States Reject Bush's Abstinence-Only Funding »
Posted by: Neophile 2 months ago309 Comments Report this Story
Skeptical states are shoving aside millions of federal dollars for abstinence education, walking away from the program the Bush administration touts for slowing teen sexual activity. Barely half the states are still in, and two more say they are leaving.
Read Full Story at huffingtonpost.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 309
-
0%
chuck-the-canuck2 months ago
Do you know why Laura is always on top when she and the "great decider" have sex?
Bush can only f*ck up.
Reply-
NemoShiZniTComment removed: User banned.62 Replies
-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
Wait...We can barely scrape together enough *Americans* to keep Bush's criminal lie in Iraq from totally disintegrating before he leaves office and you're labeling Canada as "weak"? Wow... Con chickenhawkery is quite astounding.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Wow, Libdouchebagchickenshitery is quite astounding. Haven't you beaten that broken drum too death yet? Get a new mantra to chant, libbot!
Reply-
0%
antibrainwasher2 months ago
I think drop got his fewings hurt. I don't think he likes the 80% of americans who are sick of anti american american haters and their swiftboating antiscience, ad-hominem, character based smears.
vote republican, vote to have drop and his ilk in policy making positions. Vote american hating progressive hating status quo loving, loyalist partisan drug lamebaugh shills into policy managerial positions.
Drop, you are a great republican. Abstanance does not work as policy, which has been proven to death in statistical study after statistical study, but don't worry about the truth. Its all relative for a good republican. vote for Drop, you'd get more votes than super senior senile McBush.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
You hate America with your lying smears and your reference to "Swiftboating" is simply a way to whine about anyone who points out inconvenient facts. You are an appeasing, libanazi who goose steps to the beat of the Leftist drum. Anti, you aren't great at anything!
Reply-
0%
antibrainwasher2 months ago
I'd bet I make more money than you, son. And I think for myself. Sorry to disappoint.
Reply-
-
-
NemoShiZniTComment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
tanglang2 months ago
Online you can make as much as you want. There isno way to prove it so shush! Here, this is what you sound like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GcVnhNjWV0
Reply
-
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.9 Replies
-
0%
tanglang2 months ago
So you're saying we should all follow Gloucester's lead?
I think not. Look, when the schools can finally master teaching Reading, Writing and Arithmetic THEN and only then should we allow them to teach something else.
Right now our schools are graduating morons. They are failing at teaching the basics so why the hell do you think they should teach your kids about sex?
Reply-
0%
Bacalao2 months ago
what kind of learning do you expect to put on our childrens when the bible is now a science text book?
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
0%
Tangent0012 months ago
You have clearly had a bad experience with public education. Whether that is first-hand or not, I don't know. My experience has been positive, both for myself, and my children.
There are clearly 'broken' districts, but I don't think they are the norm.
I think education should be a national priority. NCLB is a well-intentioned program, but the one-size-fits-all approach and lack of adequate funding has had only marginal success in improving sub-standard schools and has demonstrably harmed high-achieving schools.
Reply -
0%
Candida2 months ago
tanglang: "why the hell do you think they should teach your kids about sex?"
Because many parents don't. Besides, if schools are bad, whose fault is it?
I have a simple solution: those, and only those, who have never had a single extramarital sexual contact with anyone should be allowed to promote "abstinence only". It has worked for them, so they have earned the right to help others use the same method. The rest should just shut up about it or offer abstinence as one of the alternatives.
Reply -
0%
tkyrchncs2 months ago
Does it GET more basic than sex? Oh yeah, there's breathing, and eating, and eliminating waste-presumably the kids mostly know about these three when they get to school---
Reply
-
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
Heavens! Struck a nerve, I see. ;-P Listen, Dropkickalib...(can I just call you dicky, for...um, short? Thanks in advance)...um, dicky, it's nice that the cons *want* to feel as if you're supporting the disaster in Iraq and I realize you think that by merely hoping and praying that other families will continue to do all the sacrificing, while cheerleader cons buy all the American flags, "Support the Troops" magnets, beer mugs, boxer shorts, etc., but hundreds of thousands of people have died needlessly because of *YOUR* actions. You voted for Bush twice and, in my view, that makes you no less evil than Saddam Hussein. Harsh words, I know. That you will have to live with that knowledge for the rest of your life is, I'm sure, quite shameful. But think of the people your actions caused to DIE and who will never get a chance to type a post supporting the debacle in Iraq. Think about them, dicky. They deserve so much more than cons have given them. So very much more... ;-(
Reply-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
"mesostupid,
You missed the nerve...amusing attempt at mental masturbation. Save your keystrokes and therefore your finger strength for signing your public assistance check."
--Gee, Dicky...No reason to get irate. I was just saying I understand why cons wouldn't want to be reminded of the irony of voting for Bush so that we could save the people of Iraq from an evil dictator only for you to turn around and have your President (the man cons voted for TWICE) slaughter hundreds of thousands of Iraqis by unnecessarily and illegally invading their country. Just because their senseless deaths and the unforgivable deaths of so many young Americans and our allies were so violent and horrifying doesn't mean I don't appreciate what you're going through (knowing that *your* poor judgement and severe lack of education contributed to their lives being snuffed out). It doesn't mean I don't care, Dicky. ;-(
Reply-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Was that a note to yourself because it sure read like one, dumbkluck?
Reply
-
-
0%
Candida2 months ago
DropkickaLib: "We'll have to compare transcripts sometime"
No need. The posts here show quite clearly everyone's communication and critical thinking skills. I'm deliberately not using the word education because pieces of paper mean very little. I know from past posts that there are a few on Propeller, who have very little formal education but are clear thinkers nonetheless. Then there are those who may have the paper but have never learned to think.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
injest2 months ago
States Reject Bush's Abstinence-Only Funding
FTA
"A federal tally shows that participation in the program is down 40 percent over two years, with 28 states still in. Arizona and Iowa have announced their intention to forgo their share of the federal grant at the start of the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.
The program was created by Congress in 1996 as part of welfare reform."
"created by Congress in 1996"
Uhmm, do you know that Bush wasn't President in 1996?
Reply-
0%
dunkirk2 months ago
Pssst but your guys controlled Congress and tied tht into funding for a multitude of other things so if CLinton vetoed it he would have been accused of shortchanging education? Oh I keep forgetting tho that despitre 6 years of a REPUBLICAN controlled congress, Presidency and court system they were just incapable of changing that right? I mean why elect a REPUBLICAN they just never seem to be able to correct ANY of those problems you righties love to lay at Clintons feet, no matter how long ago it was. In fact based on some of your posts Carter is still controlling hte White House. AMazing, just so incapable of changin all those wroings they keep pointing to.
Reply-
0%
injest2 months ago
Dunkirk
"Pssst but your guys controlled Congress and tied tht into funding for a multitude of other things so if CLinton vetoed it he would have been accused of shortchanging education?"
Pssst, Clinton DID veto the first attempt.
Pssst, Congress gave and Clinton signed into law by President on April 9, 1996
The Line Item Veto Act of 1996
Pssst, Clinton used the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 to cancel military spending
Clinton Vetoes 38 Military Items, Drawing Many Lawmakers' Ire
President Clinton used his new line-item-veto power today to pinpoint and strike from a vast military construction
Pssst, The welfare reform act was signed in to law August 22, 1996,
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.
Pssst, now don't you feel incredibly stupid?
Reply-
0%
dunkirk2 months ago
Psssst no since the line item veto wasnt applicable. You do understand that it was declared unconstitutional right? That almost immediately after it was passed by COngress it was challenged and Clinton vetoing the military spending was to push the issue? You do understand that right? Oh wait you don't understand that since you tried to say CLinton could have vetoed the bill using it. Dang facts getting in the way again.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
HannibalBarca2 months ago
Hey dropkicked in the head: Reason most Canadians love humour is because we live beside the worlds greatest two ring circus, hell the material that is supplied is priceless....LMAO
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
-
0%
HannibalBarca2 months ago
From what???Your enemies??? LMAO, they aren't ours, and since we are helping you in Afgan, don't ask for any more, mind you you sure need it.
Reply-
-
0%
HannibalBarca2 months ago
ROTFLMFAO, ohhh you are a hoot, try googleing Norman Bethune and China and you will find out where we stand with China.
Remember it was not until 1970 or so that your brilliant way of thinking recognized 25% of the worlds population, and it seems in your mind sink you are replacing USSR with the fight on Terror and soon that to be replaced with China; not my problem.
As for Russia well that is your problem too.
WE DON"T NEED YOUR PROTECTION; BUT WHO WILL PROTECT YOU FROM YOURSELVES; AND YOU NEED IT!.
Reply-
-
0%
HannibalBarca2 months ago
ROTFLMAO, hell big bad US can't protect herself, the Mexican Drug cartels show that.
And it seems you can't even reinforce Afgan with what is asked for, 10,000 more troops, until you can release them from Iraq.
And remember WW!! USA never got into a ground war in Europe till 43, but 2 years later the war was over, and here you are still fighting Iraq for 5 years with a dim view of the future, and you think I want that kind of protection.....OMG talk about delusional.
Reply-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Thanks for proving my point. Canada has been safe since it entered an alliance with the U.S. The War of 1812 was a long time ago and I seem to remember that we were invaded by Canada then. Tell the whole story please.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
jordan112 months ago
Careful now. You probably won't get any green stamps for insulting an ally. Best you stick to negs.
Reply -
0%
HannibalBarca2 months ago
Well if we keep going up we will be in cloud 15, a rain cloud :-)
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
"Canadians love humor? I'd rather they just paid for their own defense."
--Ok but...um, Dicky, you forgot to tell Hannibal how Bush is creatively financing our disgraceful invasion of Iraq. Ok...I'll do it... Hannibal, we're puttin it on our multi-trillion dollar American Express War card. ;-P Bush and the GOP worked it out so that we never run out of credit. Cool, huh? I guess membership has its privileges and all. ;-P
Reply-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
"You're supporting our nation's enemies as ardently as possible so don't blame yourself."
--wow, Dicky...You are mighty touchy today. I was only telling Hannibal that we are borrowing trillions of dollars to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan and that our next two generations are gonna have to pay out the ying yang (hey..Dicky, what's a "ying yang" anyway? I always wondered where that saying came from) for Bush and the con cult's wargasm. That's alls I was trying to say, Dicky. ;-(
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
You are might simple today mesosimple. I'm sure that the origin of a saying isn't all that leaves you mystied. Sorry to interrupt your recreational drug use with all this posting.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
chuck-the-canuck2 months ago
Come to Canada and I'll more than drop kick you, you little brain dead weasel.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
KvilleTXComment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
TheNewsseeker2 months ago
Teens should not get restricted like that! They should experience sexuality as one of the greatest gifts god gave to us, men and women. They have to make use of it with responsibility, but it should never cause fear and shame.
A surpressed sexuality, burdened with the idea of sin, is much more dangerous than the natural discovery of the other sex, whenever it is the right time. Nevertheless, it is very necessary to talk about the dangers of an early pregnancy at school. But abstinence is only one method of preservation. The chemical, biological and "mechanical" ones should also be introduced to the kids.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Kids could use a dose of old fashioned teaching about the meaning of "sin", an actual sense of values that doesn't involve living like a dog in the park, humping everything that sits still for them.
Reply-
0%
david_nwpa2 months ago
Kids need ethics, not morality. They can tell the difference between right and wrong without having "sin" enter the equation. If they want to learn about that, let them get it in church on Sunday. If parents want to teach that at home, then fine. Just keep it out of the schools.
Reply -
0%
Coatl2 months ago
The main problem about that is that not all worldviews agree in the meaning of sin. Sin to a muslim kid, would have a different meaning to a jew kid, or to a catholic kid, or to a lutheran kid, or to a budhist kid, etc. Not to mention an atheist kid.
Reply-
-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
It's not a problem. Why do I have to adhere to the relgious values of another society? Why must my faith adhere to the tenets of other religions? That's a form of moral relativism straight out of the 1960s and I reject it.
Reply-
0%
Tangent0012 months ago
"Why do I have to adhere to the relgious values of another society?"
You don't.
By the same token, why should someone else have to adhere to the values of YOUR religion?
Teaching ethics in lieu of 'morality' is about logical consequences, harm reduction and personal responsibility, rather than subjective notions of 'sin'.
Reply-
-
0%
antibrainwasher2 months ago
Mores and ethics predated your religion by about 50,000 years. Your religion, what ever it is, if it claims credit for mores and ethics, is lying, which is propably against its own mores and ethics. Ironic, no?
Reply-
-
-
-
mishandledComment removed: User banned.7 Replies
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.5 Replies
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
-
0%
BB642 months ago
Actually, that's not entirely true. Turning the other cheek was when someone was attacking your faith. He didn't use kindness to remove the money changers from the temple, that was a whip.
Jesus was a faithful Jew so he would have shunned the "free" sex movement that pervades our world today. He might have preached to prostitutes, he never employed them. The unclean living of the Romans and Greeks would not have been something he supported. He also created wine from water at a wedding feast supporting the concept of marriage. That would between man & woman.
Shunning worldly goods, well he did suggest that of the rich man that is true. But then again he hung out with the tax collectors and told the thief on the cross you will be in heaven this very day, so I think even the rich would make it. As for cafeteria Christians, there are a lot out there, preaching success through simply "being" Christian. Hard sell when things don't go well.
Reply-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Coatl2 months ago
I thought the basis of US laws (and most of the Western Law Codes) were the Roman Laws. But let's say that indeed your religion is the basis of the US Laws and Values, are the current US values only of one religion or worldview? And if so, how would making everyone else adhere to those values would be different from Saudi Arabia imposing Sharia law to almost everyone?
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Actually, English Law, and therefore American Law is not based on Roman Law but that is true for much of Western Europe. FYI, the Romans were Christians by the end of the Empire.
Reply-
0%
Coatl2 months ago
But the Roman Law was already stablished long before the first Christian Emperor. Anyway, still how making all of those who aren't of a certain branch of christianty adhere to the values of whatever branch you're following a good thing? How would that be different of what Saudi Arabia does?
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
Not too many JW's as a proportion of Christians. There is a lively debate as to whether they are properly considered Christians since they reject the Holy Trinity.
Reply -
-
0%
Coatl2 months ago
"The basic values of Christianity are quite uniform."
Probably, but not the concept of "sin" itself. Last time I checked to recieve a blood transfusion is a sin to JW, but not to many other branches of Christianity and to use any anticonceptive measure is a sin to a catholic, but not to most of lutherans, to name a few, so wich version of christian values you would like to see imposed to everyone in the US?
You could say that those that are mentioned in the bible, but catholics and protestans don't even have all the same books in their bibles.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
jordan112 months ago
I thought the basis of US laws (and most of the Western Law Codes) were the Roman Laws>>>>
English Common Law (see magna carta prior to christianity going to England) from which habeas corpus sprung, Solon of ancient Greece (first democracy) influenced it, Republicanism (not to be confused with this republican party), Philosophers Rousseau, Locke, Montesquieu, & Voltaire from the Enlightenment period, & so on. Christ also had a strong influence, but that was separate from the dogma of the rest of the christian bible, (as the framers writings made clear).
Reply
-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
"My religion just happens to be the basis for our society's social mores and laws."
--LOL...Dicky, if you're not gonna be serious we should talk about something else. Anyway, Dicky, lots of countries have way lower teen pregnancy rates than us and they achieve this without resorting to lies, emotional bullying and scare tactics. They also don't have to flush billions of dollars down the toilet on programs that are proven to be utterly useless. As inconceivable as this might sound, sometimes America doesn't know best, Dicky? Ponder that... ;-(
Reply-
-
0%
Tangent0012 months ago
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the rate of unwanted pregnancy has DECLINED over the past 2 decades. As for divorce/illegitimacy/poverty, I would say there is more evidence that poverty is the CAUSE of divorce (and therefore illegitemacy) than the other way 'round. Of course, they feed into each other, but financial problems are the #1 cause of divorce in the US.
Divorce rates were lowest when the middle class was strongest. Now, let's see...which party has done more to squeeze out the middle class? Hmmm...
Reply -
0%
mesodude2 months ago
"Your Leftist ideology and the destruction of the family has directly led to the current teen pregnancy figures. Exploding rates of divorce and illegitimacy have directly led to rising poverty among abandoned children, thank to Libs like you pricky! "
--OMG, Dicky...Ok breeeeathe. You're spinning out of control there buddy. Is defending Bush's failed, criminal and deadly domestic policy worth a stroke? Simmer down and tell us what's really on your mind. ;-(
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib2 months ago
It's ok Pricky,
Put down the doobie, take a deep breath then think. Now that your head is clear, you're thinking more like a Conservative alright, right?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
mesodude2 months ago
LOL...I guess you haven't spent a half hour having to wade through all the porn and spam and right wing noise stories on the front page of Propeller for a story worth commenting on yet. ;-P
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
