NEW! STUDIES AND STATISTICS : UNDERSTANDING ILLEGITIMACY

NEW! PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT : BUILD STRONG PARTNERSHIPS WITH SCHOOLS

NEW! TEENAGE SEXUAL ACTIVITY : AAP PEDIATRICIANS WARN AGAINST TEEN ALCOHOL USE

NEW! STUDIES AND STATISTICS : CASUAL SEX LEADS TO MORE CASUAL SEX

NEW! PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVISES HIV+ YOUTH TO ENJOY SEX, CONSIDER WITHHOLDING STATUS FROM PARTNERS

MEDICAL JOURNAL REPORT: ABSTINENCE EDUCATION WORKS

VIEWING CHILDREN AS "SEXUAL BEINGS"

TEENAGE SEXUAL ACTIVITY : DROP IN TEEN BIRTH RATE RESUMES; UNMARRIED BIRTHS SURPASS 40%

PEDIATRICIANS SET THE FACTS STRAIGHT ABOUT SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER CONFUSION

SEXUAL ADDICTION/PORNOGRAPHY : PRINCETON EVENT: AUTHOR SAYS PORN DESTROYS INTIMACY

PARENT'S CORNER:
THE NEW “CONSERVA-TEENS”
R-RATED MOVIE VIEWING LEADS TO RISKY BEHAVIOR
PARENTAL CONTROLS AVAILABLE FOR CELL PHONES

EDUCATORS WARNED RE: NEW SEX-ED LAW

Hijacking the Brain -- How Pornography Works

Women Really Want Abstinence-Based Empowerment, Not the NOW and Casual Sex Approach

Culture Challenge of the Week: Abstinence Education...The Present Administration Abstains from What Works

IPPF Africa Conference Pushes Abortion and Youth Sex

'Pornography Harms' Website Launched

Celebrating Chastity:

National Week of Chastity -- February 13-19
http://www.chastityweek.org and www.DayOfPurity.org

Guttmacher Study Shows "Devastating Consequences" of Sex-Education [aka "Comprehensive Sex Education", i.e. "safe/safer sex" ... NOTE TO REMEMBER: Risk REDUCTION is definitely NOT EQUAL to Risk ELIMINATION]

CDC, 10/09: Sexually Transmitted Diseases Surveillance, 2008
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats08/surv2008-complete.pdf

Sexual Health Information (The Medical Institute)
http://www.medinstitute.org/public/department40.cfm

THE VOICE... www.theridgeproject.com  (for Parents!)

Study: Teens who Get Intoxicated Regularly are More Likely to be Sexually Active

Half of Urban Teen Girls Acquire STIs (STDs) within 2 Years of First Sexual Activity

Commentary: Admitting Sex is Procreative – a Surprising Proposal to Curb Nonmarital Births

Study: Groundbreaking Study Proves Abstinence Education Works

NEW! Poll Shows Majority of Americans Say Abstinence Effective, Want Parents Involved

Ridiculous: PP blames abstinence education for rise in teen pregnancy...

STUDIES AND STATISTICS : UNDERSTANDING ILLEGITIMACY
America is rapidly becoming a two-caste society, with marriage and education at the dividing line.

Children born to married couples with a college education are mostly in the top half of the population; children born to single mothers with high-school degrees or less are mostly in the bottom half. [http://article.nationalreview.com/430875/understanding-illegitimacy/robert-rector?page=1; Robert Rector, Heritage.org; APR 20, 2010, abstinence.net]

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT : BUILD STRONG PARTNERSHIPS WITH SCHOOLS
Positive relationships with schools and school districts start with approaching administrators. A positive, collaborative attitude; well-researched information; and respect for the pressures facing schools are essential when meeting with these key decision makers.

Check out this pamphlet, Promising Practices, for tips to use before, during, and after a meeting. [http://abstinence.paltech.com/assets/File/Broaden_the_Reach_Project/SPPPromisingPractices.pdf;  APR 20, 2010, abstinence.net, http://www.abstinence.net/library/index.php?entryid=4688]

TEENAGE SEXUAL ACTIVITY : PEDIATRICIANS WARN AGAINST TEEN ALCOHOL USE
A new policy statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics warns that alcohol consumption puts teens at risk by contributing to:

1) the major causes of teen deaths;
2) other risky behavior, including sexual activity;
3) binge drinking; and
4) physical damage, especially to the developing brain.

[http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-04-12-teendrinking12_ST_N.htm?POE=click-refer; APR 20, 2010, abstinence.net, http://www.abstinence.net/library/index.php?entryid=4689]



STUDIES AND STATISTICS : CASUAL SEX LEADS TO MORE CASUAL SEX
The sex may be casual—of the “friends with benefits” variety—but the consequences often are not. Recent data shows that people involved in “nonromantic” sexual relationships are frequently not monogamous, opening the door to std infection.

Among the respondents, aged 18-60, a sexual relationship with a friend made it 44% more likely for women and 25% more likely for men to have other concurrent sexual encounters.

"The United States has seen a major shift toward nonromantic sexual partnerships -- people becoming sexually involved when they are just casually dating or not dating at all," said study author Anthony Paik of the University of Iowa College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.
[http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20100408/hl_hsn/casualsexincreasinginus; APR 20, 2010, abstinence.net, http://www.abstinence.net/library/index.php?entryid=4690]


PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVISES HIV+ YOUTH TO ENJOY SEX, CONSIDER WITHHOLDING STATUS FROM PARTNERS
The controversial International Planned Parenthood guide “Healthy, Happy, and Hot” tells young people infected with the virus that they “have the right to sexual pleasure,” and only they “know best when it is safe for [them] to disclose [their] status.” IPPF also refers to non-existent international laws intended to protect their “human rights.”

Critic Peter Sprigg explains: "To the extent that 'sexual rights' and 'reproductive rights' are mentioned in documents of the U.N. or other international agencies…these terms…usually [mean] the right to say NO to unwanted or coerced sex -- not a right to HAVE sex under almost any circumstances.”
[http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/63970; APR 20, 2010, abstinence.net, http://www.abstinence.net/library/index.php?entryid=4691]

ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION -- Abstinence-only education equals decreased promiscuity. In the Archives of the Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine's February 2010 issue, abstinence-only intervention is linked to a lower rate of sexual involvement among African-American pre-teens. [March 2010, Cincinnati RT Life News Brief]

Report Says Abstinence Education Works
A new study has confirmed what pro-family activists have known for quite some time—abstinence education works. Classes that focus on encouraging young people to remain abstinent successfully convince “a significant proportion” to delay sexual activity, reported The Washington Post, which noted that the findings are the result of “the first carefully designed study to evaluate the controversial approach to sex ed.”

“I think we’ve written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence,” said lead researcher John B. Jemmott III, Ph.D., a professor of communication in psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, and director of the Center for Health Behavior and Communication Research at the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Researchers found that one-third of sixth and seventh graders who went through sessions focused on abstinence started having sex in the next two years.

But more than 50 percent of young people in other classes, including those that provided information about birth control, became sexually active.

The study is the first to evaluate an abstinence program using a carefully controlled design that compared it directly to alternative strategies which heretofore had been considered effective based on “the highest level of scientific evidence.

”Even a few critics of abstinence education conceded that the study provides strong evidence in support of such programs. This new study is game-changing,” said Sarah Brown of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, which has been a devoted advocate of the Planned Parenthood approach.

“For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well.”

Many opponents of abstinence education are unwilling to accept the findings.

“There is no data in this study to support the ‘abstain-until marriage’ programs, which research proved ineffective during the Bush administration,” said James Wagoner of Advocates for Youth.

Another charge by critics of abstinence education was that the study was not representative of most abstinence programs in that it “did not take on a moralistic tone as many abstinence programs do,” The Washington Post article said.

Most notably, the sessions encouraged children to delay sex until they “are ready” (not necessarily until they are married), did not portray sex outside of marriage as never appropriate, and did not disparage condoms.

“For our critics to use ‘marriage’ as the thing that sets the program in this study apart from federally funded programs is an exaggeration and smacks of an effort to dismiss abstinence education rather than understanding what it is,” said Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association.

The new study involved inner-city students who were randomly assigned either a program that:
· urged students to delay having sex;
· focused on teaching “safe sex”;
· urged students to delay having sex but also taught
about “safe sex”; or
· taught students ways to be healthy, such as eating well
and exercising.

The Washington Post reported the findings:
Over the next two years, about 33 percent of the students who went through the abstinence program started having sex, compared with about 52 percent who were taught only safe sex.

About 42 percent of the students who went through the comprehensive program started having sex, and about 47 percent of those who learned about other ways to be healthy did.

The abstinence program had no negative effects on condom use, which has been a major criticism of the abstinence approach.

Despite the study, proponents of “comprehensive sexuality education” are not abandoning their approach.
“One of the things that’s exciting about this study is that it says we have a new tool to add to our repertoire,” Monica Rodriguez, vice president for education and training at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), told The Washington Post.

In other words, she makes it clear that “comprehensive sexuality education” will not be abandoned.

Jemmott, who has worked to identify strategies to reduce risky sexual behavior, agreed with Rodriguez. “Our study shows this could be one approach that could be used (emphasis added). He continued: "The take-home message is that we need a variety of interventions to address an epidemic like HIV, sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. There are populations that really want an abstinence intervention. They are against telling children about condoms. This study suggests abstinence programs can be part of the mix of programs that we offer."

The world’s largest public policy women’s organization, Concerned Women for America (CWA), released a statement pointing out for many years now “social scientists” have loudly and authoritatively declared that abstinence programs are ineffective.

“This new study is extremely important because the earlier teens begin having sex, the more partners they have and the more likely they are to be exposed to sexually transmitted diseases,” said Penny Nance, CWA’s chief executive officer.

“This evidence shines a light of truth on the myths that are promoted by Planned Parenthood and those who benefit financially from ‘comprehensive’ sex education programs at the expense of the well-being of the nation’s adolescents and pre-teens.”

“When informed, parents have overwhelmingly indicated that they don’t like the agenda driven content of so-called ‘comprehensive’ sex education programs,” said Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., director and senior fellow of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute (BLI).

“All thinking adults recognize that teen sexual activity is harmful to teens and the consequences can be life-changing (ranging from STDs to unplanned pregnancies). Yet,the left continues to offer teens the option of so-called ‘safe sex’ as though they are expected to engage in sexual activity and that it can be made ‘safe’ for their physical and psychological well-being.”

Crouse said BLI research has shown that “many of the positive reviews of comprehensive sex education—self defined as ‘evidence based’—are misleading and biased.”

She charged that leftist groups have “convinced Congress to de-fund abstinence programs based on self-serving, financially-driven myths that have been constructed without a solid foundation in fact or scientific evidence.”

Leslee Unruh, president of the National Abstinence Clearinghouse, welcomed the study’s findings.

“Finally, a study that proves what those of us who have been teaching abstinence have known for years. These programs help developed self control and self-esteem, teaching kids they do not need to fall prey to the game of Russian Roulettewith condoms.”

“Abstinence programs show kids there are too many great things riding on their future to risk it to STDs, pregnancy and broken hearts,” Unruh continued.

“Abstinence is a message our kids want to hear—this study shows youth are making healthier choices and changing their behavior in response…”

“Science has finally caught up with logic and what parents have known for centuries by empirically demonstrating that equipping teens to abstain from sexual activity is an effective way to prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases,” said David Stevens, M.D., of the Christian Medical & Dental Associations.

Stevens said it is notable that the study’s chief researcher conceded that abstinence-only education had been “written-off” before anybody took a close look “at the nature of the evidence.” (The admission showed that Jemmott is intellectually honest.)

“What we should learn from this experience is that while science itself is objective, scientists themselves can be biased and can mislead the public and policymakers.”

“It is unbelievable that die-hards in the anti-abstinence education realm could reject the findings of this remarkable research,” said LDI President Douglas R. Scott, Jr.

“Scientific methods were utilized and since most of them virtually worship science they should be thrilled. But when science contradicts pre-conceived notions and a worldview, it must be flawed.”

The liberal Washington Post refused to declare victory for abstinence education.
Its story on the study was headed, “Abstinence-only programs might work, study says (emphasis added).”

Scott pointed out that proving abstinence education works is just half the story of the research.

“The study demonstrated that Planned Parenthood’s response to this issue is now and always has been a colossal failure. Simply put, scientific research shows that abstinence education works and ‘comprehensive sex education’ does not.”

The Obama Administration eliminated more than $150 million in funding for abstinence education programs and implemented a $114 million scheme that funds only those programs with “scientific” data to back their efficacy.

In other words, projects pushed by Planned Parenthood will get the money.

But The Washington Post conceded that abstinence programs are “relatively new” and there has not been a concerted attempt to determine their effectiveness.

Nevertheless, the Administration will increase spending on its new safe sex program to $183 million.

Stevens said many groups and individuals have been relentless in labeling abstinence education an utter failure.
They used their own studies to convince many lawmakers to eliminate funding for abstinence programs, “in the process depriving teens and their parents from a potent resource that can mean a life-saving difference.”

The timing could not have been better for the release of a survey of 1,002 parents of children ages 10-16 conducted by Zogby International for the National Abstinence Education Association.

The poll found that when parents are made aware of what is taught as part of “abstinence education” versus “comprehensive sex education,” support for abstinence programs jumps from 40 percent to 60 percent.

On the other hand, support for comprehensive programs drops from 50 percent to 30 percent.

This increase in support of abstinence education is seen across all political and economic groups.“

These results confirm broad-based support for abstinence education, including teaching teens about developing healthy relationships and increasing self worth and self control,” said Huber.

“While abstinence education has been continually misrepresented by its opponents, we were confident that parents would strongly prefer abstinence education over…comprehensive sex education after they received full, accurate information…”

She said the poll “confirms that abstinence education is the preferred approach for the sex education of youth…”

The survey showed overwhelming parental support for how abstinence programs permit an age appropriate discussion of birth control within the context of promoting abstinence as the healthiest choice.

A staggering 93 percent of parents said they want their children to be taught the limitations of condoms in providing complete protection against specific sexually transmitted diseases and to learn how often condoms fail in preventing pregnancy based upon typical use.

Most parents opposed the “comprehensive” approach, which focuses on promoting and demonstrating birth control use.

Nearly 66 percent of parents think the importance of the “wait to have sex” message gets lost when birth control is encouraged and demonstrated.

Another important and eye-opening finding from the poll is that 59 percent of parents said more tax dollars should go to abstinence education. Only 22 percent said more money should go to comprehensive sex education.

Robert Rector, a senior researcher at the Heritage Foundation who wrote the criteria for federal funding of abstinence programs, said the study “takes away the main pillar of opposition” to abstinence education.

“I've always known…abstinence programs have gotten a bad rap.”

The new research was published in the February 2010 edition of Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine. The article is titled, “Efficacy of a Theory-Based Abstinence-Only Intervention Over 24 Months: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Young Adolescents.”[Jan-Feb 2010, The Caleb Report, Life Decisions International, www.fightpp.org]

VIEWING CHILDREN AS "SEXUAL BEINGS"
From its inception, Planned Parenthood greatest ally has been public ignorance of its goals and activities. This has been accomplished through a network of secrecy and
clever verbal engineering. (It even claims to support “abstinence,” but its definition of the term is rather loose.)
In an unusually candid report, the International Planned Parenthood Federation has provided a glimpse of the kind of world it seeks to create. And it is not a pretty picture.
----------------
Note: This edition of Special Reports includes text that some people may find offensive. Please use appropriate discretion.

The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is at it again. The group has released yet another report that has ignited controversy. Titled, “Stand & Deliver: Sex, Health and Young People in the 21st Century,” one should not expect to hear about the
revealing report on most news programs.

“Stand & Deliver” begins with a “Who We Are” section. IPPF describes itself as “a global service provider and a leading advocate of sexual and reproductive health andrights for all…[that] works towards a world where women, men and young peopleeverywhere have control over their own bodies, and therefore their destinies…where they are free to choose parenthood or not; free to decide how many children they will have and when; free to pursue healthy sexual lives without fear of unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV…where gender or sexuality are no longer a source of inequality or stigma.”

IPPF pledges it will “not retreat” from doing everything it can to “safeguard these important choices and rights for current and future generations.”

The sentiments expressed in the “Who We Are” section were echoed by Albert Gerard “Bert” Koenders, minister for Development Cooperation of the Kingdom of theNetherlands, who authored one of three forewords to the report. “Young people have the right to be fully informed about sexuality and to have access to contraceptives andother services,” he wrote. “These rights are enshrined in various internationally agreed human rights conventions and treaties, but—unfortunately—they are still not universally respected.”

Koenders wrote that many national governments do not view “sexual health or rights” as a “legitimate part of the public duty of care…” and most fail to even recognize that “young people are sexual beings.” He claimed the “taboo on youth sexuality” is one of the “key forces driving the AIDS epidemic and high rates of teenage pregnancy and maternal mortality.”

IPPF states that young people should get “comprehensive sexuality education.” What does IPPF mean when it refers to “young people”?
IPPF defined the phrase:

As most societies define adolescence and youth
in terms of both age and life circumstances,
there is no universal agreement on what is a
“young person”…The World Health Organization
defines young people as those from 10 to 24 years
of age, including adolescents (10-19 years) and
youth (15-24 years).

IPPF uses the terms young people, youth and
adolescents interchangeably to refer to people
who are between 10 and 24 years.
Defining all people under 18 years of age as a child
is often not useful because it ignores the circumstances
of youth who are faced with pressures and
responsibilities that are usually reserved for adults.

Policies and programmes for young people should
focus not so much on age, but on the specific
developmental needs and rights of individuals
as they transition from childhood to adulthood.

As you continue to read this edition of Special Reports, keep in mind that every time you read “young people, youth and adolescents,” IPPF includes 10-year-olds.

“Cultivating Minds and Bodies: The Building of a Citizen,” is a section of the report that describes the indoctrination young people should endure.

Amazingly, IPPF claims such programs will help children in an array of other areas as well (emphasis has been added):

Sex and reproduction are central to our lives, this is a
basic truth. Here is another: young people are sexual
beings. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that
sexuality education promotes individual well-being…
Comprehensive sexuality education is perhaps the
single most important gift that parents can offer to their
children–and to adolescents everywhere–as they approach
the age at which they will begin to have sex.
…
Comprehensive sexuality education empowers young people to make informed decisions to protect themselves from sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancies (and, by consequence, unsafe abortion); it increases self-esteem, thoughtful decision-making and negotiation skills; and it helps
them to develop satisfying and pleasurable sexual lives.
…
Health providers and governments should also
engage community leaders, parents and the
general public in sexuality education so they
understand how the benefits reverberate throughout
young people’s lives, and so they can themselves
participate in creating a supportive environment
of openness and inclusion.

“Stand & Deliver” warns against underestimating “the power” of comprehensive sex education to “challenge traditional gender roles…” It states that “while it is important to respect culture, it is only with the active support of key community leaders that culture evolves to reverse harmful attitudes and traditions around adolescence, gender, sexuality and childbearing (emphasis added).”

In other words, such programs serve to undermine religious and cultural standards that IPPF considers archaic.

IPPF demands access to every child, including yours. “To reach far and wide, to reach adolescents everywhere, comprehensive sexuality education must be mandatory in school…(emphasis added),” the report states.

The report’s “Creating Youth-Friendly Services” section addressed the “need” to establish physical sites where young people may go for confidential “care.” IPPF said that in order for access to be assured, young people must have the ability to obtain services “when they are requested, free from administrative restrictions and obstacles” and “unconstrained by psychological, attitudinal, cultural or social factors.”

This means parental/spousal consent or notification should not be required and neither cultural nor religious issues should be permitted to impede access.

IPPF claimed there is no need to worry about the young people who want such services. According to the report, the “evolving capacities of the child include his or her physiological ability to…make informed decisions about counselling and health care, and his or her emotional and social ability to engage in sexual behaviours in accordance with the responsibilities and roles that this entails.”

In a section titled “Faith, Religion and Sexuality, IPPF criticized religion, especially Islam and Christianity, for preventing young people from receiving comprehensive sexuality education (emphasis has been added):

Young people’s sexuality is still contentious for many
religious institutions. Fundamentalist and other religious
groups the–Catholic Church and madrasas (Islamic
schools) for example–have imposed tremendous barriers
that prevent young people…from obtaining information
and services related to sex and reproduction.

Currently, many religious teachings deny the pleasurble
and positive aspects of sex and limited guidelines
for sexual education often focus on abstinence before
marriage (although evidence shows this strategy has
been ineffective in many settings). The reality is, young
people are sexual beings and many of them are religious
as well. There is a need for pragmatism, to address
life as it is and not as it might be in an ideal world.

Each religion or faith must find a way of explaining and
providing guidance on issues of sex and sexual relationships
among young people, which supports rather
than denies their experiences and needs. By highlighting
strong values in faiths and religions, and overcoming
stigma and stereotypes that religious conventions
perpetuate, communities and leaders can help improve
young people’s access to sexual and reproductive
health information and services, and so improve their
health and well-being.

The same section of the report includes a highlighted statement supposedly made by a young person. “Faith and spirituality have their pros and cons. On one hand, it puts up a set of rules and regulations which if followed properly, make you a better person. On the other hand, it curbs growth of some issues which are necessary for the better upbringing of present-day adolescents.”

Governments have “a responsibility” to achieve the “equitable distribution of power and resources,” the report said. “With young people as partners, today’s adult decision-makers have the chance to recast sex and sexuality as a positive force for change and development, as a source of pleasure, an embodiment of human rights and an expression of self (emphasis added).”

“Why can’t we just let children be children instead of enticing them into experimenting at younger ages than they already are?” asked Brenna Phillips of the Daily Titan, the student newspaper of California State University at Fullerton. “When I was 10, my main concern was getting home in time to watch ‘Power Rangers.’”

But, unfortunately, Phillips was more concerned about IPPF’s frankness than she was with its agenda:

I understand that…[IPPF] would like to be the catalyst
of the reformation of sexual health education on a global
level, but it needs to remember who its audience is
when it includes phrases such as, “young people are
sexual beings” and “comprehensive sexual education
helps them to develop satisfying and pleasurable sexual
lives” in its international report.

Did Planned Parenthood really think that it was going to
gain support of religious institutions, such as the Catholic
Church, that promote abstinence until marriage?

All Planned Parenthood has done is create an adverse
affect [sic] and overshadow its real mission of “preventing
the spread of HIV and promoting gender equality…”
If Planned Parenthood would like the entire world to
take it seriously when it issues narratives such as these,
it needs to omit phrases that make even the most liberal
minds cringe. There are many valid points and statistics
that are included in “Stand and Deliver”
that will now fall on deaf ears.

Phillips is essentially arguing that IPPF should continue to promote its agenda and programs, but should go back to keeping the truth hidden from the public. (There is far less trouble that way.)

Nicholas Fortes, a Daily Titan staff writer, took a more pro-IPPF position. “Knowledge is crucial for everything and the same is true for sex,” he wrote. “Not knowing the right way to do something typically means not doing it right or in the right way. To learn how to write, you must first learn the alphabet. This same idea applies to sex. Teaching children…about sex, and equally important, the pleasures of sex, is a crucialpart of becoming an adult (emphasis added).”

Let’s review his idea. If children do not get comprehensive sexuality education, they will not know how to have sex and they may do it “wrong” and, equally important, they will not learn about the pleasures of sex.

Fortes must be kidding.
Fortes argued that sex education should begin at a young age, but not “too young.” While he did not define “too young,” it is clear Fortes does not consider the age of ten to be “too young” (emphasis has been added):

The 10-year-old mind is one that isn’t going to comprehend
complex physics or the nomenclature of chemical
elements, but it is old enough to recognize adults and
their relationships.

Teaching sex at an earlier age will also make it easier
for children to fight off sexual predation. Knowing how
sex and foreplay works provides children with a line of
defense from being taken advantage of. It also makes
them aware of how other people could be making advances
on them and what is and isn’t crossing the line.

Did Fortes really argue that comprehensive sexuality education is needed to prevent child molestation? He must not believe in psychological molestation. Fortes continued tying [sic] to back his opinion (emphasis has been added):

Not allowing pre-pubescent kids the opportunity to learn
about sex is taking away from their right to mature. A
mature mind is a knowledgeable mind and is one that
can make educated decisions…but the information
needs to be made available to allow the mind to mature
prior to the physical changes we all experience.
…
Growing up, if I had the knowledge of sex that I do today,
I could have made much better and safer choices.
Abstinence-only sex education doesn’t work. Kids are
going to have sex whether or not we teach them about
it and not giving children the opportunity to learn is
simply bad parenting.

While grossly ignorant of child development, Fortes is willing to unequivocally label those who do not require their children to get sex education as “bad parents.”

“When I have a child…I want them [sic] to understand the benefits and the dangers involved in sexual interaction,” Fortes surmised.

“Simply teaching a child…how to apply a condom is only going to confuse them more. Sure they know what a condom does…but they do not understand the emotions, socially awkward situations, and important decsions [sic] that go on before even deciding to use that condom.”

This statement seems to contradict Fortes’ claim that children are capable of understanding sexuality-related concepts, but he did not seem to notice.

Despite Fortes’ rather elementary analytical skill, many people will agree. This is largely because most have spent little or no time studying the issue. Opinions are based on gut feelings or a general philosophy. I have a position on nuclear power, but I really know very little about it. Still, at the ballot box, my opinion is given the same weight as those who have spent a lifetime studying the subject. The same is true of most people who take a
position on the issues covered in the IPPF report.

Such ignorance is understandable, but can have catastrophic consequences when dealing with issues of life and death.

Leslee Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse, claimed IPPF intentionally ignores the role of parents.She said parents “have and should always be the primary sex
educators of their children.” (IPPF would agree with this statement, but defines “primary” as “first,” which is not the same as “only” or even “most important.”)

Unruh sees a sinister element to IPPF’s deeds because it “knows that the earlier they capture the children's minds, the greater the odds the children will adopt their secular world view.” She also argued that “graphic sex education” at a young age “is a proven failed strategy that only molests the minds of the children who experience it.”Unruh charged that since IPPF is “a group whose future relies on funding from failed contraception and abortions, the connection isn’t hard to make.” She said IPPF has “an aggressive political agenda, meant to make…money.”

Emmett McGroarty, director of Preserve Innocence, said the report exhibits IPPF’s “anti-religious, anti-parent, and anti-family bias.” He said IPPF’s agenda seeks to “undermine
the role of parents as the principal and primary guides to their children on issues of spirituality, morality and sexuality” and is based on “an elitist presumption that parents are untrustworthy and incapable of that role and that the state should take over.” Preserve Innocence wants a program that “respects the sovereignty of the family and
the proper place of parents in teaching their children.”

Writing for New American, Raven Clabough said IPPF’s plans will increase the number of young people who are sexually active. “If so, it all works out in favor of Planned Parenthood, however,” she wrote. “If they encourage sexual behaviors amongst America’s youth, they stand to profit from the inevitable repercussions of increased abortions and use of the morning after pill.”

One paragraph from the IPPF report pretty much says it all (emphasis has been added):
Tomorrow approaches rapidly, and while much good
work is underway, with each year that passes opportunities to reach even more young people are lost. The opportunity to “catch them while they’re young[”]–a truly
golden rule when it comes to cultivating mindfulness,
healthy behaviours and social values–is time-bound,
and time is running out.

IPPF would not be concerned if every child were sexually active.
Children may do virtually anything, if it does not result in childbirth.
Pregnancy is fine; childbirth is not.

It is giving birth that IPPF abhors. Everything else benefits its multi-billion dollar business. IPPF sees sex education as “an investment, but the investment is not in children.
It is an investment that will ensure IPPF’s existence.

“Stand & Deliver” has reminded many people of a June 2009 report by the United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organization (UNESCO). “International
Guidelines on Sexuality Education: An Evidence Informed Approach to Effective Sex, Relationships and HIV/STI Education” is in many ways more radical than the IPPF publication.

The UNESCO report lists “the ‘basic minimum package’ of subjects and learning objectives for…comprehensive sexuality education.” Lessons are broken into four age
groups. While IPPF argues that comprehensive sexuality education should begin at age ten, UNESCO’s report advocates starting at age five.

According to the UNESCO report, lessons that should be taught to children in kindergarten include:
· recognition and acceptance of different kinds of families,
including same-sex;
· harmful cultural/traditional practices;
· appropriate names for body parts and their functions;
· masturbation is not harmful and it feels good;
· children should be wanted;
· homosexuals should have the right to raise kids; and
· how HIV is spread.

Starting in the fourth grade, lessons should include:
· the concepts of “homophobia” and “transphobia”;
· both males and females can give sexual pleasure;
· ways of preventing unintended pregnancy;
· health risks of early pregnancy and childbirth;
· specific steps involved in obtaining and using birth
control (including “emergency” birth control);
· the correct use of all types of birth control methods;
· masturbation is both physically and emotionally safe;
· the importance of talking with a trusted adult (as opposed
to a “parent”) about sexuality;
· options available to teenagers who are unintentionally
pregnant (including abortion); and
· safe alternatives to sexual intercourse and reasons for
avoiding penetrative sex [oral sex, etc.].

Kids in the seventh grade should be subjected to lessons:
· exposing the difficulties of teenage parenting;
· regarding places where one may get “reproductive
health” care (including birth control and abortion);
· about gender stereotyping in pornography; and
· addressing the reasons why abortion should be universally
legal and unrestricted.

UNESCO Lessons for high school years should include:
· reasons not to have children;
· recognition of sexual and reproductive rights;
· stressing that parents should embrace different values
expressed by their children;
· telling teenagers they should advocate for the “right
to and access to safe abortion”;
· the importance of family planning for individuals,
families and society; and
· where one may access “safe abortion care.”

IPPF credited the Government of the Netherlands for its assistance in preparing “Stand & Deliver,” as well as The World YWCA, which is listed as an IPPF “partner.”

The North AmericanMan/Boy Love Association is comprised of homosexual men who seek an end to what it calls “the oppression of men and [minor] boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting [sexual] relationships.”

Members of Sex Before Six (SBS) believe children should have sex before reaching the age of six. It is easy to see such groups as existing on the fringes of civilized society (at best). But the release of “Stand & Deliver,” shows they are not the only groups willing to
sacrifice our children to Baal.
[Douglas R. Scott, Jr., is president of Life Decisions International
and author of Bad Choices: A Look Inside Planned Parenthood,
Winter 2010, Special Reports, Life Decisions International]

TEENAGE SEXUAL ACTIVITY : DROP IN TEEN BIRTH RATE RESUMES; UNMARRIED BIRTHS SURPASS 40%
The CDC has announced that teen births have once again resumed their downward trend after what may have been a “blip” in 2007 and 2008. The births, which had been falling steadily since the blossoming of abstinence education in the ‘90’s, rose slightly in 2007 and 2008. Unfortunately, over 40% of births in 2008 were to the unmarried, giving those children statistically less promising futures in every measurable way...

Teen Birth Rates Drop in 2008 Following a Two-Year Increase

The teen birth rate in the United States fell 2 percent between 2007 and 2008, after rising the previous two years, according to a report released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics.

 “Births: Preliminary Data for 2008,” based on an analysis of 99.9 percent of birth records for 2008, found there were 41.5 births per 1,000 teenagers aged 15-19 years, down from 42.5 in 2007 and 41.9 in 2006.

There was also a significant decline in the percentage of babies born preterm in 2008 (prior to 37 weeks of pregnancy). The preterm birth rate declined from 12.7 in 2007 to 12.3 in 2008.  This marks the second straight year of decline in the preterm birth rate following a 20 percent increase between 1990 and 2006.

Other findings include:

    * The preliminary number of U.S. births in 2008 was 4,251,095, down nearly 2 percent from the preliminary number in 2007, which was an all-time high of 4,317,119.

    * The birth rate for older teenagers aged 18 and 19 declined by 4 percent to 70.7 births per 1,000.  Only the youngest teenagers aged 10 to 14 saw no change in the 2008 preliminary birth rate compared to previous years (0.6 births per 1,000).

    * The birth rate for Hispanic teenagers fell to 77.4 births per 1,000, the lowest rate ever reported for this group in the two decades for which rates are available.

    * Birth rates fell by 3 percent among women aged 20-24 and by 2 percent for women aged 25-29.  Rates for women in their thirties declined about 1 percent.

    * The preliminary birth rate for women aged 40-44 in 2008 increased 4 percent, to 9.9 births per 1,000 women, the highest rate since 1967.  The rates for women aged 45-49 years also increased in 2008 from 0.6 births per 1,000 in 2007 to 0.7.

    * The preliminary birth rate for unmarried women aged 15 to 44 declined almost 2 percent from 2007 to 2008, to 52 per 1,000 in 2008 compared with 52.9 in 2007.  The decline in the birth rate among unmarried women was the first reported since a slight decline during 2001-2002.

    * The other key measures of childbearing by unmarried women – total number of births and percentage of births to unmarried women – both increased to historic levels in 2008.

    * The cesarean delivery rate rose for the 12th straight year to 32.3 percent in 2008.  Increases were seen among women of all age groups, and most race and ethnic groups.

    * The low birthweight rate remained unchanged between 2007 and 2008 at 8.2 percent; a small decline in low birthweight was reported for non-Hispanic black infants (from 13.8 to 13.7 percent).

The full report is available at www.cdc.gov/nchs.
[http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/04/06/teen.births.cdc/index.html; http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r100406.htm, CDC Press Release: April 6, 2010, Division of News and Electronic Media; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


PEDIATRICIANS SET THE FACTS STRAIGHT ABOUT SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER CONFUSION
A new website has been launched by the American College of Pediatricians that cautions educators about the management of students experiencing same-sex attraction or exhibiting symptoms of gender confusion.

The letter reminds school superintendents that it is not uncommon for adolescents to experience transient confusion about their sexual orientation and that most students will ultimately adopt a heterosexual orientation if not otherwise encouraged.
[www.factsaboutyouth.com; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


SEXUAL ADDICTION/PORNOGRAPHY : PRINCETON EVENT: AUTHOR SAYS PORN DESTROYS INTIMACY
It may seem counter-intuitive, but Pamela Paul, author of “Pornified: How Pornography Is Damaging Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families,” says that “porn is not sex,” but “at root a negation of the human experience.”

Frequently, men are surprised at how easily they get deeply involved with hardcore content, she discovered in her research, and women lose self confidence by having to compete with artificially-enhanced professionals.
[http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/09/25806/; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


PARENT'S CORNER :
THE NEW “CONSERVA-TEENS”
A consumer trends researcher is adjusting the advice he gives his clients based on a surprising flip-flop in generational values and behavior. In recent polls, 75% of teens named family as the most important thing to them, with almost half intending to delay sex and 83% planning to marry. Many middle-aged and senior adults, on the other hand, are behaving like adolescents.
[http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/community/columns/other-columns/e3iff897d5a72be7303195a70be8209cf9d?pn=1; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


R-RATED MOVIE VIEWING LEADS TO RISKY BEHAVIOR

A two-year+ study of over 6,000 youth reveals a clear link between regular viewing of “adult” films—with heavy exposure to sex, drugs and alcohol, and violence—to what the researchers call a “sensation seeking tendency.” "The message to parents is clear: Take the movie ratings literally," says James D. Sargent, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth Medical School. "Under 17 should not be permitted to see R-rated movies."
[http://dms.dartmouth.edu/news/2010/03/12_sargent.shtml; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


PARENTAL CONTROLS AVAILABLE FOR CELL PHONES
Tech blogger Geek Dad reminds parents that kids have always done stupid things, but technology such as smart phones can make the damage exponentially worse. Check out the usage control products that your provider and other companies offer, he advises, which can limit text and picture messages. After all, “teens using the technology to ‘sext’ and text in school isn’t something that is going to go away if ignored. It’s only going to get worse….”
[http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2010/04/sexting-texting-teens-need-parental-controls/#ixzz0kr9BTL9z; 12Apr2010, www.abstinence.net]


Educators Warned re: New Sex-ed Law
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=969898
One News Now
While the county DA is taking heat from some teachers and students for his stance, others in the state are coming to his defense -- including Matt Sande with Pro-life Wisconsin [an American Life League Associate group]. "All District Attorney Southworth is doing here is just simply reading the criminal code and warning his school teachers and district administrators that this type of precise instruction on contraceptive use -- which is different from the old law -- could lead to criminal liability for teachers who instruct in that way and also civil liability for the school district itself," says the pro-life spokesman.

SEXUAL ADDICTION/PORNOGRAPHY :

HIJACKING THE BRAIN — HOW PORNOGRAPHY WORKS

Pornography "acts as a polydrug," William M. Struthers [author of Wired for Intimacy: How Pornography Hijacks the Male Brain] explains. As Dr. Patrick Carnes asserts, pornography is "a pathological relationship with a mood-altering experience." Boredom and curiosity lead many boys and men into experiences that become more like drug addiction than is often admitted.
[23Feb10,  Albert Mohler, http://www.crosswalk.com/singles/11625757/]

Women Really Want Abstinence-Based Empowerment, Not NOW and Casual Sex
A group that thinks an ad celebrating Tim Tebow's life is bad news for women might be a little out of touch with what women really want.

That helps explain why the National Organization for Women and other feminist groups have vehemently opposed abstinence education while failing to notice that a culture of casual sex hasn't been so liberating for women.

Just ask the 29-year-old Briton living in America whose anonymous account appeared in her country's left-wing Guardian newspaper.

"(M)y sexual liberation was perversely trapping me in destructive relationships, while intimacy had become something elusive, insubstantial, disappointing, surreal," she writes.

Weary of a "burlesque comedy where we all pretended we were emotionless and cool," she decided to stop having sex because "I wanted sex to be, quite simply, special again."

Similar world-weary statements have been recorded by researchers such as Dr. Miriam Grossman, author of "Unprotected," and Laura Sessions Stepp, author of "Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose at Both."

Only a third of young women say they truly wanted to have sex the first time they did, Stepp reports. Young women, she writes, "are trying to make sense of what is arguably the most confusing sexual landscape any generation has ever faced."

Most sex education pushes young women into this jungle and tells them contraception will provide adequate protection. This puts incredible pressure on those who have the most at risk in the casual-sex scene.

And it jeopardizes their dreams of long-term security and love.

The vast majority of young women say marriage and motherhood are important to future happiness.

Why wouldn't we equip young women to achieve those dreams while avoiding such consequences as sexual assault and serious disease -- to say nothing of bewildering heartache?

Why not teach young women the real facts about the risks of early sexual activity?

Teen girls who engage in sex are more vulnerable to sexually transmitted disease and depression.

Girls who are sexually active in high school are half as likely to go on to college as abstaining peers from the same social setting. Later, they often have more difficulty in forging the kind of lasting relationships that lead to marriage.

Why not help young women make social choices that advance their long-term educational, vocational and marriage prospects?

What about teaching tactics for resisting unwanted sexual advances? How about helping girls build relational and communication skills that will allow them to get what they really want -- lasting love?

This common-sense approach is exactly what abstinence education seeks to do.

Contrary to its detractors' caricature, abstinence education aims to empower young people with the information, skills and long-term perspective they need to successfully navigate what Stepp calls today's "confusing sexual landscape." New evidence says this approach is helping girls do exactly that.

A study by University of Pennsylvania researchers released Feb. 2 found abstinence education is effective in delaying the onset of teen sexual activity.

After eight hours of instruction on abstinence, middle school students were one-third less likely to engage in sexual activity compared to their peers. This effect persisted two years after they attended the class.

By contrast, the study found both "safe sex" and "comprehensive sex-ed" programs ineffective. The former promote only use of contraceptives; the latter teach abstinence and contraception.

Published in the American Medical Association's Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, the Penn study used a randomized controlled experiment. The approach, designed to produce unbiased results, is considered the gold standard in program evaluation.

This is the most sophisticated evaluation showing abstinence education's positive results, but it's not the first. A 2008 research paper from The Heritage Foundation catalogued 15 scientific studies of abstinence education, 11 of which found positive effects.

On the same day the Penn researchers' study came out, President Barack Obama released his 2011 budget proposal. It zeroes out funding for abstinence education while creating a $179 million comprehensive sex-ed program -- the very kind the Penn study shows to be ineffective. Add that to more than $600 million a year already spent by the Department of Health and Human Services on pregnancy and STD prevention programs and "family planning" services for teens.

The Obama administration's plans not only fly in the face of the research, they ignore the real needs of young women. Teen girls say they want to hear the abstinence message. More and more young women who have braved the casual-sex culture say they still haven't found what they're looking for.

If we want to empower these women, let's teach abstinence.
[February 19, 2010,  Jennifer A. Marshall, http://www.lifenews.com/nat6026.html ;
LifeNews.com Note: Jennifer Marshall is the director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation and author of "Now and Not Yet: Making Sense of Single Life in the Twenty-First Century."]

Culture Challenge of the Week: Abstinence Education...
Obama Abstains from What Works

This week, the American Medical Association (AMA) published a report that shows abstinence education works. Tragically, President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had already pandered to dishonest groups, such as Planned Parenthood, that profit from teen sexual activity, and took the unbelievable action of terminating government funding of these successful abstinence programs.

When adults take the time to tell children what is right and what is wrong, and teach them how to avoid sex, the majority of them actually do.

But when a young person is constantly bombarded with sexual images, taught by those in authority that he can freely engage in sex if he wants to, and is presumed to be unable to control himself, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that he will most likely become sexually active.

In the AMA's Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, a study of sixth- and seventh-graders reveals a stark contrast between kids who are taught Mr. Obama's preferred sex education and those who receive abstinence education.

When students are told that abstinence is best at the same time that the educator is telling them how to use a condom, nearly half of the teens end up having sex within two years.

But when teachers give a consistent abstinence-only message, equip children with practical methods to say "no," and relay the full expectation that they can control themselves, only about one-third of those children become sexually active in the next two years.

How to Protect Your Family from Dangerous Sex Education

Arm yourself with truth and teach it to your children.

While many in the policy and education world are shocked at the revelation that abstinence education works, Robert Rector and Christine Kim of the Heritage Foundation have known this truth for years.

In 2008, Heritage analyzed 21 different studies done on abstinence-education programs. Researchers "found that in 16 of the 21 reports, there were significant positive results in delaying early sexual activity and initiation."

In addition to eliminating all chances of becoming pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease, Mr. Rector also reports that the research reveals that teens who practice abstinence "will be happier and less depressed than their permissive peers."

"Abstinent teens also do dramatically better in school. They are half as likely to drop out as their sexually active peers. And teens who abstain until at least age 18 are twice as likely to attend and graduate from college as those who become sexually active while in high school," he reported.

In most states, parents have the right to opt their children out of the sex-education classes, but you have to act to make that happen.

Contact your school counselor and find out what the options are, and then sit down with your children and explain why you are choosing a better way. Make certain that the teachers do not belittle or punish them for not taking the classes. Find other parents in your child's classroom who dare to take a stand, and support each other.

Secondly, be proactive in teaching abstinence to your children. Check out sites like family.org, abstinence.net, sexrespect.org, awareprogram.net and heritage.org for great abstinence-education resources. Do your homework, take action and be committed enough to your children to teach them the truth. Since the president abandoned what works and is even funding programs that make your job harder and your children more vulnerable, your sons and daughters are more reliant than ever on you to show them the way.

Rebecca Hagelin is the author of "30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family."

For more family tips, visit HowToSaveYourFamily.com or e-mail

You can read the article online here: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/08/hagelin-obama-abstains-from-what-works//print/
[February 8, 2010, Rebecca Hagelin, Abstinence Clearinghouse, www.abstinence.net ]

IPPF Africa Conference Pushes Abortion and Youth Sex
Last week in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) hosted the 4th Africa Conference on Sexual Health and Rights. Plenary speakers included a United Nations (UN) Under-Secretary General, the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, the Executive Director of UNAIDS, the Chief of the UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) Africa Section, and the director of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) Liaison Office, as well as Dr. Jacqueline Sharpe, IPPF's President.

Major conference themes included promoting sexual education and sexual rights for young people, establishing closer links between “sexual rights” and “reproductive health rights,” transforming traditional cultural and religious norms about human sexuality, and advocating for legal abortion on demand throughout Africa.

Organizers focused on youth participation, hosting a “Youth Sexuality Institute” immediately prior to the conference, as well as homosexual lifestyle promotion. The steering committee report called for a “strong focus on issues of sexual pleasure/positive sexuality” and “strong involvement and engagement of LGBTIS” [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, and Intersex individuals].
    
Papers presented at the conference included “A Boy Can't Marry Another Boy: Adolescents [sic] boys talk about gay boys and men,” “'Good Catholics Use Condoms,” “Heterosexual anal sex in the age of HIV,” “MSM [men who have sex with men], Sex and the Internet in Nigeria,” and “Sexuality Life-Size: Body Mapping With Young Women and Men from the LGBTQI [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Intersex] Community in Kenya.”

Abortion advocacy was another conference theme. The Center for Reproductive Rights launched the second volume of “Legal Grounds: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Africa Commonwealth Courts,” an advocacy guide pushing abortion liberalization and alternative sexual lifestyles in Africa.  

Despite the controversial topics, the conference had the apparent support of the host government. Ethiopian President Girma Wolde-Giorgis stressed in his keynote speech that “education curricula had to be opened up to include sexuality education to enable young people to know their bodies at an early age and to take responsible choices and decisions on issues related to sexual health.”

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Minister of Health for Ethiopia, was the “Patron” of the conference. Ghebreyesus was recently elected as Chairman of the Board of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, an enormous public/private partnership with over $18 billion dollars in committed funding. The Global Fund was the third largest worldwide donor of condoms in 2005-2006, behind UNFPA and the United States Agency for International Development.

Financial sponsors included the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC) – a group backed by several European governments and American foundations whose roots are with the population control movement –  and Nigeria's Action Health Incorporated, which promotes "comprehensive" youth sexual education.

Ethiopia has been praised by the global pro-abortion lobby for liberalizing its laws on abortion in 2006, with the ostensible goal of lowering rates of maternal mortality. Despite having liberalized its laws, Ethiopia has among the worst rates of maternal mortality on the African continent, according to World Health Organization statistics. [18Feb10, Terrence McKeegan, J.D., New York, NY; C-FAM]

'Pornography Harms' Website Launched... www.pornharms.com
The devastating harm from pornography is becoming more evident with each passing day. Now a website has been launched to provide ready access to credible, peer-reviewed research documenting that harm.

"Pornography Harms is a one-stop location for sound research, news articles and opinion pieces demonstrating the harm from pornography," said Patrick Trueman, creator of the site.

Trueman, the former chief of the U.S. Department of Justice Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, expressed strong concern for the direction of America due to the prominence of pornography.

"Since the advent of the internet, pornography has flooded homes, businesses, public libraries, and even schools. The results have been devastating to the social and family fabric of America," Trueman said.

Trueman observed that, for nearly two decades, a large segment of America's children have had ready access to internet pornography. In the latest trend called, "sexing," children are producing and distributing cell phone child pornography.

Trueman speculated that this phenomenon may well be an outgrowth of the viewing of internet pornography over long periods of time by children, resulting in diminishment of their natural inhibitions against such activity. "Pornography, in other words, is altering minds, destroying taboos, and reordering society," he said.

Addiction to pornography, Trueman noted, is now common among men, women, and even many children, bringing life-long consequences. Pornography use is a significant factor in divorce; a contributing cause of the spread of prostitution and the sexual trafficking of adults and children.

Trueman credited a multi-disciplinary group of professionals and concerned citizens from around the country for the research work on Pornography Harms.

"Pornography is a neglected pandemic and it will remain so until knowledge of its destructive forces is widely understood and disseminated. The Pornography Harms website is dedicated to this task of education," Trueman said.
[Pornography Harms, www.pornharms.com, Feb. 17, 2010, www.LifeSiteNews.com]

National Week of Chastity -- February 13-19
http://www.chastityweek.org

Annual Day of Purity: Valentine's Day, or Previous Weekday
http://www.lc.org

www.DayOfPurity.org

Resources to Promote Purity/Chastity
http://www.lc.org/dayofpurity/resources/

Students from the following schools have signed up to participate in the Day of Purity. Sign up your school at http://www.lc.org/dayofpurity/support/

Today Students Rebel Against Pop Culture and Celebrate Purity!
 
Around the nation this day, February 12, 2010, students, parents and young adults are rebelling against pop culture and celebrating purity!  The seventh annual Day of Purity sponsored by the Liberty Counsel helps encourage young people to remain abstinent until marriage.  Young people promote this choice and encourage others by wearing Day of Purity t-shirts, wristbands, handing out flyers and organizating events in their schools, churches and communities.
 
"The Abstinence Clearinghouse thanks the Liberty Counsel for organizing this powerful demonstration of purity and second chances to youth around the nation.  Sex before marriage not only causes painful physical consequences but tragic, emotional consequences that are tearing lives apart.  It is exciting to see young people raise up the standard amongst their peers demonstrating that abstinence until marriage is the best choice!"
Kimberly Martinez, Executive Director
 
For more information or to download resources, visit www.DayOfPurity.org.

Guttmacher Study Shows "Devastating Consequences" of Sex-Ed: American Life League

[ed. Many states -- well over one-third --  have refused the federal grant monies availablefor Abstinence Education projects over the past several years and many states are actively pushing "comprehensive sex ed/safe/safer sex". Many fledgling abstinence education programs could not continue in these states; thus the children have not received authentic abstinence education. That is why the pregnancy numbers are creeping back up... And now, the administration has virtually stopped all abstinence education funding.]

According to American Life League (ALL), new numbers from the Guttmacher Institute show Planned Parenthood-style sex education is having a dramatic impact on the rise in teen pregnancy rates.

The study released on Wednesday shows that the teen pregnancy rate among American teens rose three percent in 2006, teen birth rates rose four percent, and abortion rates were up one percent.

While Planned Parenthood rushes to paint the devastating statistics as an indictment against the Bush administration’s abstinence policy, ALL says that the timeline points to a different culprit: Planned Parenthood.

“This is not rocket science,” said Jim Sedlak, vice president of ALL. “When you don’t tell kids to remain abstinent, they have more sex and more of them get pregnant. Pregnancy rates go down when kids don’t have sex.”

ALL reports that:

- Prior to 1990, teen pregnancy rates were increasing just about every year as Planned Parenthood’s sex-ed programs dominated public and even private school sex-education courses.

- In the early 1990s, it became popular to teach the abstinence message to teens and preteens. Teen pregnancy rates began to fall.

- By 1995, the federal government was funding an abstinence-only message while pregnancy rates continued to fall.

- By 2000, Planned Parenthood began lobbying the various states to refuse abstinence money and reduce abstinence programs and, predictably, in 2006, the teen pregnancy rate increased for the first time in 15 years.

- Today, partnering with President Obama, Planned Parenthood lobbying has succeeded in virtually cutting off abstinence-only funds.

"We can only imagine how high the teen pregnancy rates will go," Sedlak said. “Planned Parenthood’s reach extends far beyond their vice grip on the nation’s classrooms. Their work can also be felt in pop culture, the internet, advertising and television – all excellent vehicles in their long-term goal to sexualize our children. Sadly it’s working.”  
[WASHINGTON, D.C., January 27, 2010 www.LifeSiteNews.com, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10012711.html

THE VOICE... www.theridgeproject.com ...  Ever wanted a video with real, authentic, teen-generated responses?  We did! And that's why we made "The Voice."  

The topics were not pre-planned, the teens were encouraged to be honest, and we kept the questions simple like: "Why are you abstinent?" and "Why do you avoid risky behaviors?"  Compiling the answers into eight topics was done afterward, thus allowing for the initial response to be authentic and teen-generated.

These eight videos are designed to begin discussions that will change the life of your youth. And with the discussion questions programmed into the video, you can be ready to start the discussion with little preparation.

Also available from The RIDGE is "Talk About It!" 

Taken from The Voice, Talk About It! is a video designed to spur living-room conversations between a parent and child. Send it home to the parents of your children encouraging them to follow the easy, step-by-step instructions, and before you know it, you've opened up a conversation between a parent and their child that could make life-long changes! 

If you're a parent, we encourage you to purchase your own copy and see how easy this video can make an otherwise awkward conversation.
www.theridgeproject.com
The RIDGE Project: 419.782.1511 Fax: 419.782.1577   

Study: Teens who Get Intoxicated Regularly are More Likely to be Sexually Active

A new study released yesterday by the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada has revealed that teens who become intoxicated regularly and smoke marijuana are more likely to become sexually active, among other findings.

The study, which focused on teens between the ages of 14 and 19 inclusive, used data from Statistics Canada’s National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth to draw correlations between drug use, drunkenness, time spent with a boyfriend or girlfriend and teen decisions about sexual activity.

The study found that teen girls and teen boys who smoke marijuana are 60 percent and 49 percent respectively more likely to be sexually active.  As well, a direct relationship was found between the number of times teens become intoxicated and their likelihood of being sexually active.  The study also revealed that strong associations exist between attempted suicide and sexual activity among teen girls.

Study researcher, Peter Jon Mitchell, said that the findings underscore what parents may know intuitively to be true. “Teens who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior,” said Mitchell.

“This study reveals a ‘risk profile’ that may help parents as they nurture their teens through to adulthood. And it becomes all the more critical when we consider the correlation between attempting suicide and sexual activity, particularly among girls.”

The study “Rated PG, Part II: How drugs, alcohol and other factors influence teen sexual activity,” can be read in full in English, http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/Rated_PG_Part_II.pdf

“Part I: Rated PG: How parental influence impacts teen sexual activity” is available here -- http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/IMFC%20OCTOBER_Final.pdf

[20Jan2010, Ottawa, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10012006.html ]

Half of Urban Teen Girls Acquire STIs within 2 Years of First Sexual Activity
 Half of urban teenage girls may acquire at least one of three common sexually transmitted infections (STI) within two years of becoming sexually active, according to an Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute study.

The study appears in the December 2009 issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

The researchers followed 381 girls enrolled at ages 14 to 17 years and found that repeated infection with the organisms that cause chlamydia, gonorrhea and trichomoniasis also was very common.

"Depending on the organism, within four to six months after treatment of the previous infection, a quarter of the women were re-infected with the same organism," said Wanzhu Tu, Ph.D., associate professor of medicine at the IU School of Medicine and a Regenstrief Institute investigator.

Within two years, about three-quarters of participants with an initial sexually transmitted STI were diagnosed with a second STI, although not necessarily of the same type. Within four years of an initial STI, virtually all (92 percent) of the participants had a subsequent STI.

"To our knowledge, this study provides the first data on the timing of the initial STI and subsequent STI following the onset of sexual activity in urban adolescent women," said Dr. Tu.

The study also found that screening for STI may not be initiated until several years after sexual activity begins, especially for girls with earlier onset of sexual activity.

"This is important because many clinicians are reluctant to address sexual activity with younger teens, and may miss important prevention opportunities," said J. Dennis Fortenberry M.D. M.S., professor of pediatrics at the IU School of Medicine, and senior author of the study.

The study focuses on lower income urban adolescents; a group characterized by early onset of sexual activity, multiple sexual partners, and high STI rates. [INDIANAPOLIS, December 15, 2009, www.LifeSiteNews.com, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/dec/09121502.html ]


Commentary: Admitting Sex is Procreative – a Surprising Proposal to Curb Nonmarital Births

by Helen M. Alvaré, J.D.

This is the last in my series of columns on out of wedlock births.  By now you know that 4 in 10 U.S. births are nonmarital; this rises to 7 in 10 for African-American Women, and  5 in 10 for Hispanic women, our fastest growing minority population. Women in their 20s and 30s account for the lion’s share of the trend. [1] 

Reactions to our predicament are suitably alarmist, but still terribly predictable. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy will push for both more abstinence and higher rates of contraceptive usage among the unmarried. They will call for less complacency and more parental involvement.[2] 

Planned Parenthood took the occasion to bash abstinence programs while abstinence programs linked the rise to the fact that 68% of public schools employ contraceptive instruction, which has a 4 to 1 funding advantage over abstinence in the United States. [3]

I have suggested that the now mounting collection of narrative testimony from unmarried mothers might shed some additional light on the problem. Any additional light ought to be welcomed if the interests of children, and the poor (who are disproportionately handicapped by lone-parenting) are really taken to heart. This testimony exposes deep wells of gender mistrust and confusion between men and women.

I have pointed out how, for example,[4] the women employ virtually no “morals” language with respect to their willingness to be sexually intimate with single men; at the same time, they are unwilling to marry these men, even after their baby makes his or her appearance, on the grounds that the father is unworthy of them and the child. 

The young men and women involved do not think of each other in “parental” terms while their sexual relationship is ongoing.  The man even has difficulty transitioning to “parent” after the baby is born. Women are both more likely to articulate a desire to have a baby, and more willing to reorganize their priorities, schedules and finances around the baby once he or she is born; consequently they evaluate the man’s failure to do so, often referring to him harshly as “another baby” for the woman to mother.

One might observe here that the women have in a sense “found their way” – difficult as it is – in the midst of all this chaos; they are thinking maternally, even while they barely make ends meet.  Men have not found a way. 

Often victims themselves of fatherless households and chaotic, incomplete education, with no prospects for a “living wage” in sight, the men are unable and unwilling to secure a wife. They rather drift into new sexual relationships and multipartnered parenting. Despite this seemingly endless pattern, particularly among the poor and minority communities in the United States, there persists the perception that the decision to continue to pursue sex without commitment is a “private” matter.  Although after the child is born, some single mothers feel that society ought to reward them– via generous social policies — for their childrearing efforts.[5]

Most of the state and private programs responding to nonmarital births over the last 40 years have poured their energies into “taking the baby out” of the sexual encounter via birth control.  Abstinence programs, which are less common, try to teach young people how to avoid nonmarital sexual involvement. “Big-picture” efforts have aimed to boost young people’s educational and job attainments, in order to steer them toward a different future. 

While occasionally, policy experts have referenced the need to help young people think more healthfully about the meaning of their lives, including about the importance of their heterosexual relationships, no extensive efforts have ever been directed to addressing the intertwined issues I have surfaced above.

For brevity’s sake, I would say these issues might be identified as:  the moral weight of heterosexual relations; the public nature of heterosexual relations; the intrinsically parental orientation of heterosexual relations, and the crisis of fatherhood.

Finish reading this article here: http://culture-of-life.org//content/view/598/1/

[December 9th, 2009, Helen M. Alvaré, J.D., Senior Fellow in Law and Academic Advisory Board Member of the Ruth Institute; http://www.ruthblog.org/2009/12/09/admitting-sex-is-procreative-%E2%80%93-a-surprising-proposal-to-curb-nonmarital-births/ ]

Groundbreaking Study Proves Abstinence Education Works
 
Sioux Falls, SD -- A new study released today by shows that abstinence education is highly effective in reducing sexual activity among youth. It also showed contraceptive sex ed programs to be ineffective.
 
The decrease is noteworthy; the study followed students a full two years after completion of the abstinence class. One third of students showed a decrease in sexual activity, compared with those who didn't participate in the class. Whereas, condom-promoting programs didn't affect youth behavior at all. Students in these programs showed no reduction in sexual activity and no increase in contraceptive use.
 
"Finally, a report that proves what those of us who have been teaching abstinence have known for years. These programs help develop self control and self esteem, teaching kids that they do not need to fall prey the game of Russian Roulette with condoms," said Leslee Unruh, President and Founder of the National Abstinence Clearinghouse. "Abstinence programs show kids there are too many great things riding on their future to risk it to STDs, pregnancy and broken hearts. Abstinence is a message our kids want to hear - this study shows youth are making healthier choices and changing their behavior to in response to this refreshing message," Unruh said.
 
The study, involving black middle-school students, appears in the February 2010 Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, published by the American Medical Association. It was compiled and released by Drs. John and Loretta Jemmott from the University of Pennsylvania and Dr. Geoffrey Fong from the University of Waterloo and the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research in Waterloo, Ontario.
 
This study utilized state-of-the-art evaluation techniques, using random assignment.  For more information on the study and its design, view the following:
http://www.abstinence.net/pdf/contentmgmt/abstinence.pdf
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 1, 2010
Contact: Sarah Floro 605.335.3643




New Study:
Abstinence Education Effective;
Comprehensive Sex Ed a Big Flop
 
Robert Rector
Senior Research Fellow
The Heritage Foundation

STUDIES AND STATISTICS : EFFICACY OF A THEORY-BASED ABSTINENCE-ONLY INTERVENTION OVER 24 MONTHS
POSTED: FEB 01, 2010
 
A new study released today, shows that abstinence education is highly effective in reducing sexual activity among youth. It also showed "safe sex" and "comprehensive" sex ed programs to be ineffective.
 
Students participating in an eight-hour abstinence program showed a one-third decrease in rates of sexual activity compared to non-participants. This decrease persisted a full two years after they attended the class.
 
By contrast, safe sex (promoting only contraceptive use) and comprehensive sex ed (teaching both abstinence and contraceptive use) programs didn't affect youth behavior at all. Students in these programs showed no reduction in sexual activity and no increase in contraceptive use, in either the short or long term.
 
The study, involving black middle-school students, appears in the February 2010 Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, published by the American Medical Association. Employing state-of-the-art evaluation techniques, the study used random assignment to place students into four groups: a group that received instruction solely in abstinence; a safe-sex group instructed in contraceptive use; a comprehensive, or mixed message, group taught both abstinence and contraceptive use; and a control group that received health education unrelated to sex.
 
The abstinence program proved very effective in delaying the onset of sexual activity. Students in this program were one third less likely to initiate sexual activity when compared to students in the other three groups. And if these same students did become sexually active, they were not less likely to use contraceptives than other students. By contrast, safe sex and comprehensive sex ed classes had no effect on student behavior; students in these classes did not reduce sexual activity nor increase contraceptive use when compared to the control group.
 
This study, conducted by Drs. John and Loretta Jemmott of the University of Pennsylvania, joins a long list of evaluations demonstrating the effectiveness of abstinence education. Prior to the current study, there had been 15 scientific evaluations of abstinence education, 11 of which had shown that abstinence programs were effective in reducing sexual activity. (See this 2008 Heritage paper for a review of these earlier studies.) However, the new Jemmott study is the first evaluation showing positive results which employed full random assignment. As a result, it cannot be dismissed on methodological grounds.
 [abstinence.net



Abstinence-only programs might work, study says

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Sex education classes that focus on encouraging children to remain abstinent can persuade a significant proportion to delay sexual activity, researchers reported Monday in a landmark study that could have major implications for U.S. efforts to protect young people against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.


    *Abstinence programs might work, report says   

* Poll: Can abstinence-focused programs work?

Only about a third of sixth- and seventh-graders who completed an abstinence-focused program started having sex within the next two years, researchers found. Nearly half of the students who attended other classes, including ones that combined information about abstinence and contraception, became sexually active.

The findings are the first clear evidence that an abstinence program could work.

"I think we've written off abstinence-only education without looking closely at the nature of the evidence," said John B. Jemmott III, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania who led the federally funded study. "Our study shows this could be one approach that could be used."

The research, published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, comes amid intense debate over how to reduce sexual activity, pregnancies, births and sexually transmitted diseases among children and teenagers. After falling for more than a decade, the numbers of births, pregnancies and STDs among U.S. teens have begun increasing.
ad_icon

The Obama administration eliminated more than $170 million in annual federal funding targeted at abstinence programs after a series of reports concluded that the approach was ineffective. Instead, the White House is launching a $114 million pregnancy prevention initiative that will fund only programs that have been shown scientifically to work -- a program the administration on Monday proposed expanding to $183 million.

"This new study is game-changing," said Sarah Brown, who leads the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex."

The study is the first to evaluate an abstinence program using a carefully designed approach comparing it with several alternative strategies and following subjects for an extended period of time, considered the kind of study that produces the highest level of scientific evidence.

"This takes away the main pillar of opposition to abstinence education," said Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who wrote the criteria for federal funding of abstinence programs. "I've always known that abstinence programs have gotten a bad rap."

Longtime critics of the approach praised the study, saying it provides strong evidence that such programs can work and might merit taxpayer support.

"One of the things that's exciting about this study is that it says we have a new tool to add to our repertoire," said Monica Rodriguez, vice president for education and training at the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.

Based on the findings, Obama administration officials said programs like the one evaluated in the study could be eligible for federal funding.

"No one study determines funding decisions, but the findings from the research paper suggest that this kind of project could be competitive for grants if there's promise that it achieves the goal of teen pregnancy prevention," said Nicholas Papas, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Several critics of an abstinence-only approach said that the curriculum tested did not represent most abstinence programs. It did not take a moralistic tone, as many abstinence programs do. Most notably, the sessions encouraged children to delay sex until they are ready, not necessarily until married; did not portray sex outside marriage as never appropriate; and did not disparage condoms.

"There is no data in this study to support the 'abstain until marriage' programs, which research proved ineffective during the Bush administration," said James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth.

But abstinence supporters disputed that, saying that the new program is equivalent to many other well-designed abstinence curricula that are thorough, tailor their messages to students' ages and provide detailed information.

"For our critics to use marriage as the thing that sets the program in this study apart from federally funded programs is an exaggeration and smacks of an effort to dismiss abstinence education rather than understanding what it is," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association.

The study released Monday involved 662 African American students from four public middle schools in a city in the Northeastern United States. It was conducted between 2001 and 2004.

Students were randomly assigned to go through one of the following: an eight-hour curriculum that encouraged them to delay having sex; an eight-hour program focused on teaching safe sex; an eight- or 12-hour program that did both; or an eight-hour program focused on teaching them other ways to be healthy, such as eating well and exercising.

The abstinence-only portion involved a series of sessions in which instructors talked to students in small groups about their views about abstinence and their knowledge of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. They also conducted role-playing exercises and brainstorming sessions designed to correct misconceptions about sex and sexually transmitted diseases, encourage abstinence and offer ways to resist pressure to have sex.

Over the next two years, about 33 percent of the students who went through the abstinence program started having sex, compared with about 52 percent who were taught only safe sex. About 42 percent of the students who went through the comprehensive program started having sex, and about 47 percent of those who learned about other ways to be healthy did.

The abstinence program had no negative effects on condom use, which has been a major criticism of the abstinence approach.

"The take-home message is that we need a variety of interventions to address an epidemic like HIV, sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy," said Jemmott, adding that he thinks the program would be equally effective among other age and racial or ethnic groups.

"There are populations that really want an abstinence intervention. They are against telling children about condoms," he said. "This study suggests abstinence programs can be part of the mix of programs that we offer."

NEW

Poll Shows Majority of Americans Say Abstinence Effective, Want Parents Involved

A new Rasmussen poll shows a majority of Americans believe abstinence education programs are effect and a commanding majority would rather have parents than schools teaching sex education. The survey follows on a new study showing abstinence more effective than sex education.

According to the Rasmussen poll, released yesterday, 50 percent of American adults believe abstinence-only education programs are at least somewhat effective in preventing teen pregnancy. Some 15 percent say they are very effective.

Just 42% of Americans disagree and a smaller 13 percent take the strongest position saying they are not at all effective.

Overall, 68% of adults nationwide approve of health education classes teaching children about sex or abstinence while only 21 percent of Americans disapprove of teaching kids abstinence and 11 percent remain undecided.

"Adults with children are slightly less supportive than those without children of sex education classes in school. Most adults with children at home see abstinence education as effective, while those without children are evenly divided on the issue," the polling firm pointed out.

Fifty-one percent of men see abstinence-only programs as being effective in preventing pregnancy in teens, compared to 48% of women -- making them about evenly divided.

Black Americans are much more likely than white Americans to support abstinence education, the polling firm said.

The poll also found 80% of Americans say it is the responsibility of parents to teach their children about sex. Only 11% say schools should explain sex to children. Rasmussen noted the results are identical to those found last year and in October 2007.

Rasmussen also found that the "vast majority of American adults (76%) believe elements of pop culture such as movies and television shows encourage sexual activity among young people. Only 12% disagree with that assessment, and another 12% are not sure."

The landmark study released last week found that middle school students who attended abstinence-only classes were less likely to engage in sexual behavior than those who attended classes that combined teaching abstinence and contraception methods.

Students participating in an eight-hour abstinence program showed a one-third decrease in their rates of sexual activity compared to non-participants. Of particular note, students were significantly less likely to initiate sex with the abstinence-centered approach than any other sex education strategy.

Conservative writer Robert Rector also commented on the new report at National Review.

While abstinence helped students, he wrote: "By contrast, safe sex (promoting only contraceptive use) and comprehensive sex ed (teaching both abstinence and contraceptive use) programs didn't affect youth behavior at all. Students in these programs showed no reduction in sexual activity and no increase in contraceptive use, in either the short or long term."

Related web sites:
NAEA - http://www.AbstinenceAssociation.org
Abstinence Works - http://www.AbstinenceWorks.org
[February 10, 2010, Washington, DC www.LifeNews.com http://www.lifenews.com/nat5988.html ]

Absurd: PP blames abstinence education for rise in teen pregnancy

The Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s “independent” research arm, just released figures showing an increase in the teen pregnancy rate for the first time in 15 years.  Planned Parenthood absurdly blames abstinence-only education (vs. PP style sex education) for the increase. A look at the timeline and Planned Parenthood’s lobbying to cut abstinence education – even as the teen pregnancy rate was steadily declining --- shows the absurdity of PP’s claims.

- Prior to the 1990’s, teen pregnancy rates were soaring, while Planned Parenthood’s sex-education programs were dominating public and even private school sex-education courses.

- In the early 1990’s, it became popular to teach the abstinence message to teens and preteens.  Teen pregnancy rates predictably began to fall.

- But by 2000, Planned Parenthood began lobbying the various states to refuse abstinence money and reduce abstinence programs, and in 2006 the teen pregnancy rate increased for the first time in 15 years.

- Now Planned Parenthood, through its lobbying, has succeeded in virtually cutting off abstinence-without-birth-control funds while it grabs bigger and bigger portions of government funding to perpetuate its miserably failed programs.

The bottom line is always money when it comes to Planned Parenthood.   There is no money to be made by Planned Parenthood off of kids who abstain from sex.  They don’t need birth control, they don’t get STD’s that need to be treated, they don’t get pregnant so they don’t pay for abortions.  PP has a vested financial interest in insuring teens become and remain sexually active.  The “non-profit” abortion giant recorded $85 million in profits in the fiscal year 2007-2008.

STOPP provides the book Parent Power to guide you in defeating Planned Parenthood sex education in your community. It is available online free of charge at www.all.org/stopp/pp15.htm. Part 2 of our plan for defeating PP gives a summary of the tactics detailed in Parent Power. -- from STOPP Wednesday Report, 2/3/10   [PharmFacts, 3Feb10]