Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Sex and Relationships

Still a Puritan Nation? Most '08 Candidates Support Abstinence Education

By Alison Bowen, Women's eNews. Posted November 27, 2007.


The U.S. has spent about $1 billion on abstinence-only education in the last decade. Here's how presidential candidates line up on the issue.
Advertisement

An end to abstinence-only sex education was at the top of the list when 600 self-described feminists met in New York recently to rally their ranks and craft a platform for U.S. presidential lobbying.

Abstinence-only -- for which President Bush proposes a 2008 budget of $204 million -- has avid supporters and wary detractors, who want to find a more comprehensive way to present sex education.

In March, three members of Congress introduced a bill to authorize federal funds for states' comprehensive sex education that offers menu of options from abstinence to contraception and abortion. The Responsible Education About Life Act -- or the REAL Act as the bill is known -- was sponsored by Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J.; Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif.; and Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn.

The following month a congressional study found that abstinence-only education -- which emphasizes chastity, or abstaining from sex, as the best practice for teens -- did not significantly delay their decisions whether to have sex.

Over a dozen states have dodged abstinence-only curricula for their schools by declining the funds that mandate it.

On Nov. 14 Virginia became the latest when Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's proposed budget eliminated the $275,000 matching grant that is part of the federal funding.

Plenty of GOP boosters remain on Capitol Hill, however.

In the wake of President Bush's Oct. 3 veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program -- the low-cost health insurance for families who don't qualify for Medicaid but can't afford private insurance -- some Democratic advocates of SCHIP tried to sweeten it for Republicans by attaching a $28 million increase in abstinence funding. That effort failed, but it showed the extent to which abstinence funding is viewed as a potent bipartisan bargaining.

Philosophical Tug of War

For nearly a decade, since Bush increased funding for abstinence programs that were by and large introduced during Bill Clinton's administration, the philosophical struggle over sex education has been between an abstinence-only approach and comprehensive sex-ed.

Out of that tug of war, compromisers have for a couple of years been promoting a middle way: "abstinence-plus," which mentions abstinence within a broader discussion of safe sex.

Programs combining both abstinence and contraception were most effective, a Nov. 7 study by the Washington-based National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported, echoing Virginia Gov. Kaine's reasons for declining abstinence-only funding.

But abstinence-plus by no means pleases everyone.

In 2004 the Heritage Foundation, the Washington think tank, warned that abstinence instruction comprises only about 5 percent of abstinence-plus curricula. In authentic abstinence curricula, that figure should be 54 percent, the report said.

Abstinence advocates argue that studies pinpointing abstinence-only education as a failure surveyed children too young to understand the message and didn't reach a large enough sample of abstinence programs.

Few of the presidential candidates have said much yet about any of this, and few in the news media have asked on the campaign trail.

Here's what can be said about their positions so far.

Democrats

  • Joe Biden supports "age-appropriate" and comprehensive sex education but the Delaware senator has also voted to fund abstinence programs.

  • Hillary Clinton has favored abstinence-plus for a decade. In 1996 as first lady she helped launch the teen pregnancy campaign, which has a goal of reducing teen pregnancy by one-third by 2015 through comprehensive education and awareness. Ten years later, as New York senator, she introduced the Prevention First Act, which would have allocated $100 million for family planning services in an effort to curb teen pregnancy.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: abstinence, sex education, election 2008

Alison Bowen is a New York-based reporter with Women's eNews.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Another non article
Posted by: YogiBear on Nov 27, 2007 12:38 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most '08 Candidates Support Abstinence Education

Comprehensive may work best, but if kids get STD/pregnancy contraception advice otherwise, then that pretty much covers it. I mean, if the Heritage Foundation is against abstinence plus, it must be all right.

The headline, like sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many on the Alternet appears to intentionally obfuscate the issue. Only three GOPers favor abstinence only education. Those three are obviously morons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another non article Posted by: somegirl
» RE: Another non article Posted by: patsy6
nightmare
Posted by: Eat Politicians on Nov 27, 2007 1:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
yikes. I figured more of the same BS from the Republican side, but I guess I missed the whole "abstinence plus" BS on Hilary's website.

Terrible.

It seems Americans across the board are puritanesque. I don't how many "porn will kill your family" articles I've read on alternet. It's downright depressing arguing against "liberals" or "feminists" that think more like "conservative Christians" when it comes to sex.

Europeans just kind of shake their heads at our victorianesque moral stances on sexuality. It's pathetic.

We need Sexual Education across the board. We need sexual tolerance across the board. We need unhindered sexual expression across the board.

Alternet isn't exactly leading the way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Very well put Posted by: magiquarian1969
Nonsense
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Nov 27, 2007 2:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Henry Hyde, David Vitter, Larry Craig, Ted Haggard and thousands of Catholic priests prove how effective abstinence education is. There is abundant evidence that teaching about condom use and contraception does keep teens safer and does not increase their sexual activity, as alleged by such "experts" as James Dobson. This obscene political posturing costs lives, leads to unwanted pregnancies (and abortions) and serves no purpose other than allowing smarmy right wingers to get votes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tried and True!
Posted by: talkville on Nov 27, 2007 2:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems the approach has worked over the years in many areas and not only in sexual relations. Merely consider the vast numbers of registered and un-registered voters who abstain from voting every election cycle!

Those who hold Power know well which side their erotic bread is buttered on. Why change a good technique?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why does the school have to teach sex ed, anyway?
Posted by: l_m_n on Nov 27, 2007 4:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't it a bigger problem that parents are relying on sex ed to the point that misinformation in school will be the only message their children hear?

It is the parent's place to teach morals, not the school's. It IS the school's place to inform students as to instances of sexual diseases and such, because that is data parents won't necessarily have their hands on. And frankly, it just strikes me as weird, having the school interfere with sex at all. I didn't have sex ed in school. Maybe it's something you are more used to if it happened to you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Here's the Deal.... Posted by: CatDad
Micke Huckabee
Posted by: masterjc on Nov 27, 2007 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is a idiot. Giving condsom to a aids-stricken region is the same as allowing domestic violence? That is by far the dumbest thing i have ever heard

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whats real
Posted by: rocketman on Nov 27, 2007 5:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First what is wrong with Mike Huckabee . His stance on aids prevention in Africa is total abstinence only?? The religious right is so out of touch!

Giuliani hit it on the head though – it does start at home..for most people. But if you take alook at NYC school system for example and look at some of their districts, many of those kids are lucky if they have 1 parent living where they call home no less both. These kids are lucky they are getting 3 meals so forget about proper sex education.
While abstinence sounds so “right” reality must at some point enter into the topic.

Comprehensive sex education should be taught with an emphasis on what is really going on in these teens lives. The “teen “ should come away with a real appreciation for the dangers involved and methods of minimizing those dangers. Anything less will be completely dismissed by them.

Schools have to be very careful though they do not cross messages with parents.

Handing out condoms is a tricky subject but it goes to show Giulianis liberal social values which will be his undoing!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dicipline is the key
Posted by: repearwo2 on Nov 27, 2007 6:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abstinance is not a bad thing, particularly for teenagers. The idea that teaching teens that they should not have sex is going to stop them is ridiculous, but it will help. Setting an example is really the only thing that will keep reens from participating in destructive behaviors.

Abstinace should be taught as one tool in a whole set of tools to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

It is not putitan to want young people to refrian from having sex it is just part of teaching them to be responsible and to use dicipline in their lives.

The "If it feels good, do it" attitude is adolescent and is not a good way to live your life. We are a society that lives for immediate gratification and our slippage on the world stage is as much a function of that as it is of the idiot in the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dicipline is the key Posted by: fork
We are a Young, Immature and Mostly Christian Nation
Posted by: drricklippin on Nov 27, 2007 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someday we will grow up!

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton, Pa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Left Side of the March
Posted by: vasumurti on Nov 27, 2007 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a pro-life Democrat. I support contraception and comprehensive sex education to reduce teen pregnancies (and abortions).

I've contributed heavily to Americans United for Separation of Church and State, while asking Rev. Barry Lynn (Executive Director) to keep the organization neutral on this divisive issue, rather than take a pro-choice stance.

Writer and activist Jean Blackwood, in the July 1993 issue of Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a "consistent-ethic" publication on the religious Left, notes:

"Many of the young people who make up the animal rights and environmental movement grew up with pro-abortion rhetoric in their ears. They can make the mental shift from banning CFCs, outlawing whaling, and abolishing clearcuts to 'a woman's right to choose' with such alacrity that one might suspect no self-contradiction was involved."

For many young people today, abortion is just another choice; just another form of birth control. Will they be more inclined to listen to a secular moral philosophy that doesn't dictate their sexual behavior or intrude upon their private life, or a set of unprovable religious beliefs that does?

There ARE non-traditional pro-life groups that make up "The Left Side of the March" on the March on Washington, every January 22nd, in D.C.: Democrats For Life, Feminists For Life, Vegans For Life, the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians (PLAGAL), etc. I'm not sure if Atheists For Life is included, but Rachel MacNair, a Quaker pacifist, vegan, psychology professor and past president of Feminists For Life, once pointed out that there are pro-life atheists who argue that since there is no afterlife, life is especially precious.

(This argument is also used by Reverend Andrew Linzey in Christianity and the Rights of Animals against Christians who claim animals don't have souls: if there is no afterlife for animals and they are not to be compensated in an afterlife for the sufferings we inflict upon them now, then there is no justification for causing them pain.)

My friend James Dawson, a practicing Theravadin Buddhist, used to publish Live and Let Live, a pro-life, animal rights, Libertarian 'zine. Someone once wrote in, and referred to Libertarians as "Republicans who do drugs." (Rachel MacNair broke up laughing when I told her this!) Shay Van Vliemen, President of Vegans for Life, wrote on an e-mail list for pro-life vegetarians and vegans in the late 1990s, that she doesn't expect to see a vegan president in her lifetime--she would just be glad to have a pro-life president who would work to overturn Roe v. Wade. And she insisted she is NOT a Republican, but a Libertarian.

Respected pro-life columnist Nat Hentoff, of The Village Voice, is a self-described "liberal Jewish atheist". Not your stereotypical pro-lifer! When Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a physician who presided over some 60,000 abortions before changing sides on the issue, wrote Aborting America in 1979, he was an atheist. He has since become a Christian.

The pro-life movement desperately needs religious diversity. It's already stereotyped as being Christian (born again, etc.), and will need to become completely secular as it attempts to convince the courts, legislatures, universities, philosophers, ethicists, etc. that human zygotes and embryos should be regarded as legal persons.

I mentioned this to James Dawson when he was about to write to Dr. Nathanson about information on contraception. It caused James to write to Doris Gordon of Libertarians for Life (who, like Hentoff, is also a Jewish atheist) for the information.

Had Dennis Kucinich remained pro-life, I would have voted for him. There are many pro-life liberals and non-traditional pro-lifers. Again, I support contraception and comprehensive sex education to reduce teen pregnancies and abortion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abstinence?
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Nov 27, 2007 7:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trying to get teenagers not to hump is like, ah, trying to get teenagers not to hump.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sexual Oppression makes people violent
Posted by: Cathyc on Nov 27, 2007 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Christian America's attitude towards sex is unhealthy and leads to (usually covert)aggression. Its the same in ALL religious cultures - e.g., Catholic Ireland.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A fun idea.
Posted by: SOWILO on Nov 27, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about the eradication of organized religion?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A fun idea. Posted by: Doubtom
HELP JESUS PUNISH THE FORNICATING HARLOTS:
Posted by: aka_bozo on Nov 27, 2007 10:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: coming out of the woodwork! Posted by: MeridaLady
Puritain does not Equal "Pure"
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Nov 27, 2007 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the pop-culture idea of puritains is totally incorrect...puritains were ok with premarital sex and abortion among other seemingly unpure/impure things...the aim of the puritains was to purify the anglican church which they felt was too close to catholicism...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Faith Based Pork Barrel
Posted by: Arlene on Nov 27, 2007 11:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since many of the AO curricula originate from religious entities, it is just another way to pay off the faith-based voters.

Ordinary citizens appreciate age-appropriate sex education. As one poster further up notes, many parents don't have the necessary information, and when push comes to shove, aren't happy with their own sex lives, either.

Mitt Romney of all people, should know better. Lack of comprehensive education cost his aunt her life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sex education 101
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Nov 27, 2007 11:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The two strongest arguments I can think of in support of contraception, vasectomy or tubal ligation are: Dick Cheney and George W. Bush!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: LOL - Right On Posted by: MeridaLady
» RE: LOL - Right On Posted by: Col. Jackleg
Just say no again?
Posted by: drblack on Nov 27, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember how Reagan's "Just Say No" stopped everyone from doing drugs not advertised on TV?
Birth control is the ONLY answer for a reality based society just as a total repeal of Drug Prohibition is the solution to the Drug War problem.
people will do what they want to do, are driven to do and we can minimize harm or make the activity more harmful by having a zero tolerance policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sex; Education, Abstinence, Angst
Posted by: Betsy L. Angert on Nov 27, 2007 11:48 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dearest Alison Bowen . . .

For me, this excellent essay was beyond interesting. I thank you for your research. I applaud your comprehensive report.

I was disgusted when the Democrats recently offered additional funds for a failed Abstinence Only program. While I understand their hope, if Progressives pour more money into a plan that has proved itself ineffective, we waste dollars that might go for good. An implied philosophical support benefits no one.

With one hand Democrats giveth to the children; with the other those who supposedly sit on the Left, take away funds meant to better the lives and well-being of our young.

I was simultaneously surprised to learn, and sadly, not shocked to realize Abstinence Only agendas were introduced by the Clinton Administration. It was interesting to note Hillary’s position. The Senator from New York apparently prefers to walk a fine line. She remains loyal to a legacy and appeases an electorate.

For quite some time the issues of Abstinence and Sex Education have stirred much debate. I invite your review and thoughts on . . .
Sex; Education, Abstinence, Angst
Sex Education; Abstinence or Advancing Knowledge?
Hate Abortion. Love Planned Parenthood!

Please also peruse thoughts on the State Children’s Health insurance Program and how Democrats were willing to attach more money to Abstinence Only Programs in order to provide less than is needed to insure the youth of America.
The Sacrifice; Children's Health Insurance Program [SCHIP] Costs

Betsy L. Angert
BeThink.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can't stop mother nature..
Posted by: messedup on Nov 27, 2007 4:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Teaching abstinence is like trying to teach pigs to fly. Wasted time. You'd be better off teaching them how expensive a family is, the results of domestic violence, the costs of divorce, and of course the ramifications of STD's which result from making bad choices when it comes to sex. Seems to me all abstinence does is make you more naive about sex and more apt to make bad decisions regarding your sex life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Can't stop mother nature.. Posted by: richholland
Ron Paul
Posted by: jackyD on Nov 27, 2007 6:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
favors abstinence-only programs. Only one of many reasons why Alternet's Ron Paul supporters are wasting your breath on me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: on Paul Posted by: Guy Montag
» RE: You're right Posted by: jackyD
why is this a puritan nation....
Posted by: Cowardly_lion on Nov 27, 2007 7:07 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if we just want to do the smart thing?

Everyone acts like abstinence education is so terrible because it takes away our "right" to have sex. Well you're fools. Abstinence is indeed the BEST way to avoid teenage pregnancy AND STD's. Sure we have condoms and birth control, but condoms break and birth control relies on working with your bodies chemestry....different levels of each chemical for each person. So BOTH are fallacious. What person, aside from the virgin mary herself has ever had a child while staying abstinent? And how many people really listen to anti-drug programs like D.A.R.E. anyway? Simply educating people on a subject never eliminates the problem. People know Wal-mart is bad....you still shop there. Programs like this, are simply to combat teen pregnancy in a society which is constantly bombarded by sexually profane images and a culture which deems a sexually promiscuous lifestyle as totally justifiable.

Maybe it's time for that society to grow up and realize what it's doing to itself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Failed "Wars"
Posted by: CV on Nov 27, 2007 11:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War on drugs, war on sex, war on terrorists . . .

The definition of insanity: Repeating the same failed behaviors in the belief that somehow the results will be different.

zeesch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

from a recent Abstinence-plus poster at a free-clinic
Posted by: DaBear on Nov 28, 2007 10:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The poster is in the local free-clinic and has nine ways to promote "sexual health." Of the nine ways, four are abstinence-related. One of them however was the most shocking for its transparency:

"Participate and convert to traditional religions and adhere to traditional conservative religious practices, like Christianity, which has a proven track record of safe-sex within a stable healthy marriage."

Besides being factually erroneous, it would seem that this sort of abstinence-plus is nothing more than a shill for conversion to fundamentalist Xtianity. This is a lesson in human denial and psychosis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why is governmnent in the sex business
Posted by: Joe on Nov 28, 2007 11:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Non of the philosophies the left or right talk about is without fault. let parents be parents and teach their own kids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abstince-plus is not what Bowen says it is
Posted by: tanith on Dec 6, 2007 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writing in this article is misleading. The author, Alison Bowen, doesn't properly define her terms. The truth is that "abstinence plus education is also referred to as comprehensive sexuality education." If Abstinence-plus programs were really what Bowen said they were they wouldn't be excluded from Federal funding for not meeting the criteria and some of her readers wouldn't be inclined to think that A+ programs are like Abstinence-only on steriods. It also seems to me that Bowen has skewed her article among the Democratic hopefuls to turn voters away from the candidates she doesn't like by saying they support Abstinence-plus (or "comprehensive") sex education.

At the very least, this article needs revision.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]