Bush: Keep abstinence in AIDS program

[babylonsister]

Bush: Keep abstinence in AIDS program

By BEN FELLER
Associated Press Writer


DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania (AP) -- President Bush on Sunday said Congress should renew his global AIDS program and preserve a requirement that steers money into abstinence efforts.

"We don't want people guessing on the continent of Africa whether the generosity of the American people will continue," Bush said in Tanzania, the second stop of his African trip.

Congress strongly backs the program, which is credited with getting medicine and preventive treatment to millions of people - most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. Yet its renewal has gotten hung up over ideology and political debate about disease prevention.

Some Democrats want to eliminate a provision in the bill that requires one-third of all prevention spending go to abstinence-until-marriage programs. Critics say that while they don't oppose abstinence programs, the inflexible requirement hampers the effort.

Bush said the time for debate is over, and that those seeking changes on both ends of the political spectrum should "stop the squabbling."

more...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BUSH_AFRICA?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Solly Mack]

1. Bush: Keeping the Absent in Prevention

[EFerrari]

2. "renewal has gotten hung up over ideology and political debate"

Nice framing from the AP. Bush wants to keep in an element that has been proven not to work and that puts the whole program at risk so the AP calls it ideology and politics.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

3. They aren't guessing George.

They know you tie the $$ to abstinence programs so your buddies in the God For Profit business get sweetheart deals to further line their pockets.

[11 Bravo]

4. Why couldn't Poppy and the bug-eyed old lush have practiced abstinence?

[Deja Q]

5. Well, people can choose to do what they want,

but people should know the potential outcomes of what they choose to do.

Perhaps both sides on this issue have legitimate points?


(BTW: I was told that by a relative, who happens to be, amongst other things, a very Liberal democrat. So if you insult me. You insult her. )

[Sadie4629]

6. I saw a presentation on abstinence education

just yesterday. It was actually very good. I was impressed. The emphasis was on OWNING your body, CONTROLLING your own choices, and making INFORMED decisions. Who could argue with that?

Lots of young women enter into sexual relationships before they are emotionally ready, and for all the wrong reasons--peer pressure, needing love, to "keep" a boyfriend. I think they need to hear that there is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "no" until THEY are ready. (And IMHO that is not until they are well out of high school.)

Don't know if such a program would work in African countries, but we need to see more of it here.

[Deja Q]

7. Agreed.

:yourock:

[Hugabear]

8. I don't think anyone really has a problem with abstinence per se

That's all fine and dandy. But the problem is when the religious right wants that to be the ONLY education available to teens. Kids need to know about alternatives if they choose not to remain abstinent. We can't pretend that kids aren't going to fool around.

[Sadie4629]

11. This program is actually faith-based

so I was surprised at how good it was. There is no religious content at all. They gave factual information about STDs/STIs, some physiological information about how the parts work, and busted some myths. (For instance, some kids actually believe that you can't get pregnant if you have sex standing up. Or that oral sex is safe, just because you can't get pregnant.)

They did games that involved swishing your mouth with water and then passing your cup to another person to drink. No one would, of course, but the analogy is obvious: If you don't want to catch someone's cold by exposing yourself to someone else's germs, why would you risk herpes, or chlamydia, or PID by exposing yourself to their germs?

They do not discuss birth control, but they do refer kids who want that information to their family doctors, or school counselors, or other services.

All in all, I think the program does a fine job within the confines of their own mission.

[BanzaiBonnie]

13. Possibly some abstinence ed is good

But some of it is deadly.

What my daughter got was disturbing info on the use of condoms. Basically they got cartoons that showed condoms DON'T work to protect you from disease.

So if people are taught that, then why bother to use them?

[Sadie4629]

14. Actually,

I believe that is true. Condoms decrease the risk, but don't eliminate it. If someone naively believes that a condom will keep her safe, she is at great risk of not only contracting an STD, but of passing it on as well.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. I think the point is that Bush's programs put too much emphasis on abstinence

and abstinence alone does not work. Especially for teenagers. Many of them are going to be sexually active regardless of how many times they are told to stay abstinent. So we need a menu of choices. Just say no to sex doesn't work well as AIDS prevention.

[malaise]

9. Someone should have told his parents before

they spawned this war criminal.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. AMEN!!

:applause:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

10. I have no problem with teaching abstinence, but if that is all, and not teaching how condoms prevent

AIDS, then IMHO, teaching abstinence only is criminal.

[Sadie4629]

12. I think that most people would agree

that condoms DON'T prevent AIDS; they merely decrease the risk. That's why some educational groups prefer the term "safer sex." To tell someone that they are perfectly safe from HIV/AIDS, or most other STD's is misleading.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

15. What you are saying is very dangerous. Condoms do prevent the spread of AIDS, perhaps not 100%

but to say that they don't is definitely misleading.

[NC_Nurse]

16. The argument isn't about cutting out abstinence programs...

it's about the MANDATE that 1/3rd of the money is spent on that. That seems ridiculous to me.
The people who are implementing the program need to decide how the funds are dispersed,
they could still mandate that some of the funding go to the abstinence part, just not a set amount.
Why not do that?

[spanone]

19. 'just say no' it worked so well in the drug war....bu$h* is pathetically delusional