Heritage Foundation Reports Show Effectiveness of Abstinence Education

By staff - Sep 2, 2008 - comment

The Heritage Foundation has completed multiple analyses of studies, showing that abstinence education is effective.

In 2004, Melissa G. Pardue of the Heritage Foundation analyzed a report from Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) and the minority staff of the House Committee on Government Reform entitled The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs. Pardue concludes that the report is “yet another attempt by aggressive proponents of comprehensive sex education to discredit and undermine the message of authentic abstinence education,” because the report is “riddled with errors and inaccuracies about the effectiveness of abstinence education and the risks associated with early sexual activity.

Read the Heritage Foundation’s Waxman Report is Riddled with Errors and Inaccuracies

In 2008, Christine Kim and Robert E. Rector discuss 21 studies of abstinence education. Kim and Rector find that 15 of the 21 studies have statistically significant, positive effects related to abstinence education. Therefore, the authors conclude that “genuine abstinence education is crucial to the physical and psycho-emotional well-being of the nation’s youth.”

Read the Heritage Foundation’s Abstinence Education: Assessing the Evidence

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Children, Education, Parenting, Sexual Purity, Abstinence

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com