Deval Patrick To Kids: Say Yes To Sex?

Deval Patrick is now the target of a ad campaign launched by abstinence-only education backers. I heard the ad on the radio the other day, and it basically accuses Patrick of Deval Patrick not wanting 11-year-olds to be taught to say no to sex.

Backers of abstinence-only education launched a campaign yesterday urging Governor Deval Patrick to accept a $700,000 federal grant to keep the program alive in Massachusetts.

Patrick, who vetoed language in the state budget supporting the program, has indicated he won’t apply for the money. The application deadline is Sept. 30.

“We don’t teach kids how to smoke safely, drink and drive safely, and fight safely,” said Rebecca Ray of Healthy Futures, a subsidiary of a Christian, antiabortion group called A Woman’s Concern.

Let’s be fair about this. Is that really what Deval Patrick is implying by refusing to accept funding for abstinence-only sex education? I would say no. However, his refusing the funding doesn’t bother me as much as his reasons for refusing the funding.

I am against any taxpayer dollars going toward sex education of any kind, and I am against the idea that the state should be responsible for teaching kids about such topics. Sex education should come from the children’s parents.

The troubling thing is really that Deval Patrick would likely accept federal money for the kind of sex education that includes indoctrinating kids about homosexuality, and promotes sexual activity at ridiculously young ages.

Matt Margolis is co-author (with Mark Noonan) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at The Buffalo Bean. Follow Matt on Twitter.

4 Responses to “Deval Patrick To Kids: Say Yes To Sex?”

1. Roscoe says:

   September 7, 2007 at 5:18 pm

   When I was taught “Sex-ed” in school 30 years ago it was actually called “Health Ed”. Health is the big picture that seems to get lost in the noise of this abstinence ONLY nonsense. Of course the Governor wants abstinence taught to all kids. That’s just a part of comprehensive health education that they need. Drop the word “ONLY” (gag clause) for the Federal funding, and then you are getting somewhere.
2. James says:

   September 8, 2007 at 3:37 pm

   “I am against any taxpayer dollars going toward sex education of any kind”

   Lubbock, Texas, a highly conservative area feels the same way. Yet they the charts in teen pregnancy and STD infection rates. A few years ago, a 14-year-old Lubbock jr high student contracted HIV and infected several other students.

   The numbers show that sex ed (both lack of sex ed and comprehensive sex ed) have no effect frequency of teen sexual activity. However, the numbers show that areas with comprehensive sex ed have far fewer teen pregnancies and STD infections than abstinence only or no sex ed at all.

   State Rankings – teen pregnancy prevention (with comprehensive sex ed): 1. Vermont 7. Washington 8. New Jersey 8. West Virginia 9. South Carolina

   Abstinence only states: 42. Louisiana 45. Arkansas 48. Arizona 50. Mississippi

   http://www.jphp.umb.edu/documents/203-106_health_24_3_perrin_000.pdf

   Also compare the US with France, who has a nation wide comprehensive sex ed & contraception program.

   Percentage of women aged 20-24 who had first intercourse before age 20: US 81% & France 83% – a statistical dead heat.

   Yet, teenage birth rate per 1,000 births: US 49 & France 9! The US has 7 times more teen pregnancies than France.

   http://www.thebody.com/content/art2418.html

   France, that hated bastion of liberalism hated by the right is kicking our ass. And it’s easy to see that the conservative anti-sex ed states are bringing down the average.

   Since the evidence shows denying kids comprehensive sex ed or teaching abstinence-only does not reduce the rate of teen sexual activity, and I doubt any Hub Politics denizens would concede that France has “more sexual morality” than the US, I’m forced to conclude that opponents of sex ed or those who want abstinence-only are content with the US’s absurdly high teen pregnancy/STD infection rates. What kind of conservative values are OK with high rates of teen pregnancy and STD infection?

   Please, leave your stone-age idea of denying kids sex ed and join us in the 21st century, won’t you?
3. mike m says:

   September 9, 2007 at 10:51 am

   Of course Deviod doesnt want to teach abstinence he is too busy screwing all of the hardworking txapying legal citizens of this state!!!!
4. Matt Wilding says:

   September 10, 2007 at 9:49 am

   I’m glad that 2 out of 3 of these comment responses are reasonable. It seems that MA republicans and democrats can agree that kids will be having sex whether we tell them to or not, so teaching them how to do it safely is probably a good idea. Further, that comment from the abstinence only camp about how we don’t teach our children to drink and drive safely or fight safely is absolutely insane. We don’t encourage adults to do either of those things, whereas sex is pretty much par for the course in adult life. And what we learn about sex as children influences what we do as adults. See also: I was taught to ALWAYS use protection, whereas some of my Catholic friends were encouraged to simply abstain. I do not have any children out of wedlock, while many of them do.