The "only" part of "abstinence only" refers to the curriculum. It is the only option taught. Any teaching about sexual activity is not permitted, because the people who developed and advocate this curriculum believe that knowledge about sex leads directly to sexual activity. To adopt abstinence-only puts a gag order on teachers, even if students ask specific questions about such topics as birth control and non-genital sexual activities.
That's what it means, that's how it's practiced, and that's why it doesn't work. If you think I'm kidding, discuss it with your friends who advocate this approach to sex ed.
I have no idea how much money, in "Federal" (as opposed to "US") dollars, is spent on the two. Federal dollars don't usually support public school programs; local taxes do. The Federal government has withheld funds in other areas if a state's policy is not to its liking. See also "state speed limits" and "Federal funds for highway maintenance".
So far, the only Federal sex education programs that emphasize the abstinence-only approach that I know about are tied to foreign aid, which makes perfect sense since our national hobby lately is telling other people how to be.
Current Events » in reply to re: When family and policy collide
Abstinence-only programs do prevent teaching other sex education programs.
The whole thread (37 posts)
- In Bristol Condition
- I agree
- The reason that this is an issue...
- Spy vs Spy
- Obama's inevitability?
- re: Spy vs Spy. -Where's Antonio Prohias when we need him (and TB for that matter).
- politico/economic/social class?
- re: Spy vs Spy
- re: In Bristol Condition
- Another view.
- My lack of respect is reserved for McCain
- I agree
