President Barack Obama’s budget sends hundreds of millions of dollars to the Planned Parenthood abortion business — but that’s not the only concern it presents for pro-life advocates.
Yesterday, President Obama sent his proposed FY 2015 budget to Congress. Despite the fact that most parents of teens, whether Democrat or Republican, favor the abstinence approach, the president proposed the elimination of every sexual risk avoidance program, while continuing every sex education program that normalizes teen sex.
“By eliminating SRA (sexual risk avoidance) abstinence programs in his budget, the President has, once again chosen to ignore the wishes of parents and the approach that helps youth avoid all risk associated with teen sex. This is truly unfortunate, but not at all surprising. President Obama has sought to cut or eliminate SRA abstinence programs each year of his presidency. This – despite a growing body of research showing its effectiveness,” stated Valerie Huber, President of NAEA.
Huber tells LifeNews Obama’s FY 2015 budget will only increase the current 1:16 disparity between SRA abstinence education and so-called “comprehensive’’ sex education. She says that is despite the fact that nearly 7 in 10 Democratic parents would like to see more equality in funding for abstinence education and almost 60% specifically oppose the president’s efforts to eliminate SRA funding.
“In addition, since the CDC reports that nearly 75% of teens targeted for sex education classes (age 15-17) are not sexually active, one would expect federal sex education policy to reinforce the good decisions the majority of teens are making and encourage more teens to make the same healthy choices. Sadly, the President’s recent budget ignores these compelling facts,” Huber said.
Research shows that students benefit from SRA abstinence programs, regardless of their sexual experience, or lack thereof. Students in successful SRA programs are more likely to delay sex than their peers, if sexually active, to discontinue sex or have fewer partners and are no less likely to use a condom.
According to Huber “Parents favor the abstinence approach because they recognize that it is much more than a ‘just say no’ approach. SRA abstinence education reaches youth where they live and addresses issues they are concerned about. Parents don’t want their children to have a false sense of security from those who equate ‘safe sex’ with a condom or who make teen sex seem inevitable and risk-free. Parents want the best health outcomes for their children, so it is no surprise that they favor sexual risk avoidance programs.”
CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!
Although most political analysts declare this budget even more “dead on arrival” than previous ones, NAEA calls on Congress to ignore the President’s sex education policy recommendations and instead choose the common sense position of supporting SRA abstinence programs and the positive results they are achieving among youth.