Senate Committee Cuts Funding to Abstinence Only Program, Raises Funds for Family Planning Program
In the same session the committee approved a raise to the Title X family planning program's funding by 16 million dollars. The CBAE program uses an abstinence only approach to sexual education; the Title X program uses a family planning approach to sexual education including focus on providing contraceptives to and educating the public about STDs, and pregnancy.
The CBAE program provides funding to programs that promote abstinence as the only certain way to avoid pregnancy and the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases. According to CBAE's website qualifying programs must also instruct children that: "a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity."
Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office, Caroline Fredrickson, stated: "Over the years, Congress has allocated well over half a billion dollars for programs that focus exclusively on abstinence and censor vital information that can help young people make responsible decisions about sexual activity.", according to the ACLU.
Fredrickson reportedly went on to say: "While the discussion of abstinence is an important component of any educational program about human sexuality, federally funded programs that focus exclusively on abstinence have been shown not to work, and raise civil liberties concerns. Given the current fiscal environment and the lack of evidence to support such programs, we believe it would be irresponsible for Congress to allocate new tax dollars towards abstinence-only programs."
The ACLU claims that the Title X program is a more effective public health program than the CBAE due to: the clinics it supports, the number of people who receive contraceptives from the program, and the fact that program also provides basic health services to low income citizens. According to the ACLU's press release: "Title X services prevent unintended pregnancies, promote pre- and post-natal health, lower rates of sexually transmitted diseases, and improve women's health. For every public dollar invested in family planning, three dollars are saved in Medicaid costs for pregnancy and newborn care alone."
According to Title X's website the program provided more than 5 million people with contraceptives in 2006. Title X clinics also provide pregnancy and HIV testing, along with counseling and referrals to social service agencies.
Neither of the two programs are allowed to use funds in a clinic or any other program that allows abortion as a means of family planning
The ACLU closed its press release with its hope that congress would continue the trend of eliminating tax dollars for abstinence only programs, and alternatively use the money for programs such as Title X.
Sources:
Published by A. Kairi
A. Kairi is a natural beauty care and crafting enthusiast that has operated a natural beauty care products business since 2004. She has held dozens of natural beauty care workshops in private venues and at M... View profile
- Sex Education: Why Teach Abstinence Only?Why I plan to teach my children about sex from an abstain-till-marriage viewpoint instead of a "safe sex" viewpoint.
- Effects of Abstinence-only Based Sex Education from a College Freshman's ViewpointMost teenagers seem to closely link sexuality with actually having sex, which alone is a forgivable mistake, yet the less justifiable error is how abstinence-only sexual education classes in public schools all too oft...
- Abstinence Only or the Whole Picture?Abstinence is not working in our society.
Abstinence-Only Sex Education is Asking for Disaster The United States is the only developed nation who still stands by abstinence only sex education in the face of research proving its negative, unhealthy effects. Something need...- Debate of Sex Education Programs Within the U.SIn President Bush's 2006 Fiscal Year Budget, he proposed a near 33% increase in federal spending on abstinence-only education (Pope), resulting in nearly $170 million of added funding for the program.
- Is Abstinence-Only Education Useless?
- Do Abstinence-only Programs Work?
- Funding, Ideologies, Consequences and Implications of Abstinence-Only Sex Educatio...
- Teen Sex-Ed Debates: Abstinence Only Vs. Comprehensive Sex Education
- Who is Responsible for Teaching Our Children that Condoms Are Useless?
- New Study Proves Abstinence Only Education is Failing
- 'Abstinence Only' Undermines the War on HIV/AIDS
- senate appropriations committee voted to cut funding to abstinence only sexual education program
- in same session committee voted to raise funding to the Title X family planning program
- rights group hailed decision and hopes that the trend continues
6 Comments
Post a CommentIt is not surprising that the Senate Democrats would favor promotion of decadent immoral behavior (premarital sex and the like) over abstinance. The Democrats are indebted for money and votes to radical left wing extremists and their hatred for all vestiges of morality.
Good story. The idea of having an abstinence only program is laughable. It is not a natural condition for any human being and will never work. As base as it may sound, human beings are meant to create offspring for the survival of the species to continue. We may be the most intelligent animals on this earth, but we are still animals nevertheless. Focus should be put on practical solutions to this problem and not wishful thinking abstinence programs. If men and women are going to have sex, they should learn how to protect themselves beforehand.
Oh yeah, churches preaching abstinence until unblissfully wed, really prevented all those shotguns weddings and girls being sent to homes for unwed mothers. Why not take the kids to hospitals to visit people dying from HIV? Show them vivid photo's of STD sores and such. A condom is better than no protection. How about if we decriminalized prostitution? Young boys could relieve their biogical urge and the girls could remain virgins until they are come "of age". "Just Say No" does not work.
CONT: What these abstinence only programs forget is that we, as humans, are inherently sexual creatures and teenagers are no exception to this seeing as they become sexually mature in early to mid teen years. Monogamy, and even marriage are relatively modern concepts in the grand scheme of human history. Culture tells us to wait, biology screams at us to mate as quickly as possible with the best (in our opinions) member of the opposite sex in order to have children and pass our genes down. This built in survival mechanism isn't going to change over night. It wasn't so long ago that 14 or 15 was the average age for a woman to have babies. So yes, abstinence education is neccessary to counteract this, but its also important to educate that though no method of birth control or std prevention is fool proof it is still IMPERATIVE that they be used. Balance is neccessary.
sigh. I personally think, and it appears that its what the aclu is thinking too, is that the best approach would be a combination of abstinence education and knowledge of birth control and contraceptives meant to lower the risk of contracting stds. Quite frankly, a lot of the abstinence only programs have been spreading misinformation regarding condoms (their success rates for example) and are so focused on the "sex is bad for you" argument that they leave young people who do decide to become sexually active in a dangerous and uninformed state where they are more likely to be unprotected.
Oh, great idea. Don't teach kids the only safe sex is no sex...let's teach them to use pieces of rubber that lets sperm and std's through! This is the worst idea I've ever heard. But, good article!