I was reading a Time magazine post by Amy Sullivan titled "The End of Abstinence-Only", an article about how Obama plans for elimination of federal funding for abstinence-only programs.  This is great news, and two excellent blog posts about the topic can be found here and here.

While I was reading this articile, I did something I try very hard not to do: I read the “Comments” section at the bottom of the page (gasp!).  This is the part of the internet that I usually dislike…thousands of opinions all shouting at each other, and it seems that the most ignorant and thoughtless ideas shout the loudest.  Many of the comments were positive, thoughtful responses to the idea of federal money going towards EFFECTIVE sex education programs rather than abstinence-only programs, but some comments were really ignorant and frustrating.

walkingfunny Says:

“If you don't have enough restraint to keep your zippers up, you probably don't have what it takes to put on a condom before the "act". When an animal wants "it", it usually wants it now.

btw, can someone please help answer my question: ‘increase contraceptive use (without increasing sexual activity),’
How can these 2 objectives can be achieved together”

Someone answered the question about increasing contraceptive use without increasing sexual activity:

Easy one: Let's say 10 couples are having sex. 5 of those couples are having sex WITH protection and 5 of them are having sex without protection. If one of those couples in the unprotected group starts using contraceptives, then (voila!) you've "increased contraceptive use (without increasing sexual activity)
.


And then walkingfunny’s response:

Your explanation assumes that set of people involved in sexual activity can remain while the use of protection within this same group will increase. So, the assumption here is that there is no correlation between availability of "protection" - removing any responsibility for the sexual act, and the actual increase in sexual activity. Even I, a slow conservative know this is most unlikely, when you remove any responsibility for the act, it is likely to increase, especially among teenagers. Imagine the increase in number of teenagers who will get drunk or stoned regularly or more often if there was no possibility of being caught by the cops or having their brains fried by drugs.”

These are legitimate concerns that people have about comprehensive sex education programs, and I just wanted to take a moment to correct and straighten-out these misconceptions.

As a teenager, I can say with complete certainty that increasing access to condoms and other contraception WILL NOT increase sexual activity. This is so insulting to hear, and people advocating for abstinence-only education need to understand that teens can understand a more subtle message.

We can understand a message that says abstinence is the BEST choice for you, but if you are going to engage in sexual activities you need to use protection and be responsible. The idea that giving teens information and access to condoms will dramatically increase sexual activity is insulting to me because. I know we are able to be responsible and make healthy, rational choices. We are able to abstain from sexual activity even when we are being taught how to prevent STD’s, and the truth is that if we allowed to make decisions on our terms, if we have all the information and are able to make the best choice for us personally, then that’s when people will see teen pregnancy rates go down, STI rates go down, and of course the number of abortions go down.

This comment claims that telling teens to use condoms removes responsibility from sex!  That basically implies that condoms work in preventing pregnancy, but we shouldn't let teenagers find out because then they will all have tons of crazy, consequence free sex.  It also implies that the way to prevent this from happening is to give teens abstinence-only education, because if they don't know how to prevent pregnancy then they won't have sex.  WRONG! Teens who have had abstinence-only education DO engage in sexual activity, and a lot of them don’t use protection. Please, recognize that this is reality, and that some teens will have sex no matter what. However, comprehensive sex education has been found to lower sexual activity, increase contraceptive use, and educate teens to make healthier, more responsible choices.  

Check out Amplify's pages on abstinence-only programs, contraceptive access, and sex education.  

When making the budget, the Obama team specified that they want to fund "programs that replicate the elements of one or more teenage pregnancy prevention programs that have been proven through rigorous evaluation to delay sexual activity, increase contraceptive use (without increasing sexual activity), or reduce teenage pregnancy."  No abstinence-only programs fell into this category.  

I am thrilled that Obama recognizes the need to provide quality, effective sex education to teens, and his budget proposal is living proof of real change from the last decade of failed policies. However, members of congress are trying to sneak abstinence-only funding back into the budget and we need to make sure this doesn't happen.    Check out Joe's post with the details, and contact your members of congress here to ensure that the changes that Obama wants to make can become a reality.