Are you nuts. The progrom was a complete success.
You are maybe thinking it was supposed to decrease teens having sex?
Ha ha
Nope. It was supposed to get Bush elected. And it was supposed to get some money to some text-book company to print some books that don’t have any dirty pictures in them.
That was the plan.
What do you plan tto do about the parents who don’t teach their kids this stuff? Is it right or proper to let these kids go out in the world with no knowledge?
I sure as hell would have appreciated a class, my parents never uttered a word to me.
It seems to me that, from what the article says, if the abstinence classes are a failure, then all the other classes are failures too, because the results are “mirroring the overall state trends”.
You know, I hate to defend Bush, but this didn’t start with him. It may go back as far as Ronald Reagan and the Moral Majority. It certainly was around when Clinton was president. I swear, some people don’t know how to think!
CJ
That’s a piss-poor argument, Liberal. The trends referred to in the line you quote from the article refers to the level of sexual activity among Texas teenagers. If an abstinence-only program cannot reduce the level of sexual activity amongst teenagers, it is indeed a failure because all it’s done is generated a swarm of sexually active teenagers ill-prepared to deal with the consequences of sexual activity. On the other hand, consider a program that also includes information on birth-control and disease prevention. If it fails to reduce the level of sexual activity amongst teenagers, that doesn’t mean the program is a failure because it can still succeed in its goal of preparing the students for the consequences of sexual activity.
Or more succinctly: if neither program can stop kids from having sex, then I know which one I’d choose.
In the Pleistocene epoch, arround 1.6 million years ago, female puberty would have occured several years later than in modern times, women could be expected to have their first child at approx age 20.
Our modern fat rich diet has pushed reproductive maturity forward, whether we’ve also pushed our emotional maturity to deal with parenthood forward too is another matter.
Judging from Rikki, Springer, et all, I know which side I’d put money on! 
I believe you are thinking of the stories of Cyril Kornbluth, although Niven may have done a homage. Kornbluth died fairly young, and is well thought of by the SF writers’ community.
Anyway, Kornbluth wrote “The Marching Morons”, and “The Little Black Bag”, and a number of others around this theme.
Whooooooshed again. My apologies.
This part I fond especially funny. I was a bit of late bloomer in high school, largely because I didn’t figure out I needed to apply myself until well into my sophomore year. For some reason, it dawned on me like a bolt from the blue that the sorts of girls I liked wanted their boyfriends to be reasonably bright and have a variety of interests. So I did nutty things like complete homework assignments, study for my tests, and try out for athletic teams and other clubs. The results were pretty dramatic. Discovering I could accomplish unforseen things like winning races and getting A’s by, y’know, exerting some effort, had quite an impact on my self esteem, which, up until that point, I didn’t even recognize as being low. I soon found myself having insane amount of sex with a smart and pretty girl; exactly what I wanted!
No, it isn’t.
Right. That’s what I said. There is no difference in the sexual activity between those who had abstinence only classes and those who had the other classes. Like I said, if they are identical, then if one is a failure, so is the other one.
Which one you choose makes no difference. Same results either way.
You mean the other enlightened and progressive sex education classes taught by the liberal elite in Texas?
Maybe the reason that nothing works in Texas is because they are following the role model of GWB. Do what ever the hell you want for the first 30 years of your life and then accept Jesus Christ as you saviour and receive a “Get out of Hell Free” card.
I was wondering what that sound was over my head. I’m disappointed. My sarcasm meter usually works well.
For a pedant, you can be remarkably obtuse.
The two types of programs have different goals. Hence, we use different metrics to determine their success or failure. If my goal is to go to the movies, and I don’t put gas in my car, I don’t say I failed to go the movies because that’s stupid.
The goal of abstinence-only programs: to keep kids from having sex. Result of abstinence-programs: kids keep having sex. Evaluation of abstinence-only programs: failure.
The goal of sex-ed programs which include information about contraception and disease prevention: to inform kids about the dangers of having sex, so that if they do choose to have sex at least they’ll have the sense to slap on a rubber. Result of said programs: kids keep having sex, but maybe some of them will have the sense to slap on a rubber (the article has no information on this latter point). Evaluation of said programs: success, if the kids who do have sex are at least having safe sex.
Do you get the point yet? I will freely admit: both types of programs are equally ineffective at stopping kids from having sex. Yes! I agree! Which is why abstinence-only programs suck, and why programs which accept this outcome and try to prepare kids to deal with their sexuality in a safe fashion make sense.
Because, you know, nothing says “don’t fuck me” like self-confidence and self-esteem. After all, healthy drives and interest couldn’t possibly be augmented by a healthy psyche. Anyone who thinks “sex drive” and “good mental health” in any way correlate had better cough up some cites.
These guys have it all wrong. They were doing better a better job when they had at least some of us convinced that premarital sex was a dirty sin, God would send us to Hell for it, and, for the kids, the Baby Jesus weeps every time you diddle your pee-pee.
Worse than that. The whole point, supposedly, of the abstinence program was that teaching about birth control methods would somehow give permission to the students to have sex. If the rates don’t decrease, then this contention is wrong, and either the proponents are stupid or they have an ulteriour motive, more likely. That is the attempt to limit birth control.
The side effect is that more students have unprotected sex this way.
Your pointless insults aside, you were close to having a convincing argument were it not for the fact that you’re wrong. STDs among teens (except for herpes) are increasing.
Have you considered that the increase in STDs could be the result of decreased funding for useful sex ed and increased funding for worthless abstinence-only sex miseduation? Your very cite provides that possibility:
You’re correct. Given that information, plus the argument provided by Orbifold, I must concede that I was wrong. I stand corrected.
I took it every day after school for three years. It was called chess club.
Is there a SDMB hall of fame for punchlines? This deserves to be in there!