Where's the Outrage?
Published on June 21, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Current Events

Many emotions came rushing to the surface when I read a particular article this morning.  I was mad, as in very angry, sad as in very grieved, disappointed as in I was hoping our young people knew better than this and outraged, as in livid, because the adults knew what was going on, at least to some degree.   

What did I read? 

In Gloucester, MA a group of teenage girls all under the age of 16 made a pact to get pregnant.  And they did.

Right now in Gloucester High School there are 17 girls pregnant on purpose.  Normally the average total of pregnancies each year for this particular high school hits about four. 

These girls made a pact to get pregnant and raise their babies together.  What?  Where are the parents? 

What about the school clinic?  They must have known because, the girls, according to the principal, were repeatedly making visits to the teen clinic taking multiple pregnancy tests.  He even said these girls would get  visibly upset when the results came back negative.  When they came up positive eventually there were high fives given out and plans for baby showers. 

Hello?  The clinic knew this and kept giving out these tests with no counseling?  Why?  Parents should be outaged!  I'm outraged and I'm not even one of these parents. 

One of the fathers is a 24 year old homeless man.

This just came out in Time Magazine but was first reported in the Gloucester Daily Times.  According to the Principal, Joe Sullivan, he said these particular girls lacked self-esteem and have a lack of love in their lives.  All the more reason for the teen clinic to take notice.  Don't ya think? 

All the more proof to show that the Planned Parenthood behind all this is nothing more than a business.  This meant more business for the clinic.  They keep track of the business very well.  They know the bottom line in each of these clinics. 

A Christian clinic would NEVER have closed their eyes to such a pact.  Because their goal is to try to keep kids from  having sex, counseling would have been foremost on their mind when that first girl came in for a test. 

So now we have,  just in this one high school,  17 pregnant girls with no thought of the consequences.  But what should we expect?    Isn't that what we're teaching them?  Holloywood glorifies sex outside of marriage and we mock those who dare to admit they believe in abstinence.   

So we reward stupid behavior and we punish those who do right. 

So much for sex education.  These girls knew right where to go when they wanted encouragement getting pregnant.  The adults passing out those tests did nothing to discourage them.  Perhaps they thought they'd be back later to get their abortions.  Follow the money trail. 

Shame on them! 

 

 

 

 


Comments (Page 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Jun 30, 2008
Nevermind
on Jun 30, 2008
THE KIDS, not the programs, dictate whether or not they have pre-marital sex.


BINGO!!! CB gets a cookie!
on Jun 30, 2008

I get it...you really like JUNO!



Keeping with that....I'm wondering...

We know now that many view JUNO as a story of a young girl who made a mistake, became pregnant and turned that situation into life "happily everefter" for everyone involved.

Could young people today, like these 17 sixteen year-old girls from Glouster High School, think becoming pregnant is "cool"?

Could these girls on their way to becoming mommies be forgetting that life isn't a movie that's over in an hour and a half?





on Jun 30, 2008
I don't think you can blame these pregnancies on a movie. For one thing, these women are choosing to raise their kids not give them up for adoption.
on Jun 30, 2008
It's not that they can't control themselves. They choose to.


Bingo! Of course kids can control themselves.


THE KIDS, not the programs, dictate whether or not they have pre-marital sex.


Sure, that's a given that it's the kids themselves who ultimately make their own decisions whether or not to engage in premarital sexual activity.

But permissive sex ed programs begin with the (false) premise, "your going to do it anyway", and thus interests, enables and encourages students to engage in pre-marital sex while abstinence until marriage/ character education programs do not!

Who is better off...the kids getting 13 years of explicit permissive sex instruction or the ones who are encouraged to save sexual activity for marriage?




on Jun 30, 2008
I don't think you can blame these pregnancies on a movie.


Why not? If you can blame teenage sex on the media and violence on video games, you're not responsible for anything anymore. And isn't that what we really want? To feel like we have clear consciences?

All I know is, when I go on MY shooting spree, I'm blaming GTA. And when Cedar finally admits she's pregnant, I know she's putting that blame on Juno.
on Jun 30, 2008
But permissive sex ed programs begin with the (false) premise, "your going to do it anyway", and thus interests, enables and encourages students to engage in pre-marital sex while abstinence until marriage/ character education programs do not!


Lula, I have YET to see conclusive proof that either one of these have substantial success rates. I'm not sure why you argue that one is better than the other when neither one have a good track record.

This in my mind is no different than blaming Planned Parenthood for abortions. Addressing the symptom/result and not the initial cause/catalyst.
on Jun 30, 2008


I don't think you can blame these pregnancies on a movie.


I'm not blaming these pregnancies on the movie, JUNO any more than I am on starlets like Britney Spear's younger sister who's been getting headlines for becoming pregnant at 16. Like everyone else, I'm simply making observations and asking questions.

I've pointed the blame more towards permissive sex ed and an "anything goes" culture that does little more than "ho-hum, yawn", when girls by the dozens get pregnant.

For one thing, these women are choosing to raise their kids not give them up for adoption.


Women? Really, these 16 year-old teenie boppers who will (maybe) enter their junior year next year are women to you?

How do you know what these 17 girls are going to do with their babies? Any one of them at any time could go to Planned Parenthood and have the baby aborted...any one of them at any time could decide to go the adoption route.

They are choosing to raise their kids you say or are the taxpayers going to support them...starting with day care in the school nursery? I'd say for most of them the sperm donor is gonna split and the odds of them having to be on welfare is pretty high.

How many of these teen mommies will marry the guy who was "good enough to impregnate them" and live happily ever after?
on Jun 30, 2008
Actually teenage pregnancy rates are at a thirty year low.




Pregnancy rates may be down but not across the board...and in this regard credit must be given to abstinence only education where it has been allowed. Given the fact that the government spends over 1 billion dollars each year promoting contraceptive sex ed which amounts to 12 times it does on abstinence until marriage education.

While teen pregnancy rates are down, kids younger and younger are becoming sexually active more than ever before and as a result we have an epidemic of venereal diseases.

This spike in this little town is an aberration.


Yes, but it's not unique.

For example, I learned that 11 high school girls were pregnant in a small New Hampshire town.





on Jun 30, 2008
and in this regard credit must be given to abstinence only education where it has been allowed.


Can you provide a link that supports this?
on Jun 30, 2008
AD posts:
This in my mind is no different than blaming Planned Parenthood for abortions.


No offense, but why are you so blindsighted about PP? ABORTION is Planned Parenthood's number one business...to the tune of over three quarters of a Billion dollars! That's a lot of dead babies. That's a lot of defying, "Be fruitful and multiply".

You should check out Planned Parenthood's history promoting sex not only for recreation but for social revolution.

Google PP's foundress Margaret Sangar. Perhaps your local library has George Grant's "Killer Angel", one of the best biographies of her.

Have you ever checked out PP's website wwww.teenwire.com ?



on Jun 30, 2008
Can you provide a link that supports this?


AD, Sorry, I don't know how to do links, however this might be helpful.

Last April, the Heritage Foundation released this press release:

NEW RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ABSTINENCE EDUCATION

FEATURING RESEARCH FROM:

Stan E. Weed, Ph.D., Research Director, Institute for Research & Evaluation
Robert E. Rector, Senior Research Fellow, Domestic Policy at The Heritage Foundation

Christine Kim, Policy Analyst, Domestic Policy at The Heritage Foundation

Policymakers have long debated the best methods for addressing teen sexual activity. Two new studies highlight the encouraging findings from emerging research regarding abstinence education. Dr. Stan Weed’s study, published in the January/February 2008 issue of the American Journal of Health Behavior, assesses the effectiveness of abstinence education in reducing the sexual activity of students in Virginia middle schools. The second study, by Christine Kim and Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation, presents the most up-to-date comprehensive review of 21 prior studies of the effectiveness of abstinence and virginity pledge programs.


“Comprehensive” Sex Education is Ineffective: Abstinence Works, Major National Study Shows

By Elizabeth O’Brien

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah, June 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A major report on teen sex education, released by Dr. Stan Weed of the Institute for Research and Evaluation in Salt Lake City, shows why abstinence is the most successful method of preventing physical and emotional complications resulting from pre-marital sexual activity. His research is based on the results of many studies that have followed the education and behavior of over 400,000 adolescents in 30 different states for 15 years (see http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007_docs/CompSexEd.pdf).

The final report, entitled “Abstinence” or “Comprehensive” Sex Education? begins by pointing out the flaws in a national study on abstinence released by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Conducted in April 2007, this previous study examined the progress of teens who participated in four different abstinence education programs. The final report indicated that abstinence education was ineffective and that young adolescents should receive “comprehensive” sex education, that is, sex-education that teaches about various sexual behaviors and “safe-sex” methods.

After examining the Mathematica study’s methods, the Institute found several major errors that made the study non-representative of American sex education. First, says the more recent study, it took sample teens from “high-risk” sectors of the population, such as poor African or American single-parent households. During the study, young people received abstinence education in pre-adolescence, but then received no follow-up training during adolescence. They were also examined about their sexual activity several years after any learning might have taken effect.

Dr. Stan Weed told LifeSiteNews.com: “Within the United States, sexual activity rates have been going down among teenagers for about the last 12 or 13 years, and that coincides with when the abstinence education started. Abortion, pregnancies and out of wedlock births rates have also been going down among teens during that same time period. However, pregnancy, abortion and out of wedlock births have been rising for the older age group, between 19-25, a group that has not been targeted by abstinence programs.”

Outlining these limitations and the report’s inaccuracies, Dr. Weed highlighted the problems that sexually active teens encounter and the failure of “comprehensive” sex education to remedy such issues. These include teen pregnancy, STD’s and poor emotional health. Sexually active young people are also more often physically assaulted or raped.

“Comprehensive” sex education also fails to explain the limitation of condoms, said the recent study, pointing out that “many consequences of teen sexual activity are not prevented by condom use.” Condoms are never a total guarantee against STD’s, and so there is no kind of truly “safe” sex outside of marriage. Secondly, despite 20 years of sex education, young people even fail to use condoms consistently. Most importantly, however, condoms do nothing to prevent the heartbreak, depression and low self-esteem caused by sexual activity.

The Utah Institute researchers also investigated previous major studies on “comprehensive” sex education and found that these programs had little impact on the behavior of teens during their education and no long-term effects whatsoever. In fact, “of 50 rigorous studies spanning the past 15 years, only one of them reports an improvement in consistent condom use after a period of at least one year.”

When evaluating abstinence programs, the Institute investigated both high-risk and moderate-risk students in programs such as Reasons of the Heart, Heritage Keepers, Sex Respect and Teen Aid. Students in these programs were far less likely to be sexually active and those who were reduced their sexual activity by a large percentage. In the Reasons of the Heart study, for example, researchers found that “adolescent program participants were approximately one half as likely as the matched comparison group to initiate sexual activity after one year. The program’s effect was as strong for the African American subgroup in the sample as it was overall.”

The most successful abstinence programs were those that emphasized the risk of pre-marital sexual activity. They showed how abstinence fully protects a young person from STD’s, teen pregnancy and emotional trauma. They underlined the importance of self-control and responsibility and gave students the positive goal of a stable and committed marriage towards which to work in future. At the same time, however, researchers also found that it was crucial to re-educate adolescents about abstinence each successive year.

Dr. Weed concludes, “Well-designed and well-implemented abstinence education programs can reduce teen sexual activity by as much as one half for periods of one to two years, substantially increasing the number of adolescents who avoid the full range of problems related to teen sexual activity. Abandoning this strategy…would appear to be a policy driven by politics rather than by a desire to protect American teens.”

These results are consistent with many other findings, including a 2005 study by Medical Issues Analyst Reginald Finger of Focus on the Family. He investigated over 7,000 people in the United States that indicated the many social and emotional benefits to remaining abstinent. (see http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/05050607.html).

READ THE ORIGINAL STUDY:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007_docs/CompSexEd.pdf

See Related Coverage:

Bush: Abstinence Only 100 % Effective Means of Preventing Pregnancy, HIV, STDs
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/06062308.html

Abstinence Alone Protects Fully Against HIV, Ugandan First Lady Tells Youth
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06120601.html

Abstinence Education Works - New Report Offers More Evidence
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/dec/04121004.html

on Jun 30, 2008
BINGO!!! CB gets a cookie!


I LUUUVV cookies!

Thanks, AD.
on Jul 01, 2008
No offense, but why are you so blindsighted about PP? ABORTION is Planned Parenthood's number one business...to the tune of over three quarters of a Billion dollars! That's a lot of dead babies. That's a lot of defying, "Be fruitful and multiply".


Am I blind sighted?

The abortion is a result of a pregnancy. The pregnancy is result of intercourse. The intercourse is result of decision to have sex. The decision to have sex is built on so many variables that 'abstinence only, comprehensive sex ed and other versions' do not address the root.

I have experienced several of the different variations of the above. Abstinence only was more of a scare the hell out of you and you'll get this disease if you have sex. The comprehensive are similar in a video of the variety of diseases out there if you don't protect yourself.

I'm sure the education programs vary and will continue to vary. The problem I see in abstinence only is they taboo sex (outside marriage). They stress morality and 'right' living. They don't discuss how to deal with these new hormonal based feelings and urges (during the age of puberty). They don't give you tools and tips on how to deal with these 'new' findings. Some just say, oh these feelings are normal just don't 'act' on them.

This is where and what I see being the issue being overlooked. Until this area is addressed I can find NO fault in PP. You provided correlations of Abstinence-only successes but I can post just as many links that suggests Abstinence-only failing.

My question about providing a link was to PROVE that abstinence-only SHOULD get the credit for the areas of reduced pregnancy rates? I have yet to see conclusive evidence that suggests abstinence-only programs are the SOLE reason for reduced teenage pregnancy/promiscuity.

on Jul 01, 2008
I LUUUVV cookies!

Thanks, AD.


You are welcome CB. Thanks for contributing to intellectual thought.
4 Pages1 2 3 4