A reporter David Bario in his article posted in Chicago Tribune, Rutland Herald [1] and on several other news websites wrote:
"Under the Bush administration, organizations that promote abstinence and encourage teens to sign virginity pledges or wear purity rings have received federal grants. The Silver Ring Thing, a subsidiary of a Pennsylvania Evangelical Church, has received more than $1 million from the government to promote abstinence and to sell its rings in the United States and abroad."
2007-03-28 04:30:23 · 19 answers · asked by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Just think of all the children that could be fed with that 1 million dollars.
2007-03-28 04:31:06 · update #1
It's been well documented that 85% of abstinance programs fail. Another Bush SNAFU. Hand out condoms...not lectures!
2007-03-28 04:36:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
They'll look for any reason at all to avoid the laws that state Funds and Grants can't be given to religious schools/groups based on this type of criteria. This has to be the most UNconstitutional admin I have ever heard of. As if signing a piece of paper is going to hold those kids to their word.... it doesn't with adults who sign marriage licenses.
2007-03-28 04:39:31 · answer #2 · answered by Kithy 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It got $1 million so it could SELL the rings? Why didn't they just sell the rings and make their own money?
Nice use of tax dollars. They have cut funding to the NIH for necessary medical research. And I don't mean stem cell. All research dollars have been cut. This year's budget alone was cut by nearly 30%. I object to this misuse of funds.
2007-03-28 04:34:44 · answer #3 · answered by glitterkittyy 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
It's been shown that promoting sexual abstinence does not mean that teenagers will actually abstain.
And you're right, that money has much better uses. Food, housing, schools, the list goes on...
2007-03-28 04:38:06 · answer #4 · answered by Kharm 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The separation of church and state would make this difficult. It could be passed as legisation, but it could be challenged in the Supreme Court
2007-03-28 04:48:27 · answer #5 · answered by humanrayc 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The whole purity ball thing is creepy and a waste of time and money as they fail to stop teen sex.
2007-03-28 04:40:07 · answer #6 · answered by millajovovichsboyfriend 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I like the Christian Conservative definition of nanny state.
Federal government spending money on providing the poor healthcare: nanny state.
Federal government spending money on churches so they can promote their own weird agenda: sound public policy.
2007-03-28 04:34:58 · answer #7 · answered by WWTSD? 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Penn & Teller did an excellent episode about this on their Showtime special. I agree, it's complete and utter bullshit. I don't want my tax money going to this useless education.
2007-03-28 04:41:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I personally don't believe that any church should accept a federal grant - seperation of church and state!@~
2007-03-28 04:35:31 · answer #9 · answered by nswblue 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
No. Apparently only 12 % of the girls actually keep those pledges. Plus, there's something just slightly creepy about the whole thing.
2007-03-28 04:37:25 · answer #10 · answered by Julia Sugarbaker 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋