Abstinence programs often have to struggle for government funding, while teenage sex education programs promoting condom use are offered in all public schools, and no one thinks twice about which programs actually work best for our children. A recently released federal study shows that the condom programs are misleading in their content and ineffective in reducing sexual activity and in protecting teenage sexual activity. That news won’t be on the news or discussed at PTA meetings, but alarms should be going off in the heads of all parents. Their teenage children are in danger.

More and more sexually active teenagers are coming down with sexually transmitted diseases in spite of sex education, and that study, sponsored by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families, might offer an explanation. The study offered a rare look into the actual content of nine popular “comprehensive sex education” curricula, showing them to be filled with sexual references, condom illustrations, and shoppingfor-condoms exercises. These programs are supposed to teach both abstinence and safe sex through condoms, but the study shows that condoms were discussed seven times more than abstinence. One curriculum teaches teenagers “that the surest way not to get HIV is to practice safer sex,” ignoring the 100% effectiveness of abstinence.

I spoke with the CEO of Healthy Respect (www.healthrespect.org), John Margand, about the study results. He leads a nonprofit organization that offers an abstinence curriculum for students in grades 7 through 12. He said that in the past only two sexually transmitted diseases were a risk — syphilis and gonorrhea. There are now more than 28. He also said, “I am very concerned about the gap in media coverage of this issue as it relates to our children’s health and future. The media seems to embrace anti-abstinence news while ignoring evidence showing that abstinence education works. This is surprising, given that ‘comprehensive’ sex-ed programs receive nearly 10 times more federal funding than do authentic abstinence programs.”

Mr. Marquand also sent me a chart with the failure rates of the various safe sex contraceptives versus abstinence in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. Yet misguided parents have a lame excuse that “they’re going to do it anyway, so why not teach them safe sex?” Rush Limbaugh once made the astute analogy of comparing the use of condoms to boarding an airplane that one knew would crash but 95% of the passengers would survive. Would you let your child board that plane?

Healthy Respect operates in the inner city and its abstinence program has been enthusiastically received by teenagers there. This week, Congress will be deciding on extending funding for these abstinence programs that work. It should be a no-brainer decision, but left-wingers run this Congress, so anything goes.

Evan Sayet, a writer and producer of several popular television shows like the “Arsenio Hall Show,” “Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher,” and others, calls himself a former liberal New York Jew. He became a 9/13 Republican when he realized after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that his Liberal friends with a capital “L” really did hate America and said the coutnry deserved it. He says that Liberals are not only wrong on foreign policy but every policy.

In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, he said, “Given the choice between promoting teenage abstinence and teenage promiscuity — they will use their movies, their TV shows, their songs, even the schools to promote teenage promiscuity as if it’s cool: like the movie ‘American Pie,’ in which you are a loser unless you’ve had sex with your best friend’s mother while you’re still a child. Conversely, NARAL, a pro-abortion group masquerading as a pro-choice group, will hold a fundraiser called ‘”F” Abstinence.’ And it’s not just ‘F.’ It’s the entire word, because promoting vulgarity is part of their agenda.”

Ironically, I thought of his remarks watching the latest version of “Charlotte’s Web.” I can’t say that I’m overly familiar with the original story or film but this one has its star, Dakota Fanning, making googly eyes at a young boy with whom she ends up riding on a Ferris wheel. Why unnecessarily interject a romance between children in a classic juvenile story? Why wasn’t everyone outraged at young Ms. Fanning playing in another film depicting her violent rape? Why are prepubescent actors even allowed in R–rated films? Where are their parents?

Mr. Sayet says, “If we’re going to save America, we must take back the schools, the universities, the media, [and] the entertainment industry.” That’s a pretty tall order but one thing is sure: To keep them safe, parents have to teach their teenage children to say “No.”