Sex Education and Abstinence Education

[MooCowSteph]

What’s you best argument for getting sex ed out of schools or for funding abstinence-only education. I think we are sending our kids mixed messages; I think schools have no business teaching about sex, including abstaining from it. I don’t disagree with health class-type stuff, like the reproductive systems, but sex shouldn’t be taught at all. But so many people think it’s unrealistic to not teach kids about sex. “They’re going to do it anyway”. :banghead:

 

[patientone]

If kids were taught what God’s plan is for sex and marriage (hopefully by their parents at an age that will make them think
before they react to peer pressure) at least they will be informed
regardless of the schools education programs.

Education must start in the home, unfortunatley I fear that too many parents don’t understand what God’s plan is, which is probably why there is ‘safe-sex’ education.

 

[Catholicgolfer]

I agree with you in some ways. I think that kids should be taught abstinence only or if they are going to get into birth control they need to teach about NFP also. The thing that a lot of people don’t realize is that if kids aren’t taught by the school they will either get it from their parents or some friend. Then there are the parents that are afraid to talk about sex with their children. So if the school doesn’t teach about this and the parents won’t they go to a friend and wilvl probably get the wrong information. A lot of sex ed programs teach more on how to know if you are ready for a family and the like. A parent can always get their child opted-out (is that a word?) of sex-ed which is what I would suggest if you don’t want your child to go through it.

 

[gardenswithkids]

MooCowSteph:

What’s you best argument for getting sex ed out of schools or for funding abstinence-only education.

Sex education can break down walls of modesty as young children are exposed to talk about and pictures of private parts often with members of the opposite sex sitting right next to them. One bishop noted that if anyone besides schools shared these types of pictures and information with children, they’d be arrested. The fact that some of the sexual education material boarders on being pornographic or that discussions of sex education may digress to that level I think is the best reason to argue against sex education in schools. Honestly, I don’t know if I want to see it removed altogether, but I certainly don’t like what I’ve seen in some sexual education curriculums.

 

[JimG]

Here’s my quick and easy proposed sex-ed program:

How To Tell If You Are Ready For Sex

A. Are you married?
B. You didn’t marry an irresponsible jerk, did you?

If you answered A-Yes, and B-No, you are ready for sex.

 

[Giannawannabe]

Hi Steph. We have an Abstinence-Based program at our public school. I went to the parent preview night—there were 4 parents from our school to view it (out of 57 5th graders). I think that is pretty telling. Parents don’t care enough to find out what is being taught. I feel that if more parents previewed the information, more people would opt their kids out. If more people opted their kids out, the message that parents want to teach their own kids about reproductive health would be heard LOUD AND STRONG!!! Until then, I don’t think sex ed will be taken out of the schools (public or parochial).

BTW, I opted my daughter out. I got some fine Catholic instruction books and we had a nice time together learning about God’s plan for sex and marriage-----in line with Catholic teaching.

 

[KCT]

Kids are taught to “just say no” to drugs and alcohol and gangs. Why not sex? It’s much more dangerous, physically and emotionally. —KCT

 

[MonicaPA]

MooCowSteph:

What’s you best argument for getting sex ed out of schools or for funding abstinence-only education. I think we are sending our kids mixed messages; I think schools have no business teaching about sex, including abstaining from it. I don’t disagree with health class-type stuff, like the reproductive systems, but sex shouldn’t be taught at all. But so many people think it’s unrealistic to not teach kids about sex. “They’re going to do it anyway”. :banghead:

If I hear the “they are going to do it anyway” argument one more time… I think I might scream!!

Basically, that argument shows that these parents have absolutely ZERO faith or trust in their sons & daughters ability to think for themsleves & say “NO” for the right reasons.

I quickly opted my son out of his public school’s week-long “health/sex-education” class. He & another young lady were the only two who were opted out in a class of about (30) 7th graders.

They promoted the class as one whose main focus would be on abstinence, but would teach other options as a means of “protection” from STDs etc.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

---

May the Peace of Christ be with you

 

[MooCowSteph]

I agree with most of what’s been said so far. I don’t tend to agree with the argument that they will get the info somewhere, and if they get it from their friends it might not be good information. We cannot allow the school to be a substitute for parental care. I realize some parents don’t do their jobs in the sex department, but this is no reason to give this great responsibility over to the schools. We should be educating parents! Maybe if they were told it’s their responsibility and not the school’s, they would be more pro-active.
I think it is a dangerous message to say don’t have sex, but if you are going to, use a condom. That makes it sound like you really think it’s OK to have sex. Giannawannabe- it’s so sad that so few parents at your school care about what is being taught to their kids. If more parents cared and got involed in their kids lives, we wouldn’t have so many problems today.

 

[luvthelight]

ive gone through sex ed all my years of hs plus an into in 8th grade. i personally hate it. to begin, they dont teach anything new. many people are immature and make sexual jokes, especially the guys. i agree that there are a lot of people who do not agree with our catholic/conservative standards for sexual relationships, so some instruction on artifical brith control should be given to prevent the spread of disease (BUT ONLY IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS - catholic school children should be tought to live by catholic standards, and the instructer can go more into detail about God’s plan for your body) and parents should educate their children to abstinance. (see below) but i personally think that in public hs the kids should be seperated by sex, taught the material by a teacher of their sex, the material should be less pornographic, more emphasis placed on the need for mutual respect (if he/she really loves you, he/she will respect you desire to wait ect) and respect for your own body, and NFP of course should be included as birth control. the teachers, at least at my school, really adapt to that whole - your gonna do it anyway - heres how to not get pregnant philosophy. not all the blame should go on the teachers however, because i think that parents also need to really step it up in this area, so many never really seem to get their desires across to their children, and why they should refrain from sexual relations (as a generalization)

to those who mentioned they thought that they thought that teaching any artificial forms of birth control is rediculous, if we lived in a perfect world, i would agree. but i no SOOO many kids who dont exactly have great role models at home, and become sexually involved very early. therefore, i think some material should be offered- but only to the older grades, maybe 10, 11, n 12, i agree - 7th grade is MUCH too young. forr the younger grades, emphasis on respect and abstinance, but if a student is in trouble - the teacher should be able to help them

ouf - sry that ran so long

 

[Shlemele]

I used to be a substitute teacher and thankfully the district I subbed for has an education program that centered around abstinence and waiting until marriage. I was actually asked if I would be interested in teaching the course but declined because I was moving. The main problem in a lot of these situations is that the parents are either indifferent or take the “they’re going to do it anyways” attitude. Add to that the pressure of the state to promote condom use and you are looking at a situation that begs children to fail to wait.

I think though that we shouldn’t see this as a cause, I believe it is a symptom of over sexualizaion of the media and the extension of adolescence into the mid twenties. If you want your children to wait until they are married it is a lot easier if they are not exposed to sexually charged material until they are ready. Unfortunately in our society you can’t turn on the TV without seeing someone selling something with a woman half dressed. TV has perfected the myth of sex. What children see on TV is something that sex in real life can never live up to. No consequences, true happiness, and no STD’s come on if real life was this way why wouldn’t you want to have sex as often as possible? The problem is that real life has STD’s, pregnancy, and ruined relationships. The truth is kids aren’t ready for the lie that is being forced on them. They are bombarded with it from the day they turn on the TV, go to school, and listen tot he radio. I have heard many parents want to shut their children away from sex ed. to try to shield their children from knowing about sex and that is simply the wrong way to go. The key is exposing the lies of TV and Hollywood and tell children the truth about sex to counter the lies they are going to be inundated with.

A child want to know about sex, curiosity is part of growing up and this is no different. Children WILL find out what they want to know, anyone with a 4 year old will attest to that so bear in mind either you will tell your child about sex or it will be the school, or even worse the kids friends that are experimenting themselves. Think your 6th grader is too young? While working at the Jr. High in my school district there were 4 pregnancies in one year and many more in the high school. Education is the key so encourage teachers to include abstinence based material, there is plenty out there to draw from.

A memory I have from my high school days was of a video we saw in my biology class of a live, natural birth. There was a pregnant girls sitting about 3 chairs down from me and I swear she was white as a sheet when the lights came back up. Want to keep your daughters from having kids, show them that and let them know that no form of birth control can be totally effective. Then show them pictures of what STD’s can do to you. I had a college professor pass out a web site of medical pictures of peoples genitals after STD’s had taken their toll. I don’t see this as pornography because there in NO way that could be sexually stimulating, but is sure would make you think about the possibility of contracting one of those diseases. This may be the “scared straight” way of sex education but if it works I can live with it. The ultimate thing here though is that if you are indifferent about your children waiting until marriage you can pretty much guarantee that they will not.

One more tidbit of information I received in my college psych course, teens who fill out cards pledging to remain pure until marriage are statistically more likely NOT to wait until marriage to have sex.

 

[MooCowSteph]

Shlemele:

One more tidbit of information I received in my college psych course, teens who fill out cards pledging to remain pure until marriage are statistically more likely NOT to wait until marriage to have sex.

I’m not surprised that a college was giving out this kind of information, but that is false. A Columbia University study said that those who signed a pledge were 34% less likely to have sex than those who didn’t. Other studies have had similar results. Those who have sex generally have fewer partners and wait longer to have sex for the first time.

 

[Shlemele]

I should have clarified. Yes they are more likely to wait for intercourse but they tend to engage in other more risky forms of sex.

The latest study, published in the April issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health, found that teens who pledge abstinence until marriage are more likely to have oral and anal sex than other teens who have not had intercourse.

“They substitute other non-coital sex, which, however, puts you at risk,” said Hannah Brueckner, assistant professor of sociology at Yale University and one of the study’s authors.

Among virgins, boys who have pledged abstinence were four times more likely to have had anal sex, according to the study. Overall, pledgers were six times more likely to have oral sex than teens who have remained abstinent but not as part of a pledge.

The pledging group was also less likely to use condoms during their first sexual experience or get tested for STDs, the study found.

Data from the study was taken from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.

I haven’t seen the data myself but I’m sure there are other variables involved (if you look close enough you can pick apart any experiment, especially if you know what you are doing). From what little info I have seen though it looks like the programs that educate are much more effective than the “fill out the card and drop it in the box” type abstinence programs.