Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
What should public schools teach our children about sex? It can be a complex question, especially when dealing with morals, social norms, pop culture, hormones and health. When students sit down for their sex education, should teachers embrace an abstinence-only policy?
There ya go! A little of both. When I got sex-ed, my teacher didn't take a stand point on either way. She explained about the boy parts and the girl parts. She told us about STDs and the methods with which to avoid them, and she said the best way was abstinence but also told us about condoms and such. It was an informative course without pushing the matter either way.
- Andromeda17
January 25, 2009 2:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: No
1
11
7
8
6
2
2
1
1
1
1
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Abstinence Education Works
- From Lifeway
By LifeWay Christian Resources - Biblical solutions for life
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Studies need better review, please avoid logical fallacies
"Since 1991, when federal abstinence funding began, births to 15- to 17-year-olds have dropped 43 percent" -- Can this drop be directly attributed to areas where abstinence education was used? Or was the drop seen universally? Many of the studies I've reviewed are deeply flawed: they introduce an enormous selection bias (those participating in the programs are already more likely to be abstinent). The studies cited here need to be reviewed to ensure the conclusions are statistically valid and scientific.
"The [CDC] study attributes the majority of the decline in teen pregnancy rates (53 percent) among 15- to 17-year-olds to abstinence and 47 percent to contraceptive use." -- This would suggest that eliminating contraceptive education would harm our goal of reducing teen pregnancy rates, since half of our gains come from contraceptive use.
"Even setting aside the physical risks, can a condom protect your heart?" -- The remainder of your argument is nothing more than an appeal to em
- Fastolfe
July 24, 2008 10:58AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
An Excellent Point
I agree with you completely on this. Lifeway's arguments are riddled with the holes of logical fallacies. In there very first argument against the topic, they were guilty of a red herring.
- Andromeda17
January 25, 2009 2:32PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Understand what Comprehensive Sex-Ed and Abstinence Education Mean
I pulled this off of the Wikipedia article entitled "Adolescent Sexuality in the United States":
"When parents become aware of what abstinence education vs. comprehensive sex education actually teaches, support for abstinence programs jumps from 40% to 60%, while support for comprehensive programs drops from 50% to 30%. This sharp increase in support of abstinence education is seen across all political and economic groups. The majority of parents reject the so-called "comprehensive" sex education approach, which focuses on promoting and demonstrating contraceptive use. Sixty-six percent of parents think that the importance of the "wait to have sex" message ends up being lost when programs demonstrate and encourage the use of contraception."
The quote is from a poll report conducted by the National Abstinence Education Association.
The issue seems to be a debate between extremes. Neither abstinence only or "comprehensive" seem to be the answer.
- Benjamin Tuttle July 28, 2008 6:24PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Parental Biase?
What parent want's to think about their 'little angel' having sex? Are parents rejecting comprehensive because they do not believe it will work (and that Abstinence-only is superior) or because they are uncomfortable with the idea of their child learning about sex, condoms, and birth control?
The extremes are not Abstinence-only vs. Comprehensive, because any program deemed comprehensive would have to include discussions of abstinence ... Abstinence-only is the extreme, I'm not sure what the opposite would be... condom only?
- MrBook
May 14, 2009 6:33AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Abstinence
Both abstinence instruction and contraception "succeed" and fail. The data would indicate that both should be taught to reduce unmarried and unintended pregnancy. Yet having a child, even as a teenager, in itself is not wrong. It may require much additional effort, and when teens learn how difficult it is, especially when the father deserts the mother, they may wisely choose to avoid sex before marriage. Or they may choose contraception. What needs to be taught is that abstinence is better than contraception, not that contraception is good. Contraception just encourages more sex. One school required both boys and girls to carry around life-size baby dolls during class to give some idea of what it involves. Teaching what having babies as teenagers involves is a good idea. Taking human life in the womb is a bad means to an often well-intentioned end, and abortions increase with the use of contraception. Also, many teens resort to oral sex, thinking that it satisfies the partner without risking pregnancy. Such expressions of intimacy make later breakups much more difficult than if there had been less intimacy.
- goznes
September 4, 2008 7:16AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Only if 'no education' is the best education
Abstinence education doesn't work, plain and simple.The decision of whether or not to have sex is not for the government or society to make, it's up to the teenager and future adult: and most choose sex. Even after the unreasonable perfect situation of the Christian right--ie, abstinence until marriage--they will still need to use the information. Birth control, sexual diseases, and anatomy are just a few of the things even abstinent adults will need to know after marriage.
Let's not pretend that by not teaching children about sex, they'll never find out. Not long ago at all I was in elementary school and learning about sex at that young age! But the lack of sex education at that age made a very dangerous situation for students in which sex was thought to be something fun and naughty adults did, and nothing more. You see the problem?
Further, there's no need to press a message towards children in the classroom unless it's something that there's a wide concensus on, or it's agreeable, like 'dont bully' and 'be nice'. As for something parents are split on, let the parents teach the message to their kids, and keep their hands off of the children of other parents.
- Blue Linchpin
December 20, 2008 9:49AM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Without Religious Bias
This argument is from a purely CHRISTIAN stand point which is understandable seeing as Lifeway is a Christian organization, but the topic is "Should 'Abstinence-Only' Sex-Ed be Taught in Public Schools?" In PUBLIC schools. Perhaps CHRISTIANS should be taught 'Abstinence-Only' programs, but who says it is alright to push your beliefs on others? What of those who have grown up in a family of a different religion, or even no religion? Who are we to tell them what is wrong and what is right?
We live in AMERICA, an America where we say that "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." And as such a country, we should not be allowed to decide what is RIGHT and what is WRONG for anyone other than ourselves.
- Andromeda17
January 25, 2009 2:40PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes, but
I don't believe that abstinence is a bad thing to teach your children- however, that is not going to work on everyone. If teens really want to have sex, they are going to have sex. They'll ignore what they have learned about abstinence due to urges that are expected and normal for teens. By avoiding the topic of sex and choosing to teach abstinence instead, they're missing half the point. Although some may choose abstinence, those who don't need to be informed of the risks at hand and the strategies to avoid them.
- tripleayex
February 10, 2009 7:57PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Don't Argue The Facts
I have to agree keeping a teenager a virgin is the best way to reduce the problems of STDs and pregnancies. The only problem with that is that most teenagers want to and are going to have sex. The best way to deal with the problem is not to tell them to be virgins and hope it works. You have to show them that if they do decide to have sex, they need to use condoms and any sort of birth control available to reduce the chance of STDs and pregnancies. Abstinence only sex-ed programs may be the best solution ideally but they just aren't that realistic.
- Luke2734
February 15, 2009 12:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Only One Side of the Story
Abstinence Only education is a fallacy because it only expresses one side of the argument. This article cites in the that "both abstinence and contraception contributed to the decline in teen pregnancy rates between 1991 and 2001" showing that there is indeed another side to the argument, and it is apparently a very in depth side according to another statistic that is presented. The article states "The study attributes the majority of the decline in teen pregnancy rates (53 percent) among 15- to 17-year-olds to abstinence and 47 percent to contraceptive use," that is not a very large difference in the effectiveness of the two sides, and the age range is not very wide. Depending on the individuals polled, it would likely be found that several people both younger and older have had sex. This is an important fact because abstinence promotes no sex until marriage. What age do most people get married today? There can be a wide range of answers. This statistic includes only a small group in order to prove a point that will support the argument of abstinence education works.
Sex is all over the media, and not often presented as a taboo. If someone wants to have sex, there is not much that can stop them, and signing a pledge card is definitely an example of something that will not always work. Only teaching abstinence will leave a large group of young people uneducated about factors and consequences of sex. Assuming people either won't have sex, or that they will get quality information about it is dangerous. Teaching the consequences of sex helps insure that people know what they are getting themselves into, and that they are getting good information, not lies or misconceptions that they may have heard from other sources.
Presenting both sides of the argument will be more effective because young people will know the facts, no matter the decision they make. Information can be very powerful, and a lack of information can be equally as dangerous. People will make their own individual choices, so they should be encouraged to make the most informed choices possible.
- StriveforYourDreams
February 16, 2009 12:31PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Setting a high standard is the only way to promote integrity
When you lower standards we encourage lowering of virutes. Abstinence works. I vote to continue with abstinence education only. Check Pam Stenzel and her testimony.
- truehappiness
September 30, 2009 10:29AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
What is the point of abstinence education?
Encouraging chasteness, or preventing pregnancy ?
Because it actually sort of sucks at both.
- quantummechanik
September 30, 2009 10:34AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No suck
With abstinence theres no suck.
- countryboy
September 30, 2009 6:43PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.