Good one, JK. Comparing my commet to debbyski's.. That was brilliant.
Especially since it has been proven that the Left care more about their agenda than they do about the very lives of people.

Three examples: (1)This clip where the evidence I present shows lives are being saved by abstinence programs, yet the disdain in the comments show that the Left care more about their materialism and ideology than they do the successes regarding what works. I made no statement whatsoever about the use of one tactic to the exclusion of the other. Only you hate-loving leftists have done that. I , for one, recognize the legitimacy of both ideas.
(2) egoldstein's clip and the regular dose of insensitivi...

Good one, JK. Comparing my commet to debbyski's.. That was brilliant.
Especially since it has been proven that the Left care more about their agenda than they do about the very lives of people.

Three examples: (1)This clip where the evidence I present shows lives are being saved by abstinence programs, yet the disdain in the comments show that the Left care more about their materialism and ideology than they do the successes regarding what works. I made no statement whatsoever about the use of one tactic to the exclusion of the other. Only you hate-loving leftists have done that. I , for one, recognize the legitimacy of both ideas.
(2) egoldstein's clip and the regular dose of insensitivity we get from the Left about high oil prices. egoldstein seems to enjoy the hardship and death in exchange for a wind-turbine, as do those that join in this inane chorus. (3) As we all know, Conservatives donate a much larger percentage of their time, energy, and resources to charitable causes, while the Left only pretend to care and increase hardships with various programs in order to gain politically via poverty, global warming, energy, food prices, stratification of society, political correctness, and hate.

Ironically, Willhelm accuses the "left" of putting ideology before the facts when he himself ignores the fact that even his own sources--First Things and the The Lancet article First Thing cites--do not advocate an abstinence only approach to solving AIDS.

James Shelton, author of the Lancet article said:

MYTH: Adolescents are the problem—Generalised epidemics span all reproductive ages. Although adolescent women are affected through sex with older men, HIV incidence increases in women in their 20s and later in life. Men are infected at even older ages. Thus interventions in young people, including abstinence, although important, have limited usefulness.

...

Truthf...

Ironically, Willhelm accuses the "left" of putting ideology before the facts when he himself ignores the fact that even his own sources--First Things and the The Lancet article First Thing cites--do not advocate an abstinence only approach to solving AIDS.

James Shelton, author of the Lancet article said:

MYTH: Adolescents are the problem—Generalised epidemics span all reproductive ages. Although adolescent women are affected through sex with older men, HIV incidence increases in women in their 20s and later in life. Men are infected at even older ages. Thus interventions in young people, including abstinence, although important, have limited usefulness.

...

Truthfully, our priority must be on the key driver of generalised epidemics—concurrent partnerships. Although many people sense that multiple partners are risky, they do not realise the particular risk of concurrent partnerships. Indeed, technical appreciation of their role is recent. Concurrent sexual partnerships help to explain Africa's high level of HIV prevalence. But partner limitation has also been neglected because of the culture wars between advocates of condoms and advocates of abstinence, because it smacks of moralising, because mass behavioural change is alien to most medical professionals, and because of the competing priorities of HIV programmes.

In short, Shelton is saying the key thing to do to stop the spread of AIDS is to promote serial monogamy. That's a far cry from abstinence. But somehow, in Willhelm's mind, stopping sex with concurrent partners is translated to stopping sex period.

So who is the one who puts ideology before facts?

Willhelm, I remind you that this started when you trashed graphictruth for this statement:

Studies show that Abstinance-Only sex ed works no better than nothing.

Now, maybe graphictruth was overstating the case. I don't know if what he/she said was 100% true. But the fact is, graphictruth's comments are probably closer to the the sentiments of the Lancet article than yours are.

Your own source (albeit an indirect one--via First Things) says that abstinence promotion can do some LIMITED good, but the main thing is stopping concurrent partnerships, not stopping premarital sex period, which you clearly were impyling in these comments.

Now, am I being unfair for trashing...

Willhelm, I remind you that this started when you trashed graphictruth for this statement:

Studies show that Abstinance-Only sex ed works no better than nothing.

Now, maybe graphictruth was overstating the case. I don't know if what he/she said was 100% true. But the fact is, graphictruth's comments are probably closer to the the sentiments of the Lancet article than yours are.

Your own source (albeit an indirect one--via First Things) says that abstinence promotion can do some LIMITED good, but the main thing is stopping concurrent partnerships, not stopping premarital sex period, which you clearly were impyling in these comments.

Now, am I being unfair for trashing you for ignoring the Lancet article, when you were working from the First Things article? Yeah. Do I care, when you were acting like an ass? No.

Geez, JK. That is so illustrative and typical of you -- Can't see the forest for the trees. Also, I'm sorry that you think stating the reality of the need for misery and death (as in eg cheer-leading high oil prices) is a necessary component for Left's ability to push an agenda.

Despite your inanity, my point could not be more clear. I've given many examples, which include the obvious low rates of STDs among those practicing abstinence (ie - practicing Christians), so you are just being a blow-hard.

The fact that you hate the idea of a abstinence and monogomy within the framework of a responsible and ethical approach, only shows you are more interested in 'part' of a solution, to the exc...

Geez, JK. That is so illustrative and typical of you -- Can't see the forest for the trees. Also, I'm sorry that you think stating the reality of the need for misery and death (as in eg cheer-leading high oil prices) is a necessary component for Left's ability to push an agenda.

Despite your inanity, my point could not be more clear. I've given many examples, which include the obvious low rates of STDs among those practicing abstinence (ie - practicing Christians), so you are just being a blow-hard.

The fact that you hate the idea of a abstinence and monogomy within the framework of a responsible and ethical approach, only shows you are more interested in 'part' of a solution, to the exclusion of a part that has a track-record of success. It is that simple.

Studies do indicate that AO education has exactly the same effect - <a href="http://www.graphictruth.com/2008/06/study-proves-abstinance-only-no-better.html">in terms of teen sex, pregnancy and std occurance as NO sex ed.</a>

Which leads us to consider what the real agenda must be. Fortunately, we do not have to guess.

Hell's Handmaiden > Nicest Girl and Destroyer of Planets > Winter's Haven > Classically Liberal > TPM Cafe: an excerpt from an Excerpt from "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism"

For all who believe. Reclaiming America for Christ is a place where the Christian nationalist movement drops its democratic pretenses and indulges its theocratic dreams. So at the ...

Studies do indicate that AO education has exactly the same effect - <a href="http://www.graphictruth.com/2008/06/study-proves-abstinance-only-no-better.html">in terms of teen sex, pregnancy and std occurance as NO sex ed.</a>

Which leads us to consider what the real agenda must be. Fortunately, we do not have to guess.

Hell's Handmaiden > Nicest Girl and Destroyer of Planets > Winter's Haven > Classically Liberal > TPM Cafe: an excerpt from an Excerpt from "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism"

For all who believe. Reclaiming America for Christ is a place where the Christian nationalist movement drops its democratic pretenses and indulges its theocratic dreams. So at the 2003 conference, when the abstinence educator Pam Stenzel spoke, she knew she didn’t have to justify her objection to sex education with prosaic arguments about health and public policy. She could be frank about the real reason society must not condone premarital sex—because it is, as she shouted during one particularly impassioned moment, 'stinking, filthy, dirty, rotten sin!"

A pretty, zaftig brunette from Minnesota with a degree in psychology from Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, Stenzel makes a living telling kids not to have sex. Rather, she makes a living trying to scare kids out of having sex—as she says in her video No Screwin' Around, if you have sex outside of marriage “to a partner who has only been with you . . . then you will pay.”A big part of her mission is puncturing students’ beliefs that condoms can protect them. She says she addresses half a million kids each year, and millions more have received her message via video.

Thanks to George W. Bush, abstinence education has become a thriving industry, and Stenzel has been at its forefront. Bush appointed her to a twelve-person task force at the Department of Health and Human Services to help implement abstinence education guidelines. She’s been a guest at the White House and a speaker at the United Nati

Studies do indeed show that abstanance only achieves nothing more than nothing.

Since it should be rather difficult to achieve that with any normal approach, it causes one to wonder if the goals of AO and more normal approaches to instruction on responsible sexuality are in any way similar.

They turn out not to be. These are the words of a leading AO curriculum designer:

At Reclaiming America for Christ, Stenzel told her audience about a
conversation she’d had with a skeptical businessman on an airplane. The
man had asked about abstinence education’s success rate—a question she
regarded as r...

Studies do indeed show that abstanance only achieves nothing more than nothing.

Since it should be rather difficult to achieve that with any normal approach, it causes one to wonder if the goals of AO and more normal approaches to instruction on responsible sexuality are in any way similar.

They turn out not to be. These are the words of a leading AO curriculum designer:

At Reclaiming America for Christ, Stenzel told her audience about a
conversation she’d had with a skeptical businessman on an airplane. The
man had asked about abstinence education’s success rate—a question she
regarded as risible. “What he’s asking," she said, “is does it work.
You know what? Doesn’t matter. Cause guess what. My job is not to keep
teenagers from having sex. The public schools’ job should not be to
keep teens from having sex.” Then her voice rose and turned angry as
she shouted, “Our job should be to tell kids the truth!”

“People of God,” she cried, “can I beg you, to commit yourself to
truth, not what works! To truth! I don’t care if it works, because at
the end of the day I’m not answering to you, I'm answering to God!”