Sexperts Under Fire

Experts!? A university dared have EXPERTS? Good God. What will the prudes find next? BOOKS?

That's just reprehensible. It's so hard for me to bend my mind away from a rational perspective far enough to even begin to see things from the point of view of these nuts. I'm (almost) speechless.

What luck! My site will be down for about 30 minutes later tonight as they do some maintenance to the network in my building.

Ah...come on now - what do you expect from Georgia? It is, after all, low hanging fruit in the orchard of right wing wackdom...

Georgia was nearly a blue state last election, its hardly the low hanging right wing fruit.

I should mention that the complaints of these couple of legislators went nowhere, and the House Higher Education Committee actually organized a hearing for the scientists to show up the ignorant boobs.

Georgia was nearly a blue state last election...

Indeed, and it's quite exciting! As for the low hanging fruit, Oklahoma actually became redder over the past four years. :(

As a dues paying, carding carrying, prude I would like to register a strong protest of this incorrect association of my kind with abstinence only sex education. Just because we can't get any doesn't mean that we want teen pregnancies and STDs.

Reed A. Cartwright said: Georgia was nearly a blue state last election, its hardly the low hanging right wing fruit. I should mention that the complaints of these couple of legislators went nowhere, and the House Higher Education Committee actually organized a hearing for the scientists to show up the ignorant boobs.

This is academic freedom under the Christians, yes?

Abstinence-only education is a failure. Study after study has found that teenagers who receive abstinence-only education are no less likely to have sex as other teenagers, but are less likely to use protection when they do.

Without even needing a reseach study

that's why nobody has any respect for you, ducky.

Without even needing a reseach study that’s why nobody has any respect for you, ducky.

The usual nonsense. All that would be required to prevent STDs and unwanted pregnancy and all sorts of other problems would be for us to return to the Good Old Days, except that the Good Old Days never happened. That is, we must change everything about western society, persuade everybody not only to subscribe to, but actually to enact, a code of strict abstinence from sex with anybody but their legally wedded spouse, and enforce that with censorship and blue laws and whatever else it takes.

It ain't gonna happen. It actually can't happen, but if there were ever a real attempt to make it happen, the attempted "cure" would be much worse than the disease, for all that it would be completely ineffective. Iran, anybody? The Taliban?

Any true conservative solution would be small, work at an individual level, be of proven effectiveness, would not require an increase in government power, and would be cost neutral or better. This description is best fitted by full factual education and freely available contraception. The alternative is to argue for ignorance and repression, which is a shameful and disgraceful thing to do in itself.

The hilarious aspect of this is that the people who are in effect advocating a huge increase in government power and intrusion into private lives would usually describe themselves as conservatives. You have to laugh.

Donald M said: This is mis-leading. The correct measure is what is the rate of STD's, pregnancies, and/or emotional or psychological problems related to pre-marital sex among teenagers who practice abstinence 100% of the time. Without even needing a reseach study, I can tell you the answer is ZERO. No other method of birth control or disease prevention comes close.