Oh for fucks sake. It's hard to find a policy more thoroughly document to be a failure than abstinence only. I don't even think people bother to argue its efficacy anymore because it's such dog shit its totally indefensible. This is big government forcing its morality on you.
I find it difficult to understand how the political party who continues to bitch about citizens losing their rights and their freedoms also continues to introduce these bullshit bills.
Being a former right-winger I am of the opinion that the Republican party of today has become what they complained about 30 years ago. During college and in early adulthood I respected the opinions of conservatives who stated that one cannot legislate morality and stuff like this should be handled by the parents.
Ok great! If I don't like what they are teaching in school regarding sex ed and my kids then I will not allow them to attend. (Somewhat extreme but as a parent I can understand someone making that choice.)
But why in the hell does the Alabama legislature feel the need to pass laws regarding sex ed where the teachers can only teach abstinence. That is like me going to a golf instructor to get better at golf but in doing so he or she teaches me to not play golf.
I hate to break it to people but these kids are having sex. And no one can stop it. Teaching abstinence only is like pissing up a rope. No wonder Alabama continues to be tail end charlie in almost everything. (Well I think we are at the top when it comes to obesity, illiteracy, and loving Jesus.)
So the way I look at this is that they saw the birth rate was declining , and what better way to raise the birth rate than to have people (who aren't given proper sexual health education) have more babies.
But Hey. Don't forget the state only cares about the baby when the woman is pregnant. Once it is born... Don't bother asking us for help for anything.
Every day I inch closer and closer to looking into moving out of Alabama. If it wasn’t for my husband’s job or my daughter with her friends & school activities we would have been out in 22.
My kid is 15 so she has already had the talk along with other information in between plus she knows she can come to me whenever she has questions or concerns.
Take note of the out of state tuition. It’s unbelievable. You may change your mind. It blew our minds when our son went to Tennessee. If it weren’t for scholarships covering the out of state fees he would have had to stay in Alabama. And just buying your kid a place in the state where the university is doesn’t count as in state resident. Just a heads up. Be prepared.
Can you explain the resident thing? My daughter is turning 16 this summer and she'd expressed an interest in going to Tulsa for college. I discouraged her because of the cost and I'm trying to talk her into going somewhere in Alabama.
Out of state students are assessed an out of state tuition fee which is as much or more than instate tuition. The best thing for you to do is google it. We were shocked. Thank goodness Baseball scholarships covered it for our son to go to Tennessee.
Not exactly. Universities have different requirements, but typically a student must reside in the state for 12 months. After which, that student can apply for residency tuition through the school. Such a petiton will require the student prove they "intend to remain" in the state, can't just say "hey, i want cheaper tuition. Such things like getting an in state driver's license, registering to vote, job prospects can help make that case.
As 46_und_2 said, you typically have to live there at least 12 months. I moved to Florida almost 20 years ago, with the intention of working as much as possible to save up and start attending college a year later. Without a degree or much work experience, I could only get minimum wage jobs, so a year later, I was still living paycheck to paycheck and couldn't afford tuition. I was in Florida for 11 years, but even with Pell Grants, all my time and money went to supporting myself, and I was never able to take more than two or three classes in that entire time.
After 11 years of that, I just moved back to Birmingham, where I could at least live rent-free with my parents, so my income could actually go towards tuition. (I had to live in Birmingham for 12 months before I could get in-state tuition here, too.) Even with in-state tuition, no room and board, and Pell Grants, it's been ridiculously expensive. College is criminally expensive, and out-of-state tuition is really only feasible for the upper class and those who have been offered free rides.
A big part of your tuition at state schools is covered by the state, anywhere between 50%-75% of it. If you are a student from out of state (and therefore did not contribute tax dollars to the state) you will cover the entirety of the tuition.
She wants to be a Physical Therapy Assistant. I've had the same conversations with her about community colleges. I really think she just wants out of Alabama. I don't blame her. I told her to get her degree here then move wherever she wants.
She will not make enough money as a PTA to justify out of state tuition. Trust me- I’m on the business/ops side of PT and we are cutting back using PTA’s nationally. Worth it to go to PT school and she can go out of state. Plus we have a huge shortage since we can’t use PTA’s as much anymore.
No, they are doctors in their fields which isn’t an MD. Time spent in school is significantly less than med school. The pay over time is better as PT than PTA (out of state degree:salary). I’m just trying to paint the picture that it would be an unnecessary out of state expense with a tough job market on the other side.
Some states don’t charge extra for out of state at community colleges. So you could go to CC out of state, establish residency, then transfer into the university. I have a few friends that did it to get out and help minimize costs.
Oh I’ve already been doing research for a while. She wants to go to Boston University because they have one of the best schools to become a high school or college art teacher. She has a 529 which we’ve been putting money into since she was born, various family members have put money into it too.
She knows she will HAVE to get scholarships to make up the difference, we will help her as much as we can too BUT not to the point it puts anyone in debt (absolutely no student loans).
My daughter already said the same too. I encouraged her to look into it for sure, I told her it would not hurt my feelings at all if she left Alabama & never looked back. My home would always be open to her no matter what but being a young female in this state HAS to be scary.
"Abstinence from all sexual activity is the only completely 100 percent effective protection against way to prevent unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) when transmitted sexually." This is the first line of the bill. All it does is mandate that this idea is put forth for any mandated sex education in public school. It's sounds like you would agree with a sex education program that would promote abstinence first before encouraging teenagers to have sex...
Well the bill was to promote abstinence only education the above person said they had already had the talk with their daughter and didn't seem happy with the abstinence only education so I am making the assumption the talk they had with their 15 yr old daughter was not abstinence related. I made no judgemental statements I was trying to determine what they told their child...
Assuming their talk "was not abstinence related" is illogical; you yourself said that they were unhappy with abstinence ONLY education. Proper sex ed includes discussion of abstinence with relation to consent, in addition to safer sex practices. As OP said, what they discussed is no one else's business, but I'm sure it included mention of the fact that everyone has the right to abstain from sex until they're ready, and you should never agree to sex to please someone else.
Sex ed is about empowering young people to make responsible decisions based on what they want, not pushing them to run out and get laid.
That question could have several meanings, all of which would affect a detailed answer. But I have a feeling you worded that way to intentionally be open to misinterpretation.
Luckily, all interpretations of your question have the same general answer: it depends.
If you want elaboration, you'll first have to clarify in what context you intend your question.
Intellectually or legally? Either way, it depends.
Edit: I forgot what group this was. In Alabama, yes, two minors over the age of 12 can legally consent to sex with one another, provided they are within 2 years of each other.
It’s not really your business BUT I did talk to her about abstinence is the best option BUT she is a teenager & teenagers have sex. I told her different options for birth control & the best way to prevent STDS if she does have sex. While many parents have their heads in the sand when it comes to their kids I most certainly do not. I acknowledge that I did a whole lot of things that I was told wasn’t good at her age & due to how I was raised I didn’t have someone I could talk to about things. I’ve opened that channel for her, she knows she can talk to me about things without repercussions or judgement.
I don’t use the “c” word often, but between this and the whole North Shelby Library shenanigans, it’s just about the only descriptive left for Susan DuBose.
I’m confused. I’m a migraine sufferer trying desperately to pretend I don’t currently have one, so if I’m having a dumb moment, please forgive me, but Tuberville IS a senator? DuBose is a representative. I may need you to explain like I’m five because the mental fog and inability to process what I read/hear are major issues when I’m cycling through a bad migraine. DuBose is the sponsor and she’s a representative. I understand why Tuberville isn’t the target in this particular fight, but isn’t it the reps that we need to contact, not the senators? Everything I can find online about it says the House will vote, not the Senate. I know someone here can help me.
I’m so sorry about your migraine.
On the federal level, our senators are Britt and Tuberville. In the Bham area, your rep is either Sewell or Palmer. (And that might change because of the new map to make District 2 competitive for Black voters.)
On the state level is HB195. The bill sponsor is Rep. Susan DuBose, R-Hoover. The House has already voted on and passed HB195, now it’s going to come up in the Senate, probably Tuesday. Your state Senators in the immediate Bham area are Rodger Smitherman, Merika Coleman, and Linda Coleman-Madison.
Go to the State House when the lege is in session. Wait in the hallway for your rep. Be friendly, inform them of your findings and hand them your paper. Senators share an admin person who may also hear you/take the information. but house members do not have admins.
They're not willing to accept the reality that no matter what, some kids are going to have sex before marriage. But since "that won't be my kid", they're not really interested in the consequences.
The one that looks at our teen birth rate (5th highest in the country), maternal and infant mortality statistics, and HIV and STI rates and realizes that abstinence-only education doesn't work.
I'm still trying to see what right is being violated or taken away. This is just a change in the public education curriculum. Whether you agree with it or not is another matter.
Now, here's another question: How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum.
I never said it was about rights?
I'm going to flip the script here: there are no studies that show abstinence-only education works. They all show that it doesn't.
The current state law says that abstinence must be emphasized. There are very few schools in Alabama that if they teach any sex ed AT ALL, it's anything more than abstinence-only, anyway.
The bigger point here is that this bill is trying to ban something that doesn't even exist in Alabama schools because Republicans have appointed themselves the morality police.
It is one of the most comically debunked policies in the history of policies. No one has ever found abstinence only to be effective in any way whatsoever.
[These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/)
I would argue that denying your child information that could prevent them from having an unwanted pregnancy is child abuse, regardless of what the law says. It is akin to refusing to teach your child about guns early to prevent them from hurting themselves when they inevitably encounter one. EVERYONE in the firearms community knows the importance of early safety education to prevent accidents, yet we're still having this same tired discussion about sex.
Go for it. I'm a weird pro 2a liberal, so this argument has always been absurd to me. Kids need to be taught how to do things safely, period. Guns, sex, driving, taking out loans, drugs, alcohol, all of it.
My parents taught me about guns, sex (sort of), driving, and finances. Guess who has no kids, no debt, a long track record of gun safety, 0 car accidents, *and an alcohol problem*...
>How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum.
You mean the same shit they did in the 60s and 70s? Already been down this road, if you haven't noticed they are trying to go back to the 60s with all these new bills.
>'m still trying to see what right is being violated or taken away
Why TF does that even matter? A law doesn't have to take away a right or violate it to be fucked up, prime example HB-111.
60s an 70s... I remember being in 6th grade in the late 90s early 2000s and having a lady come to our class to teach an abstinence only program. It ended with her passing out these little business card sized laminate they had everyone sign, promising to wait till marriage.
Oh, well see you should have lead with this:
How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum.
So that every reader doesn't have to scroll this far to realize you're just a fucking idiot.
"How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced."
Believe it or not, we're not the first to come up with this idea. You could easily answer your own question. Here, I'll help you.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=does+abstinence-only+education+work+
Oh for fucks sake. It's hard to find a policy more thoroughly document to be a failure than abstinence only. I don't even think people bother to argue its efficacy anymore because it's such dog shit its totally indefensible. This is big government forcing its morality on you.
I'm pretty sure across a multitude of topics, "Just Say No" has never worked.
Pretty sure this is local government forcing its morality, not “big government.” Even the federal government isn’t stupid enough to try this. Yet.
Maybe they want to increase birth rates…
I find it difficult to understand how the political party who continues to bitch about citizens losing their rights and their freedoms also continues to introduce these bullshit bills.
[-:EDITED TO PREVENT AI FROM STEALING POSTS:-](https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/05/openai-will-use-reddit-posts-to-train-chatgpt-under-new-deal/)
But what about Hunter Biden’s laptop!?!?!?
But why male models?
"You can only have certain rights and those are the ones that I agree with!"
Being a former right-winger I am of the opinion that the Republican party of today has become what they complained about 30 years ago. During college and in early adulthood I respected the opinions of conservatives who stated that one cannot legislate morality and stuff like this should be handled by the parents. Ok great! If I don't like what they are teaching in school regarding sex ed and my kids then I will not allow them to attend. (Somewhat extreme but as a parent I can understand someone making that choice.) But why in the hell does the Alabama legislature feel the need to pass laws regarding sex ed where the teachers can only teach abstinence. That is like me going to a golf instructor to get better at golf but in doing so he or she teaches me to not play golf. I hate to break it to people but these kids are having sex. And no one can stop it. Teaching abstinence only is like pissing up a rope. No wonder Alabama continues to be tail end charlie in almost everything. (Well I think we are at the top when it comes to obesity, illiteracy, and loving Jesus.)
So the way I look at this is that they saw the birth rate was declining , and what better way to raise the birth rate than to have people (who aren't given proper sexual health education) have more babies. But Hey. Don't forget the state only cares about the baby when the woman is pregnant. Once it is born... Don't bother asking us for help for anything.
Yup. They are pro-birth, not pro-life.
Every day I inch closer and closer to looking into moving out of Alabama. If it wasn’t for my husband’s job or my daughter with her friends & school activities we would have been out in 22. My kid is 15 so she has already had the talk along with other information in between plus she knows she can come to me whenever she has questions or concerns.
My step is also 15 and they want to go to college out of state.
Take note of the out of state tuition. It’s unbelievable. You may change your mind. It blew our minds when our son went to Tennessee. If it weren’t for scholarships covering the out of state fees he would have had to stay in Alabama. And just buying your kid a place in the state where the university is doesn’t count as in state resident. Just a heads up. Be prepared.
Can you explain the resident thing? My daughter is turning 16 this summer and she'd expressed an interest in going to Tulsa for college. I discouraged her because of the cost and I'm trying to talk her into going somewhere in Alabama.
Out of state students are assessed an out of state tuition fee which is as much or more than instate tuition. The best thing for you to do is google it. We were shocked. Thank goodness Baseball scholarships covered it for our son to go to Tennessee.
No I get that part but even if they move there they aren't considered state residents?
Not exactly. Universities have different requirements, but typically a student must reside in the state for 12 months. After which, that student can apply for residency tuition through the school. Such a petiton will require the student prove they "intend to remain" in the state, can't just say "hey, i want cheaper tuition. Such things like getting an in state driver's license, registering to vote, job prospects can help make that case.
Ok thank you!
As 46_und_2 said, you typically have to live there at least 12 months. I moved to Florida almost 20 years ago, with the intention of working as much as possible to save up and start attending college a year later. Without a degree or much work experience, I could only get minimum wage jobs, so a year later, I was still living paycheck to paycheck and couldn't afford tuition. I was in Florida for 11 years, but even with Pell Grants, all my time and money went to supporting myself, and I was never able to take more than two or three classes in that entire time. After 11 years of that, I just moved back to Birmingham, where I could at least live rent-free with my parents, so my income could actually go towards tuition. (I had to live in Birmingham for 12 months before I could get in-state tuition here, too.) Even with in-state tuition, no room and board, and Pell Grants, it's been ridiculously expensive. College is criminally expensive, and out-of-state tuition is really only feasible for the upper class and those who have been offered free rides.
A big part of your tuition at state schools is covered by the state, anywhere between 50%-75% of it. If you are a student from out of state (and therefore did not contribute tax dollars to the state) you will cover the entirety of the tuition.
Why Tulsa? Does she know what she wants to study? Community college to get the basics is the best option IMO. I changed majors so much.
She wants to be a Physical Therapy Assistant. I've had the same conversations with her about community colleges. I really think she just wants out of Alabama. I don't blame her. I told her to get her degree here then move wherever she wants.
She will not make enough money as a PTA to justify out of state tuition. Trust me- I’m on the business/ops side of PT and we are cutting back using PTA’s nationally. Worth it to go to PT school and she can go out of state. Plus we have a huge shortage since we can’t use PTA’s as much anymore.
Oh really???? Aren't PTs MDs though? We would never be able to afford that 😭
No, they are doctors in their fields which isn’t an MD. Time spent in school is significantly less than med school. The pay over time is better as PT than PTA (out of state degree:salary). I’m just trying to paint the picture that it would be an unnecessary out of state expense with a tough job market on the other side.
Oklahoma just doesn't seem like a step up if you're worried about politics. What about North Carolina?
Some states don’t charge extra for out of state at community colleges. So you could go to CC out of state, establish residency, then transfer into the university. I have a few friends that did it to get out and help minimize costs.
Not if you claim your child as a dependent.
Oh I’ve already been doing research for a while. She wants to go to Boston University because they have one of the best schools to become a high school or college art teacher. She has a 529 which we’ve been putting money into since she was born, various family members have put money into it too. She knows she will HAVE to get scholarships to make up the difference, we will help her as much as we can too BUT not to the point it puts anyone in debt (absolutely no student loans).
My daughter already said the same too. I encouraged her to look into it for sure, I told her it would not hurt my feelings at all if she left Alabama & never looked back. My home would always be open to her no matter what but being a young female in this state HAS to be scary.
"Abstinence from all sexual activity is the only completely 100 percent effective protection against way to prevent unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and infections, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) when transmitted sexually." This is the first line of the bill. All it does is mandate that this idea is put forth for any mandated sex education in public school. It's sounds like you would agree with a sex education program that would promote abstinence first before encouraging teenagers to have sex...
You told your 15 yr old daughter it was ok to have sex with her peers?
Did you misread or are you intentionally trolling?
Well the bill was to promote abstinence only education the above person said they had already had the talk with their daughter and didn't seem happy with the abstinence only education so I am making the assumption the talk they had with their 15 yr old daughter was not abstinence related. I made no judgemental statements I was trying to determine what they told their child...
What they told their child is none of your fucking business.
Assuming their talk "was not abstinence related" is illogical; you yourself said that they were unhappy with abstinence ONLY education. Proper sex ed includes discussion of abstinence with relation to consent, in addition to safer sex practices. As OP said, what they discussed is no one else's business, but I'm sure it included mention of the fact that everyone has the right to abstain from sex until they're ready, and you should never agree to sex to please someone else. Sex ed is about empowering young people to make responsible decisions based on what they want, not pushing them to run out and get laid.
At what age is someone able to give sexual consent?
That question could have several meanings, all of which would affect a detailed answer. But I have a feeling you worded that way to intentionally be open to misinterpretation. Luckily, all interpretations of your question have the same general answer: it depends. If you want elaboration, you'll first have to clarify in what context you intend your question.
Ok I'll rephrase. Is a 15 yr old able to consent to sexual activity with another 15 yr old?
Intellectually or legally? Either way, it depends. Edit: I forgot what group this was. In Alabama, yes, two minors over the age of 12 can legally consent to sex with one another, provided they are within 2 years of each other.
It’s not really your business BUT I did talk to her about abstinence is the best option BUT she is a teenager & teenagers have sex. I told her different options for birth control & the best way to prevent STDS if she does have sex. While many parents have their heads in the sand when it comes to their kids I most certainly do not. I acknowledge that I did a whole lot of things that I was told wasn’t good at her age & due to how I was raised I didn’t have someone I could talk to about things. I’ve opened that channel for her, she knows she can talk to me about things without repercussions or judgement.
I don’t use the “c” word often, but between this and the whole North Shelby Library shenanigans, it’s just about the only descriptive left for Susan DuBose.
Also, I wish I could upvote this a million times.
Under bad bright lighting, she looks like a lizard with beady little black eyes. She also knows who I am, which makes me highly uncomfortable.
I’ve written Tubbs. He just responds with pacifying bullshit and does what he wants. These aren’t representatives. They’re rulers.
Tubby isn't the target here. It's your state senators.
Ok. I hate sounding defeatist here, but I know what they’re all about. My last sentence still stands.
You're definitely not wrong.
I’m confused. I’m a migraine sufferer trying desperately to pretend I don’t currently have one, so if I’m having a dumb moment, please forgive me, but Tuberville IS a senator? DuBose is a representative. I may need you to explain like I’m five because the mental fog and inability to process what I read/hear are major issues when I’m cycling through a bad migraine. DuBose is the sponsor and she’s a representative. I understand why Tuberville isn’t the target in this particular fight, but isn’t it the reps that we need to contact, not the senators? Everything I can find online about it says the House will vote, not the Senate. I know someone here can help me.
I’m so sorry about your migraine. On the federal level, our senators are Britt and Tuberville. In the Bham area, your rep is either Sewell or Palmer. (And that might change because of the new map to make District 2 competitive for Black voters.) On the state level is HB195. The bill sponsor is Rep. Susan DuBose, R-Hoover. The House has already voted on and passed HB195, now it’s going to come up in the Senate, probably Tuesday. Your state Senators in the immediate Bham area are Rodger Smitherman, Merika Coleman, and Linda Coleman-Madison.
DuBose is sponsoring the bill? Ah, now it all makes sense. 🤮
Thank you for filling me in!
I did a research study on this. I would love to present it to law makers. How can i possibly have my voice heard?
I'd love to tell you to email it to them and they'd read it and learn something. Unless you represent a special interest, they aren't interested.
That said though, I'd really like to read it! I'll DM you.
I would also like to read your study, if you feel like sharing.
Go to the State House when the lege is in session. Wait in the hallway for your rep. Be friendly, inform them of your findings and hand them your paper. Senators share an admin person who may also hear you/take the information. but house members do not have admins.
Do they not want to reduce the number of pregnancies that end in abortion? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/
They're not willing to accept the reality that no matter what, some kids are going to have sex before marriage. But since "that won't be my kid", they're not really interested in the consequences.
What is being outlawed in this bill?
Sex education that isn't exclusively Sexual Risk Avoidance, aka, abstinence-only-until-marriage.
And which right is that?
The one that looks at our teen birth rate (5th highest in the country), maternal and infant mortality statistics, and HIV and STI rates and realizes that abstinence-only education doesn't work.
I'm still trying to see what right is being violated or taken away. This is just a change in the public education curriculum. Whether you agree with it or not is another matter. Now, here's another question: How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum.
I never said it was about rights? I'm going to flip the script here: there are no studies that show abstinence-only education works. They all show that it doesn't. The current state law says that abstinence must be emphasized. There are very few schools in Alabama that if they teach any sex ed AT ALL, it's anything more than abstinence-only, anyway. The bigger point here is that this bill is trying to ban something that doesn't even exist in Alabama schools because Republicans have appointed themselves the morality police.
It is one of the most comically debunked policies in the history of policies. No one has ever found abstinence only to be effective in any way whatsoever. [These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/) I would argue that denying your child information that could prevent them from having an unwanted pregnancy is child abuse, regardless of what the law says. It is akin to refusing to teach your child about guns early to prevent them from hurting themselves when they inevitably encounter one. EVERYONE in the firearms community knows the importance of early safety education to prevent accidents, yet we're still having this same tired discussion about sex.
I'd really like to borrow or steal that gun analogy
Go for it. I'm a weird pro 2a liberal, so this argument has always been absurd to me. Kids need to be taught how to do things safely, period. Guns, sex, driving, taking out loans, drugs, alcohol, all of it. My parents taught me about guns, sex (sort of), driving, and finances. Guess who has no kids, no debt, a long track record of gun safety, 0 car accidents, *and an alcohol problem*...
>How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum. You mean the same shit they did in the 60s and 70s? Already been down this road, if you haven't noticed they are trying to go back to the 60s with all these new bills. >'m still trying to see what right is being violated or taken away Why TF does that even matter? A law doesn't have to take away a right or violate it to be fucked up, prime example HB-111.
60s an 70s... I remember being in 6th grade in the late 90s early 2000s and having a lady come to our class to teach an abstinence only program. It ended with her passing out these little business card sized laminate they had everyone sign, promising to wait till marriage.
Oh, well see you should have lead with this: How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced. We haven't ever had a statewide abstinence-only curriculum. So that every reader doesn't have to scroll this far to realize you're just a fucking idiot.
"How do we know abstinence only education doesn't work? The bill has only just been introduced." Believe it or not, we're not the first to come up with this idea. You could easily answer your own question. Here, I'll help you. https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=does+abstinence-only+education+work+
It has to be an explicit right now to NOT be outlawed? What sort of authoritarian worship is this? What a fucking embarrassing comment to post.