Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mixedmedia
I realize it is a lovely thought and more like a pipe dream. Ideally we would pay for it in the interest of giving women a more concrete investment in the idea of birth control and curbing, what I consider to be, the rather barbaric practice of abortion as a means of birth control. Which, whether we like to admit it or not, is its greater purpose. After all, the public already pays a great deal for it the whether they like it or not.
So the big deal-breakers are the money (always the money, the money, the fucking money - why does the government seem to either be swimming in resources or flat broke?) and the pro-lifers who don't want women to be so empowered to engage in sex out of wedlock, especially their teenage daughters.
I fully admit to being a dreamer on this subject. Then again, if I were Queen, things would be different.  |
We can start by using the $200+ million/year the federal government has allocated for the last 6 years for three abstinence only programs - Adolescent Family Life Act, Community Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) and SSA Title V.
Funding for the largest of the three (grants to faith based organizations), CBAE, has increased over 400% since 2001 while grant program for comprehensive sex education have been flatlined or decreased. The latest CBAE guidelines require "grantees to teach abstinence from any "sexual stimulation" between two people, term so broad it could encompass kissing". (
link)
We're also paying to teach our children that "sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects"
(
link)