Monday, May 08, 2006

A different kind of Just Say "No"

Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN), Congress's chief drug warrior, is in hot water after placing two abstinence-only sex education proponents onto a panel organized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Apparently, conservative politicians have been regularly diddling with sex ed science.

But this was the first time, conference organizers said, that a single politician had interfered so clearly. The concern, they said, was that studies on sexual behavior would not be made public if they jarred with the administration's views on abstinence and other public-health issues.

"At the CDC, they're beside themselves," Zenilman said. "These people ... haven't written anything. The only reason they're here is because of political pressure from the administration."

Neither of the new speakers, Dr. Patricia Sulak, an ob/gyn and director of "Worth the Wait," and Dr. Eric Walsh, went through the peer-review process required of other participants, although CDC officials did not explain why. Both panelists were funded by HHS, although others said they were told they had to pay their expenses.

Strong parallels can and should be drawn between the shortcomings of the Just Say "No" approaches to sex education and drug education. Like it or not, teens use drugs and have sex. Rather than acting like ostriches and sticking their heads in the sand, policymakers need to acknowledge reality and respond accordingly, doing what they can to keep young people as safe as possible.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Like it or not, teens use drugs and have sex.

I LIKE IT!

Anonymous said...

Amen! Bring on the weed and p**sy!

800 pound gorilla said...

The problem starts with the ridiculous assumption that premarital sex is morally wrong by definition. The obviously false corollary is that all married sex is morally right by definition. This precludes any discussion of morally right sex or more importantly sex that doesn't come with major baggage. It should be discussed and it should be discussed without narrow selective interpretations of scripture.

Let the kids make the decisions. Most importantly it should be discussed before the kids actually seriously consider their sexual options like at ages 10-13. But it isn't because some people are told that letting kids know that sex exists is like an open invitation to have sex. Hmmm. If you make the assumption that most people tend to project their mindsets unto others. Certainly someone with self discipline would not just assume that unsupervised teens are going to seek out wild irresponsible orgies. No it's the ones without that self discipline who make that assumption.

Typically, the binge eaters would be more supportive of the ineffectual policy of removing snack machines from schools. After all, if they can't resist, neither can anyone else. Where do kids learn about becoming overreliant upon and abusing drugs? From parents who reach for the medicine cabinet for every ache or imagined shortcoming that is announced on TV that requires a quick fix.

Anonymous said...

Pleasurable activities considered immoral by loosers? Never!