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?
1
11
7
8
1
1
1
1
6
2
2
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 Saves Taxpayers Money
Um... I don't think you understand your own argument....
"...researchers estimate that adolescent childbearing itself costs the taxpayers $6.9 billion each year."
Yeah... teenagers always have, and always will have sex. That's what teens do. You can teach them whatever you want, but when it comes right down to it, they will choose for themselves whether or not to remain abstinent. You are saying that teen pregnancies are costing a lot of money. Well, don't you think that if they'd had some sex ed teaching them about proper use of condoms, etc. that they could have avoided getting pregnant? Saying "don't do it" isn't going to stop teens. Besides, you are a religious group. You can't try and force your beliefs on teens. It is up to their parents to teach them that stuff. Not public schools. Public schools are for education not religion.
- mmsomekid July 24, 2008 6:35PM
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.
Religion Isn't a Direct Concern Here
I agree with the essence of what you say against abstinence-only sex education. Impressing religious dogma on students--in a secular educational system, run by a secular government--cannot be tolerated, either. However, religious or dogmatic arguments are not employed in this argument. It could motivate LifeWay to take this stand, but, to be fair, LifeWay does not use a religious crutch to make its argument.
- The Monk
February 7, 2009 12:43PM
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.
But it is a religious based issue...
The church (and religion in general) made sex a shameful thing. It is the church that continues the rhetoric that sex out of wedlock is evil, shameful, and a sin; but says that sex within marriage is a beautiful, wonderful, and blessed by God.
So even if people are not directly proclaiming that abstinence-only should be taught for religious reason; those who believe abstinence-only should be taught have come to that opinion from religious influence. Thus whether conscious or unconscious, abstinence-only is a religious stance; so, since religion is not taught in public schools, abstinence-only should not be taught either.
- Johnny
March 18, 2009 2:22PM
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.