Reporter: “Should U.S. taxpayer money go to places like Africa to fund contraception to prevent AIDS?”

Mr. McCain: “Well I think it’s a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn. He believes – and I was just reading the thing he wrote– that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn’t succeed, then he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I’m not very wise on it.”

(Mr. McCain turns to take a question on Iraq, but a moment later looks back to the reporter who asked him about AIDS.)

Mr. McCain: “I haven’t thought about it. Before I give you an answer, let me think about. Let me think about it a little bit because I never got a question about it before. I don’t know if I would use taxpayers’ money for it.”

Q: “What about grants for sex education in the United States? Should they include instructions about using contraceptives? Or should it be Bush’s policy, which is just abstinence?”

Mr. McCain: (Long pause) “Ahhh. I think I support the president’s policy.”

Q: “So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?”

Mr. McCain: (Long pause) “You’ve stumped me.”

Q: “I mean, I think you’d probably agree it probably does help stop it?”

Mr. McCain: (Laughs) “Are we on the Straight Talk express? I’m not informed enough on it. Let me find out. You know, I’m sure I’ve taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was. Brian, would you find out what my position is on contraception – I’m sure I’m opposed to government spending on it, I’m sure I support the president’s policies on it.”

Q: “But you would agree that condoms do stop the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Would you say: ‘No, we’re not going to distribute them,’ knowing that?”

Mr. McCain: (Twelve-second pause) “Get me Coburn’s thing, ask Weaver to get me Coburn’s paper that he just gave me in the last couple of days. I’ve never gotten into these issues before.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/mccain-stumbles-on-hiv-prevention/

So basically what he's saying is that he hasn't thought about it and he doesn't give a crap.

wow! he nearly said "i don't know"!!!:worship:

I'm pro-choice and definitely believe in contraceptives but the government shouldn't be teaching sex education, just like it shouldn't be teaching religion. Sex education is up to the parents and taxes shouldn't be spend for it.

hell I don't know... there are two lines of thought here, and neither can be proven.

A. Let's try to promote willpower and self control among adolescents. Exposing them to the subject will only make them curious.

B. Fuck it, kids are gonna fuck, They see it on MTV every day. lets let them do it safely

Is there a middle ground?

hell I don't know... there are two lines of thought here, and neither can be proven.

A. Let's try to promote willpower and self control among adolescents. Exposing them to the subject will only make them curious.

B. Fuck it, kids are gonna fuck, They see it on MTV every day. lets let them do it safely

Is there a middle ground?
If you can produce a (non-governmental, non-religious) study that demonstrates the efficacy of abstinence education, sure.

A. Let's try to promote willpower and self control among adolescents. Exposing them to the subject will only make them curious.
Considering that it's impossible to prevent children from being exposed to information about sex (unless they are home schooled all their lives and never see anyone outside their family and never watch TV or movies or read books or magazines), I'd say this makes no sense.

B. Fuck it, kids are gonna fuck, They see it on MTV every day. lets let them do it safely
Obviously I disagree with option A, but I also disagree with option B. More than half of all teenagers don't have sex before finishing high school, despite the fact that probably 99.9% of them know what sex is and have heard quite a bit about it from various sources.

Kids are either going to have sex or they're not - what sex education does is teach the ones who are already going to do it that they should do it safely. However, I don't put much importance on what kind of sex ed, if any, is taught in schools, because it's unlikely that they would be telling kids anything they didn't already know and it's even less likely that the kids would even listen. I certainly knew what a condom was years before my sex ed teacher in middle school told us (in response to a question) that she wasn't allowed to say anything about condoms or birth control except that they are "highly unreliable" (not that I support that sort of blatant lying to impressionable children, some of whom may not have known that it was wrong).

I thought we wanted the gov't out of our bedrooms?

I thought we wanted the gov't out of our bedrooms?

Teens do it in cars. :lolhit:

Ok, that's the funny answer. Here's the real one: TEACHING people about something is completely different than LEGISLATING AGAINST that thing.

Do you really see no difference? Yeesh.

God forbid a politician saying that he's not sure and he would like to investigate the topic more before taking a stance. I appreciate that McCain is willing to say that.

God forbid a politician saying that he's not sure and he would like to investigate the topic more before taking a stance. I appreciate that McCain is willing to say that.

I do as well, but I'm quite surprised that he didn't know a question along these lines would be coming. And it didn't so much strike me as him wanting to do more investigation as much as it seemed he didn't want to say anything that would piss off the far right.

I do as well, but I'm quite surprised that he didn't know a question along these lines would be coming.

I dunno. Not all interviews involve pre-approved questions - clearly this was one of those. The fact that McCain was willing to do such an interview is another indicator that he's not trying to put up a false front.

And it didn't so much strike me as him wanting to do more investigation as much as it seemed he didn't want to say anything that would piss off the far right.

Yeah, that interview was back in 2000, and, as I recall, the Dubya machine was in full stride back then. Thus, it would have been politically dangerous to disagree with Bush's policies back then, particularly when you don't know much about the issue, as McCain had acknowledged.

I dunno. Not all interviews involve pre-approved questions - clearly this was one of those. The fact that McCain was willing to do such an interview is another indicator that he's not trying to put up a false front.

That's one way of looking at it. Underneath that, however, is the fact that a guy running for the leader of this nation doesn't have a clue where he stands on important issues.

That's one way of looking at it. Underneath that, however, is the fact that a guy running for the leader of this nation doesn't have a clue where he stands on important issues.

First off, I don't know if I agree that condom usage in Africa is an "important issue" (much less issues) in American politics. After all, McCain does say he's never gotten a question on the topic before - "important issue" indeed!

Second, you also have to recognize that, in McCain's position, you have to more well-versed in all aspects of the issue before taking a position than say, an Allforums poster. It's easy to say, "of course, I'm against AIDs in Africa," but he needs to know where the money's coming from (isn't it nice to see a politician actually concerned about that?), the means of engaging in such a project, the effectiveness of such a project, what alternatives exist, and whether it's even the American government's business to engage in such a project - all considerations that require some research and detailed information.

An insistence on abstinence in places like Africa only highlights McCain's complete ignorance of the reality on the ground in Africa. I guess we can add foreign affairs to the list of things he doesn't know much about, like economics.

This is a place where slavery is still a reality of daily life and many children are a product of rape. (http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=640&Itemid=118)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2174/2354234860_57cf717fe5.jpg

This woman is a former slave. Many times these childeren were the products of rape.

This is a place where slavery is still a reality of daily life and many children are a product of rape.

I wouldn't be surprised if you said the same thing about America.

There's people who would say the same thing about America (maybe you!).

Rape certainly is a reality here in America and I am sure that some of them do produce children here as well, but nowhere near as often as in Africa.

Did you have a point?

First off, I don't know if I agree that condom usage in Africa is an "important issue" (much less issues) in American politics.

Given that we're spending $15 billion in Africa on AIDS, it certainly IS an important issue in American politics.

Second, you also have to recognize that, in McCain's position, you have to more well-versed in all aspects of the issue before taking a position than say, an Allforums poster. It's easy to say, "of course, I'm against AIDs in Africa," but he needs to know where the money's coming from (isn't it nice to see a politician actually concerned about that?), the means of engaging in such a project, the effectiveness of such a project, what alternatives exist, and whether it's even the American government's business to engage in such a project - all considerations that require some research and detailed information.

Good enough. That interview happened 8 years ago, plenty of time for "research and detailed information." What does he say today about the matter?

I wouldn't be surprised if you said the same thing about America.

You would be wrong and you are out of line for suggesting I would.

If you can produce a (non-governmental, non-religious) study that demonstrates the efficacy of abstinence education, sure.

I can sure as hell give you studies, and testimony, on the inflation of teenaged pregnancies in the past 10 years. Are you saying it's not a problem when 10-15 girls out of a 100 girl student class are knocked up? (an extreme case, but real nonetheless).

Considering that it's impossible to prevent children from being exposed to information about sex (unless they are home schooled all their lives and never see anyone outside their family and never watch TV or movies or read books or magazines), I'd say this makes no sense.


It starts from the top down. Society is ass backwards as far as what is right and what is wrong. Personality disorders, sex, etc. are glorified with media attention, while being a normal, honest human being isn't being "fly".

I am a walking, talking exception to what you stated dark. I was brought up in a house that had strong morals, and I didn't have cable, air conditioning, all of that. I knew people had sex, but the topic confused me. I stayed away from it. I was taught that it wasn't something I should do, so I didn't do it. Even when two girls were asking me to show them my penis in an upstairs bedroom at a high school party, I didn't comply. My friends talked about it, but I couldn't put a picture on it. While I might have been ignorant, it was a good ignorance, and i'm glad i WAS ignorant, because sometimes not knowning is better than knowing. If you don't know that it's out there, you can't get addicted to the behavior can you... While people in here suggest that it's some biological drive to have sex.. I never did until I actually had it. THEN i became "addicted", if you want to call it that. That was at the age of 20.

Nowadays, kids who are 14 have a clear solid picture of what sex is, and society tells them that they should be having it to be cool... and then they do. In today's society, with shit-bag parents, I agree.... maybe option A isn't possible.

I can sure as hell give you studies, and testimony, on the inflation of teenaged pregnancies in the past 10 years. Are you saying it's not a problem when 10-15 girls out of a 100 girl student class are knocked up? (an extreme case, but real nonetheless).

You're nuts. I'm gonna have to see those studies.

Meanwhile, here's something (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/09/12/USTPstats.pdf) for you to study (scroll down a bit past the index to Summary).

Different page from same site (can't C&P from a pdf - call me lazy):

Facts on American Teens' Sexual and Reproductive Health (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_ATSRH.html)
PREGNANCY

•Each year, almost 750,000 women aged 15-19 become pregnant. Overall, 75 pregnancies occur every year per 1,000 women aged 15-19; this rate has declined 36% since its peak in 1990

•The majority of the decline in teen pregnancy rates is due to more consistent contraceptive use

Dharma, I hate to burst your bubble here.. but how in the hell are people who get RAPED going to have ANY say in whether or not a condom is used. Do rapists really take time to wrap up their penetrator? no...

So your comment really had nothing to do with the topic. But we do give lots to Africa. I'm sorry that you cannot come to grips with reality and still strive for some utopian society. The world is a messed up place... maybe some day you'll learn that.

Dharma, I hate to burst your bubble here.. but how in the hell are people who get RAPED going to have ANY say in whether or not a condom is used. Do rapists really take time to wrap up their penetrator? no...

So your comment really had nothing to do with the topic. But we do give lots to Africa. I'm sorry that you cannot come to grips with reality and still strive for some utopian society. The world is a messed up place... maybe some day you'll learn that.


You gonna supply those studies of yours or not?

While I might have been ignorant, it was a good ignorance, and i'm glad i WAS ignorant, because sometimes not knowing is better than knowing.

A perfect summation of the conservative mindset.

Truly sad.

You gonna supply those studies of yours or not?

I stand corrected sir.. as far as percentages go, teen pregnancies have gone down.

But a percentage really doesn't tell the total tally.. perhaps its just more teenagers are having sex, but that's just speculation.

Here are a few interesting facts:

-82% of teen pregnancies are unplanned; they account for about 1 in 5 of all unintended pregnancies annually.

-The U.S. teenage pregnancy rate is among the highest among industrialized nations.

-11% of all U.S. births are to teens.

Teenage parenthood is by no means a new social phenomenon. Historically, women have tended to begin childbearing during their teens and early twenties. During the past two decades the U. S. teenage birthrate has actually declined (Polit and others, 1982). In the late 1950s, 90 out of 1000 women under 20 gave birth as compared with 52 out of 1000 in 1978. Several factors contribute to the current attention focused on teenage pregnancy and parenthood.

There is currently a large number of young women in the 13 to 19 age range, so that while the birthrates are declining, the absolute number of teenagers is increasing.

These statistics do not distinguish between intentional and unintentional pregnancies, or pregnancies occurring in or out of wedlock. From the 1978 figures, only one in six pregnancies concluded as births following marriage, and eight in ten premarital teenage pregnancies were unintended.

-The declining birthrate is not consistent for all teenagers: among those 14 or younger, the birthrate is increasing.

-These trends are occurring at a time when contraceptives are increasingly available to teenagers as a means of avoiding unwanted pregnancy.

-The evidence documenting the unfavorable consequences of unintended teenage pregnancy and teenage parenthood, whether intended or not, has continued to mount.

-There is an unmistakable and dramatic trend away from teenagers giving their children up for adoption.


By the numbers:

500,000- children born to teenage mothers each year.

850,000- The number of teen pregnancies each year.

35%- The number of girls who become pregnant at least once before reaching 20.

52- The number of teen girls who become pregnant every hour.

34- The percentage of teen mothers who are under 18-years-old.

40%- The number of teen mothers, under 18, who finish high school.


Just some food for thought. As for testimony.. here in Avon, Ohio.. where I reside, I was shocked to hear that 6 girls were pregnant out of a class of 225... i spoke of this to my friend who went to nearby Elyria High School, who told me of the 15 girls who were pregnant in one class. Maybe it's just this area.. who knows.

Given that we're spending $15 billion in Africa on AIDS, it certainly IS an important issue in American

That is now and the interview was then (2000) - although I have no doubt the Times reporter knew that when he dug this interview up.;)

Good enough. That interview happened 8 years ago, plenty of time for "research and detailed information." What does he say today about the matter?

Honestly, I'm not sure. I googled his website and it doesn't address this "important issue."

However, here's what he said at the 2000 GOP debate.

Q: Should we appropriate $300 million out of the surplus to help fight AIDS in Africa?
A: The premise of your question [is that we] measure compassion is by how much money we’re going to throw at some problem, regardless of whether the problem is susceptible to being dealt with by all the money. After all, asking whether we should spend $300 million to cure an incurable disease is kind of an academic point, and you should realize that.
Source: GOP Debate in Michigan

Gary Bauer: Africa: Needs better governments, not bailouts
Q: Should we appropriate $300 million out of the surplus to help fight AIDS in Africa? A: As president I would. use that surplus first to help the American people, and then to help whoever else we can. The suffering people of Africa ultimately will not be bailed out by us on this or any other thing. They must get governments in Africa that promote economic growth, that treat people as human beings. That is the long-term answer for Africa, not reaching further into the hands of the American taxpayer

http://www.issues2000.org/Archive/GOP_Michigan_Foreign_Policy.htm

Great answers, if you ask me.

A perfect summation of the conservative mindset.

Truly sad.

Sad that people aren't exposed to risky behavior?

So we should just give every kid a gun, show them where a vagina is and tell them how good it feels, have them try wine, alcohol, and beer, and have them smoke pot and let them make the choice for themselves?

I'm glad I had the guidance which i was blessed with during my adolescent years... which are quite confusing and cloudy. I guess FT doesn't mind people making life decisions during this period... I think it's beneficial for parents and peers to help. Maybe FT was mistreated by parents, and has a thing against them, i don't know.

Sad that people aren't exposed to risky behavior?

No. Sad that some people are so self-deluded by the propaganda machine in America that they prefer ignorance over being informed.

So we should just give every kid a gun, .

No. Guns can inflict death and injury on those who do not know how to handle them.

show them where a vagina is and tell them how good it feels,

YES. Absolutely! 100%. Give them the information that will allow them to deal intelligently with issues of human sexuality.

have them try wine, alcohol, and beer,...

If they are informed as to the dangers and are of legal age.........sure. (old enough to die in combat, old enough to drink a lite beer, I say)

and have them smoke pot and let them make the choice for themselves?

Yes. Let them make the choice for themselves....IF they are given comprehensive information about the drug. Info which I'd like to see the government make available. Correct scientific based info.....NOT the scaremongering anti-marijuana bullshit that the propaganda machine spews daily, and has since the time of William Randolph Hearst and his despicable tabloid journalism propaganda campaign.

I guess FT doesn't mind people making life decisions during this period.

"I guess" what I like is for the American People to be free to make their own decisions, without being brainwashed and browbeaten by Big Government and/or The Church into being complacent, ignorant sheep (and most amazingly, sheep who have been so indoctrinated by the God-N-Country propaganda that they actually PREFER to be ignorant) who are afraid of their own shadow.

No. Sad that some people are so self-deluded by the propaganda machine in America that they prefer ignorance over being informed.

Whoa... who said anything about propaganda and putting things in black and white?? Ohhhh right... YOU did FT... Well, if you prefer on being "informed" on everything, maybe you'd like to know what beastiality looks like, or watch a girl who gets off when a guy takes a crap on her face LOL. I would rather be ignorant to that than being informed.


No. Guns can inflict death and injury on those who do not know how to handle them.

and penis's and vagina's can severely altar lives on those who do not know how to handle them. I would imagine a decent parent knows better than a confused 15 year old who is going through massive hormonal changes.


YES. Absolutely! 100%. Give them the information that will allow them to deal intelligently with issues of human sexuality.


At what age would you sit your son down and say "son... every girl has a vagina, and it feels soooo good in there. It's warm, and wet, and makes you get off. Just be sure to use a condom, or make sure she's on the pill."....

While you suggest using a condom, the behavior can be addictive, and cause impulsive behavior. Let's say your young little teen gets into having sex a lot, and he and a girl are ready to go.. but OH NO.. he doesn't have any condoms!! "It's okay, i'll just pull out" he says... and then the downward spiral. What's better is that he can be drunk off his ass, and just say "fuck it" and blow a load in her and not even realize it until 4 weeks later when she says she missed her period... what a way to be!!!


If they are informed as to the dangers and are of legal age.........sure. (old enough to die in combat, old enough to drink a lite beer, I say)

but not at age 14 or 15, which is my point, and which is when kids nowadays start fucking.


Yes. Let them make the choice for themselves....IF they are given comprehensive information about the drug. Info which I'd like to see the government make available. Correct scientific based info.....NOT the scaremongering anti-marijuana bullshit that the propaganda machine spews daily, and has since the time of William Randolph Hearst and his despicable tabloid journalism propaganda campaign.


That makes no sense. The government could make a KILLING off of marijuana cigarettes... So what is stopping them from making trillions of dollars? Maybe it has more harmful effects than you want to think.


"I guess" what I like is for the American People to be free to make their own decisions, without being brainwashed and browbeaten by Big Government and/or The Church into being complacent, ignorant sheep (and most amazingly, sheep who have been so indoctrinated by the God-N-Country propaganda that they actually PREFER to be ignorant) who are afraid of their own shadow.

yada yada yada... same ol' song and dance. We aren't talking about "The American People"... or being "brainwashed by government"... or "God-N-Country propaganda".... You happen to bring that into most arguments you get into. It's like your defense mechanism. BUT...

The bottom line is... I think sometimes NOT knowing something can be a good thing. I think it's good that my kids doesn't know how good a vagina feels, because if he did, he would keep on wanting it. I'm a walking example that if you don't know what it does or how good it feels.. you don't need it or want it. So you can take your "scientific sex drive" theory and shove it up your... nostril. And you can also feel free to expose your children to sex nice and young.. I will hold a different standard in my household.. if I ever have kids.

Whoa... who said anything about propaganda and putting things in black and white?? Ohhhh right... YOU did FT...

?!?!

I did?!?

That's odd. I don't recall saying anything whatsoever about "putting things in black and white". :rolleyes:

Well, if you prefer on being "informed" on everything, maybe you'd like to know what beastiality looks like, or watch a girl who gets off when a guy takes a crap on her face

The topic was not about *being informed on everything*. The topic --and my response-- concerned only your statement that you were GLAD you were ignorant about sex.

So you can take your "scientific sex drive" theory and shove it up your....

For a supposed religious person, you're one of the worst liars I've seen. This is twice in one post you have attributed to me something I did not say. I did not make the slightest comment or suggestion concerning a 'theory' about a "scientific sex drive".

In the post in question, I did not suggest nor hint at any "theory" about anything, and I did not use the phrase "scientific sex drive".


I will hold a different standard in my household...if I ever have kids.

Maybe a neighbor will drop by and relieve you of your ignorance by helping you locate her vagina.

?!?!

I did?!?

That's odd. I don't recall saying anything whatsoever about "putting things in black and white". :rolleyes:
.

These are your words exactly:

"that they prefer ignorance over being informed."

So you put the terms in black and white. You didn't say in this instance. You said people either want to be ignorant, or informed... I don't see how someone could take it any other way.

The topic was not about *being informed on everything*. The topic --and my response-- concerned only your statement that you were GLAD you were ignorant about sex.
.

I am glad i was ignorant on sex, or I might have made mistakes, or been more prone to delinquent behavior.

the term "ignorance" has such a negative connotation.. you seem to be obsessed with not being it, even if it produces positive results.



For a supposed religious person, you're one of the worst liars I've seen. This is twice in one post you have attributed to me something I did not say. I did not make the slightest comment or suggestion concerning a 'theory' about a "scientific sex drive".

In the post in question, I did not suggest nor hint at any "theory" about anything, and I did not use the phrase "scientific sex drive".
.

You are correct, you didn't say it. Some people on this site have though. Sorry if I mislabeled you FT, I kinda meant it as a whole to the entire forum, but i realize my wording was directred at you. My apologies.

My statement still stands for whomever argues that we, as human beings, are slaves to sex and can't fight it...


Maybe a neighbor will drop by and relieve you of your ignorance by helping you locate her vagina.

I've located it, and my son eventually would I am sure.. just not at the age of 15. ;)