Chakolate wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/health/06birth.html?ref=3Dhealth
>=20
> According to this, under B.Ad's abstinence-only sex education, the [tee=
n] birth=20
> rate rose 3% last year - the first growth in 15 years. Go, Dubya!
>=20
> Huh? He wasn't trying to raise it? =20
"Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage=20
Foundation, said that blaming abstinence-only programs was=20
=93stupid.=94 Mr. Rector said that most young women who became=20
pregnant were highly educated about contraceptives but wanted to=20
have babies."
What I want to know is, how did they get highly educated about=20
contraceptives, if all the Feds were feeding them was abstinence?
Then again, the same SFB said: "that teenage and unmarried birth=20
rates were driven by the same factors: young women with little=20
education who are devoted to mothering but see no great need to=20
be married."
Little education, but highly educated about contraceptives? Hmmm.
FurPaw
--=20
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
To reply, unleash the dog.
|
