Talk:Abstinence programs

	This Sexuality related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Broader dimension

Currently the article says, "abstinence-only doesn't work, free contraception and sex ed does". But the experience of the UK would indicate that neither is particularly effective. Contraception is freely available, including emergency contraception, to everyone, and sex education is a mandatory part of the National Curriculum. Yet there has been no real impact on teen pregnancy rates or the the epidemic of teen STIs. Despite knowing about contraception and it being readily available, teens seem to simply choose not to use it. There are obviously much more influential factors at work, which neither approach tackles. Is there scope for this in the article, or a separate article? Fox 11:22, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

The "20 a day" statistics for schoolgirl pregnancy.

I think in the UK it's mostly that the attitude of some kids is, seriously, that if they have a baby, they get a free house and another dole cheque. It's really very little to do with the sex education and more about general attitudes that's the problem. ArmondikoV^{d hominem} 11:32, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

(EC) Compare the Netherlands, where contraception is also readily available, sex ed begins at a young age, abstinence programs are pretty much non-existent, & teenage pregnancy rates are probably the lowest in Europe. The UK is kindof atypical in a lot of ways. Teens' lifestyles & choices, including sex & pregnancy, have as much to do with cultural trends & peer pressure as they do with education. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:37, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

Title

Someone (user:Strom) just made a stub to try to cover this under "abstinence-only sex education" or some such. Is the title here weak in that they didn't find it? Could it be better? ħuman 09:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Unconstitutional!

I just realized that abstinence-until-marriage programs are unconstitutional. Compare:

“”D: Teach that a mutually faithful, monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of sexual activity

—A-H Definition of Abstinence Education for Title V, Section 510 Programs

Oops-only, meet Amendment the First (emphasis mine):

“”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Some religions, e.g. Mormonism, endorse or even require polygamous relationships, so teaching students that only a monogamous relationship is to be expected from them violates this. Hence, abstinence-only pseudo-education violates the First Amendment, and is therefore unconstitutional and should be removed from the curriculum, preferably replaced with sex ed which has been shown to actually work.

Discuss. The Heidelberg Kid (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Mainstream Mormonism has not been polygamous for a long, long time. There are many reasonable restrictions that can get placed on behavior even though a religion might require said behavior--animal or human sacrifice, child marriage, etc.etc.etc. P-Foster Talk "Watched Mad Men thinking it was supposed to be a sit-com. Found it disappointing." 15:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Estimating effective hourly rates for abstinence education

Here's something I'm itching to add to the page: There are about 13.4 million high school students in the US, divided to three grades (https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/hs/hsfacts.html). So, call the amount of students receiving the education every year 4.5 million. Presuming twenty people per class, and that each class is given the education separately, this would be a total of two hundred and twenty two thousand lectures given on the subject each year. In 2008, a total of $176 million went to abstinence only education (http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1158). This makes it $788 per lecture. Finally, it takes roughly five seconds to say "Not having sex is a pretty good way to avoid the bad side effects of having sex", making the effective cost per hour of abstinence-only education a whopping $567k. Too tongue in cheek? ^{— Unsigned, by: Hertzy / talk / contribs (signed by bot)} 14:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Abstinence Only Sexual "Education": Telling hormonal teens not to press the big sexy red button

Mentioned this in the Saloon Bar before. Still true. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

irrational wiki moment

i like how the authors of this wiki are deluded and mendacious enough to overstate the importance of abstinence in PEPFAR. 'ignore the spread' whichever lying scumbag included that neither knows about the fact that bush is directly responsible for saving the lives of over 25 million Africans over the course of 20 years due to pepfar. the life expectancy in sub saharan Africa, which was drastically decreasing from the 80s onwards due to the aids epidemic, not only stabilized, but also started increasing as a result of pepfar.^{— Unsigned, by: 86.99.29.77 / talk / contribs}

BoN is apparently right.[1] GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 16:35, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

BoN would have had better luck in not getting their edits reverted if they didn't decide to post using inflammatory and condescending language. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 18:07, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Hence I didn't restore their edits. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

What is the article trying to say, anyway? PEPFAR doesn't seem to be an abstinence program as it is a general imperative entailing in funding and research, care and prevention. There might be an abstinence subdivision in there and maybe the article talks about how ineffective it is compared to the overall program's success? Perchance? I think bon is misreading the page: it's not criticizing pepfar, it's criticizing efforts to include abstinence protocols in there and the results of abstinence protocol. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll rewrite the section and mention that, while PEPFAR is overall a successful, this specific part of the program failed. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 20:24, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I think it's better now. Tell me what you guys think. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 20:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Much better now. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 21:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)