The State of Texas has adopted an abstinence-only approach to sex education.  My state has put all of their eggs into one basket when it comes to the prevention of teen pregnancy and STDs; it's a good thing abstinence-only sex education programs work!  

Oh, wait...that's right, they are an abysmal failure!

The discussion of abstinence-only sex education in schools has fallen off the radar.  The idea that sex education in schools should be based on abstinence and not on a more comprehensive approach seems to be a topic of the past.

But is it? This divisive issue returns every year as federal funds are doled out to pet projects.

Underneath the discourse about the educational strategies needed to prevent teen pregnancy lies a much harder and complex issue: Violence in girls’ lives leaves them at risk for teen pregnancy—especially for girls of color.

Last month, the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy hosted a congressional briefing on the racial and ethnic disparities in teen pregnancy rates. The research revealed that while 19 percent of white girls will become pregnant during their teen years, 53 percent of Latina and 51 percent of African-American girls will do so.

It's a dramatic story.

In Gloucester, Mass., out of a class of 1,200, 17 girls are pregnant or had children this year. Time magazine reported that some of the girls even joined a "pregnancy pact."

What went wrong? What would cause so many teen girls to get pregnant? Is the
'pregnancy pact' story legit?

Apparently, the only question the right is asking is: who's to blame?

According to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at least one in four teenage girls nationwide have a sexually transmitted disease. Clearly abstinence only school programs do not deter young people from sexual activity, but in fact this direction actually deters young adults from access to information that they need to make responsible and safe choices.  We must act immediately to withdraw funding for this program and allow teachers to present sensible sexual education curriculum.

The Swift Boats are coming ashore, hitting Obama on sexuality education. But the facts will sink them. Americans are very clear in their support for reality-based sex ed.

Originally published at RH Relality Check - News, information and analysis for reproductive health and justice.

Cristina Page's article Obama: The Real Pro-Life Candidate re-enforced an opinion that I have held for a long time:

Education is the key.

Or in other words - it's education stupid!

Abortion is a very sensitive subject, and people feel very strongly about it on both sides.  But the discussion about it is similar, in my mind, to another issue:  sex education.  The theme between the two is the same:  education.

Educate what?

This is cross poste at: Randomly Ray

I started asking about sex when I was 8 or 9 years old. I would hear things or see things on T.V. that I didn't understand, so I asked. No one would answer my questions. No one would tell me anything. When I asked, they said I was too young or didn't need to know. My parents, it seemed to me, had no intention of ever telling me anything about sex. One day, when I was 10 years old, I was in the garage with my aunt's brother-in-law who was then 17. We were talking as he worked on his motorbike and he casually said, "You can always talk to me about anything. Ask me anything you want." So I asked. His response?

This is cfrossposted at Randomly Ray

I started asking about sex when I was 8 or 9 years old. I would hear things or see things on T.V. that I didn't understand, so I asked. No one would answer my questions. No one would tell me anything. When I asked, they said I was too young or didn't need to know. My parents, it seemed to me, had no intention of ever telling me anything about sex. One day, when I was 10 years old, I was in the garage with my aunt's brother-in-law who was then 17. We were talking as he worked on his motorbike and he casually said, "You can always talk to me about anything. Ask me anything you want." So I asked. His response? "It's easy. You put yours in hers. Simple."

[Cross-posted at The Left Coaster.]

As a very concerned Democratic Party constituent and citizen I had a natural expectation that the 2008 nomination process would yield tangible policy plans for a number of urgent problems:  precise extrication plans from the nightmare in Iraq, specific goals to reach in acquiring universal health care, unambiguous 2020 initiatives to combat global warming, and exact taxation proposals for inequality and deficit reduction start a very long list.

With a ludicrous American political propaganda corps obsessed with hair and preachers, a careful, optimistic Democratic candidate and a 2009 Congressional majority that hasn’t been set yet it’s finally dawned on me that my expectations for the American electoral process remain absurdly high, faith will have to do that policy directions in Iraq, healthcare, global warming and inequality will be aggressively reversed by Senator Obama’s 2009 presidential term.

Kevin asked about sex-ed and the war on science today. Here's my answer.

UPDATE: I added and changed some things on this post until 9:22 AM.

McCain, in my eyes, represents the republican view of science and technology. He employs a series of beliefs that have little to no scientific standing or evidence, and goes against scientific findings. First, it was his pandering to those who seek to remove evolution from public schools. Then, it was his stupid position on vaccines and their "risks of autism." Now, its condoms and whether or not they help prevent AIDS, as well as McCain's position on sex education in the united states. His support for bush's policy on sex education is not even nearly as egregious as his statements here. I don't even need to editorialize, here it is straight from the horses mouth:

A critically important piece of research is likely to go unnoticed in the media brouhaha over Hill and Barack, rather like Sibel Edmonds' story was obscured by speculation regarding Britney Spears' panties.

Read this: UW researchers say comprehensive sex ed cuts teen pregnancies

Students who receive comprehensive sex education are half as likely to become teen parents as those who get none or abstinence-only sex education

Written by Lisa Codispoti, Senior Advisor
and Brigette Courtot, Policy Analyst
National Women’s Law Center

Recently, we learned that one-quarter of American young women ages 14 through 19 have a sexually transmitted infection (STI). Educating adolescents about the risks of STIs, and how to protect against them, is one way to respond to this shocking statistic –- an earlier NWLC blog post covered why comprehensive sex education should be promoted over ineffective abstinence-only programs. Another important way to prevent the spread of STIs is by ensuring that all sexually active people are regularly screened for these infections.

http://nwlc.blogs.com/...

Here's a completely unacceptable statistic:  According to the CDC, more than three million teen girls have a sexually transmitted infection (STI).  That's one in four.

By including questions about abortion on Republican exit polls, but not Democratic ones, pollsters guarantee the media pays attention to how conservative, anti-choice voters feel about the issue, while overlooking the majority of Americans' support for broad access to abortion and contraception.

Read the original and discuss at RH Reality Check - News, Analysis, Commentary and Information for Reporoductive Health

Should policies aimed at reducing the number of abortions focus on prevention or punishment?  At Planned Parenthood, the answer has always been a no-brainer.

The teenage birth rate rose 3% in the United States in 2006. Take a look at this New York Times article for the details. This is the first increase in the teenage birth rate since 1991. Thanks to the Bush Administration and their right-wing allies in Congress, we have seen huge increases in federal funding for ‘abstinence-only sex education.’ Anybody see a connection here?

Join me after the jump for more.