NY Times: Abstinence Education is "Anti-Science"

I thought it was pretty sciency to say that abstinence is the only sure fire way to avoid pregnancy but it turns out that the New York Times knows better.

I'm linking to Breitbart's story about it because I try not to reward asshattery:
The New York Times editorial board says the Trump administration is “quietly advancing an anti-science” agenda by supporting teen pregnancy prevention programs that encourage young people to refrain from sex to avoid pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STD).
In an editorial Sunday, the board condemns the promotion of abstinence among teens by the current Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The reproach is delivered without one word about the scientific fact that the only certain way young teens can avoid having to deal with the unfortunate situations of an unplanned pregnancy or being infected with an STD is to not have sex.

“The administration is promoting a ‘just say no’ approach” and is ‘poised to shift Title X family planning dollars … toward programs that advocate abstinence outside of marriage,” says the editorial board, sure that only horrific outcomes will ensue from encouraging young people to delay sex until they are older, have completed school, and have met someone special.

“The administration’s approach defies all common sense,” the editors write, claiming there is no evidence that teaching young people to make healthy decisions about sex will reduce teen pregnancies or STDs.
Because the narrative is more important than SCIENCE.

I get a big kick out of accusations of being anti-science when one is saying clearly scientifically accurate things sorta' like boys are boys and girls are girls or that the way to not get pregnant is to not have sex. Y'know, crazy talk that can now be considered a hate crime.



*subhead*Narrative.*subhead*

Comments