McCain fought money on teen pregnancy programs
flywallyfly
Posts: 1,453
"Palin herself said she opposes funding sexual-education programs in Alaska.
"The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," she wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates."
Not as explicit as the actual sex act.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_teen_pregnancies;_ylt=Al9iIu8DCzq7u3KUEjBTVa0DW7oF
"The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," she wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates."
Not as explicit as the actual sex act.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_teen_pregnancies;_ylt=Al9iIu8DCzq7u3KUEjBTVa0DW7oF
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Lets not be naive and think our kids dont know what sex is. Its the consequences that they may not be too familiar with.
anyway, another reason not to support the GOP.
education AND access to BC, with no social stigma/judgement.
ahhhhhh....to dream the impossible dream!
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
this is never going to happen in a country founded by puritans where far too many people think sex is either something shameful or some absurdly cosmic spiritual endeavor.
Do you mean access to FREE BC? Because, as I know it, a lot of BC is readily available.
I'm happy anytime there are people who vote to limit the power and control our government has over our freedoms through the stealing of funds and bribery/extortion of federal money.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
What can the government do to eliminate social stigma and judgement of birth control.....or any social stigma or judgement anywhere?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Imagine if Palin went on record as saying that parents should be responsible for sex education.
You bet, parents should be responsible to teaching their children about sex. Give the parents the right to pull their kids out of the class and put them in study hall if they are offended and dont want their kids to be in the classroom. They will have to explain to their kids why they pulled them out of health class, resulting in the same end result anyway.
Where I live, its usually the kid with shitty parents that end up getting pregnant when they are 14, 15, 16. Not the kids with the responsible parents. Sure, there are exceptions, as there is to everything.
They can stop passing official judgement and regulating that stigma be taught in schools, for one.
thank you.
and also btw - i wasn't actually saying the governemtn need to do so, although it would be great.....it was merely a comment, overall, about the topic.
as to cincy's question...while free would be great, i would be more than happy with extrmemly affordable. and while condoms may be 'easily accessible'....the BC a girl/woman has full control over for herself, is not as easily accessible for all due to costs, social stigmas on a cultural and familial level, etc. education would do much to relieve a lot of that i am sure, but education geared towards alleviating such stigmas would be good.....and yes, affordable access to BC options, ease of acess w/o parental consent...b/c yes i DO believe a girl should be able to control the options on her own body w/o asking mom or dad.....i think ALL of these things would greatly contribute to greatly reducing abortion #s. a realistic view of sex would be helpful for ALL.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
If we really wanted to decrease abortion and save state and federal welfare money, we would make all forms of birth control free - and we would bring it to your house... or school.
(I only bring up the welfare bit because preventing unintended pregnancy is part of the Welfare Reform Act.)
Lets also say the pregnancy rate increases. Who pays to raise these babies? Who provides health insurance for them?
Wouldn't the burden fall on the social services system and medicaid? In other words, the tax payers?
Just thinking out loud.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
what do you think is more expensive?
Teaching kids how to use a condom?
Or putting an uninsurred child mother and her baby through the medical system and/or welfare system?
And we could stop giving welfare recipients more money if they have another child after they are already on welfare.
what should be done?
forced sterilization?
forced abortions?
forced birth control?
allow these children to live in uttery poverty?
while i agree it's a serious problem...i really am not sure what alternative you suggest?
however, i thin this is where education and access....without social stigma...for the use of BC would be VERY handy! it would be great if some religions would stop taking such a hard-line stance against BC and look at the bigger picture as well.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
While I would entertain forced sterlizations, it seems wrong...or does it?
What I suggest is that if one is unable to support their children and continue to make poor decisions that put their children's welfare at risk, that those children are taken away from their unfit parent. Radical huh?
I remember reading about a program when I was in college.... I can't remember what country it was... but the gist of it was that when a woman had a child and needed formula to feed that child, they wouldn't give it to her unless she got sterilized. :(
-Enoch Powell
I honestly do not know which is more expensive. I know for a fact that if there is such a program, then it will cost money. What I do not know is how the effectiveness of the program is measured. If the program isn't effective and I vote against it, someone could say I was voting against sex education, but in reality I may have been voting FOR something more effective.
That's why you can't just take everything at face value and you need to think about what isn't being said as much as what is.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
i don't see how that would save taxpayers any money, nor am i too sure how 'beneficial' it would be for the child(ren).....but since we were discussing $$$...i don't see the savings, but so be it.
as i said, i do agree it IS a serious problem, but i really don't see any good solutions either.
i WOULD really like to see the full embrace of BC at all socioeconomic levels, i think THAT would make a world of difference.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
and given to who? have you worked in the foster care system? i have. it's not a solution to these problems.
forced sterilization is something china does and the nazis supported. that said, i'd entertain it too. too many morons polluting the gene pool.
I'm pretty damn sure a couple of hours of instruction cost much less than a lifetime of healthcare and welfare, but I don't have any data on that.
We wouldn't need to come up with any more money for comprehensive sex ed, though, because there are already millions going toward ineffective abstinence-only sex ed programs. All we have to do is reappropriate this money.
Here are a couple of big-time studies on the ineffectiveness of abstinence-only sex ed programs:
The Mathematica Study (summary):
http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/abstinencereport.asp
The Waxman Report:
http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf