen contains ovulation-triggering chemicals, women have NO infertile cycles. The purpose of NFP is to estrange couples, impregnate women with unwanted pregnancies, and leave those neglected kids as easy targets for pedophile priests. Paul VI was a Nazi war criminal.

      • August M

        So, what are you saying here? That your mom was a hooker?

        • Arekushieru

          Uh, no. If you actually read some of Heil Mary’s posts, rather than cherry-pick to read those that you like and don’t like, just like you do from the Bible, you would understand what she’s talking about. SFS.

        • fiona64

          Flagged.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Actually, it was the comprehensive sex education courses that I took in HS in the eighties that persuaded me to abstain from sex as a teen. I’d rather my kids heard all the facts than BS telling them to ‘remain pure for their future husband’.

  • nvrbl

    We could reduce unwanted pregnancies and abortions by 80% if we offered comprehensive sex education and free long term contraceptives. It would also save money.
    Why don’t ” right to lifers” support that? Why won’t conservatives support that?

    • night porter

      Sex.

    • fiona64

      Why don’t ” right to lifers” support that? Why won’t conservatives support that?

      Because women are nothing but life support systems for our uterii, and any failure to conform to their “your job is to make babies and have my dinner on the table when I get home” script must be punished.

      • JPL

        I have no problem with a lot of the long term contraceptives I don’t think that most people are against the majority of them. There are a couple that some people believe cause abortion and they are against only those. The great thing about america is that we can disagree.

        I have friends that range the political landscape from extremely liberal to very conservative. Known of the women I know on the conservative side believe that – I do know some very large families and they love it.

        I think your generalization seems to be based on your upbringing and not true in life for the general population. It seems based on your comments that you have suffered a lot of abuse and I’m truly sorry for that

        • fiona64

          There are a couple that some people believe cause abortion and they are against only those.

          And what they believe is *factually inaccurate.*

          I think your generalization seems to be based on your upbringing

          No, sweetie. It’s based on two things: once having been an anti-choice idiot myself and thus knowing what the “playbook,” if you will, is really about … and then getting out into RealityLand and *understanding* what the playbook is really about.

          It seems based on your comments that you have suffered a lot of abuse and I’m truly sorry for that

          Save your pretend pity for someone who needs it, JPL. You aren’t one bit sorry about *anything,* and we all know it.

          • August M

            Fiona, sweetie, baby, you are a stupid bigot.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Want some cheese to go with that whine?

          • Arekushieru

            No, she is not. She is not anti-woman. YOU are. Also, ableism is another form of bigotry!

          • lady_black

            Bigot against what? Ignorance?

          • fiona64

            Yes, I am a bigot against ignorance and rape apologia. Quelle horreur.

          • fiona64

            I am beginning to think that “August” is Christine Smith’s latest sock puppet.

          • fiona64

            August, go color while the adults talk.

        • fiona64

          PS: Thanks for exposing yourself as anti-choice to boot. It’s awfully easy to be an anti-choice male, isn’t it, JPL? After all, it’ll never be *your* life or health endangered by pregnancy …

          • JPL

            I was answering a question on why right to lifers don’t support. As someone who did read more than headlines about the case. Your so-called right to lifers were asking that they note provide 4 of the 20 proposed contraception. My wife and I used an IUD for a long time.

            I try and stay out of the abortion fight as each person is allowed there own opinion. My opinion has changed on this over the years especially when I heard my son’s heartbeat at 6 weeks.

            My true passion in this area if you must know is adoption.

          • fiona64

            Your so-called right to lifers were asking that they note provide 4 of
            the 20 proposed contraception.

            I don’t think you did more than read the headlines, or you would have known that *the very next day after the ruling* the case was expanded to cover all forms of contraception. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-expanded-hobby-lobby-20140702-column.html#page=1

            I try and stay out of the abortion fight as each person is allowed there own opinion.

            Indeed, we are. Look! An area of concurrence.

            My true passion in this area if you must know is adoption.

            I think adoption is a great alternative to unwanted parenting, but it doesn’t do much about unwanted pregnancy.

            So, I’m curious. Since your “true passion in this area is adoption,” what are you doing to help the 100K children currently available for adoption in this country? You don’t have to take my word for it on the numbers, BTW; the latest report is right here. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/afcars-report-21

            That’s 100K kids for whom the plan is adoption, not familial repatriation or anything else. Adoption.

            And most of those kids? Will age out of the system without ever having been in a permanent home.

            So, what are you doing to help them, with this “passion” of yours?

          • JPL

            Yes, the supreme court applied it to all forms. However, the main case by hobby lobby was 4 of them. There was another lawsuit by a catholic company asking for all as it is against their practice. I’m for birth control and I’m not catholic.

          • P.J.

            My concern with the social conservative is the push to impose views on others. I am not saying this about you or anyone, my concern is just that it often happens that because a social conservative feels one way about a subject, they feel others should be forced to adhere to their views. In America, I should be able to be employed without having my employers views dictate my standard health coverage. In America, I have a right to protect my reproductive health by choosing a birth control method that works for me- that is a fundamental for a modern society (one we should be glad a woman chooses to take control over). Women bear the brunt for reproduction in so many ways, why should basic health coverage be an added cost for a woman to bear. Pro lifers would also have taken away your family’s choice to use an IUD because it’s method prevents a clump of cells from attaching to the uterus lining- this is my concern, no one should have the right in modern society to tell another what to do with their own body- and believe me a clump of cells inside their own body is in no way autonomous so yes it IS a part of their body and not anyone else’s business. And seeing as Obamacare is for those who have difficulty affording health insurance then absolutely health insurance should cover such a basic provision- the cost is irrelevant, what is important is that my employer does not get to use their religious views to prevent access to a basic health care need.

          • JPL

            P.J. I can say the same about social liberals and all we need to do is look at the gay marriage issue (I have a gay brother and don’t really care one way or the other to be honest – however this is a good example). Look at how people who oppose gay marriage are treated and belittled for their belief that they think it is wrong. Heck in 2008 Obama even said so. Now when Chick-fil-a president comes out and says he believes it is wrong all hell breaks lose on them and called all types of names and all the threats. He does not discriminate against gay people or anything but he became a villain. So the bully pulpit of social issues goes both ways.

            Personally I miss the days where we could have a good debate on a subject and some times agree to disagree but have a beer and enjoy each others company. Funny thing happened with the main guy that work the big piece about Dan Cathy – they ended up becoming friends even though they could not agree on gay marriage.

            Lets clarify one thing – Obamacare is not just the people who can’t afford insurance it is for most people. I handle insurance for our company and we are having to move to an ACA plan.

            I will holly hearty disagree with you on your feelings that you should have the rights that trump the employers beliefs. A job is not a right the opportunity to apply and be consider for a job is a right. The employer has created a company based on their beliefs and have run that company in that manner and if you don’t like there beliefs then you should not go to work for them. If you feel that you want your employer to cover contraception then I would suggest not applying to work with a Catholic organization. You also have the right not support a company that does believe the same way you do – instead of shopping at Hobby Lobby you can shop at Michaels.

            I have no problem and we provide contraception to all our employees should they want them (it use to be only $7 a month for the pill and a one time fee of $25 for an IUD I know this because we used both).

            Regarding your comments on the IUD I understand that there are people who believe life starts at conception, those at implantation and those that believe at birth. Personally I’m at implantation because I we had some complications with our son and so we had an early ultrasound that we heard the heartbeat. That is me – you may have a different view point and that is fine.

          • P.J.

            I did not say people on both sides aren’t bullies, my point is that liberals don’t want to force others to comply with their views. Health insurance is a basic right, which is why obamacare was put into play. Everyone should have healthcare. Birth control in a modern free society as part of a basic health plan should be a basic right. Where an employer has a right to deny certain basic rights is why laws come into play to balance both sides. If healthcare is not a basic right then your points may be valid but I consider it to be such. Life begins at fertilization, it does not become an independent life for many weeks, until then that life is under the auspices of the woman in question. Again the point is conservatives would enact laws that would once again place a woman’s right as inconsequential because of a fetus within her own body. It was not long ago that women’s rights were non-existant, subjugated to men. Do not want a return to the stone ages. Gay marriage again is about not imposing your views on others. Two adults who spend their lives in a loving committed relationship should have the rights due to them. They should have the right every other adult has. If liberals were forcing straight people to marry someone of the same sex then that’s imposing. If they are asking for conservatives to stay out of people’s way it is a different thing.

          • JPL

            Lets just focus on the birth control and this so called right. Sex as you know has two purposes. One is for reproduction and the other is for recreation/pleasure. So now what you are saying is that business must pick up the cost for your recreation. Also, why make someone else pick up this cost for your recreation?

            Also, why should your rights for sexual recreation trump a business owner rights to provide the type of health care they would like to provide? Why would you even want to work for one of those companies why not just move on – and guess what if enough people don’t want to work for that company they will either need to change or go out of business.

            The issue that I brought on the Gay marriage was the fact if someone disagreed with them then they are called bigots, etc by name calling those that oppose your view you are trying to bully them into your point of view

          • P.J.

            I know the point you made regarding Gay marriage, my point was only to state I am talking about using legislature to impose ones view.

            In free and modern society, healthcare for its citizens should be a basic right. Reproductive health is a part of a persons total physical well being. Basic healthcare packages already do the right thing and provide for women’s health (reproductive, recreational is irrelevant). You are using your judgement regarding sex only being right if it is for procreation to say that a business operating in a free and civil society should be able to deny basic rights, that means you cannot stop at reproductive health, anything and everything would logically be up for grabs and as I said there are laws that already ensure that people receive basic health care. How much more basic does being able to control your own reproduction because the science is there and safe get? Should my employee be able to stop me from getting a blood transfusion as covered by basic plans etc. where would it stop. If you disagree with single people having sex for fun, do you disagree with married people having sex for fun? Shouldn’t married women have the ability to protect their health without the explicit approval from their employer?

          • JPL

            I’m not against anyone enjoying sex especially in marriage but the question is why should the employer for that fun versus other types of fun – how about paying for some beer?

            You are correct that a lot plans do offer (my company does) but then again I don’t have issues with most of the birth control options out there. I do have an issue that we are forcing company to go against there views and now your making them give up their rights so you can have fun. So your saying your rights out weigh their rights. However, you can chose to not get a job at that company so that you can work for a company that provides what you want why can’t that solution work – why does it have to be all or nothing?

          • P.J.

            Answer me a few questions:

            In America today should every citizen be able to access affordable basic healthcare insurance?
            Is a woman’s reproductive health a part of her basic healthcare needs?
            Should employers who are mandated to provide for basic healthcare coverage be allowed to pick and choose aspects of that basic coverage?

            the point being there are laws to cover a basic right as a contributing citizen to take care of your health. If a woman cannot control her reproductive health as a basic right, you are probably a man and have no idea just how basic a woman’s reproductive health is to everyday living (and lord help me, I am not talking about our right to have sex) I’m talking severe issues that many women face, again if you are not a woman I might have to detail the list to convince you.

          • JPL

            Please define the services that you believe should be covered under reproductive health

          • P.J.

            Those services have already been defined in existing basic healthcare insurance plans. Picking and choosing which services my employer agrees with, is willing to pay for or whatever motivation that they may have is why we have laws to protect basic rights and prevent that sort of thing from happening. In the real world it is not an employees market to pick and choose work options at complete leisure, most people struggle to find work and do almost anything to keep a job because it is not easy to find work contrary to what you may think. People require health care, women’s reproductive health is more impacting than it is for a man, doctors and lawyers etc have already developed comprehensive plans, birth control is used for more than just preventing pregnancy and regardless, how more basic is it for a modern woman to be able to control when she conceives and gives birth, how much does that affect her health and her life (it is not for you to judge which women and what circumstances they have the right to do that).

          • JPL

            So lets just focus on birth control, those that want an exemption and ones individual rights.

            I understand that there are women who for medical reason need birth control so lets set that group aside as if there is a medical reason then there is a good argument there. So now lets look at the other who want birth control provide for free by there employer for their own convenience to be able plan their family and also to enjoy recreational sex.

            Those that are asking for the exemption are privately family owned companies that have always operated within their belief system. These stores are closed on Sundays and their religious holidays. I don’t think any objective person would be able to say that these companies are not operating within their faith values. These companies also make it very clear what type of company they are and will be. There are very few large companies that operate this way the two that jump out our Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A. The others were smaller local or regional business or off shots of Christian charities. Lets also separate the two companies that were in the case the supreme court decided Hobby Lobby – which the family that owns hobby lobby are protestant and the wood company (forget their name) the brothers who own it are both Catholic. With regards to the Hobby Lobby lawsuit they asked HHS to give them a waiver to not provide 4 types of birth control because they believed they caused abortions (I’m not going to debate that issue if those 4 do or don’t as I said we used the IUD) based on their belief that life begins at conception. This is a view that is constant with how they do business. They had no problem providing other methods of birth control to their employees and I believe that they are providing the other 16. The Catholic groups were asking that they not be required to provide any birth control because it goes against the teaching of the church.

            So why does a person who owns and runs a privately family owned business give up their rights just because they own a business? Luckily for those business owners in 1993 Democrat Chuck Schumacher introduced the RFRA act that passed almost uniamiously between both house and senate to put in place a strict test to determine if ones rights were being violated. So now to provide the 4 birth control methods that you want as your right goes against the rights of hobby lobby to excretes there religious beliefs. If you don’t get those 4 forms of birth control will you die? No – Are there other means to which you could receive birth control? Yes, there are clinics that provide free to inexpensive birth control.

            I would also argue that you have more rights than hobby lobby in this case. You have the right to go to Micheals and get a job if those other 4 forms of birth control mean that much to you, but you want to force hobby lobby to supply those 4 that they find objectionable.

            Please explain why a hobby lobby should have to provide those when a person who is qualified to work there could easily go and get a job at a competing store?

            Should the Catholic church be made to provide birth control? Also, should any church be made to pay for abortions? (Yes, in California they are now mandating all policy cover that)

            Lastly RFRA and the supreme court made the decision narrow so that it would not apply to corporations and test to determine if a privately held company met the definition. Thus Walmart would not qualify.

            So why can’t business owned by religious people be able to keep their rights – how does that hurt you?

            It is called freedom of choice – you want choice when it comes it good for you but not when you don’t agree.

            I disagree with a lot of what planned parenthood stands for so I don’t support them and would not go to work for them but I’m not going to sit here and say that they need to bend to my desires and my views.

            Again I provide birth control to all my employees but I respect company and individuals rights not to, just I respect the rights of others to do as they would like.

            I do not expect others outside my family to live to my standards nor do I want people placing their standards on my life.

          • P.J.

            The privately owned company is not the one providing birth control. They are required to provide access to healthcare coverage- the details of that healthcare coverage is not within their purview. If they are required by law to provide for healthcare then that is the end of the story. If they were the insurance company and they do not provide birth control different story (and different fight because again reproductive health is a basic healthcare need- your distinction between the different reasons for birth control is unnecessary because you CANNOT argue that in a free and modern society a woman’s reproductive health is not a basic need- they’re not asking for liposuction) but these private companies are not the ones providing the birth control the insurance companies are because at least they recognize it as a basic need. Private companies should not decide the details of an employees healthcare they must only supply access to healthcare benefits, they are stepping outside of their bounds with that. I don’t need to explain to my employee that I need birth control pills to manage my debilitating menstrual cycle, it’s private, it is basic, it is covered by my insurance not by them. Their religious views should not dictate my healthcare requirements. If they want to operate in a modern free society, yes i believe in freedom of choice and therefore their choices should not be able to impact mine- and yes it does hurt many women if they have to start paying out of pocket for a basic need and sends the message that taking care of our reproduction is an option not a right. They should do business in a country that allows others to subjugate women’s rights, this is America 2014.

          • JPL

            If a company is paying for the healthcare they are doing more then providing access to health care the are actually providing the health care benefit to the employee. If the employee (or employee plus subsidy from he gov’t) is paying 100% of their health care expense then I agree with you. However, if an employer has to use their money to pay for the healthcare then they do have a right to object.

            The insurance company technically pays reimburse the provider for services but it is from the fees that it charges the companies to cover those fees.

            Lastly I would think that everyone would want the basic right of not being forced to do something that goes against their beliefs and be protected that is what a free society is.

            Answer why can’t someone get a job elsewhere – why must all conform? Don’t you want to have the right to not be forced to do something that you find objectionable?

          • P.J.

            Companies are required to provide access and subsidies for healthcare because in a civil society healthcare is a right. The company is not the insurance provider nor the medical provider- they provide the access by paying their mandated portions, again as per a civil society. If an employer has a right to use their power to determine the details of my healthcare then why have laws that require them to provide it in the first place- because we are not slaves, we have rights, such as healthcare- you cannot start nitpicking those details because where do you draw the line. If a private company decides that they do not believe in paying for blood transfusions they should be able to deny me that aspect of basic healthcare- I’m not their slave, I am their employee in a civil society and that is part of my healthcare options and you cannot take that away because you choose to do so. If we allowed companies to do whatever they want we would not have laws to protect individuals. If a private company decides they don’t want to hire people of a certain race because of their beliefs- guess what legally they cannot do that in a free and civil society. If a private company decides they don’t want me to vaccinate my children well guess what it is a basic healthcare need and they cannot take that away from me because they choose to in a free and civil society. If they decide they don’t want me to use birth control it does not matter the reason they cannot take away that basic health care provision because they feel like it- this is a free and civil society. They are not being forced to do anything, they are being forced to comply with basic laws that protect individuals rights not to be subjected to the whims of their employees because we are not slaves and we have rights.

          • P.J.

            This time, please actually answer the question I am abut to pose.
            If a private Jehova’s Witness Company petitions to deny health care coverage for blood transfusions to it’s employees do you believe that they should be granted their request?
            If you believe that they should have that right then I guess we really will have to agree to disagree. If you don’t believe that they should have the right to deny coverage for blood transfusions then we would have to have a discussion about why one is okay and the other isn’t.

          • JPL

            No they don’t have the right to refuse paying for a blood transfusion because that is a life saving procedure. However, if a person can not have an IUD is that life threatening? Again it is a person choice to have recreational sex.

            Now please answer me this – Do you want your rights to object to a law based on well established beliefs that you hold to be trumped by a law? Or do you want the ability to have your beliefs and not have those infringed upon? Should we force a muslim or jewish butcher to carry pork products?

          • P.J.

            should we allow a muslim or jewish butcher to force their employees to not eat pork at home?
            so by forcing a jehova’s witness company to provide for blood transfusions you are saying that only in situations when the person may die do they not have a right to have their own beliefs infringed upon by their employee accessing healthcare methods they do not believe in. If the blood transfusion is not for a life saving procedure (it is not always to save a life and I’m sure you know that) then that employees rights to have their belief and force that belief on their employee can be upheld?

          • P.J.

            and by the way there are women who face illnesses that require them to prevent pregnancies as it is a risk to their life- if you need me to provide an example then I will say severe endometriosis. Should I have to check in with my employer about my health care needs to get their permission to receive birth control to save my life because they object to the use of birth control and because I work for them they feel they have a say so in my private medical issues? Will they suggest I should get a full hysterectomy or partial, maybe they might suggest the other options, we really will have to sit down and discuss it at length because I wouldn’t want my medical issues to infringe upon them in any way. Oh schucks mas’er you know what I’ll just pay for it out of my own pocket because I wouldn’t want to cause no fuss now.

          • JPL

            Yes we would allow the person that works for the muslim butcher to eat pork at his own house. Nobody is saying you can’t have sex. However, should it be in the right of the muslim butcher to not have to provide the pork or pay for it directly? What the person does with the money they earn for working is there own decision.

            I do not know all the reasons a person gets a transfusion but I think they all have to do it with medically needed issues to sustain life. Also, the witness is a very small cult like group less than .03 of the population. However, the belief for Catholics 24% of the population has been a belief that has been around for centuries (I don’t agree but that is there right). The beliefs about abortion are held by Christians, Jews and Muslims (not sure about any other religion)

          • P.J.

            Thank you proving the inconsistencies in your logic. A company’s religious beliefs only need to be upheld if it is a religion that you deem large enough or valid enough (again by your definition). I have had blood transfusions and refused blood transfusions- none in any life threatening situations- my medical private business- not my employers- I have a civil right to healthcare (you seem to want to avoid admitting that fact). The butcher is paying for my pork because they are required to pay me and then I use that money for my pork which they disagree with. In addition to paying money, in a civil society, my employer must also provide partial payment for my health care. Just like my pork is my business, my medical issues are my business. I will not have to sit down with my employer every time I have to access medical care in order to ascertain if they are Okay with what procedures I choose for myself because they have long standing beliefs from a large recognized religion that you decide supersedes my right to basic healthcare insurance. You also avoided mentioning my endometriosis, my kids vaccinations, basically any aspect of my healthcare which is not my employers business. Just because sex and contraceptives is an easy band wagon for conservatives to jump on and say companies should be able to throw their weight around to deny women their basic rights doesn’t change it from being a basic right just as I have a right to blood transfusions no matter what my employer thinks, and can get my children vaccinated no matter what my employer thinks or any other thing we can think of that has to do with my private medical matters. Again you avoid questions that make it clear- is basic health care a right????? If it is then women’s reproductive healthcare is also a right. This is a secular society and companies that operate here know that- our laws are not based on religion, they cannot be based on religion. If Hobby Lobby can say they don’t want their employees to have access to certain birth control, then a Jehova’s witness can deny access to blood transfusions on religious grounds also- if it is for life threatening situations one can still pay for it by oneself, one does not have to force an employer to go against their belief by providing for a service they oppose morally. So now we are going this slippery slope, the principle that we have a right to healthcare is questionable, companies can cut corners now by deciding if they will provide healthcare and if they do what they will be willing to pay for.

          • fiona64

            So, validity of beliefs should, in your mind, be based on the size of the group?

            I will get a bunch of like-minded Wiccans together so that they can vote on your medical decisions; Wicca is the largest-growing faith group in the US. Is that okay with you?

            No?

            Then stop using Catholicism as an excuse to deny medical care to others.

          • JPL

            If you were going to work for a Catholic organization you might need to – However, it is the only the Catholic organization that have asked for and for the most part received the exemption. Now were are talking about 1 large company and then a bunch of small business that for the most part will provide some type of birth control so for the most part your argument is only with those few catholic businesses – I would say that if working for a catholic business and need birth control or that important to you – you will either need to spend the $7 a month or figure out something else – as the person that has to oversee our insurance plan the more I know about an employee’s health concerns the better I can make sure we have coverage that they need. When I had an employee with HIV I was able to make sure that we had the best policy to take care of his needs.

          • P.J.

            If my basic healthcare is that important to me? are you kidding me? You obviously are oblivious to how other people live. You keep talking about just get a job somewhere else- you are disconnected with the realities of life most people lead if you think it is just that easy or that it should be. If one company can do it then any company can do it too- a precedent is a precedent. health care is health care and employers should stay out of it- provide access to the plan by paying your part and then mind your business. I am a little grossed out by the idea that you think that you should be closely involved in your employees health concerns (if you are friends sure but as my employer what a gross invasion of my privacy) and just because you use your position to help people doesn’t mean many won’t use it to harm people. Because you agree with conservative views on sex you are willing for employers to use their position to meddle in private affairs but because you don’t agree with Jehova’s witnesses views on blood transfusions you want to talk about what the blood transfusion is for to make a point- it doesn’t matter what it is for, just like it does not matter what the birth control is ultimately for- it is a medical service- those things are private. You are going to have to take the stance that Jehova’s witnesses can deny access to blood transfusions in situations that are non life threatening and catholics can deny birth control except in treatment for life threatening ailments in order to maintain the consistency of your logic.

          • JPL

            Luckily for the majority of America the supreme court was able to protect the right of business owners. Really wish people would stop trying to push their views onto others even if the call it laws or rights – lets see how you react should the laws change

          • P.J.

            Let’s hope all business owners use their power to deny access to medical procedures for good only. It is a slippery slope and let’s see how you like it when businesses choose to rampantly discriminate and claim religion.

          • fiona64

            However, it is the only the Catholic organization that have asked for and for the most part received the exemption.

            You really need to go back and re-read the Hobby Lobby ruling. It applies to *all* closely-held corporations.

            Do you know who employs 90 percent of workers in the US? Closely-held corporations. Do you know that not all closely-held corporations are small employers? Cargill, for example.

            you will either need to spend the $7 a month

            You are laboring under two misconceptions. The first is that all hormonal contraception is $7/month (it can be quite expensive, actually, as one size does not fit all). The second is that all women can use hormonal contraception. It is sometimes contraindicated.

            And that’s to say nothing of the fact that if someone is one of the working poor, that $7 may make a huge difference in what they can afford to make ends meet.

            You really do betray your privilege an awful lot.

            as the person that has to oversee our insurance plan the more I know
            about an employee’s health concerns the better I can make sure we have
            coverage that they need.

            I don’t believe you do any such thing, as you clearly have no idea how insurance works. An individual employee’s health concerns are none of your business as a benefits administrator anyway.

          • fiona64

            However, if a person can not have an IUD is that life threatening? Again it is a person choice to have recreational sex.

            Well, there it is at last: “If you don’t want to be pregnant, don’t have sex.”

            Really, that’s a true disappointment.

          • fiona64

            Health insurance is provided as part of a total compensation in lieu of higher salary; many people (myself included) also have a payroll deduction portion for insurance.

            “No additional co-pay” is not the same as “free.” Women have already paid for their insurance.

            Which of your medical decisions do you think should be made by your boss?

            However, you can chose to not get a job at that company so that you can
            work for a company that provides what you want why can’t that solution
            work – why does it have to be all or nothing?

            What a completely asinine assertion. While things are improving here in the US, there are not just jobs lying around for the taking. When it comes to women working at places like Hobby Lobby, it’s not as though we are talking about women with a huge, transferrable skill set.

            You would probably stroke right out if an employer decided that they didn’t want to pay for something that only *men* use (e.g., Viagra). But since it’s only women trying to control their reproduction, it’s bad. I’m really disappointed by this discussion between you and P.J. It demonstrates a lack of comprehension of how insurance works, and of how important contraception is to reproductive health.

          • JPL

            Adoption (November is National Adoption Month) – thank you for asking we may find some common ground. I know that there are a lot kids that need forever homes both here in the US and abroad. The reason I have a pre-teen and two little ones is because we adopted the little ones (one hispanic and one asian). One of our cousins that we are very close works with one the larger adoption groups here and her sister in law has adopted 4 kids.

            We also volunteer with and support an organization in our area that is working with the state to train people to become foster parents and respite care givers. They work with all ages and do try to place the older kids so they have a chance. Through this they have helped many kids and the program is expanding.

            We also support both local and international organization that are helping getting kids adopted. A great number of our friends have adopted children.

            Once our little ones are little older we will start looking into respite and fostering to see what is best for our situation (we are not as young as we once where).

            So yes adoption is very near and dear – our lives haves changed because of it, we volunteer and give our money to support organization that focus on adoption.

            You might also be surprised that we even volunteer to help at a local shelter for homeless women with kids. These are ones who have left an abusive relationship.

          • fiona64

            I applaud you for all of this.

            I have friends who are getting up in age who adopted six special needs kids over the years; one of those kids died due to cardiac complications related to Down syndrome, before I met said friends. So, anyway, they now have five special needs kids, only one of whom is really functional enough to live independently. They have recently completed setting up conservatorships for their kids; my guy friend is 75 now, and his wife is 70. They know they won’t be around forever.

            It’s not an easy road, by any stretch of the imagination, and my hat is off to those who do it. Far too often, the anti-choice tout “just give it up for adoption” as a panacea that adoption quite obviously is not.

            As a survivor of DV, I also thank you for your work with woman who have been where I was.

          • JPL

            Here is what I want my kids to learn:
            Sex is a great thing with a person you love
            Love is not just an emotion but it is also a verb love is something that needs to be worked at
            Sex can have consequences and you need to be ready for those when you decide to have sex (Both good & bad)
            It is never okay to hit a women
            It is never okay to have sex with someone against their will
            Just because they say yes to coming home does not mean yes to sex
            To really understand date rape
            understand how drugs and alcohol can cloud your decision making but that does not excuse your actions (ignorance is no excuse).
            Understand about all types of birth controls both the pro’s and con’s of each of them
            To understand the only way to be 100% to protect against pregnancy and STD’s is to abstain
            How to set goals
            And no matter what happens they are loved for who they are and should they fall down we will be there to help them up
            Teach our kids to look for the good in everyone and focus on that
            You don’t have to agree with everything the person stands for but you can still be there friend

            You might also be surprised to know that I have 5 siblings and I’m closet to my gay brother who comes to visit us 3-5 times a year to be with the kids and we never ask him to hide who he is.

          • fiona64

            Thank you. Honestly, thank you.

            I won’t apologize for calling out factual inaccuracies, and I wont apologize for pointing out the corruption involved in the programs you looked at.

            But I will apologize for some of the remarks I leveled at you personally. It was out of line, and I regret it.

            There are a lot of things going on just now, so I will not say more than that. I hope that you will accept.

          • JPL

            Yes, and I apologize if any of my comments offended you. Also, thank you for debating this topic. We can agree to disagree but I think we are both trying to do what is best for kids in our own way.

            Have a great week.

          • fiona64

            You, too.

        • Arekushieru

          They are not the VOCAL majority of Pro-‘Life’ Conservatives, then.

          Also, if they are against those that *may* cause an abortion and are all for making women pay out of pocket for them, they are misogynists, like you.

  • JPL

    I found this video from some type of hearing on sex ed – it seems that while there are open minded people this debate is more ideological then I even knew and I wonder if anyone here would answer yes to this question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM_G3YIL0dk

    • fiona64

      Since there *is no evidence whatsoever* that “abstinence education” is as effective as comprehensive sex education] (and plenty of evidence that it is NOT), your premise is wrong from the get-go. The only correct answer when the initial premise is false is *no.*

  • JPL

    This has been a very interesting discussion. I would like to thank Jennifer for some good information.

  • JPL

    I would like to thank Fiona64 for consistent statement that valerie huber founded and is in charge of choosing the best. Once I googled here I came across her organization NAEA and they have research showing programs that do work http://www.thenaea.org/resources/Abstinence_Works.html

    Also, I notice they focus on a strategy of risk avoidance vs risk reduction. This is what Jennifer and I discussed. Risk avoidance is about educating teens so that they have all the information to make informed decisions in there life. I would suggest reading those back and forth if you are really interested in this topic versus just trying to bully people.

    • fiona64

      if you are really interested in this topic versus just trying to bully people.

      All you have done since you got here was bully people, JPL. And now you’ve moved on to gaslighting and other forms of abuse.

      Your wife may find that acceptable, but others don’t.

      • JPL

        How have I bullied – have I called anyone names? Have I attacked anyone with the exception of a few snide remarks to you about there views? How about you? Can you say the same?

        • fiona64

          More gaslighting, I see.

          I also see that you couldn’t stick your flounce; if you don’t want to talk to me, you don’t have to. But you think that because I’m female, and I proved you wrong repeatedly, that you have to get back at me.

          And don’t you *even* pretend that you didn’t pull a little marital rape apologia game in this thread. That is bullying as well.

          Grow the hell up.

    • fiona64

      You know, just for fun, I decided to google “Bruce Cook Choose The Best.” And you’re partially right; he is the founder. So, go ahead and crow about that.

      Want to see what else I learned?

      http://www.communityactionkit.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1178&stopRedirect=1

      Quote: Choosing the Best PATH and Choosing the Best LIFE
      continue to rely on messages of fear and shame, misleading information,
      and biased views of marriage and sexual orientation. In addition, the
      format and underlying biases of the curriculua do not allow for
      cultural, community, and individual values. Instead, they discourage
      critical thinking and discussions of alternative points of view in the
      classroom.

      Ibid:
      In
      an exercise entitled “A Mint for Marriage,” a peppermint patty is
      unwrapped and passed around the class. Once returned, the teacher
      asks if a student would like to eat it. The teacher is instructed
      to ask, “Why is this patty no longer appealing?” The answer: “No
      one wants food that has been passed around and neither would you
      want your future husband or wife to have been passed around” (Choosing the Best PATH, Leader Guide, p. 25).
      In
      an exercise entitled “A Rose with No Petals,” the teacher is told
      to “hold up a beautiful rose.” Students are then told to pass the
      rose around the room with each student removing a petal. When
      the rose has no more petals, the students are told that the rose
      has lost all of its value, just as people who engaged in casual sex
      would lose their sense of value and worth (Choosing the Best PATH , Leader Guide, p. 7).

      (Earlier in this discussion, JPL, I seem to recall that you had “never heard of” shaming messages like this … but it is possible I’m remembering a different conversation.)

      You also claimed that this was not about purity culture, that I remember for certain.

      Ibid: “Today I commit to Abstinence as a way to make the Best preparation for my future by Choosing to wait until marriage to have sex, because I want to be free: from worry, guilt, pregnancy sexually transmitted diseases, and the feeling of being used by another; to control
      my life, to like myself, to work towards personal goals, to
      experience healthy relationships, and to enjoy being a teenager… (Choosing the Best PATH, Student Workbook, p. 30).

      I could go on, but I’m confident that people can read more about the religiously-biased, shame- and fear-based program you think is “best.”

      • JPL

        I happen to have a preview copy of the path leader guide and looking at page 25 and page 7 (from the SEICUS community action pack on shame). I don’t see either of those in the copy I have. Regarding the pledge it seems that it is an optional activity based on the leader guide (it sure helps to actually have what we are discussing in your hands and not lean on someone else :-).

        It seems that you want to tell teens that sex is okay and go at just use a condom and not worry about any of the possible negative outcomes.

        • fiona64

          It seems that you want to tell teens that sex is okay and go at just use
          a condom and not worry about any of the possible negative outcomes.

          Don’t quit your day job to become one of Dionne Warwick’s psychic friends.

          I happen to have a preview copy of the path leader guide and looking at
          page 25 and page 7 (from the SEICUS community action pack on shame). I
          don’t see either of those in the copy I have.

          I can claim to have a contract in-hand to be a coloratura soprano at the Met, too …

          • JPL

            Wow you are all of sudden an expert on choosing the best after not even knowing the founder and also congrats on your job with the met. I really can’t respond to your question regarding Journey as I don’t have a copy of that program.

            I believe you are correct on the programs not covering puberty, response and reproduction. That is covered in our current health books so we were not looking for something that gets into that subject matter. I don’t recall that being in the comp. sex ed books either (but I could be wrong as that is not something we are looking for)

            Regarding how they discuss STD’s there path material seems very straight forward giving out factual information sourced from the CDC – like 4,000,0000 new cases of STD’s every year. Reading over there information on HIV/AIDS it seems pretty in depths stating how it spreads. The STD sections seems very extensive and detailed. I don’t see any details on STD that are not from a nationally recognized source. It mainly seems that the data comes from CDC. I’m not sure how stating facts can be bias or called a scare tactic.

            In there intro teacher notes – it states that they do not go into sexual preference directly, the programs contain universally applicable principles that are designed to help all students avoid sexual risk, regardless of sexual orientation.

            In summation, I will be teaching my kids that sex is wonderful and that they should do there best to save that for the person they hope to marry. Should they not make it there – there is no shame in that – however, there could be consequences and I will be there for them

          • JPL

            Also, do you have anything from an unbiased source might be nice. I was just reading through their guidelines for sexuality for 5 to 8 years old for the public school – Bodies can feel good when touched. I’m sorry but I don’t wan to little ones to be taught about playing with themselves in Kindergarten. If there standards are what you want then go for it

          • night porter

            You sound perverted.

          • JPL

            Not me – I’m just typing what SEICUS the source that was used says about what little kids should be taught -yes I agree it is perverted

          • night porter

            No. YOU are perverted. That much is obvious.

          • JPL

            I guess you are Pee Wee Herman

          • fiona64

            You just keep giving me reasons to feel sorry for both your kids and your wife …

          • JPL

            LOL – I feel for you and your cats

          • fiona64

            My husband and son both think you’re a dickhead. ::shrug:: I think you’re a misogynistic, gender-essentialist POS. I guess they’re more generous than I am in their assessments.

          • fiona64

            I know, right? Because teaching little kids that, even though touching their own bodies can feel good, it’s not okay for other people to touch them without permission, is *totes* teaching kindergarteners how to masturbate. Only a freaking perv would think such a thing.

          • fiona64

            Thank you. I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed that.

          • night porter

            He obviously spends too much time thinking about these things.

            As Plum would say, he is skeevey.

          • fiona64

            Also, do you have anything from an unbiased source might be nice.

            That’s laughable, coming from you. You clearly have no idea how to recognize bias.

            I’m sorry but I don’t wan to little ones to be taught about playing
            with themselves in Kindergarten. If there standards are what you want
            then go for it

            Here’s a news flash for you, buddy; little kids touch themselves. If you can’t talk about that, how do you expect to teach them that it’s not okay for others to touch them without permission?

            PS: learn the difference between a proposition and a possessive.

          • JPL

            I apologize this is where my dyslexia comes through in writing.

            I’m looking for unbiased sources – unlike you

            Yes, I have little kids also and I know they touch themselves but I don’t want them to learn about masterbation in kindergarten

          • fiona64

            I’m looking for unbiased sources – unlike you

            Again, you clearly have no idea how to evaluate for bias, or you wouldn’t be buying the utter nonsense these shame-based courses are pushing.

            Educate yourself.

            Yes, I have little kids also and I know they touch themselves but I don’t want them to learn about masterbation in kindergarten

            Teaching little kids that it is NOT okay for someone to touch them without permission is NOT teaching masturbation — and you know damned well that the rigorous, comprehensive sex ed does not “teach masturbation in kindergarten” any more than marriage equality means “my kids will be taught to be gay when they’re five.” Although I would not be one bit surprised to learn that you believe just that.

            Jesus wept.

          • lady_black

            I have a news flash for you, dummy. They learn about masturbation much younger than kindergarten.

          • lady_black

            More on… kids don’t need to be “taught” to play with themselves. They pick that up in infancy. What they need to be taught is that’s private behavior, and that they don’t have to tolerate unwanted touching from ANYONE.

          • JPL

            I would agree with everything you said. Kids are taught before for the most part that touching themselves is to be done in private. Should that not happen then a teacher would say that to the child (more likely some what private) and move on.

            The SEICUS guidelines that I was referring had nothing to do about others touching them – it was based on them touching themselves and that it feels good.

          • lady_black

            “The SEICUS guidelines that I was referring had nothing to do about others touching them – it was based on them touching themselves and that it feels good.”
            YES, they absolutely DO have EVERYTHING to do with boundaries. You are allowed to touch yourself. Others are not allowed to touch you.

          • fiona64

            I really can’t respond to your question regarding Journey as I don’t have a copy of that program.

            Oh, but you informed us you had a copy of the materials “right here.”

            So much backpedaling …

          • JPL

            Let me help you get you facts straight so you can update your talking points for further discussion. choosing the best has 4 programs for sex education 2 primarily for middle – one for either middle or high and 1 for high school. While my son is a genius he is still in middle school for most things. So our committee is looking at two of their programs Way and Path. Your first comments were in regards to Path which I do have and your second was about Journey there high school program. Again trying to create confusion

          • fiona64

            Your first comments were in regards to Path which I do have and your second was about Journey there high school program.

            Both. Courses. Are. Fear. And. Shame. Based. And. Factually. Inaccurate.

            Did I spell it out slowly enough for you?

          • JPL

            Could you please tell me what is factually inaccurate that is what I have been looking for this entire time. Instead of giving me examples of actually inaccuracies you give blanket statements. I’m assuming that is because you don’t know of any.

    • night porter

      Fiona just buried you.

      • fiona64

        Cats have excellent ideas for what to do with POS …

  • fiona64

    For those who are unclear about why I have called JPL out as abusive, here are a couple of links that will help. These are his two specific methods:

    Gaslighting: http://www.thehotline.org/2014/05/what-is-gaslighting/

    Tone-policing: http://groupthink.jezebel.com/on-tone-policing-why-its-bullshit-and-why-you-need-to-1148310719

    Edited to add one more: http://tooyoungforthelivingdead.tumblr.com/called-out

  • fiona64

    Just in case the importance of comprehensive sex education is lost on anyone: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/11/03/carry-weight-shows-need-comprehensive-sexual-education/

    Quote:

    Bringing the existence of sexual and domestic violence into the forefront of the public consciousness by sharing our stories and speaking out is critical, but it is only one part of enacting wide-ranging change. We must also ask why students are not taught about
    consent or what a healthy relationship looks like, and why they aren’t given adequate resources to prevent and respond to gender-based assault.Instead, they’re taught that sexual responsibility lies on the shoulders of only one gender.

    As a result, sexual violence is rampant. The statistics are staggering—nearly one in five college women have experienced rape, and one in four have faced unwanted sexual contact. And those numbers are not going down fast enough. The fight to end sexual assault must include efforts to improve sexual health education, starting many years before students even think about going to college.

    Comprehensive sexual education in every school, for every student K-12, could help decrease incidents of assault and abuse. In New York City, for example, despite efforts to improve sexual education, gaps still exist when it comes to communication, healthy relationships, and support for LGBTQ students. These causes are interrelated—until we are able to talk about what meaningful consent and cultural competency look like, and how the patriarchy hurts all of us, any policies we pass will fail to achieve their stated purposes.

  • JPL

    I can’t find your last comment in all these comments – I think Phillip should give us some money for bringing this article to life.

    I looked at your second source http://www.ncsse.com/index.cfm?pageid=928 but they are basically the same source you already gave me
    NCSSE c/o SIECUS
    1012 14th Street NW Suite 1108
    Washington, DC 20005

    So the reviews of the programs are the same as before.

    Because this report is from 2008 it is a little difficult to check some of the facts – I could not find what you brought though.

    I did look through and saw the statement regarding condoms:
    The site also contains false and misleading information regarding condoms, claiming that they are not effective in preventing STDs.13 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), when used consistently and correctly condoms can reduce the transmission of many STDs including HIV, gonorrhea, Chlamydia, genital herpes, and syphilis. 14

    They attributed this to Meg Meeker, MD and could not find the article they were referencing but I did a search and she states the following:

    condoms “work” differently against different infections. They reduce the risk of getting HIV and gonorrhea but aren’t very reliable with Herpes and HPV

    If you read the current CDC fact sheet – it says similar thing at the bottom of the last page.

    Regarding Bruce Cook – I did find an article from creative loafing but I also found a press release where he was moving from DHR to a task force – not sure there is that much there

  • fiona64

    Unfortunately for the good people of Colorado, this creep was elected. Barely.

    At least the “personhood” measure went down in flames.

    Again.