Skip to comments.Deluge of FOIA requests forced HHS to make public new study lauding abstinence-based sex ed
Posted on 08/27/2010 3:25:17 PM PDT by DBCJR
Officials at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Administration for Children and Families were keeping the lid on the results of a new study they funded until they received a flood of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests sparked by the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA), according to LifeNews.com.
The tax-funded study found that 70 percent of parents believe sexual intercourse should be delayed until marriage and that parental attitudes on such issues are the most important determinant of how adolescents view them as well. according to LifeNews.com.
The study was discussed at a recent meeting of the American Public Health Association that was attended by researcher Lisa Rue, Ph.D. who specializes in adolescent behavior. She requested a copy of the full report from HHS but her request was denied, as was a subsequent FOIA.
So NAEA encouraged its members to submit their own FOIAs, with a result that hundreds of additional FOIAs were received by the government. At that point, HHS officials relented and posted the study on the Internet. You can read it here.
For more on this interesting illustration of government bureaucrats attempting to suppress the results of a study on an important social issue, go here on the LifeNews.com web site.
A clear case of NO separation of church and state. By suppressing science to favor such a position, the government has taken a religious position.
I will offer this observation. If you live in the heartland or rural parts of America...the abstinence idea has weight. If you live in urban America or a metropolitan area...it doesn’t work, period. There are two basic Americas, and most folks connected to the government refuse to believe in that concept.
If you drive around and start talking to folks...after a while...most all of us will come to agree on this split situation that exists. And I don’t think it can be fixed to make either party happy.
What’s comical is that Bush was lambasted by the left for his “anti-scientific” support of abstinence-based sex education.
I guess when the science doesn’t support your ideology, it’s fair game to simply suppress the results. We wouldn’t want the morons who make up the general public to get confused by the conflict between what science says and what lefties are preaching. And the reason the end justifies the means (lying by omission) is because it’s “for the children.”
People already have the answer but the elites use the government to try to obscure the issues.
If the government stopped subsidizing illegitimate children, abstinence would become popular overnight in urban and metropolitan America overnight.
The breakdown in morals is caused by “free” gubmint money, it just happens slower in rural areas because it’s harder to live on the dole in the hinterlands than it is in urban settings
Didn’t an article about this get pinged out? Brain fog on my part. I remember it, sort of.
“If you live in urban America or a metropolitan area...it doesnt work, period.”
Well, then. Teach it and let it not work for some kids. The other way around is the state actively trying to undermine abstinence education by parents. Why should kids be punished by the state just because they live in urban areas?
At most you can say abstinence education works for a smaller percentage of kids in urban environments. I don’t see any reason to throw them in the crapper just to satisfy the sexual longings of Kinsey’s devotees.
This study was in a metropolitan area.
Having said that, I have thought for quite a while that there is merit in a Red America and Blue America. Our value systems are that divergent and the red states are getting sucked down the sewer with the blue.
This article was posted/published TODAY. Read the tag.
Perhaps you are addressing someone who was not a practicer as well as a non-believer.
I realize this particular article came out today but there was a different article about the same topic recently. Waggelbee and I run a couple of ping lists and sometimes we may not post several articles (even though they are different articles) about the same topic; sometimes we do. So I was just checking with him.
Doesn’t mean these articles shouldn’t be posted; people need to see this.
“Perhaps you are addressing someone who was not a practicer as well as a non-believer.”
If that’s what they want to teach their kids, fine. They pretty much don’t have to do anything at all and their kids will end up promiscuous, by nature. So all the abstinence education in the world by the State won’t undermine their teachings. That is, their parental teaching and the natural promiscuity of humans work nicely together.
OTOH, deferring instant gratification by abstinence is not natural for teens. If parents teach abstinence and the State teaches promiscuity with condoms, the State will win that battle more often than not because they are telling the kids to go for the instant gratification, which is what they want anyway.
In other words, if the promiscuity advocates are wrong but get to control teaching, much damage is done. If the abstinence advocates are wrong and get to control teaching, the other set of parents can surely get their kids to engage in premarital sex with little difficulty. So little damage is done.
As most parents want abstinence, I don’t see why the State should be undermining their teaching. Our ruling class, though, really doesn’t care what most parents want. They are the descendants of Kinsey, Hefner et al and think that sexual expression is a great thing in almost any context not involving force or violence. So they will force this down the majority’s throat, regardless, because they know better than stupid middle class people.
which is what they want anyway.
The most effective education tests all assumptions. Including this one.
Is this what people really want? Or would they be happier with a husband or a wife who truly loves them and they feel they have to play this game or they will be alone all their life?
You want to have effective education point out how promiscuity damages people prior to marriage, and makes it less not more likely that you will get what you want.
Thank you self-appointed subject matter police. Long may your censorship reign!
The article was published today, 2 hours before I posted it. So butt out. If you have a problem, whine to the Moderator.
Not a practicer or or believer in what?
abstinence before marriage
DBCJR; not sure if you’re on the Moral Absolutes or Homosexual Agenda ping lists; that wagglebee and I both run. We do it in tandem - no set method, just whoever sees an appropriate article pings it out. Sometimes I’m busy for a while and can’t, occasionally he takes a weekend off.
There are so many articles that are relevent (more and more, unfortunately) that is hard at least for me to always keep track of what has been pinged, what is new, what is different etc.
He is not being a subject matter police or a censor. Just being on top of things.
Thank you for your explanation. I am not sure that I understand but want to explain my response. There are a few people on Freep who do like to police things. They usually post something similar to what wagglebee said, indicating that I or someone else posted something that we should not because a similar article was posted by someone else. I am not sure why anyone, other than a Moderator, would think it their responsibility to do that. It seems to me to be the regulatory antithesis to Freep. It bugs me so I push back.
The way I deal with most stuff on FR that aggravates me (other than leftist trolls) is to ignore it, just my method.
He wasn’t being a “it was already posted” cop, he never does that, it was in response to my asking if either one of us had pinged an article about this yet.
Believe me, he never patrols looking for dupe articles.
(Courtesy ping since I’m talking ‘bout you, wag!)
Great. My apologies. Just be aware in the future that there are several jerks who say things very similar. They are very self-righteous and feel like they own the discussion board. I can see that this was not one of those cases.
I don’t think I will adopt your typical response though, little jeremiah, as I really do think such behavior is diametrically in opposition to what Freerepublic is about. I refuse to acquiesce to such behavior here. A principle thing.
Good evening to you both!
Thanks - I have enough heartburn dealing with leftists on FR. The thread nannies I let alone.