Religious Groups Get Chunk of AIDS Money

[elbales]

Oh yes. Like, a quarter of it.

President Bush's $15 billion effort to fight AIDS has handed out nearly one-quarter of its grants to religious groups, and officials are aggressively pursuing new church partners that often emphasize disease prevention through abstinence and fidelity over condom use.

BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW HOW WELL THAT WORKS. OH YES.

BUTTMONKEYS.

Comments

[aspasia02.livejournal.com]

Wow... are you really looking for ways to raise your cortisone level tonight? ;)

May I point you towards The Onion and The Daily Show... and The Colbert Report... the only way I feel safe getting "news" these days. Because, really... I'm not missing anything. It's all "news" these days, despite what so-called legitimate source it comes from.

(hehehehe, buttmonkeys.)

[elbales]

Hee. No, I just saw a bunch of links in cleolinda's journal and reposted some of them here because I think more people should know about these things.

I'm not angry in the sense that I'm stomping up and down the room cursing. I'm quietly sitting here feeling outraged, basically.

*grins*

[psybelle.livejournal.com]

I was going to ask if you really thought your blood pressure needed the boost.

Overall, I'm also outraged and appalled. But I don't know what to do... and I'm not sure where I'd move to if I decided it was time to bolt.

Re: *grins*

[elbales]

Hee.

Yeah, same. Where the hell is truly better? Although at least in Canada I don't hear about them invading. It's fucking cold up there though.

Re: *grins*

[psybelle.livejournal.com]

Yeah - I grew up in Wisconsin, but I've been out here since 1980 and have kinda gotten used to the weather. The Pacific Northwest isn't as bad as the East coast, but still....

[litgoddess.livejournal.com]

ANGRY ANGRY ANGRY

[dizzyditz.livejournal.com]

Well hold on a minute. Many many of the best planned and active charitable organizations on this planet stem from a religious foundation.

[elbales]

Sure, I know. Faith-based organizations do a lot of good in the world.

However, in the midst of an AIDS epidemic they are stressing abstinence rather than condom use. In my opinion, that is unconscionable. My understanding is that teaching only abstinence is much less effective in stopping the spread of AIDS.

Here, have a report:
http://hrw.org/reports/2005/uganda0305/8.htm#_Toc98378386

It may be biased. Isn't everyone? The section this link jumps to has some information that seems pretty compelling to me. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it. You're much more up on statistics than I.

[dizzyditz.livejournal.com]

Actually that report sounds very factually sound: they cite MANY papers, including quite a few conducted by sources very likely to be unbiased (the United Nations, for example). The writers were almost certainly biased against abstinence-only education, but they cite so many sources that it doesn't matter.

I suppose my objection was that just because you are a faith-based organization doesn't necessarily mean that you support abstinence-only education. I guess that sounds silly, but it is a possibility. And to know that the administration is favoring religious groups we'd have to see that on average faith-based organizations were more likely to receive money than secular ones that applied. If they aren't favoring these groups, but rather giving out the grant based on some other agenda (other application strengths, for example), it still isn't necessarily an indication of the worst.

However, your point about this very likely meaning that money has been given to less-than-optimal causes is well taken and seems to be completely correct. Thanks for the extra link.