Rule 1: Abstinence education works.
Rule 2: In situations where it doesn’t appear to work, see rule 1.
That’s the read that people like Steve Benen are getting from this clip of Rick Perry:
From Benen:
The problem here isn’t just that Perry has the wrong answer. The more meaningful problem is that Perry doesn’t seem to know how to even formulate an answer. He starts with a proposition in his mind (abstinence-only education is effective), and when confronted with evidence that the proposition appears false (high teen-pregnancy rates), the governor simply hangs onto his belief, untroubled by evidence. As Jon Chait put it, Perry seems to struggle “even to think in empirical terms.”
Perry subscribes to the prescriptive model of reality.
Did anyone else hear W in the back of their mind when Perry was speaking here?
Sometimes Texan accents can be charming (I’ve been told– as a Texan). Admittedly, when Bush and Perry play theirs up, it’s annoying.
You mean like when Bush talks about terrists with nukular weapons?
Yes. No excuse for improper diction, y’all! LOL!!! :P
I especially ***HATE*** the way he says nuclear. >:(
Even Indiana Jones said it that way in #4.
From his own personal life huh? Someone get this man laid.
No, thanks. It might be easier to cure cancer.
Further proof that this is not a man of reason. If I were a serial killer, hey, serial killing worked for me! Does that mean it works for everyone? No, of course not. Perry has done nothing but defend his confirmation bias while ignoring evidence to suggest that his confirmation bias has led him astray. Just another Republican, Texan governor with little, or no, intellectual integrity.
He’s technically right when he says, “abstinence works.” If people don’t have sex, they won’t get pregnant or catch an STD. But the problem is that abstinence education doesn’t produce abstinence. You can tell teenagers “don’t have sex” until you’re blue in the face, but a large percentage of them are going to do it anyway. And if all you’ve ever told them is “don’t have sex,” then they’re not going to know how to protect themselves. Quality sex ed can explain the benefits of waiting, but it also has to prepare kids to take precautions if they don’t wait.
@bigjohn756, yes Perry does remind me of Bush. Not a pleasant sensation.
He is not technically right, because he is not being asked about absitnence, he is being asked about abstinence only education programs.
If we’re quibbling over technicalities here, he’s technically not answering the question on abstinence-only education when he says “abstinence works”, but answering a question not asked, namely:
Does abstinence, in your opinion, work?
Well no surprise there. Any politician asked a question where the real answer is unflattering will try to re-ask the question to give a more favourable answer.
Correlational studies on sex outcomes and type of education have been around for decades. Though correlation doesn’t imply causation, for the studies to be so consistent for generations suggests there’s something there worth looking at.
Perry doesn’t seem smart enough to understand the simplest of research methods applied to real world outcomes. This is painful to watch. Is there something wrong with him? Running for higher office needs to come with some sort of basic knowledge exam.
Ugh. If he had some half-intelligent people working with him, they could teach him to spin a coherent answer and still hold his (wrong) conclusion. Let’s hope he doesn’t find any.
Correlation is all we really still have as far as gravity is concerned too.
True. It’s just a theory.
Indeed, this explains why thousands of people go missing every year.
They fall up and just keep a-going.
Except there’s real math and physics involved with gravity, as well as reproducible evidence to its properties and behaviors, making it a much different subject material than the sexual behavior of adolescents.
To do a true double-blind randomized control study on a large enough population, taking into account their confounding differences, would be a trick. It might not be ethical either.
I can think of no trial methodology that wouldn’t have severe difficulties in either gaining ethical approval or gaining informed consent. You could maybe do it as a small part of tracking all health related issues in different populations, including sexual and reproductive health. But I honestly doubt them good Kris-chun parents would sign up to anything that might threaten to debunk their views.
I’d like to think that Perry couldn’t POSSIBLY get elected with statements like that, but he’s the longest serving Governor in Texas. (Yikes!)
Time to move, I guess. Any ideas on where to go to avoid this kind of stuff?
Off this planet – which is where I’ll be going if Perry or Bachmann get their hands on the launch codes.
OPINION RAGE FOLLOWS
I detest this whole ‘abstinence education’ thing. They do it a bit in the UK too. People can and should have as much sex as they themselves deem appropriate, as long as they take adequate precautions, which amount to condoms for casual relations, and for the long term, blood tests to avoid disease and pills to avoid pregnancy. If people just tell everyone “Sex is baayd, mmkay?”, they’ll just be like (and are) “Fuck that shit! I do what I want!”. Luckily this has been largely avoided in Britain with free chlamidya tests and contraception from the NHS without parental consent. Even better, I think there should be a system of ‘STD free’ cards. With the reception of negative blood test results, patients would receive a holographic card certifying them free of STDs.
Let me rephrase it in case anyone misunderstood: There is nothing morally wrong with safe, consentual sexual relations in any circumstance, except for the over 18, under 16 rule, or similar.
Apologies for the harsh tone.
I tried to read it in a ranting harsh tone, it didn’t work. What you said just seems so reasonable. Leaving kids without education about safety is just ridiculous, when has that been a good idea for any other hazard? We teach all kinds of things for alcohol: have a designated driver, we provide information about taxi services in case there is no able driver, and sure they do point out there is an absolute limit beyond which death can occur, but only because the stuff is poison.
So for alcohol, we have designated drivers and taxi services (ie, professional drivers). I wonder how would that would work for sex…
No matter how you slice it, STD-free certification is only valid until your next sexual encounter, even if you only have sex with someone who is also certified to be STD-free. Tests do occasionally return false negatives. I see this as a practical problem that is not likely to be solved, even assuming that people would go for the idea.
You are far better off approaching every partner outside of a long-term monogamous relationship as a potential sort of infection, and taking appropriate precautions.
Or…we could walk in holiness and purity, free from the stains of this fallen cosmos and live ‘above’ its insidious grasp thereby avoiding the consequences of disobedience to the Truth, its many accompanying plagues, ie Pharaoh as an example here, I mean really, who wants a darkened palace full of frogs, flies and locusts right? (which are all swarming metaphors for the condition of our inner man and heart life in disobedience). No pests in my palace.
That’s a (whole) ‘nother option, is it not Ursa? Or just one you’ve never considered friend?
Judging by the poeishness and irony i hope you are speaking with, i would assume that praying also prevents pregnancies.
All together now…
AHAHAHAHAHAHaaaaaaa
John C, your “option” seems to be “living life properly.” Do you really believe diseases only happen to bad people?
Because if so, there are billions of people out there who would like a word with you.
I normally try to sympathise with people like you, but this time, I simply cannot. Your reply was filled with non-sequiteurs and literal nonsense. Can you provide one shred of evidence for a single one of your propositions? Bearing in mind that the Bible is a millennia old piece of fiction.
Can you provide one shred of evidence for a single one of your propositions?
He can’t. He systematically refuses to say anything other than trite nonsense. Frankly, it’s baffling why he continues with this solipsistic foolishness.
because he believes
hahaha oh god, you are obviously trolling. I don’t get why everyone who responded to you doesn’t see that? wtf.
You don’t get to basically say to someone’s face that they are dirty, disgusting and unclean to the extent they are inviting and deserve illness because they do not subscribe to your philosophy, and then call them ‘friend’. That’s just being a dick. I know you like to pretend you are the real deal, a genuine Christian who does what Christ actually asked rather than a judgmental godbot who is a slave to doctrine, but you are just as judgmental as any religious person you try so hard to pretend you are so different from. Your attempts to philosophise why people act, think and suffer the way they do comes across as smarmy and hollow as any TV preacher.
Well, one would hope that those with the cards would only have sex with others with the cards, so infection would be contained. Ideally, they would be near ubiquitous, so that anyone without a card would most likely have some sort of infection, and would be viewed as such. Of course, it wouldn’t be 100% effective, but neither are condoms or the pill.
And I agree, ideally people should take precautions, but not everyone does. IMO, we need to stop fighting the trend and go along with it.
“You are far better off approaching every partner outside of a long-term monogamous relationship as a potential sort of infection, and taking appropriate precautions.”
I would not use the word ‘monogamous’ here. Instead, I would describe the relationship as having ‘fidelity’, or some closed form.
Dear, everyone here: It is spelled Parry; with an “a.” He’s not the lead singer of Journey. It’s hard to take you seriously if you can’t spell what you are talking about.
Um, no it’s not. His name is Rick Perry with an “e”. Unless you’re saying his own government website spells it wrong.
http://governor.state.tx.us/
It’s even harder to take you seriously when it’s abundantly clear that you don’t have a gnat’s clue.
Y’know, I love Stephen Colbert, but I was hoping he’d do something more productive with his superpac funds, like actually fighting the Citizens United ruling. All the Parry write-in votes were awarded to Perry.
Oh, and the lead singer of Journey is Arnel Pineda. A great ‘Cinderella’ story.
Just to complete the fail, the former lead singer of Journey is name Steve, not Rick.
There’s just too much fail for me to believe someone can operate a computer and write that… I call troll, in which case, bloody well done!
I think he was parroting something from the Colbert Report . . . so no, he probably wasn’t being serious.
But of course, you never know.
His name says it all ^^
Damn kids and their hippity-hop pop-culture references… GET OFF MY LAWN!
I think Rommney is just as befuddled by religion, he’s just sneakier about expressing it. Since he’s more likely to be the GOP candidate than Perry, I hope the dirt on him is being dredged up.
The ridiculous thing, to me, is just how badly he blunders this as an interview question/prospective debate topic. I mean, how hard is it to produce a coherent answer to this question?
Watch:
Interviewer: People are criticizing abstinence education, because it seems like it isn’t working.
Non-stupid person who actually supports abstinence education: Well, like so many things, in sexual education there is an easy way and a right way. The easy way might be “have sex, wear a condom.” But I firmly believe the *right* way is through a comprehensive abstinence education program. We haven’t perfected it yet, but yadah yadah yadah.
I mean, how hard can that possibly be? He just objectively failed at *interviewing.* Regardless of what he thinks about abstinence, there’s no way he should be trusted with any job which requires him to be interviewed.
The follow up question is if the “Easy Way” is more cost effective and actually has studies demonstrating the effectiveness, what makes a comprehensive abstinence education program the “Right” way?
I mean aside from the mixed up moral commandments of men who wear dresses?
Or
Has there ever been an abstinence education program implemented on a large scale with any demonstrated effectiveness?
Tens of thousands of evangelical churches (representing millions of young people) have implemented it with those bloody chastity rings, and my informal check on the internet yields this result: single evangelical girls are getting pregnant at a rate higher than the non-churched population. Fail.
“If you want to wear a ring to show you’re not having sex, get married like the rest of us.”
Some stand-up whose name escapes me.
While I agree completely with your main point (that there are plenty of decent ways Perry could have answered that question without looking like a complete retard), I still don’t think the interviewer would have let him get away with it. Notice when he says “that’s not what the questioner is asking,” he points out that the real question isn’t whether abstinence-only education is better or worse than “liberal” sex-ed, but rather whether it is worth the money at all, given it seems to be ineffective at best and counter-productive at worst.
Right, but literally all Perry has to do at that point is stick to his morally superior guns. That makes him “principled,” and doesn’t dirty his nose at all. It’s like he’s trying to fail…
You can tell teenagers “don’t have sex” until you’re blue in the face, but many of them are going to do it anyway. Kids need the knowledge and tools to protect themselves and their futures. This is just another example of why religious or “moral” views belong in church or your own home where they don’t impact others. Perhaps Perry should ask his fellow cult members to pray for abstinence education to work. That sure seemed to help Texas out the last time.
Didn’t watch it but I concur!
With what do you concur?
He comes across here as being even dumber than Commander Cuckoobananas. Something in the water?
Now now, Mr Parry. Just because you’re not getting any doesn’t mean nobody else can. Sour grapes are not a Friut of the Spirit.
That wonderful Christian State, Texas, has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the US. In spite of having the Death Penalty, which Texans are so proud of, they have a very high crime rate as well.
How’s that Christianity workin’ for y’all??
Sounds to me that they need a BETTER death penalty, to keep the population down.
Nobody really suggest that to them. they might take me seriously.
Or they just need to kill more people. If they executed a good three or four thousand per year, I’m sure that’d teach ‘em!
Then just think how bad crime would be if they didn’t have the death penalty, and how bad teen pregnancy rates would be if they didn’t have Christianity to diminish it.
I expect this is what people like Perry will argue.
And here we have the spear-counterpart of Sarah Palin. Two halves of one whole, and by the grace of probability, they have not been joined together.
Imagine the nightmare scenario where they breed with each other… A super-pious, utterly gullible freak with amazing hair but a negative IQ….
So let me get this straight John C. You’re saying all I have to do is be a good, holy, pure, guy free from some cosmos stains and those awful consequences won’t befall me? That sounds terrific! Although, I’m quite ignorant of how exactly I walk this path of holiness and purity, could you teach me or direct me to where I can find these answers? The bible perhaps, which denomination? Or maybe another religion? I just strongly want to avoid all those nasty little frogs, flies and locusts when I arrive in my palace. What other accompanying plagues would come before me if I accidently disobey the truth? I just want to be prepared, ya know. It is a whole other option, in fact, I truly believe it’s the ONLY option! Thank you so much for sharing you’re very intellectually insightful words with everyone, regardless of how harshly and senselessly they responded… fools! I don’t mean to over flatter you John, but I honestly think that when Perry does retire, you should definitely consider taking his place. It’s a stretch, but I believe you’re at least one, maybe even two steps up from him, and he’s amazing so I know you’d do a great job in interviews and such. Maybe you could even institute religion back into schools and make it a requirement for all students to learn from Jesus! Then they’d really focus on abstinence and living a pure life, doesn’t that sound swell :)
A little sarcasm/cynicism there I suppose Buck? What, you don’t believe its possible, to live ‘above’ all the corruption and the filth we’re ‘plagued’ with down here (in fallen man’s world?). Perhaps its because we, like the frog (more frogs, sorry) in the boiling pot of water analogy, having had the temp (a metaphor for the degree of filth) turned up ever so slightly for so many years now have accli-MATED to it over time, do you see that friend?
Rescentia
*Renascentia (correction)
Is it just me who finds this thing John has of calling absolutely everyone ‘friend’, extremely irritating? Like it makes his message that we’re all depraved sinners that much less arrogant.
You’re kinda new, I’ve never called anyone here ‘depraved sinners’ in the last three years but I do call you friends and mean it with all sincerity of heart.
All the best.
Generally speaking if someone is your friend then you don’t have to say it … people who insist on saying it all the time to people they don’t even know obvious have some other motive – love the sinner not the sin and other such clap-trap?
Certainly there are better things to harp on than my calling someone by a ‘friendly’ term in all sincerity, eh Jabs?
Perry is dangerous. He is a religious nut that will try to drag his fanatical beliefs into the White House in an attempt to force everyone to believe the B.S. he believes in. What ever happened to separation of church and state?
I agree that Perry would be very dangerous if he is elected to the office of President. This might not come off exactly like I want it to but historically separation of church and state is fairly new in this nation. It has always been within the wording of the US Constitution but it wasn’t enforced as it should have been until the 50′s or 60′s. Even today you see the conservative courts trying to tear the wall down. If you want citations, I would say look at all the old blue laws first. It wasn’t until the 70′s I believe that school prayers started to go away and even today many still have them unless someone speaks up. There have been some rulings within the past few years that use obscure definitions of words or twisting of words to justify keeping religious symbols within government sites.