So the National Abstinence Education Association is all cheesed off about Bristol Palin saying that the abstinence approach is “not realistic”:

During Sarah Palin’s recent vice-presidential bid, her unmarried teen daughter Bristol’s pregnancy became a hot campaign topic. As a follow-up report on this compelling human interest story, Fox News Commentator Greta van Susteren, asked Bristol Palin about abstinence. Bristol shared her view that “abstinence is….not realistic at all.” It is suspect that media, seemingly devoted to science based research, is quick to claim Bristol Palin’s experience as proof positive that abstinence education for all teens should end…

<snip>

While Bristol’s story makes for an interesting human-interest story, her comment should not be the basis to form public policy on the complex issue of teen sex especially if we look at the facts regarding the teen sexual activity.

No, public policy by anecdote is not a good way to go. Bristol Palin isn’t necessarily the rule.

But that the daughter of so prominent and steadfast an abstinence-only supporter should herself wind up pregnant suggests that even those who profess the strongest commitment to abstinence might forget all about it in the heat of the moment.

It also suggests that sometimes teens tell moms and dads one thing - the thing they want to hear - and then do another.

I do not suggest that abstinence education should end. What I do suggest is that abstinence-only education has not proven to be effective; and in keeping with what Obama said last night - are we going to continue to fund ineffective programs?

But now we’re down to brass tacks. As noted in the vid last week - some people favor abstinence-only education because is is the “right,” “moral” approach to take, and whether or not it’s effective is beside the point.

Particularly in this fiscal environment, the program must be effective. “Moral” and ineffective has to get the ax - period.