Bush, the Great Intellectual, followed in the
Then here comes reality.
Lawmakers cited government statistics showing that one in four U.S. teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease and 30 percent of U.S. girls become pregnant before the age of 20.Hmm, doesn't sound like those programs are working. Maybe we should look into funding comprehensive sex education, right? Wrong.
How dare those "educated" people, the ones who dedicate their lives to the study of public health and issues of sexual health, attempt to advise the government about sex ed! Of course, we should listen only to the "value-voter" population segment, the ones who think the Earth is 6,000 years old and that evolution is all a hoax. I think Waxman (D-CA) said it best. , a Tennessee Republican, said that it seems "rather elitist" that people with academic degrees in health think they know better than parents what type of sex education is appropriate. "I don't think it's something we should abandon," he said of abstinence-only funding.
"We are showering funds on abstinence-only programs that don't appear to work, while ignoring proven comprehensive sex education programs that can delay sex, protect teens from disease, and result in fewer teen pregnancies."