A group that thinks a Super Bowl ad celebrating Tim Tebow’s life is bad news for women might be a little out of touch with what women really want.

That helps explain why the National Organization for Women and other feminist groups have vehemently opposed abstinence education while failing to notice that a culture of casual sex hasn’t been so liberating for women.

Just ask the 29-year-old Briton living in America whose anonymous account appeared in her country’s left-wing Guardian newspaper.

“(M)y sexual liberation was perversely trapping me in destructive relationships, while intimacy had become something elusive, insubstantial, disappointing, surreal,” she writes.

Weary of a “burlesque comedy where we all pretended we were emotionless and cool,” she decided to stop having sex because “I wanted sex to be, quite simply, special again.”

Similar world-weary statements have been recorded by researchers such as Dr. Miriam Grossman, author of “Unprotected,” and Laura Sessions Stepp, author of “Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose at Both.”

Only a third of young women say they truly wanted to have sex the first time they did, Stepp reports. Young women, she writes, “are trying to make sense of what is arguably the most confusing sexual landscape any generation has ever faced.”

Most sex education pushes young women into this jungle and tells them contraception will provide adequate protection. This puts incredible pressure on those who have the most at risk in the casual-sex scene. And it jeopardizes their dreams of long-term security and love.

The vast majority of young women say marriage and motherhood are important to future happiness. Why wouldn’t we equip young women to achieve those dreams while avoiding such consequences as sexual assault and serious disease _ to say nothing of bewildering heartache? Why not teach young women the real facts about the risks of early sexual activity?

Teen girls who engage in sex are more vulnerable to sexually transmitted disease and depression. Girls who are sexually active in high school are half as likely to go on to college as abstaining peers from the same social setting. Later, they often have more difficulty in forging the kind of lasting relationships that lead to marriage.

Why not help young women make social choices that advance their long-term educational, vocational and marriage prospects? What about teaching tactics for resisting unwanted sexual advances? How about helping girls build relational and communication skills that will allow them to get what they really want _ lasting love?

This common-sense approach is exactly what abstinence education seeks to do. Contrary to its detractors’ caricature, abstinence education aims to empower young people _ especially young women _ with the information, skills and long-term perspective they need to successfully navigate what Stepp calls today’s “confusing sexual landscape.”

New evidence says this approach is helping girls do exactly that.

A study by University of Pennsylvania researchers released Feb. 2 found abstinence education is effective in delaying the onset of teen sexual activity. After eight hours of instruction on abstinence, middle school students were one-third less likely to engage in sexual activity compared to their peers. This effect persisted two years after they attended the class.

By contrast, the study found both “safe sex” and “comprehensive sex-ed” programs ineffective. The former promote only use of contraceptives; the latter teach abstinence and contraception.

Published in the American Medical Association’s Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, the Penn study used a randomized controlled experiment. The approach, designed to produce unbiased results, is considered the gold standard in program evaluation.

This is the most sophisticated evaluation showing abstinence education’s positive results, but it’s not the first. A 2008 research paper from The Heritage Foundation catalogued 15 scientific studies of abstinence education, 11 of which found positive effects.

On the same day the Penn researchers’ study came out, President Obama released his 2011 budget proposal. It zeroes out funding for abstinence education while creating a $179 million comprehensive sex-ed program _ the very kind the Penn study shows to be ineffective. Add that to more than $600 million a year already spent by the Department of Health and Human Services on pregnancy and STD prevention programs and “family planning” services for teens.

The Obama administration’s plans not only fly in the face of the research, they ignore the real needs of young women. Teen girls say they want to hear the abstinence message. More and more young women who have braved the casual-sex culture say they still haven’t found what they’re looking for.

If we want to empower these women, let’s teach abstinence.

___

ABOUT THE WRITER

Jennifer A. Marshall is director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation and author of “Now and Not Yet: Making Sense of Single Life in the Twenty-First Century.” Readers may write to the author in care of The Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, D.C. 20002; Web site: www.heritage.org. Information about Heritage’s funding may be found at http://www.heritage.org/about/reports.cfm.

Source:  California Chronicle.com

Read this interesting blog that I found:

by Gary Dickson — Publisher

Updated: 02/12/2010 05:37:25 PM PST

Last May I read a story on the Poynter Institute’s Web site that had been in the Washington Guardian’s U.K. editon. The headline was, “Obama to scrap funding for abstinence-only programmes.” The sub-headline stated, “U.S. president proposes a new $110 million plan to help teens avoid pregnancy.” I printed the story because I just had an intuitive feeling that I might be able to use some of the articles’s information in a future column. Well, that day has arrived.

According to Neil Cole, the founder of the Candie’s Foundation, “Teen pregnancy is an epidemic. It is staggering that almost 750,000 American teens will become pregnant this year.” The Candie’s Foundation goal is to provide teens with information about the impacts of teen parenthood.

President Obama and his administration must have been convinced that it was best to attempt to reduce the U.S. teen pregnancy problem by providing condoms and birth control pills than to teach abstinence, so the president eliminated more that $150 million from abstinence programs and has now promised to pour $114 million into methods that had been “shown scientifically to work.”

One of the unfortunate issues about the president’s decision was that it was made before the results of any major, long-term study of abstinence programs had been released to the public. Earlier this month, the Associated Press reported on a recently completed research project that provided some startling information concerning the success of programs that teach teens that sexual activity abstinence is a good way to go until they are ready for a meaningful sexual relationship.

A Washington Post story called the research “a first-of-its-kind landmark study.” The research indicated that only about one-third of sixth- and seventh-graders who went through a course focused on abstinence from sexual activity started having sex during the next two years. On the other hand, nearly half of the students who went through the other type of classes, involving sex education and the usage of condoms and birth control pills, became sexually active within the next two years.

According to Sarah Brown, the director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, “This new study is game-changing. For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well.”

I think some of the abstinence-only programs have been criticized by some people for being considered to be religion-based, or due to being based on a plan to completely avoid sex until marriage. The program involved in the new study was neither. It was reported that “The program did not advocate abstinence until marriage, did not portray sex in a negative light or suggest condoms are ineffective, and contained only medically accurate information.”

I certainly don’t see anything wrong with teaching youngsters that it is best to wait longer before becoming sexually active. Research indicates that, on average, American kids are becoming sexually active earlier than at any time in the past. This is causing more unplanned, less-wanted children, interfering with the education of many teens and causing more children to be raised in poverty.

It would be naïve to think that any administration would change its program funding based on one study. I am just hopeful that additional research will be accomplished and provide positive results. With the magnitude of the national teen pregnancy problem, I don’t believe that we should place all of our hope on a single type of program, especially one that, in effect, actually sends a message to teens that sexual activity is OK, just practice safe sex so you don’t wind up being a teen mom or dad.

Gary Dickson is the editor and publisher of the Record-Bee. Call him at 263-5636, ext. 24. E-mail him at gdickson@record-bee.com.

Source: rockforlife.org

Pro-abortion advocacy groups use Valentine’s Day to peddle their unbridled sex message by handing out condoms and equating love with hopping into bed with someone. Planned Parenthood has also declared February to be “National Condom Month.” One way to combat this is to have your own activities spreading the true chastity message. Hand out stickers that say, “Condoms don’t protect the heart.” Set up a table full of pro-chastity literature.

Take part in “Day of Purity” and for more information go to www.dayofpurity.org.  

American Life League www.all.org has a number of powerful brochures available through the ALL store. “A Letter to My Future Husband/Wife” would be a great one to distribute. 

Search our store www.abstinence.net for other products and resources.

www.LC.org

Washington, DC – Tomorrow, young people in America and around the world are beginning Valentine’s celebrations by committing to sexual purity and encouraging their peers on the value of purity. This is the seventh annual Day of Purity, which helps educate youth to remain sexually pure until marriage. Young people are actively promoting this choice of purity by wearing Day of Purity T-shirts and LivePure wristbands, handing out flyers, and organizing events in their schools, communities and churches. Liberty University, the world’s largest Christian university, will spend time celebrating the Day of Purity with the entire student body in a campus-wide gathering.

The Day of Purity is designed to raise awareness about the dangers of promiscuous behavior. Statistics show that every day, 24,000 Americans ages 15 to 24 contract a sexually transmitted disease (STD); that’s one every four seconds. According to the Centers for Disease Control, there are 19 million new STD cases every year in America, and half of those occur among teens. A study released this month showed that abstinence-only education was the most effective way to reduce sexual activity. It reduced sexual activity from half to one-third in young teens. A Rasmussen poll this week showed that 50% of Americans believe that abstinence-only education helps prevent teen pregnancy. Eighty percent believe it is the parents’ responsibility to teach their children about sex, and three out of four Americans believe that “pop culture such as movies and television shows encourage sexual activity among young people.”

Students who embrace the purity lifestyle are countering the Hollywood culture with its risqué television shows, vulgar jokes, tasteless commercials, graphic movies and descriptive magazines. They are inundated at school, on television and on the internet with messages that lust and exploration are normal, even healthy, and that they should give up traditional moral values. On February 12, 2010, thousands of students will rebel against the popular culture and celebrate the Day of Purity.

Day of Purity is a project of Liberty Counsel that offers participants a planning manual, wristbands, T-shirts, informative flyers, and other resources on our website, www.DayOfPurity.org. Day of Purity has a fan page on Facebook and also recommends the Truth for Youth Bible, which contains information and stories geared for teens.

Amber Haskew, Coordinator for the Day of Purity, commented, “The heartache surrounding the tragedy of sexual promiscuity demands that we offer clear moral guidance and encouragement for our youth to stay sexually pure until marriage. The consequences of sexually transmitted diseases in our nation’s youth are devastating, and abstinence is the only effective action. It is time to take a stand against behaviors that cause disease and death. Youth who have already engaged in sexual activity can make a fresh start on the Day of Purity. Young people are ready to send a positive message to their friends, parents, churches, communities, legislators, and the media. It’s time for a positive change in our culture.”

By Rachel Campos-Duffy

Feb 10th 2010 11:00AM

Let’s face it. Polls and studies can be easily manipulated. In Amy Hatch’s recent column, “Abstinence Education to Blame for Rise in Teen Pregnancy Rates,”she cited a study by the Guttmacher Institute that concluded that pregnancy rates rose as a result of abstinence programs.

This month, the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine released a study that contradicts those findings. The APAM study on 662 African American 7^th and 8^th graders found that those enrolled in abstinence-only programs were less likely to engage in sexual activity.

Instead of arguing over whose poll is right, I propose we consider something most parents can probably agree on: Abstinent teens are happier and more likely to succeed in school.
Do moms and dads really need a study to tell them that teens who abstain from sex until at least the age of 18 are more likely to go to and finish college? Plenty of studies confirm this, but we also know from our own observations in high school that teen sex and high academic achievement are rarely compatible.

Sex is a powerful force that intensifies emotions and attachments. It can make a high school breakup feel more like a mini divorce. Now imagine doing that a couple times over a four-year period. No wonder sexually active teens report higher incidences of depression.

Homework, SAT scores and resume-building service projects can easily take a backseat to worries about adult-oriented trivialities like sexy lingerie or the far more distracting pregnancy or STD scare. After all, no contraception is as full proof as abstinence. Needless to say, none of this is conducive to being academically focused. Plus, common sense tell us that the parent of a sexually active teen weilds less influence over their child which can drastically impact their decisions and the course of their future.

The same way we warn our kids about the dangers of smoking (as opposed to giving them filters for their cigs), adults ought to discourage rather than enable teens to have sex at a time when so much of their future is at stake. Kids deserve to be told the truth about the academic, economic (college graduates earn nearly half a million dollars more than nongraduates over a lifetime), and emotional tradeoffs of high school sex — even if they don’t always heed our advice.

Neurologists tell us that the teenage brain is not fully developed or able to processes consequences, which is why some teens will have sex despite our admonitions and well-intentioned abstinence programs. But this knife cuts both ways. Their underdeveloped brains are also the reason why they are notoriously poor practitioners of contraception despite having condoms and birth control pills practically thrown at them in schools.

President Obama recently eliminated abstinence education in schools and now we learn that Planned Parenthood International is pushing intensive sex education for children as young as 10 (which includes discussions on the “pleasures of sex”).. But we sell our kids short when we allow the culture, vested organizations like Planned Parenthood, and government bureaucrats to send them the message that pregnancy and STDs are the only consequences of teen sex that they need to be concerned about. As parents, we cannot lose sight of our primary objective: to raise happy (and yes, moral) kids and to maximize their opportunity to succeed in life. When that is the goal, abstinence education looks pretty darn good.

Source:  ParentsDish.com

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 9, 2010

Source: lifenews.com

New York, NY (LifeNews.com) – A recent Planned Parenthood report pushing sex and abortion for children is drawing more fire from pro-life advocates. Now, Catholic League president Bill Donohue is attacking the document because he says it rips Catholicism and promotes “sexual engineering” by “smearing religious conservatives, especially Catholics.”

The new report, titled Stand and Deliver,” sees the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) demanding that governments, religious institutions and society at large provide “comprehensive sexuality education” for children as young as ten years old.

According to IPPF, as “young people are sexual beings,” it should be self-evident that “sexuality education promotes individual well-being and the advancement of broader societal and public health goals.”

Naturally, once children are enabled to have sexual relations, they will eventually need the contraception, birth control and abortions that Planned Parenthood sells.

“IPPF uses the terms young people, youth and adolescents interchangeably to refer to people who are between 10 and 24,” Donohue notes in a statement sent to LifeNews.com today. “In other words, 5th graders should be treated the same way graduate students are when it comes to their ’sexual and reproductive health and rights.’”

Donohue says the entire program is based on a faulty assumption.

IPPF says that “The taboo on youth sexuality is one of the key forces driving the AIDS epidemic and high rates of teenage pregnancy and maternal mortality.”

The Catholic League president calls that “nonsense” and says: “In the 1950s, there was no sex education in the schools, the pill was not commercially available and AIDS didn’t exist. Yet the out-of-wedlock birth rate was comparatively miniscule and sexually transmitted diseases were relatively rare. All because of taboos.”

Donohue also criticizes the IPPF report’s language saying, “Fundamentalist and other religious groups—the Catholic Church and madrasas (Islamic schools) for example—have imposed tremendous barriers that prevent young people, particularly, from obtaining information and services related to sex and reproduction.”

According to IPPF, religious institutions – like the Catholic Church and Islamic schools – need to be “pragmatic” to accommodate young people as “sexual beings” and amend their teachings to “find a way of explaining and providing guidance on issues of sex and sexual relationships among young people, which supports rather than denies their experiences and needs.”

He responds: “So the kids in Sister Mary’s class who learn about responsible sex are analogous to Imam Mohammad’s kids who are either denied sex education or are told that homosexuality is punishable by death.”

Ultimately, the pro-life advocate says Planned Parenthood is putting children at risk.

“Why is it that public school students, who know so much more about sex than those dunces in the parochial schools, are precisely the ones walking around with the highest rates of illegitimacy, abortion and herpes?” he asks.

NAC Press Release 2/10/10

A new report by the International Planned Parenthood Federation is recommending that children as young as 10 years old receive mandatory graphic sex education, which includes teaching them the “pleasures of sex.”
 
The report, “Stand and Deliver” recommends - in fact, demands - that children as young as 10 should be seen as “sexual beings.”  Further, the report criticizes religious institutions such as Catholicism and Islam for placing tremendous barriers on the ability of young people to receive information and services related to sex and that these teachings “deny the pleasurable and positive aspects of sex.”
 
Leslee Unruh, spokesperson for the Abstinence Clearinghouse, said, “They are intentionally ignoring the role of parents in this report.  Parents have and should always be the primary sex educators of their children.  However, Planned Parenthood knows that the earlier they capture the children’s minds, the greater the odds the children will adopt their secular world view.  Further, coming from a group whose future relies on funding from failed contraception and abortions, the connection isn’t hard to make,” she said.  “This is an aggressive political agenda, meant to make Planned Parenthood a lot more money.”
 
Lastly, Unruh stated, “Early graphic sex education is a proven failed strategy that only molests the minds of the children who experience it.  We are committed to ensuring our nation’s greatest resource, our youth, is protected.  Parents, will you stand with us to prevent this sexualization of our children from happening?”
 
The Abstinence Clearinghouse, with offices in Sioux Falls, SD and Washington, DC, was built on the foundation that parents are the primary sex educators of their children.  The mission of the Abstinence Clearinghouse is to promote the appreciation for and practice of sexual abstinence until marriage through the distribution of age appropriate, factual and medically-referenced materials.

Article by Family Research Council fpc.org

Most third and fourth graders barely know what sex is, let alone have any desire to try it. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is advocating in a new report, “Stand and Deliver.” As part of the global push, IPPF “demands” that children 10 and older have access to “comprehensive sex education” that defines sexuality as a ” positive force for change and development, as a source of pleasure, an embodiment of human rights and an expression of self.” What they neglect to mention is that this “expression of self” also leads to death, disease, teen pregnancy, and depression. Regardless, the latest research suggests that abstinence–not liberal sex ed–is the most effective approach for this age group. In the February edition of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, researchers found that a third of inner-city kids who participated in a targeted abstinence-only program were sexually active, compared to about half of their peers.

Of course, it’s no secret why IPPF would advocate for early sexual involvement. What better way to advertise for abortion than encourage young children to have sex? The most troubling part of the study is that it purposefully squeezes parents out of the equation. What children learn (or don’t learn) about intimacy SHOULD BE up to parents–not the government, and certainly not Planned Parenthood.