"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.Isn't that amazing. Color me skeptical but if abstinence only programs worked it would fly in the face of the liberal agenda's free sex beliefs. Funny how before the days of sex education when abstinence was the only form of birth control taught, teen pregnancies were very few. After sex education was introduced into the public schools, teen pregnancies sky rocketed. Now they still teach sex in school but then expect a program that tells teens not to try sex to work? Of course no one is suggesting we NOT teach kids about sex. In fact they still laud that great decision to take sex education away from parents.
The study, conducted by Douglas Kirby, a senior research scientist at ETR Associates, also sought to debunk what the report called "myths propagated by abstinence-only advocates" including: that comprehensive sex education promotes promiscuity, hastens the initiative of sex or increases its frequency, and sends a confusing message to adolescents.Very powerful statements. But again color me skeptical. Why does Kirby praise Sex Ed and is so down on Abstinence programs? Could it be he has a vested and financial interest in sex education?
None of these was found to be accurate, Kirby wrote.
Instead, he wrote, such programs improved teens' knowledge about the risks and consequences of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases and gave them greater "confidence in their ability to say 'no' to unwanted sex."
The sponsors of the study praised Kirby for his "thorough research" and for being "fair and evenhanded," but they also acknowledged that ETR Associates developed and markets several of the sex education curricula reviewed in the report. Several of the previous studies that were reviewed also were written by Kirby.That makes sense now. Say that sex ed helps and then sell sex ed curricula. Some of the programs he claims are doing well are his so he reviews and promotes his own products at the same time under the guise of "objective study." Yeah right. He even promotes sex ed combined with abstinence training. It's the abstinence only programs that are the only ones he wouldn't make a cent on. You would think people would sponsor a study by someone who didn't stand to personally gain from the outcome of their own report.