Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hypocrisy, Stupidity and those red state "FAMILY VALUES"! Teen Pregnancy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:48 PM
Original message
Hypocrisy, Stupidity and those red state "FAMILY VALUES"! Teen Pregnancy
Per DKos;

Teen pregnancy rates per 1,000.



When Red States get their social problems under control, and things such as teen pregnancy down to nationwide lows, then they can try and foist their solutions on the rest of the country.

But as things currently stand, on this issue (as well as others like divorce), the Red States have no ground to stand on. Those crazy New Englad liberals are running circles around them in this tangible measure of their residents' "values".

http://www.dailykos.com

Rightwingnuts crack me up; so stupid, so dumb, so moronically hilarious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
illflem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. How can there really be a red state vs. blue
Edited on Mon Dec-06-04 04:58 PM by illflem
when no state voted over 60% for bush?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I thought Texas went 65%. Figures. I see signs of it all around here. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ztn Donating Member (284 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. That map doesn't tell the whole. It's more than just votes. It's culture.
Edited on Mon Dec-06-04 05:55 PM by ztn
Regardless of voting percentage. There's more to red/blue than who won the state. The majority of "red states" when refering to who they voted for Bush, are ALSO red states in terms of culture. Same with blue states.

In his book "The Great Divide", John sperling delves into this subject by separting the states into METRO states (blue) and RETRO states (red). By this cultural measure (not electoral) Retro/red states, including battlegrounds like New Mexico and Iowa, are so because of many social, cultural and economic factors. Voting red in the republican sense of the word is just one likely symptom of these states as is a greater tendency to have higher teen pregnancy and other negative demographics.

The same goes for Metro/blue states, as shown in their TENDENCY to vote blue in the Dem sense and to have better social demogrphics like the teen pregancy stat. Among these Metro/blue states are states that voted Republican/red like Florida, Virginia and Ohio. See where they are in the rankings?

www.retrovsmetro.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #5
17. I believe Ohio and Florida were stolen
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heath.Hunnicutt Donating Member (454 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. It can't be a meaningless distinction with a trend like that shown.
I agree that states may have been close, but when you look at the coloring of the sorted pregnancy rates, the pattern which emerges is undeniable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Teen pregnancy results in part from ignorance
as does the tendency to vote republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThorsHammer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'd like to see a common sense approach, whether red or blue
I have no problem with teaching abstinence, nor with teaching about the use of contraceptives, and don't see why they can't be taught together. My approach would be that abstinence is the only 100% safe form of birth control, but if you choose not to abstain, then contraceptives should be used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. "teaching abstinence" = not teaching anything else
because all that other crap is immoral.

It's not like every single teacher everywhere doesn't say, during sex ed/health or whatever it's called, "Of course, abstinence is the best way to prevent pregnancy and STDs."

There's no reason to differententiate unless you mean to teach ONLY abstinence, which is what is going on in half of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. When we had sex ed
it was explained to us how ineffectual the "timing method" was, (can't remember if that is what you call it - Gawd it's been a long time!) It was the reason my Catholic friends usually had a lot of siblings.

Anyway, it was very valuable information and I did not see anyone running out from sex-ed to have sex! This was in the 70's and unwed pregnancy rates were LOW. Of course when most of us did end up having sex we used a condom because we were TAUGHT that it would keep us from getting pregnant.

And guess what? It worked!

Banning sex education from teens is like handing them a loaded gun with no instructions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Yes, that and the "pullout method"
were both explained to me in sex ed.

I didn't want to have sex after sex ed either! After looking at diagrams of all that stuff covered by just a flimsy layer of my skin, I barely wanted to walk around!

And I had been thinking and talking about sex long before sex ed, in like 7th or 8th grade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThorsHammer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Sorry, didn't word that well, I support the actual sex ed
The differentiation was meant to point out the fundies' belief in abstinence only, and everyone else's belief in common sense, where abstinence and contraception are taught. I strongly favor the latter, and find the theocons to be either ignorant or stupid on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
6. What are the abortion rates in each state?
I bet that may make a difference. Are blue states higher abortion rates?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. That accounts for some of it....
in 2000 - "Statewide teenage abortion rates were highest (36–47 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–19) in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, California and Nevada; the rate in the District of Columbia was 55 per 1,000.

Teenagers in Utah, South Dakota, Kentucky and North Dakota had the lowest abortion rates (6–8 per 1,000).

Overall in 2000, one-third of pregnancies among 15–19-year-olds ended in abortion.

However, in New Jersey, 60% of teenage pregnancies ended in abortion, as did at least 50% in New York, Massachusetts and the District of Columbia."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. Turn it around and it makes sense.
They aren't hypocrites. They are trying to control themselves by controlling the country. If they suffered from these problems less, maybe they would have voted their pocketbooks more. They don't see themselves as the perpretrators of these problems. They see themselves as victims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LimpingLib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
14. All none religous people in any country at any age arent having many kids
Edited on Tue Dec-07-04 02:31 AM by LimpingLib
The average native European (white,as opposed to religous Muslim immigrants or 1st geners) in Europe has like 1.2 kids , far below replacement levels.

Take the white population here (the ethnic group the most prosperous and the least religous per capita) , the reproduction rate is about 1.83 per woman (thi doesnt mean the kids are 100% white mind you, thats another subject) , again far below replacement levels.


The catcher is that the most poor and religous have all the kids.Both go hand in hand generally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 03:28 AM
Response to Original message
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
proudbluestater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-07-04 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
16. This is what comes with abstinence-only sex ed
It is almost as successful as Nancy Reagan's "Just say NO!" to drugs campaign for the younger set.

It looks as though a lot of red-staters are not saying no and also not allowed to KNOW about birth control. Freaking Repukes with their heads in the sand, or worse.

I married a guy who went through K-8th grade at a good parochial school, parents of course thinking the kids would get all them "good moral values" taught to them there, right? By the time we graduated high school the majority of the girls from that good Lutheran school were knocked up. Public school girls were NOT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC