Browsed by
Tag: women

Abstinence-Only Education Teaches Blatant Lies

Abstinence-Only Education Teaches Blatant Lies

Comments 0 Comment

This NOW press release is only one of many on Waxman’s report, but I want to do my part to get this out there. Read the complete report at http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf

Just as a side note – does anyone stop to think of the basic fact that abortions in the USA increased during Bush, decreased during Clinton, increased during Bush II?

A report released on Dec. 1 by Rep. Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., found that abstinence-only education programs supported by George W. Bush, and carried out with federal funding by a variety of right-wing organizations, contain outrageously false information about reproductive health issues.

Rep. Waxman’s report examines the scientific and medical accuracy of the most popular abstinence-only curricula used by grantees of the largest federal abstinence initiative, SPRANS (Special Programs of Regional and National Significance Community-Based Abstinence Education). Through SPRANS, the Department of Health and Human Services provides grants to community organizations that teach abstinence-only curricula to youth. These curricula are not reviewed for accuracy by the federal government, nor are grantees required to have any expertise in the area.

The report finds that over 80 percent of the abstinence-only curricula, used by over two-thirds of SPRANS grantees in 2003, contain false, misleading or distorted information. This information distorts data about the effectiveness of contraceptives, misrepresents the risks associated with abortion, blurs religion and science, treats stereotypes about girls and boys as scientific fact, and contains basic scientific errors.

Among these inaccuracies are reports that a pregnancy occurs one out of every seven times that couples use condoms. One curriculum states that 5 to 10 percent of women who have legal abortions will become sterile. Many of the curricula present as scientific fact the religious view that life begins at conception — one calls a 43-day-old fetus a “thinking person” and another describes a fetus as “snuggling into the soft nest in the lining of the mother’s uterus.” Some of the curricula erroneously state that touching another person’s genitals “can result in pregnancy,” and others claim that the HIV virus can be spread through contact with another person’s sweat or tears.

Perhaps the most disturbing information being disseminated through these programs is the reinforcement of gender stereotypes about differences between women and men. One curriculum instructs, “Women gauge their happiness and judge their success by their relationships. Men’s happiness and success hinge on their accomplishments.” Another lists “Financial Support” as one of the “5 Major Needs of Women,” and “Domestic Support” as one of the “5 Major Needs of Men.” This same curriculum encourages girls to show their admiration of boys by “regard[ing] him with wonder, delight, and approval.”

Under the Bush administration, federal funding for such programs has grown rapidly. In fiscal year 2005, the federal government will spend $170 million on abstinence-only education. This is twice the amount spent on such programs in fiscal year 2001.

Unlike comprehensive sex education, abstinence-only programs have not been shown to decrease rates of teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. In fact, a recent study found that youth who pledge abstinence are significantly less likely to make informed choices about precautions when they do have sex. This $170 million would be better used for accurate sex education and family planning information that includes abstinence among the options.

100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq

100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq

Comments 0 Comment

Here is the full press release and link to the study.

October 28, 2004

Iraqi Civilian Deaths Increase Dramatically After Invasion

Civilian deaths have risen dramatically in Iraq since the country was invaded in March 2003, according to a survey conducted by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Columbia University School of Nursing and Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The researchers found that the majority of deaths were attributed to violence, which were primarily the result of military actions by Coalition forces. Most of those killed by Coalition forces were women and children. However, the researchers stressed that they found no evidence of improper conduct by the Coalition soldiers.

The survey is the first countrywide attempt to calculate the number of civilian deaths in Iraq since the war began. The United States military does not keep records on civilian deaths and record keeping by the Iraq Ministry of Health is limited. The study is published in the October 29, 2004, online edition of The Lancet.

“Our findings need to be independently verified with a larger sample group. However, I think our survey demonstrates the importance of collecting civilian casualty information during a war and that it can be done,” said lead author Les Roberts, PhD, an associate with the Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for International Emergency, Disaster and Refugee Studies.

The researchers conducted their survey in September 2004. They randomly selected 33 neighborhoods of 30 homes from across Iraq and interviewed the residents about the number and ages of the people living in each home. Over 7,800 Iraqis were included. Residents were questioned about the number of births and deaths that occurred in the household since January 2002. Information was also collected about the causes and circumstances of each death. When possible, the deaths were verified with a death certificate or other documentation.

The researchers compared the mortality rate among civilians in Iraq during the 14.6 months prior to the March 2003 invasion with the 17.8 month period following the invasion. The sample group reported 46 deaths prior to the March 2003 and 142 deaths following the invasion. The results were calculated twice, both with and without information from the city of Falluja. The researchers felt the excessive violence from combat in Falluja could skew the overall mortality rates. Excluding information from Falluja, they estimate that 100,000 more Iraqis died than would have been expected had the invasion not occurred. Eighty-four percent of the deaths were reported to be caused by the actions of Coalition forces and 95 percent of those deaths were due to air strikes and artillery.

“There is a real necessity for accurate monitoring of civilian deaths during combat situations. Otherwise it is impossible to know the extent of the problems civilians may be facing or how to protect them,” explained study co-author Gilbert Burnham, MD, associate professor of International Health at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and director of the Center for International, Disaster and Refugee Studies.

“Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey” was written by Les Roberts, Riyadh Lafta, Richard Garfield, Jamal Khudhairi and Gilbert Burnham. Roberts and Burham are with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Lafta and Khudhairi are with the College of Medicine at Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. Garfield is with the Columbia University School of Nursing.

The study was funded by the Center for International Emergency, Disaster and Refugee Studies at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Small Arms Survey in Geneva, Switzerland.

Public Affairs media contacts for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health: Tim Parsons at 410-955-6878 or paffairs@jhsph.edu.

American Dead, Censorship, Women’s March

American Dead, Censorship, Women’s March

Comments 0 Comment

Sinclair Broadcasting Group, one of the largest owners of local television stations, will pre-empt tonight’s ABC News program "Nightline" in 8 cities: St. Louis; Columbus, Ohio; Greenville, S.C.; Greensboro, N.C.; Charleston, W.Va.; Mobile, Ala.; Pensacola, Fla.; and Springfield, Mass.; and Sinclair-operated WTXL-TV in Tallahassee, Fla. This network is even more conservative than Clear Channel – In 2004, 98 percent of Sinclair’s political contributions have gone to GOP candidates.

Why won’t they show Nightline? Ted Koppel will read aloud the names of every soldier killed by hostile fire in Iraq, showing the dead soldiers’ photo. You would think this memorial would evoke respect for those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

It has aroused controversy on both sides. Nightline won’t be aired across Sinclair-operated stations because they feel the memorializing of the dead is an unpatriotic anti-war statement. Anti-war activists aren’t very comfortable either – they would like to see the same treatment for the Iraqi dead, not just the American dead (now THAT would be a long show!).

Koppel rarely criticizes US policy even when he disagrees with it – he’s probably one of the best we’ve got – which is why ultra-conservatives are so hopping mad. He has credibility. Sinclair is right, of course, about Koppel’s stance – but that’s not a reason to censor it off the air. Koppel’s reading of the names of the war dead comes on the eve of the anniversary of President Bush’s appearance on US aircraft carrier under a carefully placed banner announcing "Mission Accomplished." The program also will be aired on the anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War, April 30, l975, when the city of Saigon fell to North Vietnamese and NLF forces – maybe then my students won’t believe that we WON that conflict?

In any case, isn’t it about time that we showed some respect to the American soldier? For all the ballyhoo about supporting them, are their jobs there when they return? What kind of respect are other veterans getting? In the last five years of my father’s life, he couldn’t even get the VA to acknowledge him AS a veteran, much less get any of the benefits he deserved. These poor guys go over there for a President that dared our enemies to "bring it on," but when our soldiers die – we must not see or acknowledge or memoralize their deaths.

We must not even admit that the war is not over.

We must not admit that our children and grandchildren will be paying for it.

We must not admit that the soldiers aren’t the only ones to make sacrifice.

We must not admit that we weren’t prepared, that we don’t understand the culture, that we aren’t succeeding in the propaganda war. Our memes and thought contagions just don’t seem to be very self-propagating.

Yesterday I heard a radio announcer describe a Sports Illustrated journalist as a liberal pansy pinko anti-American. I never thought this could happen again. And where is the spine of the American left? Why are you all so silent?

Last weekend was the Women’s March on Washington. On network news, across several stations, I only saw a brief comment by the director of NARAL, a snippet of Hillary Clinton urging people to vote, one shot of the crowd, and several comments by anti-abortion counter-protestors. Issues of choice and abortion were certainly at the top of the agenda list, but that’s not all there was! The coverage of this amazing event was sickeningly minimal. I was so angry that I actually understood the expression "hopping mad" from the inside. I was hopping! HOPPING!

So it’s as if it never happened. Please, someone, publish the transcripts. I want to know what the speakers said!

I was raised a Jehovah’s Witness, in a group that doesn’t fight, doesn’t vote, doesn’t salute the flag (false idol), doesn’t celebrate Christmas or (like the new conservatives) Halloween. They thought Dungeons and Dragons was demonic long before the hysteria surrounding things like the Columbine attacks and Harry Potter. I was completely out of touch with politics (and the social scene in general) when I was growing up – I remained apolitical even through my undergraduate and master’s degrees. It has only been in the last decade that I even took an interest in these sorts of things – other than a few so-called women’s issues. WOMEN’s issues?

You know, there is a feminist argument against abortion. It’s to the man’s advantage for the woman to have an abortion when he doesn’t want to marry her or even provide support. I’m not personally a big fan of abortion. It’s a really difficult and awful thing to have to think about. But it’s not for the government to legislate. Whatever the choice, it’s my choice. I have never had an abortion and I hope that I would never be in a position to have to consider it. But I have had two pregnancies, while married, that didn’t make it to term. One of them almost killed me. Suppose my two doctors in those cases no longer had the training to do a D&C, for example?

Well, I won’t get off on a rant on that, but it does really bother me that Bush is propelled by an evangelical vision of himself and this country. The "Faith-based initiatives" funding that was approved by executive order and bypassed the congress all went to protestant groups – you knew that, right? No catholics, no jews, no buddhists….

How can we be so stupid? Has all the rapid change just shut down people’s brains? Are we as susceptible as Germany was?