Perhaps we should also rephrase what was said about the rapist. She shouldn’t accept it (unless her life is forfeit if she does), but that still doesn’t validate an abortion.

God believes in you, by the way.

The topic may not be done, but I’m going to hate making the same responses all over again.

I recommend Courtney’s site to you, Anon. She’s not some sort of right wing religious whacko like me, though I suspect members of her family are.

yet you reject the idea that anyone with a different perspective from yours may actually have a valid argument.

That is untrue.

why don’t we examine the record of what they actually have done to help or hurt the interests of the public.

I do that. After substantial reading of current events since 1980, I’ve decided Bush is the candidate for me in 2004. I’ve chosen to focus on Kerry’s waffles as I think he’s a poor candidate, and a trial lawyer didn’t help his selection.

For someone who has half of their posts removed from this blog for insulting me, you are certainly full of advice about “working together” “for civil, logical, and reasonable conversation.”

You’re under some sort of belief this is a debate forum, which it is not.

Since apparently you’re going to stick around, I suggest choosing a name to keep from confusing you with other “Anonymous” people that pop in here from time to time.

I agree that Kerry will often say one thing to one group and one thing to another to gain a populist appeal. I agree that politicians should say what they believe and do what they say. The problem with this is that hardly any politician does it. How many promises are made by candidates during a campaign that are never fulfilled? Can anyone actually name one politician who is completely honest, fulfills all his promises, and responds 100% to the needs of the majority of those people that he represents? I don’t think it is even possible for a politician to do that. Rather than bash a politician for trying to appeal to his voters by making empty promises (because this can be said of any politician), why don’t we examine the record of what they actually have done to help or hurt the interests of the public.

I don’t agree with this:

If Kerry feels that abortion is wrong personally, but the majority of the people he represents feels that a woman should have a choice, then he should respond to the interests of the people, not his own. We don’t elect officials to represent us so that they can push their own private agendas, we elect them so that they can serve our needs.

I want them to a) say what they believe, b) do what they say. I have far more respect for somebody that says unabashedly that he’s pro-abortion than somebody like Kerry that straddles the fence and doesn’t seem to believe anything.

If his beliefs are not the same as his constituents, then they should elect somebody else.

2+3) I am arguing that abstinence education IS effective AND necessary, but that it MUST be combined with other methods to be MORE effective. Teaching abstinence is great and should be the first priority always, but it doesn’t work for everyone and this is a proven fact. Your own source states this so you must agree. There is a need for greater parental involvement and responsibility on the part of adults. The article states that abstinence education alone and without further support is ineffective, which is what I said when I clarified my statement.

4)You’re right, neither of those numbers is close to nil. I agree. However, I was talking about European countries with effective sexual education systems, such as the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark. Those numbers are close to nil. So I don’t see any argument there. We are in agreement.

5)Yes most of those rants have little to do with abortion. But you must agree that there are other factors in society contributing to the high rate of abortion other than a lack of abstinence education.

6)A politician is supposed to represent the interests of the people. If Kerry feels that abortion is wrong personally, but the majority of the people he represents feels that a woman should have a choice, then he should respond to the interests of the people, not his own. We don’t elect officials to represent us so that they can push their own private agendas, we elect them so that they can serve our needs. Again I am not trying to defend Kerry at all. I think he is a horrible candidate. But I think it is a little childish to blame a politician for changing stances on an issue without first looking to see whether the majority of the people that he represents are also changing their stances on the issue.

7) You allow comments to be made so you must expect people to make them. You don’t have to respond if you don’t want. I’m only trying to help you.

2&3 – You implied that teaching abstinence was the root of teenage unwanted pregnancy. I stated teenage prenancy is curbed by teaching abstinence, not increased. Your conclusions after reading the Catholic article are different than mine; I only concluded that abstinence was a deterrent to teenage pregnancy after you stated it was “ineffective.”

4 – Math error on my part. 20% for Europe, 25% for American. Neither number is very close to “nil”.

5 – No, I don’t take the rest of your agument as fact. I agree with some of your points, but skipped over your contentions about minimum wage, the reason large numbers of blacks are in jail, or that corporations are committing murder. They had little to do with the topic, your anonymous verbosity is overly prolific for a comments section of my blog.

6 – None of this has anything to do with my original point, that Kerry is trying to pretend he believes one thing and vote a completely different way.

7 – You need to go get your own blog. I’ve mentioned that to you before.

I do appreciate greatly the interest you show in this topic and if you think about it, our opinions on the matter are very similar. I appreciate the open debate and the research. What do you think about the rest of the information about the root causes in society? I’m sure there’s more that could be contributing to the abortion issue and would love to discuss other factors involved. Thanks.

The culture in South America is that of the Catholic population in the impoverished North-East region (This region is twice the size of Texas and contains over 40% of Brazil’s total population). If you like you can read the article describing their culture and their opinions on abortion. The Catholic Church there accepts the fact that with such harsh conditions and high infant mortality rates, they can only determine a child as being an actual human being after it has proven itself to be a “survivor,” which is usually only after 2 or 3 years.

Sheper-Hughes, Nancy. “Mother’s Love: Death Without Weeping” in Conformity and Conflict: Readings in Cultural Anthropology. Ed. James Spradley and David McCurdy. Longman: New York. 1997. pp 195-204.

Neeru Gupta; Iuri da Costa Leite “Adolescent Fertility Behavior: Trends and Determinants in Northeastern Brazil.” International Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 25, No. 3. (Sep., 1999), pp. 125-130.

Your second argument is not very strong. You are right that hormones are involved, and peer pressure. These are both major factors. But you can’t tell me that my opinion is a fabrication by offering your opinions and not facts. Of course this (being told not to do something) is not the only reason why people engage in sexual activity. But I think we can both agree that in this society (and in many others) there is a natural tendency for youth to reject authority. We tell kids not to do drugs but they still do drugs. We tell them not to drink but they still drink. Again the urge to be a resistant reactionary isn’t the sole cause; kids won’t do these things just as a negative reaction to make adults angry, but it is a factor. I just feel there are better ways to teach in addition to just bluntly stating “Just Say No!” and leaving the discussion at that. And you must agree that if peer pressure is a factor, then there is a great responsibility among parents, teachers, and other adults who influence children, to make serious commitments to the children’s lives. We both know peer pressure is a major factor in drug and alcohol use, and sex. So I think we can agree that parents must actively seek to educate their children and teach them how to act responsibly. Is it going to solve the problem completely and immediately? No, of course not. But it is a good place to start, to try and alleviate the problem. And many studies show that a large percentage of abortions are had by young women who lack sufficient education or a strong family structure. I am assuming that you also know this but just in case here a just a few:

Lisa C. Remez. “Confronting the Reality of Abortion in Latin America” International Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 21, No. 1. (Mar., 1995), pp. 32-36.

Malcolm Potts. “Sex and the Birth Rate: Human Biology, Demographic Change, and Access to Fertility-Regulation Methods” Population and Development Review, Vol. 23, No. 1. (Mar., 1997), pp. 1-39.

As to your third argument, I agree that abstinence is the only 100% sure way to prevent pregnancy (and the spread of STDs). I was referring to the teaching of abstinence as the only guide in sexual education. The article you refer to only backs up my argument. Lets go through it, shall we?
The author says that students who were taught only abstinence education increased their sexual activity over time, until they were having sex more than children who were taught about condom use. He attributes this increase to a lack of self-control and also to a failure on the part of parents and teachers, the people who are responsible for instilling virtues to make correct choices. Is this not what I have been arguing? The author also points out that education about condoms had no effect on the number of kids having sex and that it is a second-rate method. I agree. If you only teach kids about condoms and not the importance of abstinence, then they will think that there is nothing wrong with having sex. Now where I differ from this author is that I believe that sex education should work to incorporate a number of teaching methods. First and foremost, abstinence is the only 100% proven prevention. If you don’t want to get pregnant, don’t have sex. Period. However, in addition to this, it must be stressed that if one were to engage in sexual activity, then they should be properly educated about the risks and consequences involved, so that if they make that decision then they will be doing it while being well-informed about their actions and subsequent responsibilities. This is why I feel it is incredibly important to teach about contraceptives (ie condoms, the pill). It is also important to discuss the risk of pregnancy and disease thoroughly. So if you are going to have sex (and it shouldn’t necessarily be promoted) then at least be safe. It is perfectly fine to believe that premarital sex is a sin, but it is not right to assume that everyone holds the same belief and must therefore be subjected to something that goes against their own belief system. I admit, this is a point that can be argued either way, but I think that progress will only be made when people decide to respect each other’s opinions and work together. So basically, the article you cite only verifies my statement, which is that abstinence education (without additional resources on safe sex and without strong moral support from parents) is ineffective. Thank you for helping with that. If you have analyzed the information in your article some other way, please let us discuss.

Now as far as your fourth argument is concerned, I wasn’t talking about England. England is one country where abstinence education is strongly advocated. In fact, you prove that your own statement is a fabrication by saying that the abortion rate is 1 in 4 (25%) when the very source you are quoting says that it is 1 in 5 (20%). The article again strongly supports my opinion and argument. Maybe everyone should read it together:
“One in five pregnancies in England results in a termination, giving a mean lifetime abortion rate of 0.44 per woman, which is higher than a decade ago.1 Most women having abortions are young (under 30), single, and childless.2 More women (26.9%) are having repeat abortions.2 3 Not practising safe sexual intercourse is associated with abortion, testing for HIV, and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.4 Contraceptive use is associated with social class, and abortion rates rise with deprivation.4 These factors indicate the need and potential for targeted, preventive interventions.
High fertility and abortion rates in developing countries can be readily explained, but high abortion rates in affluent populations of low fertility with ready access to contraception are less easy to rationalise. Women in all societies need access to safe, legal abortion services. With the Abortion Act 1967, the United Kingdom led other European countries in reforming abortion legislation. As in the Netherlands, there is a need to target the causes of unwanted pregnancy through more effective education and contraceptive services. This will also reduce the costs of abortion and improve sexual health.”
Thanks again for the source.

And I didn’t mention anything about having access to abortion clinics, so I don’t know why you brought up that point. Like I said, abortion is the symptom, we should work together to recognize the root causes. I think you will find a lot of good information in these articles about sexual education systems that are more effective than the approach that the United States takes:

Henry P. David; Janine M. Morgall; Mogens Osler; Niels K. Rasmussen; Birgitte Jensen.
“United States and Denmark: Different Approaches to Health Care and Family Planning” Studies in Family Planning, Vol. 21, No. 1. (Jan. – Feb., 1990), pp. 1-19.

This is an extraordinary article on the topic and since I don’t believe you will bother to actually look it up, I will provide the first paragraph:
“The findings of this study suggest that, compared to the United States, Danish health care policies and family planning services delivery systems are, in the aggregate, more conducive to the promotion of effective contraceptive practice, more instrumental in conveying information to high-risk groups, and more successful in reducing the incidence of unintended pregnancies and induced abortions. One of the major reasons for this difference may stem from the positive and nonambivalent climate of public opinion about sexuality in Denmark and the manner in which health care and family planning services are delivered to all segments of the population regardless of age, income, or location of residence.”

Another great article that highlights a successful education system (that of Sweden) can be found here:

Gigi Santow; Michael Bracher. “Explaining Trends in Teenage Childbearing in Sweden”
Studies in Family Planning, Vol. 30, No. 3. (Sep., 1999), pp. 169-182.

Here are some that explain the importance of education for both children and adults, and its impact on sexual health and abortion rates.

John Cleland; German Rodriguez. “The Effect of Parental Education on Marital Fertility in Developing Countries” Population Studies, Vol. 42, No. 3. (Nov., 1988), pp. 419-442.

Pat Burdell. “Teen Mothers in High School: Tracking their Curriculum” Review of Research in Education, Vol. 21. (1995 – 1996), pp. 163-208.

You may be interested in another article where you will see some interesting patterns. It is about abortion in Greece, and why there is such a high rate.

http://www.greece.gr/LIFE/Lifestyle/safesex.stm