Teens Request Abstinence Programs

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform recently held a hearing titled, "Domestic Abstinence-Only Programs: Assessing the Evidence." While the hearing was stacked against abstinence education funding, two experts testified as to the effectiveness of such programs. Federal funding for these programs is in jeopardy. Chairman Henry Waxman (Dem-California) advocates for comprehensive sex education, which has no evidence of reducing teen sexual activity.

A press conference was held yesterday at the National Press Club to release evidence from recent studies that prove over 50 percent of teens will refrain from sexual initiation if taught abstinence. And teens are requesting the programs.

Concerned Women for America (CWA) is providing, to congressmen, letters from students who want abstinence to be taught. In a letter written to Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California), Jordan wrote,

"Most teens who stay abstinent will be more emotionally stable, will not contract STDs, and will not get pregnant. This would not only benefit many individuals, but society as a whole. This is because the upcoming generation would be happier and healthier."

Lauren believes that even though there are "teens and other individuals who want to do whatever they see fit, most teens want to receive a strong message about abstinence. They want to know that they can say 'no' and that they don't have to give in to peer pressure. By informing students and teenagers of abstinence, you are allowing them to choose a better future and avoid all the emotional and physical heartache and risks of having casual sex."

CWA, along with teens across the nation, encourages members of Congress to continue to fund programs that not only provide proven results, but keep our children safe. Concerned Women for America is the nation's largest public policy women's organization.

TOPIC: The TRUTH About the Waxman Report
Several websites, blogs and agencies have renewed articles (this week) about the Waxman Report (the recent one regarding Crisis Pregnancy Centers, not the 2003/2004 The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs report). Most responsible researchers and agency personnel knew there were outright lies in Representative Henry Waxman's report when it was first touted by Planned Parenthood and liberal newspapers. Now, the truth is out in the open -- again.
The TRUTH is that Henry Waxman is against pro-life and CPCs. He is very PRO-ABORTION (including partial birth abortion) -- and he pushed for a report that would prop up his own morals.
Jane Jimenez did some research into the underpinnings of the initial Waxman Report on abstinence programs. Her findings are as true now as they were of the original report. "Henry Waxman ordered the report. Why? Because he wanted to. Waxman’s own paid staff prepared the report…for their boss…who hires and fires them. ... Waxman receives a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and NOW…earned for his steadfast support of abortion on demand and without restriction and of same-sex marriage."
As for the most recent Waxman Report, Concerned Women of America (the right's answer to the abortion-minded NOW) wrote on their website:
A report spearheaded by pro-abortion Rep. Henry Waxman (D-California) states that 20 of 23 crisis pregnancy centers gave "false or misleading information about the potential risks of an abortion" to staff investigators who posed as pregnant 17-year-olds, The Washington Post said. The congressional report claims that this information "denies the teenagers and women vital health information, prevents them from making an informed decision, and is not an accepted public health practice."
Thirteen of the crisis pregnancy centers said that abortion commonly causes severe psychological effects. Seven told investigators that abortion increases risks in future pregnancies, such as infertility and miscarriages. Eight told callers that abortion also increases the risk of developing breast cancer. However, despite the claims of abortion advocates who are behind Waxman's report, the pregnancy centers based their responses on sound research.
Dr. Janet Daling of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (who says she is pro-choice) brings dramatic evidence to the table: "I resent people messing with scientific data to further their own agenda, be they pro-choice or pro-life. I would have loved to have found no association between breast cancer and abortion, but our research is rock solid and our data is accurate." Dr. Daling's research found overall a 50 percent risk increase in women who had undergone an abortion. So why skew the data?
"The abortion industry views CPCs as competition and fears that they will take away their customers," says Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America. "They know that if women are properly educated on the physical and emotional dangers of abortion, many times they will opt out of the dangerous procedure. CPCs take the time to inform women about the consequences of their decision to either continue or end their pregnancy."