Replies

I have posted my thoughts numerous times, and don't feel like retyping them. Basically, though, I think the most important thing is to recognize that even beyond the risks of pregnancy and disease, sexual relations have significant life-long psychological implications. There is something quite wonderful about exploring major aspects of one's sexuality for the first time with the person one is going to share one's life, and there is often something not-so-wonderful about realizing what intimacies were shared with someone who isn't going to share one's life.

To be sure, it's possible for people to become innured to the psycholigical effects of unwise sexual relations, but that's a major cost in and of itself. Someone who has sex with reckless abandon and reaches the point that it doesn't bother them anymore will find it very difficult to really settle down in a meaningful long-term relationship.

Why is the argument insulting? Teenagers have been having sex since the beginning of time. The best way is to tell them straight up that abstience is the only 100% proven method of preventing pregnancy and STDs. However, you should also mix in teachings about condom use and other prevention methods.

I think it's insulting that we don't tell kids about ALL their options, and let them decide what's best for themselves.

There has been very little data to show the efficacy of abstinence-only programs, good or bad. Now there is data starting to appear and it seems that abstinence-only programs are not working very well.

The Effects of Abstinence-Only Sex Education Methods on Sexual Behaviors and Attitudes in High-Risk Teenage Males [PDF]

Last year, Minnesota commissioned a report on their own abstinence-only program. The results came out just a couple of months ago, and indicates that not only does it not work so well, but overwhelmingly (77%), parents also want their kids taught more about sex than just abstinence.

Minnesota Department of Health Reports Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Program Ineffective
Abstinence-only education not effective, report shows

This is particularly scary when contrasted with articles like this:
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Among Young Americans Call for Realistic Approach

I completely understand where you are coming from with your view on sexual education. My question is that would you rather our teenagers not have the information about sex and protection and face the decision as to engage in it or not? I think that what is sad and pathetic is the fact that we don't trust our teenagers to know about sex and how to protect themselves. Scaring them with abstinence only programs that emphasize on getting a disease doesn't work, because it doesn't give options to people who are not going to choose to be abstinent. Why not stress abstinence but at the same time give people options to make sure they are safe with whatever choices they make. These people are of course entering the age of adulthood and maybe we should start to consider treating them as such. And by the way the use of a condom greatly reduces risks of contracting an STD. If you were in an sex ed program that emphasizes the use you would realize that the fact that they don't protect against everything is stressed as well as abstinence an many other options. Not telling people how to protect themselves is nothing but closing your eyes to a problem. Do you think that owning a smoke detector means that you're going to start a fire? Probably not... so why does sexual education carry such a weight. Teaching about safe sex doesn't mean that we are pushing people to go have sex. . . we just want to make sure that the know how to be safe if they choose to. Would you send a doctor into surgery with out teaching him what to do? Probably not. Knowledge is power... we need to try and remember this.