Sex Education Will Be an Issue This November
 | TAKE ACTION:
Click HERE to send an email or a fax to your state lawmakers and the governor to let them know you are in favor of Title V funds for abstinence education. |
Despite political pundits' disparaging comments that social issues will not be as important in 2008 as they were in the 2000 and 2004 elections, the Hard Left isn't buying it. They are pushing to eliminate any federal funds spent on abstinence education, making what kids are taught about sex an issue in the upcoming presidential and congressional races.
Last week, abstinence education opponent U.S. Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) called for Congressional hearings to discuss whether abstinence education is providing medically-sound information and statistically making a difference in our youth's decisions on whether or not to postpone sexual activity.
The abstinence education issue even made its way into Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's town hall meeting a couple of weeks ago in Pennsylvania. Obama said he wanted his daughters exposed to comprehensive sex education rather than "be punished" with an unwanted baby or an STD.
"Comprehensive sex ed" is really a pretty good description of what kids learn via those programs. They learn everything you ever wanted to know about sex and were afraid to ask, as well as everything you didn't want to know about sex but were forced to find out.
Comprehensive sex ed includes hands-on experiments in condom application skills, encouragement to shower together, as well as explicit information about oral and anal "outercourse" as an alternative sex to intercourse, among other numerous sexploits. Frankly, it's almost too embarrassing to describe in mixed company what our kids learn via Planned Parenthood's sex-ed curriculum.
The U.S. Congress allocated $370.5 million to such exploitive sex-ed programs in 2007, while at the same time setting aside only $174 million to teach kids that it's normal and preferable to wait for sex until marriage.
But despite Congressman Waxman's careful stacking of last Wednesday's Congressional hearing witnesses against abstinence, National Abstinence Education Association Executive Director Valerie Huber said the California Representative's plan may have backfired.
"During the five hours of testimony and debate last week, it became clear that the witnesses were interested only in an ideological debate. They were not interested in scientific fact and independent research," Huber said.
"At one point U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) asked how many of the panelists promoting comprehensive sex-ed would support abstinence education if it were to be found effective through scientific means. Of the six panelists," she said, "only one said 'yes.' The comprehensive sex-ed community has no interest in scientific proof that the U.S. should spend money on abstinence education. Their answer last Wednesday should be very telling about how much they want the truth to be taught to our kids."
In response to the overwhelming number of anti-abstinence testifiers, Heritage Foundation's Christine C. Kim and Robert Rector reviewed the findings of 21 studies of which 16 showed positive results from abstinence education and virginity pledges.
"Abstinence education teaches the social, psychological, and health benefits of abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage. These programs focus on preparing young people for future-oriented goals," Heritage's study said. "They provide youth with valuable life and decision-making skills that lay the foundation for personal responsibility and developing healthy relationships later in life."
Indeed, premature sexual activity is costly for all of us. Those who engage are at risk for negative outcomes such as infection with a sexually transmitted disease, emotional and psychological harm, as well as out-of-wedlock child bearing.
But still, both at the federal and state levels, those who would encourage kids as young as nine years old to begin thinking about and experimenting with sex are slowly squeezing the life out of abstinence programs. Governor Rod Blagojevich inexplicably cut Illinois-based abstinence program Project Reality's $1.2 million out of the 2008 state budget and plans to do the same this year, while at the same time pouring more and more into comprehensive sex-ed programs.
Without the voices of outraged Illinoisans in the ears of both state and federal elected officials, the trend away from abstinence education will speed up, and our children will have no alternative but to learn about experimenting with sex.
Is that what you and I want for our children and their children?
Anyone who says people won't be voting on social issues this election year doesn't have their kids in elementary, junior high, or high school. They most likely don't live or function outside the nation's beltway or Illinois' Capitol. If they did, they'd know what we know: parents want their kids to have better psychological well-being and higher academic achievement rather than becoming sexually active at a young age.
The best way to keep kids from being exposed to opportunities for unwanted babies or STDs is to invest in abstinence education.
In a letter written to U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), a young man named Jordan wrote, "Most teens who stay abstinent will be more emotionally stable, will not contract STDs, and will not get pregnant. This would not only benefit many individuals, but society as a whole. This is because the upcoming generation would be happier and healthier."
We agree, Jordan, social issues will matter in the fall because nothing would make us happier than to see you and your peers grow up happier and healthier.
What will happen to federal abstinence funding will likely not be determined until after the fall elections, Ms. Huber told us. "The liberals are waiting to see what message the American people will send at the polls."
Find out now what the candidates in your area think about funding abstinence education at the state and federal levels. Then make social issues a key issue in the fall. Our kids' happiness and health could depend upon it.
 Fran Eaton is a free lance journalist and political consultant who lives in the south suburbs and attends Parkview Christian Church. She edits IllinoisReview.com, a conservative blog, when she's not spoiling her five grandchildren. She can be emailed HERE.
Click HERE TO SUPPORT Illinois Family Institute.
As little as $35 goes a long way toward protecting your values in Illinois!
Sign up as an IFI Ministry Partner for just $35/year, which is just a little less than $3 per month.
E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format
|
 |
|
| |
|
