And the winner is….
by Mary Kay Hastings
From the the Buffalo News, by Jerry Zremski:
On the 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision that started a national political battle over abortion, opponents Tuesday declared partial victory.
And the head of the nation’s main abortion rights group agreed that her side has been losing.
Nancy Keenan, president of the nation’s largest abortion rights group, said the declining abortion rate was tied to changes nationwide that made abortions more difficult to obtain.
“Yes, we won 35 years ago — but women have been losing ground, losing rights, losing options, losing access, losing availability and just plain losing nearly every day since,” Keenan, who heads NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a recent speech….
While clear majorities continue to favor the Supreme Court’s Jan. 22, 1973, ruling in Roe v. Wade, which established a constitutional right to abortion, there are signs that public support for abortion is not as strong as it once was.
Gallup polling shows that the percentage of Americans who think abortion should be legal under any circumstances fell from 33 percent in 1994 to 26 percent in 2007. And the percentage that wanted to see Roe v. Wade overturned increased from 28 percent to 35 percent between 2005 and 2007.
In other words, Roe’s future depends largely on the future of Justice John Paul Stevens, 87, a staunch supporter of abortion rights. Masci said that if a Democrat is elected president this fall, Stevens’ eventual successor would be a Roe supporter — but just the opposite would likely happen if a Republican wins.
In the meantime, though, abortion opponents are taking cold comfort in the fact that the abortion rate is declining.
Now why do you suppose, pro-CHOICERS are upset by the decline? Isn’t “RARE” one of their battle cries? Why is a decline bad?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Hey, where did Rae’s article go?
Anon, we removed it yesterday. I’m very sorry for any inconvenience.
OBAMA FINALLY WINS MISSOURI!!!!
But more to the point — why did Rae’s article go?
I don’t know anybody who’s upset by the decline in the number of abortions.
I’m thrilled that the rate of teen pregnancy, a tragedy that usually stomps a young woman’s aspirations into the dust, has declined almost 30% in the last two decades.
Prevention is always better than a surgical cure. Cheaper and less dangerous, too.
Yeah, why did Rae’s article go?
Now why do you suppose, pro-CHOICERS are upset by the decline? Isn’t “RARE” one of their battle cries? Why is a decline bad?
A decline is bad when it’s due to lack of access rather than lack of desire.
I can guarantee that Rae’s article was pulled after she posted that she wanted to change hearts, not outlaw abortion.
That’s basically a pro-choice position.
Laura,
You have a prochoice position. You’re here all the time.
I think it’s because she said that the other blog changed her mind about being pro-choice, not this one. Either that, or the rosary comment…who knows.
Phylosopher, anonymous, the post is gone, and I’m sorry for the inconvenience, as I said before. Rae requested we take the post down, and we took the post down for her sake. It’s really not a big deal.
If you’d like to continue discussing the topic with Rae, I’m sure you can the next time she comes back to post.
Laura,
You have a prochoice position. You’re here all the time.
Posted by: Carla at February 6, 2008 9:09 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…And I’ve never been promoted as a pro-life diva. Rae was.
Laura, no that’s not it at all. We took the post down per Rae’s request. Sorry to burst your bubble.
“I can guarantee that Rae’s article was pulled after she posted that she wanted to change hearts, not outlaw abortion.”
The pro-life position is that abortion is murder, and hence can never be tolerated. It says nothing about the law or how it should be enforced.
Laura, I didn’t say she was “pro-life”, as Rae does not desire to be labeled pro-life in the first place. Mary Kay and I are certainly capable of reading, and we read her story before posting it, so it’s silly to say that we would post it, and then take it down based on what it said in the post. lol
Alexandra 9:03am
Would you agree a decline in drug abuse is bad when its due to lack of access to drugs rather than the lack of desire for drugs?
“Would you agree a decline in drug abuse is bad when its due to lack of access to drugs rather than the lack of desire for drugs?”
Yes
Hal,
I’ve worked with people with a history of substance abuse. They will never end their desire and can only control it by lack of access. There are people who will recover only if they are not in an environment where there are drugs and must get into another line of work.
If a house was on fire, would you put out the fire and then clean up, or start to clean up while the building was still blazing?
Personally, I think we need to end abortion. Now. Then we can pick up the pieces and clean out the ashes.
Some people would prefer to fix up a shelter before putting out the fire. Either way, we both want abortion to end.
Or we can make pro-life legislation that actually includes real help for mothers at the same time. Just a thought.
Mary, drug abuse (like alcohol abuse) is a very serious and difficult problem. However, I don’t believe it’s the government’s role to limit adults’ access to anything. Free people make their own decisions and deal with their own consequences
PIP,
Or we can make pro-life legislation that actually includes real help for mothers at the same time. Just a thought.
That’s what I meant by building a shelter…having help for all women before we pull the plug…
“If a house was on fire, would you put out the fire and then clean up, or start to clean up while the building was still blazing?”
MK, I think this statement may ignore the reality that without changing the hearts and minds of people, abortion will continue to occur even if it is outlawed. I recognize that outlawing abortion will significantly lower the number of abortions occuring in this country, which would be awesome, but not a poermanent, or even the most important solution. Without convincing the masses that abortion is abhorrent, it will continue to occur and can even be re-legalized after it becomes illegal if the support for it is there. I think that is why changing attitdes rather than laws is so important.
Rachel,
“I think that is why changing attitdes rather than laws is so important.”
‘Both/and’, not ‘either/or.’ I think we can do both, and we need to do both. God love you.
Rachel,
Again, that’s why I said some would like to “build a shelter” so than when abortion is outlawed, there will be other options.
As for changing hearts, you know I’m all about that, as is proven by way of communicating here…but if we wait til all or most hearts are changed, how many babies will have died in the process?
Now why do you suppose, pro-CHOICERS are upset by the decline? Isn’t “RARE” one of their battle cries? Why is a decline bad?
For groups like NARAL it means lower donations, lower salaries, less visibility, less publicity, lowered status,less job security. I think many of the leaders thought that by now all the women in the U.S. would have embraced their idealogy , and they are realizing that it’s just not going to happen, ever.
Women are smart enough to think for themselves, they don’t need groups like NOW and NARAL and PLANNED PARENTHOOD to speak for them. It’s not the 1950’s anymore.
“Yes, we won 35 years ago — but women have been losing ground, losing rights, losing options, losing access, losing availability and just plain losing nearly every day since,” Keenan, who heads NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a recent speech.”
Keenan says it herself right here, she’s a (sore) loser. These groups need to get over it, and find something productive to do. Nancy, just stay away from the elderly, please!
Something that we’ve touched on rarely-
Has anyone figured out why the EU has a fraction of the teen pregnancies, unplanned pregnancies, STDs and abortions per capita that the US has?
Why hasn’t anyone launched a study into what they’re doing right.
Laura, you’re right!
Dirty little secret about Europe’s teen pregnancy rates
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
image
WND Jane Chastain
Have you ever wondered why some of the most permissive countries in Europe like Holland, Denmark and France have such low teen pregnancy and abortion rates?
In April, I wrote a column that provoked this e-mail:
“Does abstinence education really work so well? I wondered because Holland, which does not promote abstinence education, and instead teaches fully and frankly about contraception, has only 12 teenage pregnancies per 1,000 pregnancies, while the U.S. has more than 80 per 1000. … I would be pleased if you could offer me some instances where abstinence has lowered teen pregnancy rates.”
These are good questions and they deserve honest answers. However, the research was much harder than I expected because of the bias that exists in the media for abortion and the anything-goes-as-long-as-it-goes-with-a-condom (“safe sex” or “comprehensive”) brand of sex education that is so common in our schools.
A recent analysis of government data published by Dr. William A. Duncan in July shows that increases in abstinence education funding coincides with decreasing teen birth rates. The birth rates for all teenagers 10-14 is the lowest in 40 years, while the birth rates for all teens ages 15-19 is the lowest in 20 years.
(Birth rates are more accurate indicators of teen sexual activity than pregnancy rates. Pregnancy rates are calculated from the birth rate and abortion rate data and there is no universal requirement to report abortions.)
This is good news! However, the “pregnancy profiteers” in this country attribute this dramatic decrease to their brand of sex education. This just isn’t so!
When “comprehensive” sex education, was first introduced in our schools, it was like pouring gasoline on a fire. Teen pregnancy rates when through the roof! The decline did not occur until abstinence education campaigns begin to take hold.
In 2003, a peer-reviewed “Analysis of the Causes of the Decline in non-marital Birth and Pregnancy Rates for Teens from 1991 to 1995” was published in Adolescent Family Health. This definitive work was ignored by the pregnancy profiteers (it didn’t help their bottom line) and the mainstream media (it didn’t conform to the current standard of political correctness). The authors emphatically state: “The factors making the greatest contribution to the decline in overall 15- to 19-year-old birth and pregnancy rates were an increase in abstinence and a decrease in the percentage of married teens.”
As for those low teen pregnancy and abortion rates in permissive European countries we have heard so much about, they are useless! It’s like comparing caterpillars to elephants.
Though pregnancy data and abortion rates are not collected and reported the same way in each European country, here’s what I discovered: The much-heralded Dutch teen pregnancy, abortion and birthrates used are for all females under 20 years of age (including elementary school children), while ours are for adolescents ages 15 to 19. If you factor in prepubescent girls, naturally you come up with a much smaller number. Also, teenage girls are routinely put on the pill.
In Holland, there is a strong emphasis on delaying sexual activity. Fetal development is taught in schools, and most Dutch educators report they do not use condom demonstrations. There is little tolerance for teenage pregnancy. Unwed mothers are not subsidized the way they are in the U.S.
Also, Europe has tighter abortion laws. Abortions are typically allowed up to 17 weeks – 22 weeks is considered an emergency. Counseling and waiting periods are standard.
One of the biggest reasons the Netherlands and other European countries have much lower abortion rates is that early abortions simply are not counted! If a young girl misses her monthly period and goes to a clinic, they don’t do a pregnancy test. They do a D&C (scrape out her uterus) and call it a “menstrual extraction.” If there is no pregnancy (no test to confirm), technically, it was not an abortion!
These data were compiled from a 2000 analysis of the European sex education model published by Focus on the Family, An “Apples to Apples Report Comparing the U.S. to Europe” by Leslee Unruh, president of the National Abstinence Clearinghouse, and interviews with Dr. John Willke, the president of the International Right to Life Federation.
In short, much of the data commonly used to compare U.S. teen pregnancy and abortion data with other countries has been put out by groups who profit from teen pregnancy. The same applies to much of the information on abstinence education.
What is needed is an honest evaluation of how pregnancy rates are reported in some of these other countries as well as the negative social stigma that is attached to teen motherhood in Europe.
The much-heralded Dutch teen pregnancy, abortion and birthrates used are for all females under 20 years of age (including elementary school children), while ours are for adolescents ages 15 to 19.
Get out of town! You’ve got to be kidding!
Hal 10:06am
I hope you feel the same way when a drug or alcohol impaired driver puts you in the hospital or nursing home, or you have an impaired health care practitioner taking care of you or someone you love.
In Holland, there is a strong emphasis on delaying sexual activity. Fetal development is taught in schools, and most Dutch educators report they do not use condom demonstrations. There is little tolerance for teenage pregnancy. Unwed mothers are not subsidized the way they are in the U.S.
Well there you go. Just what we’ve been saying all along. Show them the babies, and the rest takes care of itself.
Europeans have a realistic, common sense attitude about sex for one. They accept that sex is pleasureable and people will have it, including teens. Then, they encourage those teens to have protected sex, including more use of implant and injectable longer lasting hormonal contraceptives, and with universal healthcare, there is no financial barrier to contraceptive access. Most Europeans consider American prudishness and sexphobia to be some sort of pitable social neurosis.
Perhaps they should have added dogs to their list…would’ve lowered the rates even more!
Phylosopher,
Well you gave your opinion and Bethany gave an actual study…hmmmmm…wonder which one I’m going to go with…
Bethany 10:33 AM,
Dirty little secret about Europe’s teen pregnancy rates
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
image
WND Jane Chastain
Awesome post, Bethany. I hope everyone gets a chance to read that. It just goes to show how statistics can be manipulated any way you want.
One of the biggest reasons the Netherlands and other European countries have much lower abortion rates is that early abortions simply are not counted! If a young girl misses her monthly period and goes to a clinic, they don’t do a pregnancy test. They do a D&C (scrape out her uterus) and call it a “menstrual extraction.” If there is no pregnancy (no test to confirm), technically, it was not an abortion!
This is such an important fact. As long as a pregnancy test IS NOT done, it is technically NOT AN ABORTION???? Does that hold true in this country? Is this practice (menstrual extraction) taking place in the U.S. in OB/GYN offices, without being counted as an abortion?
Here is a link to a photo of a menstrual extraction (notice the arm and shoulder of an 8 week old baby(fetus): http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/extract.htm
And they say this isn’t a life?
Let’s try the link again, http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/extract
As a former pro-abort, I wouldn’t put too much credibility on Ms. Keenan’s “admission” that the Party of Death is losing ground. When I was a NOW member during the 1980s and 1990s, we were always being told that Roe was on the edge of defeat. It was a standard fundraising tactic.
Pro-choice donors will give more money if they’re scared. Keenan just wants to get some of that moolah for NARAL.
Here you go Janet,
Thanks, mk.
“This tissue (see Photo courtesy Dr Jack Willke and Hayes Publishing Company) was produced by a menstrual extraction, that is, a very early suction abortion. In this case it was done at 8 weeks into the pregnancy.
In this method, the abortionist inserts a hollow plastic tube with a sharp edge — called a “suction catheter” — into the womb. The other end of the tube is connected to a suction device, similar in principle to a home vacuum cleaner but 29 times as powerful. The force of the suction tears the fetal tissue apart, and it is then sucked out the tube and disposed of. The abortionist then uses the sharp edge to cut and scrape the placenta from the lining of the uterus.
At this stage the tissue is soft and the result is like running something through a blender. But if you look closely, you can see an arm and a shoulder.
This is a commonly used method for very early abortions.”
From “Pregnantpause.org
Regarding the pregnancy rates in the Netherlands:
Study you quoted certianly was skewed – a far right twist.
The “delay” the study speaks of is 1 year, from 16 -17 y o on average.
Yes, there is total (comprehensive) sex ed there, too. Fetal development would presumably be part of that, but also sex education beginning at age five, including mastubation “how to” films for kids as young as age 10. Most girls are on the pill before they are sexually active.
And, I’m not posting the studies – do your own research, but do it responsibly, buy looking at who is doing the study and tracing back to original sources.
So, which one of you is taking the day off form harassing women going to get medical services to go to your school board and suggest they get some masturbation films for middle schoolers?
Sorry phylosopher,
You made the claim, you cite the sources/post the studies…
Post a source, Phylosopher. There’s no point in debating someone who just posts claims that aren’t substantiated by any evidence whatsoever.
And what about the menstrual extractions not being counted as abortions?
What about the counseling and waiting periods before obtaining abortions?
What about the fact that they include prepubescent girls in their statistics about abortions and pregnancy?
Funny how you just ignore these facts among others…
Is there a good reason for them calling this a “menstural extraction”? I just don’t understand where this name comes from. Plus, I’ve never heard of it. It’s another new one for me! (when will it end!)
“Europeans have a realistic, common sense attitude about sex for one. They accept that sex is pleasureable and people will have it, including teens….Most Europeans consider American prudishness and sexphobia to be some sort of pitable social neurosis.”
Here is a reading suggestion for those who don’t mind being considered a bit prude: “A Return to Modesty: Discovering the Lost Virtue” by Wendy Shalit. (She also has a website called “modestyzone.net”.) Wendy was 23 years old when she wrote the book. She has a realistic, common sense attitude about modesty. A very interesting read.
“I hope you feel the same way when a drug or alcohol impaired driver puts you in the hospital or nursing home, or you have an impaired health care practitioner taking care of you or someone you love.”
I don’t like those things anymore than you do. In fact, a more rational drug policy would make such risks less likely.
I’ve been meaning to read that book, Janet. It sounds really good.
Hal,
Really? You think there are less drunk driving accidents because drinking is legal? Seriously?
phylosopher (12:33) “Regarding the pregnancy rates in the Netherlands…Yes, there is total (comprehensive) sex ed there, too. Fetal development would presumably be part of that, but also sex education beginning at age five, including mastubation “how to” films for kids as young as age 10. Most girls are on the pill before they are sexually active.”
In the Netherlands, prostitutes sit in store windows, and marriage is an after thought throughout Europe. How is that good for women?
That is where we are headed, unless things change drastically.
MK, yes.
Seriously. There would be much more crime of all types if alcohol were criminalized.
http://www.sisterzeus.com/MenExt.htm
Here is an article on mentrual extraction…
Eye-opening!
Hal,
then why criminalize anything? I mean if your theory is that criminalizing it makes it more enticing and prevalent, why have laws at all? Do we have more murders because they are illegal? Would we have less if they were legal?
Your logic is, well, astounding.
Hal,
No one is talking about criminalizing alcohol. However, I support drunk driving laws and think that if anything they are much too lenient. I also support a legal drinking age.
Also, there has to be some regulation and control of drugs, especially narcotics. I have to strictly account for every narcotic I use and must be able to explain any discrepancies. This protects the public by making abuse much more likely to be caught.
We also have to get over the silly notion that legalizing something puts the criminal and abusive element out of business. Sometimes its only makes it easier for them.
then why criminalize anything? I mean if your theory is that criminalizing it makes it more enticing and prevalent, why have laws at all? Do we have more murders because they are illegal? Would we have less if they were legal?
The distinction many people draw is between ‘victimless’ crimes and crimes with a victim. ie, smoking pot versus killing someone. Which does marijuana have more in common with — alcohol? or murder? If you murder someone, that action has a direct victim, and so it is a crime. If you murder someone while drunk — then that’s still a crime, because there’s a victim. But just being drunk is not a crime in and of itself, as there is no victim. Why should it be any different with marijuana? C
mk (1:50),
I can see it now – ME Home Parties!!! (“Because it’s all about ME!”)
Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.
“Unfortunately finding a menstrual extraction is difficult. It is an underground technique, barely legal in some states, falling into grey areas in others. Women who know how to do them don’t advertise. Working only by word of mouth, basically you have to know someone, or be very lucky. Menstrual extraction was taught during the 70’s by women in the feminist movement. Good places to start looking are feminist health centers, and lay-midwives. Start by asking if they’ve ever heard of menstrual extraction, if they have you are doing good, you will find most have never heard of it. If you have interest in learning how to do them, consider signing up for a women’s self-help group. For your own information, menstrual extractions are physically impossible to do on yourself.”
Barely legal in some states.. can’t imagine why..do they care? No.
“There are some clinics in the NYC area that offer the Aspiration Proceedure, which is essentially the same as a menstrual extraction, there is no cutting and scraping, it can be done early, its quick, with minimal discomfort. Early Options, An Abortion Clinic in NYC specalizing in early abortion.(they) offer the aspiration proceedure. Friendly professional staff, and they’re working on opening more clinics and other areas. I’d love to see more offices/clinics like this around the country.”
She’d love to see more clinics like this….
“There are no drugs given. Allowing the woman to stay in touch with what is happening to her body. She is in control. “
It’s always about power and control. Does sister zeus think she’s a goddess? They are doing this in each others’ homes. This is too weird for words.
mk,(1:50):
I’ll keep my eyes closed, thanks.
“However, I support drunk driving laws and think that if anything they are much too lenient. I also support a legal drinking age.”
I agree. No one under 18 years old should be able to legally drink or do drugs.
We’ve gone a bit off topic. I noticed the Pro-Life Republicans endoresed McCain today.
oops, Republicans for Choice:
As moderate and conservative pro-choice Republicans are we happy with the results of the Florida primary? Yes and no.
Our first choice, Rudy Giuliani, did not win. He ran a campaign with a risky strategy and it didn’t work. But our number two choice did win…John McCain. McCain came in second in a survey of our membership.
While he is personally “pro life” he has time and again reached out and worked with people across the spectrum. We know we can work with him to create common ground that will allow moderates and conservatives to come together to rebuild the GOP.
From the Wing Nut Daily article posted above:
“When “comprehensive” sex education, was first introduced in our schools, it was like pouring gasoline on a fire. Teen pregnancy rates when through the roof! The decline did not occur until abstinence education campaigns begin to take hold.”
—that is an outright lie. Teen birth rates were at their highest during the 1950’s.
And this, also from the WingNut Daily article:
“The much-heralded Dutch teen pregnancy, abortion and birthrates used are for all females under 20 years of age (including elementary school children), while ours are for adolescents ages 15 to 19. If you factor in prepubescent girls, naturally you come up with a much smaller number. Also, teenage girls are routinely put on the pill.”
—-also an outright lie. The Dutch teen birth rates of 12 per 1000 are for girls aged 15 to 19, just like ours are. Take a look here: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_teens.html
And that last sentence of the paragraph about the Pill….the author is too stupid to understand that she just destroyed her own argument by contradicting herself. Why anyone would even consider believing something published on Wing Nut Daily is beyond me.
Here you go Janet,
Posted by: mk at February 6, 2008 12:15 PM
……………………………………..
Why did you post a pic of the inside of a pomegranate?
Here is one very thoughtful, very nuanced study on the Netherlands versus UK approach to sex education, including some stats, which are not as important IMO as the attitudinal difference.
http://www.sheu.org.uk/publications/eh/eh194jl.pdf
Thanks for pointing out the WND article problems Hieronymous, it was quite pastiche, wasn’t it?
and just the stats without the wnd filter
http://www.planetwire.org/files.fcgi/6282_youngpeoplesexualityfacts.doc
Impressive. Statistics from nations which are dying out from not reproducing.
Netherlands is the 3rd most densely populated country in the world. They would put all those extra folks you want them to have…where? They’ve already reclaimed land from the sea.
Now, would you like to try reading the article and posting a relevant comment?
Impressive. Statistics from nations which are dying out and ignorant enough to abort their future nationals.
But, having a phylosophy that assures their de- population will continue through abortion is typical of civilizations in decline.
The Netherlands. A weak nation which imports labor from Muslim nations while being overpopulated according to the generalissimo Phylosopher. The joke is on those non-populating Dutch in the Netherlands. Why take population/sex education lessons from a dying nation?
—that is an outright lie. Teen birth rates were at their highest during the 1950’s.
Been there/done that…more teen pregnancies? yes
But they were MARRIED!
Sally,
Why did you post a pic of the inside of a pomegranate?
If you get a pomegranate with an arm and ribcage in it, I suggest you try to sell it on ebay along with the grilled cheese sandwiches…I’d sure like to know where you shop for produce.
MK: Now why do you suppose, pro-CHOICERS are upset by the decline? Isn’t “RARE” one of their battle cries? Why is a decline bad?
I think “rare” would be good, as I see pregnancy prevention as preferable to having an abortion, from a variety of perspectives.
Personally, I haven’t been upset by the decline, but pehaps there are factors I’m not aware of.
Alexandra is perfectly on target: “A decline is bad when it’s due to lack of access rather than lack of desire.”
Doug
Impressive. Statistics from nations which are dying out and ignorant enough to abort their future nationals.
But, having a phylosophy that assures their de- population will continue through abortion is typical of civilizations in decline.
So wait, if they have a higher teen pregnancy rate, then they’re proof that we, not they, are “on the right track.” If they have a lower teen pregnancy rate, then they’re proof that we, not they, are “on the right track.” Got it.
MK —
Been there/done that…more teen pregnancies? yes
But they were MARRIED!
Do you have any stats on how many of those marriages occurred after conception, rather than before? I would chalk the high-teen-pregnancy-rate-within-marriage thing at least partially up to social pressure not to have a child out of wedlock, rather than just everyone marrying at 18 and immediately having babies. Which is, IMO, not the solution to teen pregnancy — I think the worst thing some of these kids could do is yoke themselves for life to the guy who got them pregnant.
But, having a phylosophy that assures their de- population will continue through abortion is typical of civilizations in decline.
Posted by: uspsgirl@gmail.com at February 7, 2008 12:31 AM
Actually, their abortion rate is remarkably low. Much lower than ours. But keep on with the magical thinking; I’m sure it’s a comfort to you.
—that is an outright lie. Teen birth rates were at their highest during the 1950’s.
Been there/done that…more teen pregnancies? yes
But they were MARRIED!
Posted by: mk at February 7, 2008 6:20 AM
My point was that the author’s claim that teen pregnancies spiked upon the advent of comprehensive sex ed was false. Apparently you know that, so I’m not sure what your point is.
Alexandra,
I think the worst thing some of these kids could do is yoke themselves for life to the guy who got them pregnant.
I think the worst thing some of these kids could do is yoke their private parts to a guy that spending their life with, would be the worst thing they could do…
Apparently you know that, so I’m not sure what your point is.
The point being that even tho there were more teen pregnancies this does not indicate that sex ed was the reason for teen pregnancies to go down. There is difference between a married teenager (which they did in the fifties) and an unmarried teenager…and comparing one to the other is dishonest.
Try comparing single parent pregnancies in the 50’s to single parent pregnancies now (or at the point that sex ed was introduced…)
I think the worst thing some of these kids could do is yoke their private parts to a guy that spending their life with, would be the worst thing they could do…
I think the worst thing some of these kids could do is yoke their private parts to a guy that spending their life with, would be the worst thing they could do…
Of course — obviously, we want teenagers to be responsible — but the point is, the teen pregnancy in question has already happened. Is it better or worse if the girl in question marries the guy out of social obligation? I would say worse.