Drinking Liberally of Salt Lake City » Soapbox

Let’s drink a little and talk about sex

Jeremiah — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:13:31 +0000

Laura has been doing a great job of getting interesting speakers for Drinking Liberally, and last nights’ speaker was a good example. Laura invited Missy Bird, the executive director of the Planned Parenthood Action Council. Missy talked about the proposed sex education bill and the discussion it’s already gotten despite not being an actual bill yet. The Salt Lake Tribune has a good article that talks about some of what’s already been going on, like Senator Chris Buttars flying out an “expert” to try and discredit groups like Planned Parenthood and comprehensive sex education.

Missy also had some interesting statistics that illustrated the need for comprehensive sex education, like:

Every day in Utah 12 teenage girls aged 15-19 become pregnant. In 2007, 4356 young girls in Utah, ages 15-19, became pregnant. (According to the Utah Department of Health – 2007)
In 2007, 62% of births to unmarried mothers were to those under the age of 24. 2747 of those births were to unmarried mothers under the age of 19 (again according to the Utah Department of Health, 2007)
In a 2006 national survey, 26% of high school students who dropped out of school said that they did so because they became parents. (The Silent Epidemic, Civic Enterprises, Peter D. Hart Research Associates, produces for Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
In 2007, 72% of 15-17 year old girls who give birth reported that their pregnancy was unintended. Of 18-19 year old girls, the number was 67%. (Utah Department of Health, 2007)
Roughly 57% of new chlamydia infections and 42% of new gonorrhea infections occur among youth ages 15-24. (Utah Department of Health, 2007)
In Utah, you’re more likely to get chlamydia than you are H1N1 flu.

Of course there’s going to be a lot of FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) spread about the bill, so here’s the gist what Representative Lynn Hemingway (D-Holladay) is proposing (from PPAC’s website):

Rep. Hemingway’s bill provides parents a choice of two tracks for reproductive health education for their kids. Parents CHOOSE the track in which their child will be enrolled. Both tracks teach that abstinence is the only 100% effective means of preventing pregnancy and STDs, but the comprehensive option includes medically accurate information about contraception, avoiding pregnancy and STDs, and preventing sexual assault through the teaching of healthy relationship skills.
Rep. Hemingway is trying to address serious health issues that our teens are dealing with in Utah. This bill offers one more tool that parents, educators, and health care professionals can use to address Utah’s rising teen pregnancy and STD rates. Chlamydia is the #1 communicable disease in Utah and 12 teenage girls a day get pregnant. Parents deserve to have a choice in their children’s reproductive health education.
Studies show that teens who receive comprehensive reproductive health information have lower rates of teenage pregnancy and STD’s than those receiving abstinence-only education. Comprehensive reproductive health education does NOT increase rates of sexual activity; rather, it helps delay initial onset of sexual activity and increases rates of protection among those who are already sexually active.
Rep. Hemingway’s bill addresses the fear that teachers experience because of current law. While the current law allows for comprehensive information to be given, local school districts across the state have widely varying health curricula and kids are receiving very different information based on where they live. Teachers are afraid of serious penalties if they fun afoul of strict local guidelines that often restrict them from answering kids’ questions or using precise, medically accurate language.
Will kids be exposed to sexually explicit material? NO The information that will be presented will be age-appropriate and medically accurate. This is not a class that teaches “how to have sex,” nor does it encourage sexual activity. We simply want kids, whose parents approve, to have access to the information they need to make smart decisions about their health and know the possible consequences of those decisions.
Will the two education choices result in two “extremes”? NO The abstinence-only track simply reiterates current law and would still contain some limited discussion of contraception and STDs, while the comprehensive track would cover these subjects more in depth. Because parents would also have the choice of opting out of any reproductive health education altogether, the options they have clearly cover the vast majority of possibilities of parents’ wishes.
Will some kids from the comprehensive class “talk”? NO The truth is that all kids are talking, but mostly in myths in half-truths. Despite even the most vigilant parents’ best efforts, every child is hearing things in the hallways and the locker rooms that would surprise most of us. We simply want to provide a resource for those who want it that can combat these untruths and provide accurate information in its place.

It seems to be pretty clear from the stats that what we’re doing now isn’t working. Many of these kids try to live up to their religious obligation to not have sex prior to marriage, but then look for ‘loopholes’ like oral or anal sex (There’s even a saying: if it’s anal or oral, it’s moral). This reduces the risk of pregnancy, but not necessarily STD’s. Floating (penetration but then no movement) is a new ‘loophole’ that doesn’t really reduce either risk. Don’t ask me what you do to pass the time while you’re floating – the whole concept seems pretty asinine to me.

Our DL crowd has a fair amount of educators and people in the medical service field, and they know exactly how bad the problem is. People like me who have very little interaction with kids are always surprised to hear the stories and statistics. It’s an awareness issue, so if you have some insight into the reality of our current failing system, write a letter to the editor. If you’re a parent, urge your congress people to support the bill. And if you’re neither of these or either of these, support health care groups like Planned Parenthood.

Full page hate

Jeremiah — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 18:26:26 +0000

A group calling themselves “America Forever” pulled a full-page ad in the Sunday Salt Lake papers warning Utahns of the “homosexual movement”. In the Tribune it’s on page D12, and I’m sure that it’s in the Deseret News too. The ad is full of lies and fear tactics and it’s scary that there are people that believe this. My first instinct was to laugh because it seems like it should be bad satire, but this group seems legit.

In case you don’t get the paper and you need a laugh you can see the ad by clicking the photos below:

A full page of hate in the Salt Lake Tribune

Big Brother Waddoups

Jeremiah — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:59:04 +0000

When Governor Huntsman suggested the state should do away with the antiquated private club law, I figured it would get some resistance from the legislature. I’ve been watching the debate play out, cheering for Dave Morris – one of the most vocal leaders in opposition to the current law and the owner of the Piper Down where Drinking Liberally meets – and the Utah Hospitality Association.

What I didn’t expect was for the new clown of a Senate President Michael Waddoups to try to make our laws even more regressive. Despite his previous waffling on the issue, Waddoups has recently stated that he wants to start collecting information about drinkers in the state, recording where they go (and in his dream world how much they drink, no doubt) into a central database of sinners. And not just for bar patrons – he also wants to record everyone who has a glass of wine with their dinner in a restaurant. Privacy? Who needs privacy? What’s next, a Ministry of Information?

The Republican party claims to be the party of limited government, don’t they? How is creating a large database of your citizen’s social habits not an intrusion of government? And is this something the state should be spending money on?

To create a database of drinkers is to presume guilt before innocence; assumes the majority of drinkers are reckless and irresponsible. In my experience this is the opposite of reality. Don’t treat us all as potential criminals, Sen. Waddoups.

Drinking Liberally on the air!

Curtis Haring — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 04:04:07 +0000

Just in cased you missed it, here is the link to listen to Heather and Jeremiah’s apperance on Radioactive last Tuesday.

Those crazy liberalls were all like “yo Drinking Liberally is cool!”

God Luv Ya, G. Dub’ya ~ (funny video!)

Starland Gophers — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:47:57 +0000

Hey, Folks! · Might we suggest this as your apropos theme music ’til January 2009..?

Click here to view the embedded video.

greatest single blog post of all time?

Janus — Fri, 02 May 2008 08:06:41 +0000

Simple Answers to Simple Questions
possibly the greatest single blog post of all time.
(Add a rave about it in the comments; I did.)

Olbermann is the MAN

Jeremiah — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:26:23 +0000

A conservative friend of mine caught Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment last night, and was so impressed he had make sure I saw it.

The first place I turn, of course, is One Good Move. Sure, Crooks and Liars probably has it, but I like to keep it local.

Pete Ashdown vs. Nanny-state Legislators [UPDATED]

Jeremiah — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:44:16 +0000

Pete Ashdown sent an e-mail to his Politech list today that I really liked:

Since 2002, I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in building a free community wireless network. This initiative started with the Olympic games and has expanded to many other locations(1) – gathering places, Salt Lake City Main Street, libraries, Liberty Park, Pioneer Park and an ambitious project in Ogden that will eventually cover most of the city. Unlike other many other municipal wireless projects, the installation and support of these systems has been done without tax dollars. The benefit to business, tourism, students and the public is clear and often spoken of to me.

This week, Representative Brad Daw(2) wrote House Bill 139(3) which will effectively put an end to public XMission Free Wireless. Sourcing from a legislator who describes himself as being in favor of “limited government”, this bill introduces civil penalties if a minor is able to access pornography over public wireless Internet. With XMission wireless never earning one red cent in profit, the potential of a civil suit hanging over its operation immediately makes it not viable. The moment this bill is signed into law, I will shut down all XMission free wireless and cease expansion of this service.

Some may accuse me of packing up my “toys”(4) and refusing to cooperate. When this plan surfaced last year(5), I had a long conversation with Representative Daw expressing my concerns of such legislation. In reading the text of this bill, I see those concerns were flatly ignored. XMission has provided free Internet filters longer than any other provider in the state, but I can never guarantee that a minor can not access pornography over an Internet connection. Nor do I believe government or business is the best parent of my children or anyone else’s.

While the corporatives at the Utah Legislature sharpen their knives to deal a death blow to the public infrastructure fiber-network UTOPIA(6) to protect private interests, their cohorts effectively scribe business-burdensome legislation against XMission rolling wireless networks without public dollars. As the owner of the largest free public wireless Internet network in Utah, I see this bill as anti-XMission and anti-business to the core.

(1) http://xmission.com/wireless/
(2) http://braddaw.com/
(3) http://le.utah.gov/~2008/bills/hbillint/hb0139.htm
(4) http://peteashdown.org/media/radio/kuer-20070424.mp3
(5) http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/19/2129256
(6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency

Someone on another technology list wrote a letter to Rep. Daw stating his dissatisfaction with him, and called him a fraud – presumably because this constituent found it counter to what’s stated on Rep. Daw’s website: “Solidly conservative. I believe in limited government, low taxes, property and gun ownership rights..”

Call me a cynic, but this is exactly the kind of bill I’d expect from someone “solidly conservative”.

02/06/2008 UPDATE: It’s now coming out that the Daw Law is being pushed by Ralph Yarro, the former chairman of the SCO group, a company that has been a thorn in the side of technology progress in recent years. Yarro’s group is called CP80, and they’re trying to get laws in place that put porn sites on a port other than the standard web port used to connect to most websites.

Yarro’s lack of understanding on the way the Internet works is no surprise, I suppose. It’s just too bad he’s still here in Utah to help keep up the stereotype of us being a bunch of backwards yokels.

What’s an independent to do?

Jeremiah — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:42:13 +0000

I’m not a Democrat, and since reading “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”, I see candidates less as Democrats or Republicans or Greens, etc. and more as pro-human or pro-business. I essentially have the same views as Jen at Jen’s Green Journal, and her post on progressive independence was a heartening read for me.

Then my favorite progressive magazine, Mother Jones, has a blog post about the futility of voting for a third party candidate. Admittedly, MoJo has had some strange blog posts and articles recently, and I guess they’ve got a new editor – something I wasn’t aware of. But what do you think? Is it unreasonable to vote for the candidate that most closely aligns with your beliefs, knowing full well that it might help the lesser candidate win?