• “I don’t believe abstinence-only education programs work in the long run.  There is some evidence that they may delay the onset of sexual activity, but over the long term, there’s no data there that show they prevent, in a statistical sense, sexual activity outside of marriage.  I believe in a comprehensive approach.” 

• “The Governor supports abstinence-based education, but the governor wants to see us funding programs that are evidence-based.”

• “[Arizona should not fund] an educational system that does not educate.” 

• “We don’t believe that the science of public health is pointing in the direction of very specific and narrowly defined behavioral approaches like the one that is mandated by this funding.”

•  “In past years, your department has provided us with the flexibility to run this program in a manner consistent with our state core curriculum content standards (CCCS). However, strict adherence to all of the elements of the Title V abstinence education program is not consistent with the Comprehensive Health and Physical education standards and the New Jersey’s AIDS Prevention Act of 1999.”

• “There’s a debate now about whether kids should be taught abstinence only. Of course abstinence is the best choice for kids, and that’s an important message they need to hear. But ideology isn’t more important than our kids’ health.”

• "I'm not chasing the dollar. The state of Washington made its decision; we did as a Legislature, that we believe kids ought to be taught a comprehensive sex education with abstinence-only included in that program.” 

--Senate Education Committee Chairwoman Rosemary McAuliffe, a sponsor of Washington State’s Healthy Youth Act which conflicts with the strict A-H definition.[8] She continued, “If the federal government will not agree to that and will not fund it because we aren't doing that, I guess that's too bad. I wish they would look at a balance because that's what kids need.”[9]