Mythical Perfection...

Speaking of sex education and mixed messages, the invaluable congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) has released a report documenting distortion and fabrications in abstinence-based sex education materials.  11 of 13 of the curricula from federally-funded programs "contain unproved claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods" regarding health and reproduction.

As important as this report is, the article nevertheless recapitulates one of the more pernicious myths regarding abstinence:

Speaking as a pediatrician, Golden said, she knows "abstaining from sex is the most effective means of preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, STDs and preventing pregnancy."

It is certainly true that if people do not have sexual contact they are extremely unlikely to become pregnant.  This might be called the "duh!" theory of pregnancy.  But that is not at all the same thing as claiming that abstinence programs are the best way to reduce teen pregnancy.  Used properly, the failure rate of condoms is around 3%.  But evaluating a condom-based program would also have to include failure rates due to condoms being used improperly or not at all.  And they do -- these are the numbers used by supporters of abstinence to show that condom programs are less effective.

But this real failure rate is compared to the mythical failure rate of 0% for abstinence programs.  "Abstinence is 100% effective," they say, referring to the duh! theory.  But this effectiveness is a myth -- rather like saying "Heads I win, tails don't count."  What is the total failure rate when you factor in the teens who apply abstinence improperly or not at all?  Since more than 60% of high-school graduates are sexually active, one might imagine that rate would be fairly high, especially if they are not given information about how to prevent pregnancy and disease if their commitment to abstinence fails.

- jack*

Comments

[The Liberal Avenger]

I'm always fascinated by the concept of "dental dams" that are either included in, or are conspicuously absent from these types of programs.

Fortunately for the world condom use is widespread. Dental dams on the other hand... We've been talking about them for years, yet I've never seen a package of them and never heard of anyone who has actually used them.

I wonder what the experience is like? I envision something like pulling a piece of wax paper off of a cheese danish.

[The Liberal Avenger]

Jack:

Your input is sought on this post:

http://liberalavenger.com/2004/12/military-efficiency-opinions-sought.html

SVP

[bedrocktruth]

Sorry, Jack. Now this is the only thread I could find that would take a post.This relates to the abortion, ACLU discussion....

I read the entire post but the point I was trying to make related to fully developed babies-a "slippery slope" argument maybe but murder on whim(not often but possible under current law) should have some legal limitations. Gacy's 16 years in prison didn't mean much at all apparently. Granted he wasn't allowed to murder anyone else but he became a jailhouse celebrity-drawing pictures, granting interviews, signing autographs, etc. They had to pass a law, I believe, as result of his disgraceful souvenir profiteering while enjoying his status as a full service guest of the taxpayer.

During that 16 years of "suffering (?)" the families of his 33 victims were reminded of his celebrity status and the death of their loved ones on a near daily basis. In my opinion, yes, justice for those people and society as a whole was only achieved by his removal from their presence in any form other than maggot food. And the conversion process should have begun no later than a year after his conviction.

Alan I'm not aware of any circumstance in which a woman who aborts her child can be charged with murder. I'm not a lawyer however, so if you do then I stand corrected.

Your comment that the only victim of a pregnancy ending crime is the woman is really troubling.

There was a time that I would have agreed with you. But with the advent of ultra sound and the ability to see fully formed fingers and toes, even happy or frowning expressions on the child, at that point in development I can no longer consider it anything less than a human being that should be fully vested with the right to live. With that in mind any action taken to deliberately kill the baby-except in those extreme circumstances you outlined-should merit consideration of a homicide charge, even if second degree, in my opinion.