Study:

>>51879
>catholic private university
>study on birth control
Like they aren't biased at all or anything.

>>51880
Teen pregnancy is a real problem, faggot. It needs to stop.

>>51881
It's a problem for today's society. In reality it's as natural as a river flowing to the sea.

>>51879
What was the rate before they gave out free condoms? I would surmise that the free condom program was a response to ridiculously high pregnancy rates at the schools, so the condoms may not be the problem, they may be a response.

>>51881
>Teen pregnancy is a real problem
It's actually at a 40 year low

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/02/08/teen-pregnancy-rates-reach-dramatic-40-year-low-in-us.html

>It needs to stop.
Why?

>one america news
Oh, I see what's going on here. That channel is trying to out-fox Fox News.

>>51885
Found the pedophile

>>51890
>Teens across the nation having sex with each other
>Hes a pedo because he cant stop them
You're high as fuck.

Also, stopping humans from mating is impossible without directly disabling reproductive organs. Its how the world works. Before our time of age regulations, pregnancy at younger ages was very common.

>>51879
>birth rates that are 10 percent higher than schools that don’t
>10-percent higher birth rates than expected

So which one is it?

>>51889
>Why?
http://slideplayer.com/slide/5855272/

>>51892
>pregnancy at younger ages was very common
Rape was also very common. Dieing of smallpox was also very common. I could go on.

>>51901
He's right though, until World War II, 12 and 13 year olds getting married and pregnant was common, especially in the American south.

They even made movies about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Bride

>>51879
>1 million teens get pregnant every year
>85% are unintentional and 2/3 are 18-19 year old women
>2/3 are 18-19 year old women
I'm sorry, what's the range for a teenager? 13-19 , yeah? Wouldn't you expect a higher distribution AT that age since that's when most people actually start fucking a lot? I'm kinda surprised it's not higher.

>>51902
Even if that's true, that doesn't mean we should allow it today. Public beheading used to be a thing, but we left that behind us. And it's not like Obama has to sit in the back of the bus, either.

>>51906
>We shouldn't allow teenagers to accidentally get pregnant
We dont. There are laws against this. They do it anyways.

Also, 18 and 19 year olds are adults. Me and my wife had our first child at 19, and married at 20. We now own a house, have 2 kids and both have decent jobs. It has nothing to do with age, just your motivation in life, as long as you're not having kids under 18 and with random people.

You cannot convince kids of these days to not have sex, and you can't reach them common sense. Blatantly spreading liberal ideals since the 50s has caused this, and there's no stopping it now. I don't think that we should all be farming our crops and sitting on the porch with a shotgun, but at least stop telling kids that having sex while wearing condoms is ok.

By the way, I agree that 12 and 13 year olds shouldn't be getting pregnant. I have a daughter, I understand. Unfortunately, most parents who have children at a young age pass this ideal on, and their children get pregnant young. It also directly correlates to income and living conditions. I remember fucking this fat girl when I was 15 whom lived in government housing. We would fuck with the door closed while her mom was home. She know, but didn't care. Even at that age, it shocked me that a parent would allow it. My parents were the 'leave the door open, hands to yourself' type. Luckily for me we moved away, and fatso went on to get pregnant at 15 by another guy. She actually lives in the same fucking government housing apartments as her dirt bag mother.

And then this argument falls apart when you take in other stats from more than just one Catholic school.

https://m.mic.com/articles/98886/the-states-with-the-highest-teenage-birth-rates-have-one-thing-in-common#.aATCs2Mma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/

States who practice abstinence only education and do not hand out condoms have the highest teen birth rates. Also, despite what the OP article claims without much method to study teen birth rates have dropped universally for the past 20 years.

https://www.guttmacher.org/about/gpr/2014/09/what-behind-declines-teen-pregnancy-rates

>>51885
/thread

>>51879

can we at least use decent fucking sources?

Onenews is an outlet for The American Family Association (AFA) is a non-profit organization based in the United States that promotes fundamentalist Christian values.

This turns an interesting finding into bait level bullshit.

>>51946
WTF is not decent about Christian values? GTFO kike, mudslime, or whatever brand of degenerate you are.

>>51954
>>>/pol/

>>51954

The point of what he was saying is that you shouldn't use sources that are obviously biased.

This is like reading a manuscript written by big tobacco saying that cigarettes don't cause cancer.

>>51956
Every source is fucking biased. OneNewsNow is reputable and decent, fact. If you want communist bbc cancer, go make your own thread.

>>51960

>implying anyone gives a shit about the opinion of a guy who starts screaming about jews and throwing out derogatories even when it has nothing to do with the conversation

Back to the trailer park, bubba.

LOL

>>51963
>[screams internally]
You mad

>>51960
Legitimate, unbiased sources exist. Like the NCBI journal I linked.

Sorry if raw numbers and data don't match your own preconceptions. Get over it.

>>51965

The only one screaming here is you, bubba.

You mad that you had to marry your cousin because you didn't learn how to use a condom in middle school?

>>51879
>schools distributing free condoms to students have teen birth rates that are 10 percent higher
which is the cause and which the effect

>>51954

>Every source is biased
Yea. A fundamentalist advocacy group's "news" is on par with the Wall Street Journal or the NY Times. WSJ and NYTimes lean right and left but to compare them to a media outlet for a advocacy group is a bit short sighted.

>>51960
>reputable and decent... communist bbc cancer
hmm, you certainly seem like someone who should be telling anyone what is reputable or decent.

>>51881
It is being stopped, you idiot. With abortions and morning after pills.

Stop worrying about other people's genitals so much.

>>51906
Personally I think its a great time for guillotine to return, used in the same manner as the French of old

>>51879
Lol, is it possible high teen pregnancy causes schools to distribute to distribute condoms? Fuck head, lrn2think

>>52001
This post is too obviously bait.

>>51888
Exactly. If the study didn't take that into account then the findings are near meaningless.

>>51979
>NY Times
Liberal dishonest garbage. Short sighted is you.

>>52049
Your head goes first.

>>51901
So everything an adult would do if an adult had an unexpected pregnancy lol. Get off your high horse.
Also the female body stops maturing at 18 so under 20 is false.

>>52136
>make no sense whatsoever
Okay

>>52131

I'll bite. Anon can you explain why you believe that NY Times liberal dishonest garbage? Is it simply that you don't like anything that leans to the left so you refuse to see any merit it anything that might disagree with you ideology or do you have solid reasoning for assuming the paper is "garbage" compared to other newspapers?

The long standing history of the paper and the fact that it has won at least one Pulitzer prize nearly every single year since 1932 (it has won a total of 117 Pulitzers since the 1920s) seems to put it on pretty solid ground. What are we missing anon?

>>52153
You yourself admitted it leans left, albeit a gross exaggeration. NYT is the devil at the left grabbing at the legs of anyone who gets too close.

Herein lies my point: they are so biased to the left that they deliberately lie so as to further their agenda. Legal, sure, but for weak-minded liberals such as yourself, it's a cesspool of misinformation. I bet you have no idea what an AR15 is, or why banning a gun by name is the worst idea ever. Do you even know what a clip is?

I understand there are extremes on both sides, but we Republicans aren't shoving falsified graphics down your throat, are we?

>>52179
Not the guy you're reposponding to, but frrankly it sounds you yourself are so far to the right that you wouldn't know what was leftist and what was centrist. The NYT, for being the "devil at the left" that you claim, is the originator of the Hillary Email story and also all the alleged financial malfeasance of The Clinton Foundation; hardly the "liberal dishonest garbage" you are claiming. "Weak minded" conservatives such as yourself are always going to blame the left for everything that is wrong with your own party.

>>51879
Abortion need to be a thing.

>>52182
I would hardly call myself anything but a slight republican, as I'm pro abortion, legalization of marijuana, anti-religious, etc. My firm standing is on the right to bear arms and smaller government.

Anyhow, out of curiosity, can you provide a link to the breaking story by NYT? At the time, Clinton was not very far left, and many other candidates caught the attention of liberal Dems. This could be a reason, but the NYT without a doubt is one of the most leftist biased media outlets.

>>52197
> t. "breitbart is totally legit guys, I swear"

>>52179

Anon, I can't say I'm all that convinced that you have any idea what you are talking about. Instead, you seem to be so blinded by irrational hate (of other Americans) that you simply hate the idea of the paper without knowing much about it.

Why is the NYTimes bad?
>it is the devil.
>Do you even know what an AR15 is?
>Republicans don't shove graphics down your throat

Instead of telling us about the paper you are accusing me of not knowing anything about guns and telling me Republicans don't push falsified graphics down my throat.

It seems you believe that the NYTimes is garbage, simply because it doesn't lean to the right? The key sign of quality in a newspaper is leaning to the right? Thats it?

Anon you are entitled to your uninformed opinion, but I can't say I'm impressed or convinced. I'll continue to us the NY Times, WSJ, WaPo, The Economist, Harpers, etc. as news sources. I don't consider myself a centrist, but I certainly see the value in seeing issues framed from different perspectives, which allows me to see the strengths and weaknesses in various arguments.

>>52197

Not who are responding but the BBC reports that NYTimes put a story about Clintons private server on its front page and alerted the world to the issue.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31806907

>>52223
Not the anon you're replying to, but nyt seriously lives in an alternate reality. As a conservative, it's not news. It's propaganda.

>>52269
Can you explain how "the NYTimes lives in an alternative reality" or how "it is propaganda"? Instead of just throwing out accusations help us understand what are the indicators of a propaganda news source and what are the indicators of a good news source. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it based on any objective attributes?

>>52210
As a non-American observing you from the outside, I must say that the American lefts obsession with Breitbart is fascinating.

>>52336
>American lefts obsession with Breitbart

It's an internet meme. Almost nobody in the real world has even heard of Breitbart, or if they have they dismiss it as another shitty bloggregator.

>>52373
Butthurt sjw detected

>>52376

I love it.

The centrist (poss liberal) anon here >>52298 asks why conservative anon doesn't like the NY Times in a fairly respectful manner.

Conservative anon here >>52376 decides to engage in low level insults. Way to make conservatives look intelligent and reputable people anon.

>>51879
www.onenewsnow.com/Your latest news from a Christian perspective. OneNewsNow.com - a division of the American Family News Network.

mate I'm not sure how unbias and legitimate that news source is...

>>52391
> Conservative [?] anon here decides to *respond* to low level insults.

FTFY

I'm not that guy; but I'm also non-American and even so read Breitbart twice already - before realizing I shouldn't waste my time reading such thing. Having two non-Americans who both had read Breitbart (even it being focused on US audiences) and are commenting on a same 4chan thread however tells me a bit more people than "nobody" knows Breitbart overseas while having more audience inside US of course. And by calling it a "shitty" bloggregator *you* engage in a low level insult - even if deserved - thus opening the door to rebuttals like that anon did.

>>52507
I disagree with you on Breitbart, but my hats off to your accurate analysis of the discussion itt.

>>52507

>assuming I was the one anon was responding to
>making excuses for shit tier childish behavior

>>52432
Well it's infinitely better than al jazeera.

>>52658
At least Christians don't have 5 different words for lying about and for Christianity.

>>52658
>Any news source that isn't American based is shit
>Any news source that isn't Christian based is shit
k.

>>53120

He didn't say or imply any of those things.

>>53125
>One News is notable for it's reporting favoring American Christians
>Gee, this mud skin bombermen news source sure is shit. I definitely said that for absolutely none of those implications though.

>>53146

not the anon you are responding to, but your bias has blinded you from understanding the difference between different and bad. Furthermore you sound like a crazy extremist.
>mud skim bomberman news source
>notable for favoring Christians

One way of looking at quality is number of awards won. Jazeera America won quite a few awards in it 10 year tenure in the states
http://www.aljazeera.com/pressoffice/2012/04/2012416161854868952.html

A google search comes up with zero awards for onenewsnow.

However, CS Monitor is a solid Christian based news paper that has won quite a few awards.
http://www.csmonitor.com/About/Advertise/Awards

Onenewsnow, is not news it is the media outlet of an advocacy group. Try to understand the difference. Attacking a source you don't like by calling it names isn't going to make onenews any more credible.

>>53155
You definitely didn't understand the sarcasm that I just used. I'm aware of how well done Al Jazeera and its American counterpart is and its level of professional journalism.

I dislike Onenews very, very much. I liken One American News Network to a propaganda machine similar to Russia Today (RT). Thanks for the info tho.

>>51918
Best post
The OP and his brainwashed cronies can't refute this

Only solution that produces an outcome that is a net positive for the US:
1) Abortions and birth control are free, widely available, and encouraged for blacks, Muslims, illegal immigrants, and anyone on public assistance. Permanent birth control (tubal ligation, vasectomy) for these groups results in a substantial one-time cash payout.
2) Abortions and birth control are discouraged and difficult to get for all other groups, unless they can prove that the father is from one of the groups listed in #1.
3) Watch the US take a massive positive turn economically and socially in just one generation.

>>54654

add sterilization of criminals

>>51879
They give free condoms to people who had no actual sexual education because the country's views on teaching teens about proper safe sex is really fucked up.

>>52131
>NYT
>Liberal
Kek.

>>51901
Go ahead, just try to stop someone from don't of small pox, doctors today can do very little against it.
It's a virus.