Updated Friday, April 25, 2008

Abstinence hearing called a 'circus'

By Erin Roach

Baptist Press

WASHINGTON - Supporters of abstinence education were disappointed April 23 by a hearing called by Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of a House committee.

"This was really a circus to try to move an ideological agenda, and that was to defund abstinence education," Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association in Washington, told Baptist Press.

Waxman's opening remarks before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform included the statement that "we must base our policy on the best available science and evidence, not ideology."

Waxman, D.-Calif., invited a panel of seven experts who spoke against abstinence education and one who spoke in favor of it. The only other person on the panel to support abstinence education was Sen. Sam Brownback, R.-Kan., who was one of two members of Congress called to testify.

Huber, who attended the hearing, said the most astounding piece of information that came out of the proceedings was the response the panelists gave to a question from Rep. Virginia Foxx, R.-N.C., who asked, "If abstinence education programs were shown to be effective, would you support funding them?"

"She asked this to those who were brought in supposedly as objective experts on this, looking only at the effectiveness," Huber said. "With the exception of one other witness besides our own, every single one of them said, 'No. Even if it were shown to be effective, we would not support its funding.'

"... I was actually glad that Mr. Waxman had this hearing if only to reveal the disingenuous nature of this whole argument," Huber said. "In his opening comments he said he wanted to put ideology aside - assuming that it was abstinence educators who were ideological - and look solely at the science."

"By his opening statements, he was suggesting that these experts were brought in for their scientific and research knowledge and because they were heads of national organizations and associations concerned with health, but the fact of the matter is they were brought in just to say the same ideological talking points that Mr. Waxman wanted to be said," she added. "They were putting aside their professional objectivity to push an ideological agenda."

Further into the hearing, Waxman asked the panel why they would not fund abstinence education if they knew it was effective, and Margaret Blythe, a witness representing the American Academy of Pediatrics, said it was because students need more information for their sex lives. Others nodded in agreement, Huber said, standing by their testimonies that comprehensive sex education - which promotes methods for sexual activity along with contraceptive ideas - is the best option in a culture that assumes teenagers are going to be sexually active.