Teen pregnancies go up - who's to blame?

[Confederate Kahanist]

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=874212



Teen pregnancies were up three percent in 2006, which is the latest reporting period available. Proponents of comprehensive sex education are blaming abstinence programs for the increase.

 

The figures come from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a strong opponent of abstinence education. But Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association reports that that organization is simply putting its own twist on old information as a way to gain more support.
 
Valerie Huber"They're just re-circulating data that we've known for months -- but they're putting their own spin on this to castigate abstinence education and put in a plug for the new teen pregnancy prevention funds, which is just another way of saying more money for contraceptive education," she explains.
 
Guttmacher and others are actually placing the blame for the increase in pregnancies on the abstinence approach funded during the Bush administration, claiming that abstinence funding doubled from 2000 to 2003 to $120 million, and that by 2008 that amount reached $176 million. Huber points out, however, that abstinence education received only 25 percent of the funding earmarked for teen sex-education programs.
 
"[Guttmacher's argument] doesn't make sense," she argues. "It's an oversimplification of the problem, and it's just obviously a P.R. stunt."
 
She says that if the Guttmacher Institute's thinking is extended, it must mean the proponents of comprehensive sex education are 75 percent to blame for the increase in pregnancies.

[Lisa]

Not to sound harsh, but it's mainly the fault of sluts refusing to keep their legs together.  I would also be interested in knowing how the pregnancy rates are divided along ethnic/racial lines. 

Also, if shaming was done properly, there would be a lot less of this kind of thing going on.  As it is now, many of these girls end up on welfare. 

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Not to sound harsh, but it's mainly the fault of sluts refusing to keep their legs together.

[Rubystars]

Not to sound harsh, but it's mainly the fault of sluts refusing to keep their legs together.  I would also be interested in knowing how the pregnancy rates are divided along ethnic/racial lines. 

Also, if shaming was done properly, there would be a lot less of this kind of thing going on.  As it is now, many of these girls end up on welfare. 

I agree with you that girls should keep their legs together. I wonder if shaming is the right approach to take in this modern time though.

It worked well in the past, but in the past abortion was illegal and very dangerous and much less likely for those reasons. Now if someone gets pregnant and would face shame for it, they might secretly abort the child instead of face the shame.

[Lisa]

I see where you're coming from, Rubystars.

But how does that explain how some teenaged girls carry their babies to full term and then stick them in garbage cans.  As far as I know, abortion is legal in quite a few states. 

[Rubystars]

I think some of those girls either don't know they're pregnant, (it can happen, ever see that show on Discovery?) and panic when they see the baby, or they knew but didn't have anyone to help them or were too scared to ask for help until it was too late and then they kill the baby to keep from getting into trouble or because they panic.

No matter what it's absolutely horrible to do that to a defenseless baby but I think there need to be some resources there not only to encourage abstinence, but also to teach these young women about other forms of contraception and what to do if they are in that kind of situation, what options they have, if they have an unplanned or unwanted newborn.

I don't really think abstinence education can work by itself. Teaching only abstinence hides important information from kids whereas encouraging abstinence while teaching other things would be best because that way they have the tools they need to stay healthy.

[Lisa]

I read that some places have places where women can drop off their unwanted babies with no questions asked.  What do you think of that idea?  I also read that some on the right opposed it on the grounds that it would encourage women to sleep around without consequences. 

[cjd]

I read that some places have places where women can drop off their unwanted babies with no questions asked.  What do you think of that idea?  I also read that some on the right opposed it on the grounds that it would encourage women to sleep around without consequences. 

I think this program is to stop young girls from dumping just born babies into the trash leaving them to die. It may be  enabling bad behavior but if it saves the babies from being abandoned in the trash or some other place the program should be continued.

[Rubystars]

I read that some places have places where women can drop off their unwanted babies with no questions asked.  What do you think of that idea?  I also read that some on the right opposed it on the grounds that it would encourage women to sleep around without consequences. 

You can't teach moral values to a dead baby. I think it's important to have a safe place for the baby's sake.

[~Hanna~]

for the Christians here: I know of a ministry that takes pregnant teenagers in and takes care of them until they give up the baby for adoption..if anyone needs that, let me know...I think that is also a good option. They have this really nice Christian woman who is like their housemother while they are there.

[Lisa]

I know of a ministry that takes pregnant teenagers in and takes care of them until they give up the baby for adoption..if anyone needs that, let me know...I think that is also a good option. They have this really nice Christian woman who is like their housemother while they are there.

I have no problem with that.  I do have a problem with teenaged girls getting knocked up and going on welfare, only to pop out more and more babies with no father in sight. 

I put up a post last year on my blog about how these girls in Colorado were pushing for "maternity leave" from their high schools for being knocked up.  The article said that the guidance counselors would negotiate on their behalf for this leave. 

[Rubystars]

I think people on welfare should either get a bonus for being on contraception (probably more politically feasible) or not be allowed benefits if they don't use some form of contraception.

for the Christians here: I know of a ministry that takes pregnant teenagers in and takes care of them until they give up the baby for adoption..if anyone needs that, let me know...I think that is also a good option. They have this really nice Christian woman who is like their housemother while they are there.

What if the girls want to keep the baby? Do they help them with that?

[cjd]

I know of a ministry that takes pregnant teenagers in and takes care of them until they give up the baby for adoption..if anyone needs that, let me know...I think that is also a good option. They have this really nice Christian woman who is like their housemother while they are there.

I have no problem with that.  I do have a problem with teenaged girls getting knocked up and going on welfare, only to pop out more and more babies with no father in sight. 

I put up a post last year on my blog about how these girls in Colorado were pushing for "maternity leave" from their high schools for being knocked up.  The article said that the guidance counselors would negotiate on their behalf for this leave. 

People seeking social services should be required to go on Norplant or some other temporary sterilizing program to stop them from having more children. One mistake can be at the taxpayers expense we can't allow occupational pregnancies that milk the system for more and more money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norplant

[Lisa]

The problem with Norplant is that you'll get the teen welfare crowd and other white liberals howling that it's not the government's job to dictate morality. 

But it is if taxpayers have to foot the bill. 

[Secularbeliever]

I read that some places have places where women can drop off their unwanted babies with no questions asked.  What do you think of that idea?  I also read that some on the right opposed it on the grounds that it would encourage women to sleep around without consequences. 

I would not consider nine months of carrying a baby plus sneaking off to a hospital to dump the baby (with the emotional trauma involved) as no consequence.

[FreedomFighter08]

Obviously you can't have a child without having sex but have these girls never heard of this fancy new pill that makes it impossible to have a child?

[cjd]

The problem with Norplant is that you'll get the teen welfare crowd and other white liberals howling that it's not the government's job to dictate morality. 

But it is if taxpayers have to foot the bill. 

Yes ..... Then another argument also comes into play by blacks that the white man is trying to exterminate the black race by not allowing them to reproduce like roaches. I still maintain once anyone applies for welfare be they black, white, red, or even a combination of all three  they should be placed on temporary birth control. That or absorb the cost of additional children on their own.

[Rubystars]

Obviously you can't have a child without having sex but have these girls never heard of this fancy new pill that makes it impossible to have a child?

The pill isn't 100% effective. If they are taking other medications, like antibiotics, or something else, it can fail. There are other things that can make it fail too. It is mostly effective though. The pill or other contraceptive plus a condom is almost full proof though.

[Lisa]

I think the problem with teaching sex education in a public school setting is that it's not something you can tell children about without discussing moral values.  And since the public schools are supposed to be neutral when it comes to religion, then it's all about whose moral values you teach these kids.  You clearly can't teach one to children without the other. 

In Wendy Shalit's excellent book "A Return To Modesty" she wrote about the sex education being taught in her school.  Her mother was luckily able to pull some strings so that young Wendy could forgo the sex ed class.  But in her book, she wrote about how the young boys began acting out and taunting the girls as a result of the sex ed.  Excellent book. 

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

People seeking social services should be required to go on Norplant or some other temporary sterilizing program to stop them from having more children. One mistake can be at the taxpayers expense we can't allow occupational pregnancies that milk the system for more and more money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norplant

Why not just castrate them as a prerequisite of getting welfare?

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Obviously you can't have a child without having sex but have these girls never heard of this fancy new pill that makes it impossible to have a child?

It depends on what you want, I guess. As far as I am concerned none of this human drek should be spawning in the first place. But if you are an older and somewhat more mature person, I would advise condoms for temporary contraception and a vasectomy for permanent. Pills are poison, and unreliable.

[Secularbeliever]

Obviously you can't have a child without having sex but have these girls never heard of this fancy new pill that makes it impossible to have a child?

The pill isn't 100% effective. If they are taking other medications, like antibiotics, or something else, it can fail. There are other things that can make it fail too. It is mostly effective though. The pill or other contraceptive plus a condom is almost full proof though.

I doubt if one of a hundred couples use both the pill and condoms in combination. 

[Rubystars]

Layering protections is the surest way to prevent a pregnancy though. Condoms and pills both have a failure rate.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Layering protections is the surest way to prevent a pregnancy though. Condoms and pills both have a failure rate.

Not to sound crude but I kind of think that barriers would kill the mood... no? (But people use them anyway.)

[Secularbeliever]

Layering protections is the surest way to prevent a pregnancy though. Condoms and pills both have a failure rate.

Not to sound crude but I kind of think that barriers would kill the mood... no? (But people use them anyway.)

Condoms are usually used by people who are not in steady relationships.  It certainly reduces pleasure.  People in steady relationships use a more permanent form of protection such as the pill.  Condoms are more popular where risk of STDs are present such as sex with someone you don't know that well.