I agree with those who say that abstinence-only is the wrong approach. First, there has been a history in this country of trying to suppress behavior that is natural to the human animal. It's high time for the dinosaurs to grow up and face facts. Telling teens not to have sex will work about as well as prohibition. It is perfectly natural for them to become interested in sex at their age.

A far more mature and responsible approach is to educate them as fully as possible as to the risks, preventions, and consequences. Abstinence should be mentioned, perhaps even recommended, but it is NOT the only valid solution. Life means risk, so it is irrelevant that abstinence is 100% prevention. People have to live their lives, and that includes learning about and experiencing sex.

The only other thing I will add has to do with the consequences. People often take the "that will never happen to me" approach, so consequences need to be made REAL to them. At the same time, the goal is not to fill them with fear about sex. THAT has been the problem for too long.

GROW UP, America!

As a high school student and teenager, I know about my friends' feelings about sex. I, myself, am a virgin. About 100% of my friends are not. I know that they will never be abstinent. about half of them are on the pill, and one has had an abortion. They aren't "bad kids" or sluts. They are normal teenagers. I am so thankful that they have been taught about the choices they have. If these options weren't available, they would all be pregnant with no options. I know that they planned parenthood in my community has saved my friends' lives. They give out free condoms, not with the message that with a condom, you are safe to go out and have as much sex as you want. They come in a ziplock bag that is stuffed with information about safe sex.

Abstinence-only promoters need to sit down and think. They need to have a real conversation with a real teenager. They will hear that no matter whatyou tell them, teens aren't very interested in practicing abstinence.

Teens will do it whether or not they are protected. Let's hope they are protected. Let's hope that their local Planned Parenthood is still up and running, even without government support. Let's hope that we give these girls a chance.

Wade Horn's notion that abstinence only is a wonderful ideal in an ideal world. But unfortunately, we live in a world of increasing sexuality in the media, absent fathers, child sexual abuse (1 in 4 girls), earlier menarche for girls- all of which increase sexual behavior in young girls. Abstinence should be a very loud message to our youth, however, 75% are sexually active by age 17. I believe they deserve protection too.

On Justince Talking, Mr Horn read a letter from a 13 year old girl wishing she had heard his message sooner. At this age, she is a child, and statistically, her sexual partner is likely an adult. What would he have the child do in this situation? According to Mr horn, she should have just said no. It's not so easy as he makes it out to be, espcailyl if there is a lrage age difference. Early sexuality is a complex issue; to consider only one linear solution is to ignore the reality of many children and teens.

I think most can agree that Wade Horns vision of 'no sex until marriage' is an admirable one. However, this is not what is reflected in current CDC statistics on teen sexuality and pregnancy; what is really going on. Vision is good as Mr Horn says, however we also need to deal with 'what is', not only what we want it to be. I've worked with pregnant teens for 20 years. 'Abstinence only' programs are not a cure for the myriad of social problems that foster teen pregnancy. Clearly, Wade Horn and the Bush administration are not in touch with reality. In my view, it's a reflection of a world view that is limited by the provisions of wealth and priviledge.

We are all human. Sexuality is not a dirty concept, nor is it to be condemned. We as a nation need to give our kids a little more credit for being able to have access to full information and to use it wisely to make good decisions. History has proven that the true danger in any society is NOT having access to full information. As a world leader, we should be asking why we have more teen pregnancy, more STD's, more abortions, and more single parent families than any other industrialized nation. They don't seem to be as uptight about sexuality, AND they provide FULL access to information on teen sex. Most of the teens in these countries actually USE birth control and protection against disease - it's a NO BRAINER.

Everyone makes mistakes - I believe our own President and many well known conservatives have made plenty of their own (Newt, Rush, et al). Interesting that they are always the most vocal on the behavior and conduct of everyone else. Fortunately for them, their mistakes did not result in an STD or worse, an unwanted pregnancy. Why should that have to be the price of an instant of poor judgement? Teens are going to have sex. Period. Let's make sure that they are equipped to understand the consequences, have the availability of the information and contraception necessary to insure that IF they do, it doesn't condemn them for the rest of their lives.

After all, are we seriously to believe that all of these conservatives who love to tell us how to conduct ourselves never had pre-marital, extra-marital or unprotected sex? Of course not -they had access to all the information AND resources to ensure their own "human" actions did not impact the rest of their lives with an Unwanted child or unintended pregnancy.

If we were a smart nation, we would be giving away contraception and the morning after pill to anyone who asked. When is the last time a teen got parental consent to have sex? Talked to a teen lately?

Right to Life? How about Right to Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? - Abstinence Only is the equivalent to a Gag Order on the truth - it is a propaganda campaign. Give our kids some credit. If we can send them to war to die at 18, surely we can trust them with some information on sex.

I am disappointed that more people have not responded to this issue. This issue, unfortunately, has now become a political issue. Instead of asking what is best for the health and well-being of our young people, it has now become a matter of political ideology. (Be sure to vote) Teens are sexual beings. There is going to be experimentation. There is going to be sexual intercourse. Just as we need to support the teens who decide to practice abstinence, we need to support those young people who decide to become sexually active.

Hank Kearns

Well, I know first-hand the failure of abstinence-only education. My parents and church promoted this idea and I ended up pregnant at fifteen. It is darkly ironic that I was six months pregnant before my school had any type of sexuality education. Thank goodness that it was a baby and not a life-threatening disease that I ended up with.

The same politicians who preach abstinence until marriage are also against abortion. Yet they refuse to support welfare policies that will actually help these low-income mothers successfully care for their children. I was lucky because my state allows welfare moms to go to college (Maine), so I ended up on the other side of poverty.

Society can't have it both ways. You can't expect to keep kids in the dark about sex and not expect them to wind up pregnant or worse. A parent can hope that his or her child will remain abstinent, but in the end the choice is up to the individual. Comprehensive education is the only way to ensure that kids can make sexual decisions with their eyes wide open.

After listening to the debate, I found myself pondering the diffuse message that abstinence-only proponent Wade Horn left. When he spoke, he was very careful to deflect any particulars of a question into his overall “wait until marriage” mantra. When asked to select a movie that embodied abstinence-only ideals, he chose “A Walk To Remember”, a movie that describes two teens who meet in high school, date fitfully, and then marry before their senior year (and who presumably have sex only after wedding).

Since the linchpin of the abstinence-only program seems to be “wait until marriage”, I feel startled that the idea of marriage is being used as a prophylactic. Abstinence is truly the only “100% effective” way of staving off sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. A marriage is still at the mercy of extra-marital sex, rape, and other sexual activities that expose the non-participating party to diseases. A marriage license does not provide the same type of protection as condoms against STDs. Yet in an abstinence-only program, the failure rates of condoms are touted while the failure rates of marriages remain unmentioned. Not all marriages are built the same.

While Wade seems eager to discount the abilities of teenagers to thoughtfully exercise their sexuality, he seems to think that after your senior year of high school, teens would be prudent to marry and begin having sexual relations after a wedding. Assuming a marriage at 18 with at least a year of knowing the person beforehand, it’s fascinating that Wade feels a 17 year old can fairly assess the physical, mental, financial, emotional, and sexual qualities of another person enough to marry them but not enough to have sex with them. Does having sex with another person require that they be marriage material? Wade seems to think that the opposite, wanting to have sex with another person, should require a marriage.

I agree that abstinence is a great method of prevention. BUT, we have to remember that teens are going to experiment and they are going to break "virginity pledges" and abstinence vows. The best way to headbutt this issue is to talk with our teens and discuss their progression into a sexual world. If they choose to become sexually active, show them the correct methods of prevention and contraception. It's not that hard, teens who get pregnant are usually acting stupid or unclear of the methods of prevention. The knowledge is the key here.

Waiting til marriage???... have any of u ever been to high school lately or middle school for that matter. They are overrun by britney spears and thug wannabe types. And all of them are looking for the fastest and best way to score. Sex is very much an issue among our teens and it shouldn't have to be. As a society, let's stop looking at it as this taboo thing that people can or can't fathom teh consequences of, but let's look at it as a perfectly natural and loving thing between two people. Age ain't nothin but a number, all ages can get pregnant or std's...

abstinence-only education is such a narrow-minded concept. It takes a faith-based brainwashed person to believe it. and any logical human being who can see beyond the filter of religion can understand this. the concept of waiting until marriage means that you subscribe to marriage being a good thing. and with the divorce rates that stand today, who's to say that marriage is an affective tool anyway? marriage should have nothing to do with sex. love should. but not marriage. that's just another old religious concept. please leave religion out of this debate. then we might get some real solutions to common sense sex education.

Fighting full sex education programs in the schools is a cop-out, it is easier than going against popular culture which glorifies sex to all ages. Victoria Secret ads, Temptation Island, Marrying the Millionaire, etc. Either mass media needs to be changed or people need to face reality and recognize that abstinence only is out-of-date and futile.

Abstinence only programs are not fair to our kids. Young people need information--all information in order to protect themselves. I'm tired of the President trying to impose his own morals on this country. Does he even know what his own daughters are up to?

Over the last 8 years I have volunteered for a pregnancy organization. Most callers are involved in passing relationships. Many girls feel they need to have sex to have a boyfriend. Condoms and the pill are used but fail. Some become pregnant and are faced with decisions like abortion that they never even considered before. I think a big issue going on with these young ladies revolves around self esteem. Is sex the only way to have a boyfriend? Where is their freedom in sex or are they looking at being an object that is used and discarded? Not a great self esteem booster. STD's is a real problem. Emotional baggage is another burden. I try get them to consider the risks and if they are worth taking. I want them to feel empowered to uphold their own value and personal respect. Young people don't have the benefit of personal history to be able to see where this new frontier of sex is leading them. Some are not thinking of what they will be bringing emotionally (past intimacies) and physically (STDs or abortion) into their future marriage. Many are calling because condoms are coming off and breaking. I was a science major in college with a 3.85 GPA and became pregnant once on the pill and once on the diaphragm. Artificial contraceptives promotes a false sense of security. Sex feels good but we can feel great about other accomplishments in our lives. I feel that by addressing self esteem, self control, and encouraging empowerment, we are truly promoting abstinence.

I'd also like to add that if we teach young people about sex education and we're all so worried that they're going to go out and try it, maybe we should re-look at giving them information about drug abuse, as they learn about illegal drugs aren't we afraid they're going to go out and do them? Let's give 'em some credit here...

If the Bush family believes that abstinence only programs work and marriage is such a sacred event, then why is Neil Bush getting divorced for having repeated sex with Asian prostitutes as 'payment' for 'consulting' work he performed for the former Chinese president's son's company? Seems to me, the Bushies, Gingrichs, Guilianis, Barrs, etc... should practice what they preach.

As a physician who has taken care of several young teen pregnant patients both in delivery and prenatal care, I can safely say that ignorance is the major culprit. When irrational myths like if a girl is on top she won't get pregnant, or if she douches after intercourse, etc. One girl hadn't realized that what she was doing was actually sex. These were in the one state that has a long tradition of no sex education in schools because "it might encourage young people to have sex." It also ranks among the top 3 states in teen pregnancy. Yes, it's Louisiana, where the Catholic church prefers to keep kids heads in the sand.