Did you want a crucifix with that? What you need to know about abstinence-only until marriage programming
A recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer announced the recent loss of federal funding for The Silver Ring Thing, an abstinence-only until marriage program targeting teens. The reason cited for terminating the contract? Concerns that the money was being used to convert teens to Christianity.
First of all, the utter contradiction between the current administration’s allocation of more than $170 million for abstinence-until marriage programs and their statement of concern about the separation of church and state is laughable. The nature of abstinence-only until marriage programs is that they are based on Christian ideals and reflect (quite transparently, actually) a religiously conservative view of marriage, homosexuality, and family. Just take a look at the Federal Guidelines for Abstinence-Only Education.
These grant projects must meet the legislative priorities as described in Section 510 of Title V of the Social Security Act. Abstinence education is defined in the legislation as “an educational or motivational program that:
A. Has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
B. Teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
C. Teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
D. Teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
E. Teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
F. Teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society;
G. Teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
H. Teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.
While the blurring of church and state is worthy of our concern, it is also important for us to note that these programs have not been proven to have any lasting impact on either delaying sexual activity or preventing unplanned pregnancies or disease transmission. But then again, if you are having trouble reaching scientifically-based outreach measures, just change your measuring stick. Which is what the administration did at the end of 2001.
When these programs fell short of impacting the teen birthrate and the proportion of teen participants who engaged in sexual intercourse, the measures were replaced with loose definitions such as “the proportion of program participants who understood the benefits of abstinence, who committed to abstinence, and who reported that they had the skills to avoid sexual intercourse.” Despite the absence of evidence that these programs are having any lasting impact at all, Bush has recently proposed a 15% increase in abstinence-only funding! Nice reward for a job undone! (For further documentation of the ineffectiveness of these programs, take a look at evaluations from 10 states who funded them.)
And as if that weren’t enough cause for outrage, at least 10 of the 13 curricula most frequently used by federally funded programs are riddled with inaccuracies or misleading information.
Below are just a few of my favorite examples of what some of these programs are teaching young people about sex:
“At the least, the chances of getting pregnant with a condom are 1 out of 6.”
Me, My World, My Future, Revised HIV material, p. 257(pdf)
(In truth: when used consistently and correctly, condoms are 98 percent effective in preventing pregnancy.)
“AIDS can be transmitted by skin-to-skin contact.”
Reasonable Reasons to Wait, Teacher’s guide, Unit 5, pg. 19(pdf)
(In truth: HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be transmitted only through direct exchange of bodily fluids such as blood, semen, vaginal secretions, or breast milk.)
“Among Kinsey’s most outrageous and damaging claims are the beliefs that pedophilia, homosexuality, incest, and adult-child sex are normal.” Clue 2000 Curriculum(pdf)
“These are simply natural consequences. For example, if you eat spoiled food, you will get sick. If you jump from a tall building, you will be hurt or killed. If you spend more money than you make, your enslavement to debt affects you and those whom you love. If you have sex outside of marriage, there are consequences for you, your partner and society.”
Sex Respect, Student Workbook, p. 11(pdf)
Ah, yes… money well spent.
Posted by Jenn on March 9, 2006 10:01 AM
Permalink | Email to a Friend | Add post to del.icio.us
More Recent Stories:
• The consistency paradox continued - New rules of engagement
• Now you see me, now you don't - Why consistency matters
• Are you a good cyberflirt?
• Mother May I? OH! YES YOU MAY!
• Flirting online – Can you feel me undressing you with my keystrokes?
• Board game makers continue in pursuit to end your relationship, destroy your life
• Why sex-pigs have got everybody's panties in a bunch
• White guy on black love site tells women, "stop dating guys that aren't me."
• You viewed my MySpace profile... why haven't you called?
• Rap and hip-hop song lyrics proven to twitterpate teens
