gets on my nerves, because it makes it look like the intention of the evil Bush theocracy was to ensure that no teenager would ever again know the the joys of putting a condom on a bananna in a tax-funded HS classroom. In fact, no matter how liberals try to brand it, the only purpose of this appropriation was to ensure that some of that tax money goes towards getting the message out that there is another way besides promicuity. Liberals, of course, believe that adults have zero influence on adolescents, and teenagers will be having sex not matter what we tell them, because that's what teenagers do.
Why do Catholics continue to fawn over this guy?
The more young unwed mothers you create, the more welfare recipients you create. The more welfare recipients you create, the more loyal Democrat voters you create.
Thus, Democrat sex-education must always focus on getting teenagers to have more sex, not less.
How does replacing a 100 million dollar program with a 110 million dollar equate to a cut? No body questions this community organizer...
So let’s see... so far, he’s turned his back on Christianity, turned his back on abstinence, funded and encouraged abortion both in the United States and world-wide, nationalized the automobile industry, nationalized the banking industry, put caps on businessmen’s salaries, demoralized Wall Street, demoralized the CIA, cut the military budget, bowed to the Saudis, flipped off the Israelis, offered the Glad Hand to Fidel, played kissy-face with Iran and turned a blind eye to their nuclear weapons program... what am I leaving out?
Yep, it’s been a heck of a start. If present trends continue, by the time 2012 rolls around, we’ll have Red Guards parading in the streets and waving the Little Red Book as the urban proletariat is marched out to the farms to grow rice.
Well after all. The sexual promiscuity and immorality advocates are among Maobama’s biggest voting blocs. BHO has to reward them so they’ll keep fawning over him.
SEICUS and other “sex positive” agenda foundations encourage teen sex.
Positive.org has a “just say yes” campaign targeted at teens.
The falicy is they proclaim that “abstinence doesn’t work”. They lie. Elsewhere you can find them making statements that it is an “unhealthy” supression of sexual desires. They are against it in principle, not the practicality of it.
Hey, it worked so well for the Palin's, right? Programs that preach one solution and one solution only are pretty much useless, and that is true of programs which preach birth control only as well as ones who preach abstinence only. I have no problem with abstinence being one of the suggested guidelines in a government program, but for it to be the only one ignores the problem of teen pregnancy rather than deals with it.