Bush’s abstinence-only policies at work.
By on Dec 5th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Bush’s abstinence-only policies at work.
According to a new government report, the U.S. “teen birth rate has risen for the first time in 14 years. … The birth rate had been dropping since 1991. The decline had slowed in recent years, but government statisticians said Wednesday it jumped 3 percent from 2005 to 2006.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Boehner
Bush
Bush Legacy
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Hannity
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Liz Cheney
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
There is no evidence which suggests abstinence only works. In fact all the evidence states the opposite is true.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:41 pmSeems like abstinence is leading to an uptick in immaculate conceptions.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:42 pmSince when does the Bush administration allow facts to get in the way?
December 5th, 2007 at 4:47 pmResearch shows these programs have about a 3-4 month effect on young people. After that, well, back to having sex.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:48 pm...and the states with the highest teen birth rates are the reddest of the red states.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:50 pmtold ya! in bush world, front is back, wrong is right, up is down, white is black.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:50 pmAbstinence-Only programs championed by a dry drunk.....
Only in America
December 5th, 2007 at 4:51 pmComment by ForTruth — December 5, 2007 @ 4:48 pm
The obvious solution is to have them repeat the class four times a year!
December 5th, 2007 at 4:52 pmIf you read the report closely, you will see that the birth rate jumped 5% among blacks, who are hardly the followers of any of Bush's policies. Given that they ARE pregnant, these women clearly didn't abstain.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:52 pmand the states with the highest teen birth rates are the reddest of the red states.
Comment by Bob — December 5, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
What the hell else are the kids supposed to do while daddy's out gettin likkered up and maw's doin crack out in the garage?
December 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pmJust an ongoing example of why it's not really in society's best interest to give so much political power to a bunch of religious fanatics.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pmCondoms have been around for millions of years? Not according to Hukabee. Maybe 6,000 years but not a million.
There's a more people are getting f%@k'd joke in here somewhere.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:54 pmTranslation of Jason ManHandler:
If you scour the report closely enough so that you can find something to offset the damage to Bush administration's stated policies, you can blame it all on black folk.
For us neocon apologists, it's a Win-Win!
December 5th, 2007 at 4:57 pmTeenage pregnancy rates, like abortion rates and many types of crimes go up in direct relation to poverty rates. Poverty rates have risen under Bush after declining for eight straight years under Clinton.
But the statistical comparison I think would be even more interesting would be teenage birth rate by religion. I'm guessing the states most likely to be considered "christian" would have the highest rates. They also happen to be red states, so I'm sure there are many connections.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:58 pmJason I knew this birth-control/abortion issue was about race. Thanks for backing me up.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:58 pmJason,
It seems like you don't understand the issue.
The fact that they didn't abstain is proof that the abstention-only education doesn't work. If the programs worked, people would abstain.
The bottom line here is that the program is typical of all of the Bush/Cheney programs: Expensive and ineffective.
The shame of this is that "abstinence" education, combined with information about birth control, does work. Abstinence should be a part of the plan, along with realistic options for people who make other choices.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:59 pmJason,
It seems like you don’t understand the issue.
You could have stopped right there.
The fact that they didn’t abstain is proof that the abstention-only education doesn’t work. If the programs worked, people would abstain.
Comment by Skeeter1 — December 5, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
Far too subtle for Jason, Skeeter. And you have failed to blame Black people, another strike against you.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:02 pmWell, when you tell young people that condoms don't work, hoping this will scare them into keeping their legs crossed, the more likely result is that they will succumb to their hormones anyway and not bother using condoms or any other method of birth control, because after all, "they don't work".
A rising teen birthrate is a big DUH.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:04 pmPerhaps Jason would feel better if we gave each unwed mother 200 lashes for her sins. Oh, yeah, 300 for black unwed mothers.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:07 pmMore flat earth science from Bush and the Republicans.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:15 pmHow did the Bush bootlicking koolaid drinkers ever get to be so dumb?
December 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pmLooks like the right wingers skipped logic courses in college.
CHD, (#21):
If rates start out high and then decline, the high AVERAGE number is due to high start. The trend is what matters.
When President Clinton came in, the numbers were high and went down.
When the B-Team came in, the numbers were low and went up.
What was the poverty rate when Mr. Clinton came into office? Was it higher or lower when he left? That's the comparison that matters.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:17 pmGiven that they ARE pregnant, these women clearly didn’t abstain.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Takes two to get pregnant, fu(kwad. One of those would be a man. In case you weren't sure how that works. 'Cause it seems you don't.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:19 pmInteresting, but official government figures have the average poverty rate during the Clinton years at 13.28, and the average poverty rate under the Bush administration at 12.32 through 2005.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 5, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
CHL, the poverty rate under Clinton started at 15.3% (a gift from Poppy Bush) and declined EVERY YEAR of the Clinton presidency, to 11.4% when Bush Jr took over. The poverty rate has been rising ever since, with one pause when it stayed the same.
The misrepresentation you cling to is the ONLY way poverty statistics can be held up to the light so that they seem to be favorable to Bush. No surprise that you'd rush right to it.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:20 pmhttp://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/ 2007/ 08/ bush-poverty-rates-continue-to-plunge.html
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 5, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Did you actually read the information in the link you provided? Just by looking at the graph in the link you can see that unemployment sank every year under Clinton...starting at 15.1% and ending at 11.1%. The reason that Clinton has such a high average is because he started his terms with a high average thanks to Bush I. Bush II has only Clinton's low employment rate when leaving office to thank for his low average, unemployment has risen every year but one since he took office.
Nevermind that all of that is completely off topic.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:23 pmIf you read the report closely, you will see that the birth rate jumped 5% among blacks, who are hardly the followers of any of Bush’s policies. Given that they ARE pregnant, these women clearly didn’t abstain.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 5, 2007 @ 4:52 pm
I'll ignore your obvious attempt to make race an issue here, and instead focus on your remark about students following Bush's policies.
I don't suppose it occured to you that in most schools, students don't get the choice of what type of sex education they receive? It's not like they are asked, "would you prefer to receive abstinence-only education endorsed by President Bush, or would you prefer to receive comprehensive sex education that includes factual information about birth control and prevention of STDs as well as abstinence -- endorsed by godless liberals?"
A student's opinion of Bush or his policies has no effect on what kind of sex education he/she receives -- that decision generally rests with the school system.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:23 pmi can see the freeper headline now: 'Teenage girls "asking for it" rises 3 percent.'
Helluva time for the supreme court to swing right, eh?
December 5th, 2007 at 5:25 pmThe misrepresentation you cling to is the ONLY way poverty statistics can be held up to the light so that they seem to be favorable to Bush. No surprise that you’d rush right to it.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — December 5, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
A beautiful example of how to skew a graph, too, on the second chart. The breathless headline "much lower!!" is part of the koolaid package, but the choice of Y coordinate is priceless. Less than 1% difference between the two bars, so all you need to do is streeeeeeeeeeeeetch out the vertical. And morons like this just lap it up.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:31 pmLooks like CHL has been busted lying again. Good work guys. Keep on hammering this paid liar.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:35 pmIf you read the report closely, you will see that the birth rate jumped 5% among blacks, who are hardly the followers of any of Bush’s policies. Given that they ARE pregnant, these women clearly didn’t abstain. Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 5, 2007 @ 4:52 pm
We could probably reverse that trend if the politicians would stay out of the stalls.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:43 pmWonder if Jenna & BabsII are 'abstaining', or just staining...
December 5th, 2007 at 5:43 pmPerhaps Jason would feel better if we gave each unwed mother 200 lashes for her sins. Oh, yeah, 300 for black unwed mothers.
Comment by RUCerious
Brand them, and their bastards. It's the Christian way.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:51 pmCHL, you thought Xisithrus was being serious? Wow. conservatards are waaay stupider than they think progressives are.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:51 pmUh, oh... Billy's been into the Nyquil again...
December 5th, 2007 at 5:52 pmThanks to Ralph and erock for debunking the Neocon's bogus comparisons on poverty, torturing the numbers to avoid the truth - poverty rates fall with Democratic policies and they rise with Republican policies, period.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:17 pmDollars to Donuts William Hill doesn't think professional wrestling is fixed...
December 5th, 2007 at 6:18 pmtorturing the numbers to avoid the truth -
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — December 5, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
Those numbers will confess to anything if you eraserboard them...
December 5th, 2007 at 6:19 pmQ: What does every living organism, every cell, have in common with every other organism?
A: Reproduction. It's often called the "biological imperative". It is impossible to remove this imperative, and the urge to act upon it. It's absolutely healthy and natural. Celibacy is unhealthy and unnatural.
One of the interesting things about this imperative is that the urge, or need, to reproduce increases in times of stress, fear, or uncertainty. It was the driving force behind "the baby boom", for instance. War makes people horny.
So, one could argue that there is an increased desire for sex due to the uncertainty caused by Bushco's disastrous reign and the neocon message of fear. When this is combined with the demonization of safe, healthy, alternatives to conception; the pregnancy rate, inevitably, goes up.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:20 pmYou somehow think that gay men having sex in stalls increases the birth rate of black women?????? Wow, “progressives†are even dumber than I thought.
Comment by cold_hard_left — December 5, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
when caught in a lie, CHL, changing the subject only works among your crrew in the basement. Even your attempts are weak, just like your "logic".
December 5th, 2007 at 6:25 pmAbstinence only IS achieving it's goal. They want more babies born -- white babies. Abortion/birth control is veiled racism.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:31 pmThe program does a great job of maintaining the Conservatives' 100% policy failure rate.
Heckuva job Righty!!
December 5th, 2007 at 6:34 pmAbortion/birth control is veiled racism.
Comment by knitaknee — December 5, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
WTF ?~?
December 5th, 2007 at 6:38 pmAnyone catch the recent published study which included what i belive many be the first or perhaps one of only a few which linked genetic makeup with the question of longterm adverse effects of early sexual behavior? I can't find any links at this moment but the bottomline was that of the twins studied, those which engaged in first sexual contact at a younger age then their genetic clones where in fact 1/3 LESS likely to display poor academic preformance, antisocial, or criminal behavior. Interesting
The age of first sexual contact has changed suprisingly little through the years and the DARE program has been shown to have little to no longterm impact of adolescent behavior
December 5th, 2007 at 6:40 pm"I understand that. heh heh. I understand, that when people are not busy screwing each other, it's a lot easier for me & the boys to screw them, see. heh heh heh."
December 5th, 2007 at 6:43 pmCockblocker-in-Chief
December 5th, 2007 at 6:43 pmWrong, you are trying to blame the increased teen pregnancy rate to Bush policies, and I was showing you hard evidence from the same report that showed Democratic constituents rates of teen pregnancy were higher than average, disproving your assertion that Bush's policies are to blame.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:51 pmJason, critical thinking isn't really a strong point for you is it. What on earth would the fact that African Americans tend to vote for Democrats have to do with the teenage pregnancy rate?
December 5th, 2007 at 6:59 pmWhoa, Jason -- get involved in a particularly absorbing Lifetime Christmas movie or what? Or maybe you figured you'd reply after the traffic on the thread had petered out and you wouldn't get pounded for your statement?
So let me see if I follow your "reasoning" here... because the rate of teen pregnancy among a group of "Democratic constituents" was higher than average, somehow this proves that Bush's "abstinance only" policies are not to blame?
They were subject to someone else's policies and not the administrations? They deliberately refused to follow policies because they're Democrats and Bush is Republican?
You're really gonna have to lay this one out for me, Jason.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:00 pm"...Democratic constituents rates of teen pregnancy were higher than average,..."
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
.......Whatever it takes to throw the bums out........
December 5th, 2007 at 7:02 pm“they regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them.â€
- former bush counselor dan bartlett
he's referring to trolls like you, cold_hard_left!
(congratulations of being a great gop regurgitator)
December 5th, 2007 at 7:10 pmAbstinence programs would work alot better if we handed out condoms when we told young people not to have sex (like they have been doing for millions of years).
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 5, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Did you not know that:
In days of old,
When knights were bold
And rubbers weren't invented,
They'd put a sock
Upon their cocks
And babies were prevented.
They need to teach these kids that a girl can't get pregant from spit.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:24 pmThat is "pregnant" of course! Old fingers don't float across the keyboard so well anymore.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:31 pmThere was a study in the late 80’s out of USC that found the rise in “Democrat constituency’s†birth rates could be due to the fact that apparatuses used were in fact to large deeming them nonfunctional thus the higher rate. Maybe it was the Mel Brooks Institute for Higher Learning that done the study…not sure.
Comment by Billy Hill — December 5, 2007 @ 7:32 pm
Sounds more like the apparatus you use to get pregnant in the mens room - that's nonfunctional for a 'fake' girl like you as well! ROTFL!!
December 5th, 2007 at 7:43 pmWrong, you are trying to blame the increased teen pregnancy rate to Bush policies, and I was showing you hard evidence from the same report that showed Democratic constituents rates of teen pregnancy were higher than average, disproving your assertion that Bush’s policies are to blame.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 5, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
What, Bush's policies would only have an effect on GOP constituents?
ROTFL!!! Boy, that Aspergers has made on you 'tarded little girl!
December 5th, 2007 at 7:43 pmBottom Line:
Bush sucks, and the country now hates the repubs for it, and nothing about one of his bizarre domestic pet programs is going to help either one a bit.
Sucks to be a Righty these days.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:45 pmSo... no reply from Jason?
And Billy -- lay off the Robitussin!
December 5th, 2007 at 7:46 pmStudies show that wives of conservatives have extramaritial affairs at a rate 3 times that of liberals. This is a study I performed when I sang with church choirs and hit on the good looking married women. Occaionally I was the answer to a prayer.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:57 pmAbstinence programs would work alot better if we handed out condoms when we told young people not to have sex (like they have been doing for millions of years).
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 5, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
That's not an 'Abstinence Program', dum bass. The nature of Abstinence programs are the "ONLY" part, which is completely incompatible with condoms, and why young people get pregnant at a HIGHER rate, not to mention get STDs (including AIDS) at a higher rate. But I bet you prefer the abstinence programs since they increase the chance that a young male will participate in sodomy by 6 times. I bet you and Hendler both are BIG FANS of any program that has that result!!!!
December 5th, 2007 at 7:58 pmStudies show that wives of conservatives have extramaritial affairs at a rate 3 times that of liberals. This is a study I performed when I sang with church choirs and hit on the good looking married women. Occaionally I was the answer to a prayer.
Comment by Saint Augustine — December 5, 2007 @ 7:57 pm
You know that might be related to so many Conservative men being in the closet...
December 5th, 2007 at 7:59 pmrepublicans hate facts: Many of those women did say that their husbands were always asking them to turn over!
December 5th, 2007 at 8:08 pmScientists will someday show the existance of a genetic defect suffered by conservatives. It involves a newly discovered neural pathway, named the optirectal nerve. This nerve which runs from the rectum to the eyes is thought to be responsible for the shi**y outlook on things suffered by many conservatives.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:18 pmComment by Saint Augustine — December 5, 2007 @ 8:18 pm
That must be related to the condition that makes them talk out of their a$$es.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:27 pmI was showing you hard evidence from the same report that showed Democratic constituents rates of teen pregnancy were higher than average, disproving your assertion that Bush’s policies are to blame.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 5, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Here, Jason, since it seems you are having some problems understanding the basics: Abstinence-only programs were a federal idea and are taught at schools across the US to all students, regardless of their political affiliation and race.
That a certain percentage of those students happen to be minorities takes nothing away from the fact that they were taught the very same same abstinence-only sex education.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:33 pm"So… no reply from Jason?
Comment by ralph the wonder llama "
Maybe he's waiting for dan bartlett to tell him what to regurgitate. (the thread above.)
December 5th, 2007 at 8:36 pmWow, you guys are mean, you have crushed the trollies to dust.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:34 pmI can’t believe I never read Georgie’s Wiki Quote entry before:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_W._Bush
Pay especial attention to “grammatical errorsâ€, but, make sure you aren’t drinking. Enjoy!
December 5th, 2007 at 9:42 pmhttp://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2005/shelbyknox/about.html
check out the youth pastors picture
December 5th, 2007 at 10:17 pmWhen are we going to get these GD religious nuts out of power. They are ruining us.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:35 am"Wrong, you are trying to blame the increased teen pregnancy rate to Bush policies, and I was showing you hard evidence from the same report that showed Democratic constituents rates of teen pregnancy were higher than average, disproving your assertion that Bush’s policies are to blame."
Wow! Jason! Did you come up with that great logic by yourself?
....Dumbf-ck!
December 6th, 2007 at 8:37 am