abstinence education

[hopeisthegoal]

The topic seems like a tragedy to me.


I know as a Christian it seems wrong to advocate for any other education then that which is promoted in the bible. Abstinence is the only form of sex education that taught in the Bible.

That said, abstinence education doesn’t make people abstinent. It denies students from learning how to make the best of a bad situation if they decide to have sex before marriage.

I’m all about character education in public schools, even secular character education; we need to strive to create students with good decision making skills, over reading, writing and arithmetic.


I think that emotional education should be taught along with a comprehensive sexual education. The emotional progression of student is predictable in their formative teenager years, and students have the right to know how their body, mind, and emotional needs are changing as well.

Would I have it that everybody waits until marriage to have sex. YES!


But if I had to choose an alternative, I would want students to be taught how to have sex with safely. I would rather a student lose their virginity, then to lose their virginity, get and STD and have an abortion.


And I want to make this EXTRA clear. Showing teenagers how to have sex safely is not giving them a FREE PASS to go out and have sex with every female in sight. The students that have sex with more then one person suffer from ignorance and not understanding their own emotions. This is why mandatory emotional education is so important inside a health classroom.


With the tools of knowing personal needs, students will make the right decision as to when sex is right for them.

 

[little_lily613]

I am writing an essay about this for school now actually (about my opinion on whether or not sex education should be taught in school.) I don't think I will have a problem with my future children's cirriculum at all as they will be attending an Orthodox Day School. However, as I went to public school, that is generally the kind of cirriculum I know. I thought they taught us too much. Of course they cannot enforce abstinence but they should ENCOURAGE it immensly and I thought they downplayed that a lot in my school. Abstinence was rarely mentioned. They were more concerned with teaching us how to do it, giving us free condoms and telling us exactly how to get rid of any mistakes we make. I think the basics should be given and that is all. You can talk about birth control while STRESSING abstinence, rather than just hand them out hoping the kids will use them (instead of hoping the kids won't NEED to use them), which is what it seemed they were doing. I am also a fan of separating the genders for subjects like this. Of course, that won't be a problem with my own children as they will not be attending co-ed schools (or schools with co-ed classes). I think the material taught should be age appropriate too. Kids can learn about puberty in grade 4 or 5. They don't need to be given condoms and told how to get secret abortions at that age. I think today's cirriculum should really be revised to be based around abstinence. Religious or not, it is a good idea. Too many little kids are out there making babies and STDs are spreading like wildfire. Abstinence can be expressed in an entirely secular view if need be, but it should be stressed. The basics of sex should be taught, but when it comes to the most intimate details, that is not something for a classroom of 12 or even 15 year olds. I am more for the parents teaching their children. I think that it is a private issue and that is who should do the teaching. The "basics in school" come in when the parents can't or won't speak to their kids.

 

[Dennis Moore]

I’m all about character education in public schools, even secular character education; we need to strive to create students with good decision making skills, over reading, writing and arithmetic.

While I'm generally in tune with what you're saying in your OP, on this part I have to say ... WHA?!?!?!?! Public education is not about character education; that's the job of family and community. While school is a part of that, the school's whole reason for existing is academics. So, no, I don't buy this part. I see college students everyday without the ability to write coherent sentences or balance a checkbook; that is, IMO, an utter failure of the education system, regardless of their "character."

 

[eptatorata]

I am more for the parents teaching their children. I think that it is a private issue and that is who should do the teaching. The "basics in school" come in when the parents can't or won't speak to their kids.

The schools should teach the facts, including all the nitty-gritty details of human sexuality, up to and including contraception and abortion, and leave it to the parents to deal with behavioural issues.

 

[mepalmer3]

While I'm generally in tune with what you're saying in your OP, on this part I have to say ... WHA?!?!?!?! Public education is not about character education; that's the job of family and community. While school is a part of that, the school's whole reason for existing is academics. So, no, I don't buy this part. I see college students everyday without the ability to write coherent sentences or balance a checkbook; that is, IMO, an utter failure of the education system, regardless of their "character."

related to what you are saying...

I would suspect that as a large number of people don't believe in objective moral right/wrong behavior, then they also necessarily feel like any behavior that gets taught is arbitrary. Why pick one over the other. Although luckily, if these folks don't believe any behavior is objectively right/wrong, then they won't think it's wrong for schools to teach any arbitrary behavior over the other.


To the OP ... Personally I think the more educated people are, then the better off they potentially are. Abstinence should be taught as it is scientifically the best proven method to prevent STDs and such. You can't throw out the best science just because it's politically unpopular. But the other prevention methods should also be discussed.

And Dennis is right. If a parent really cares, he'll teach his child himself on these matters.

 

[gracefaith]

The thing that gets me is that we teach sex-ed (safe sex or abstinence based) from a purely negative perspective. It's all about how you can avoid getting STDs and pregnant. Giving kids all the negative reasons to do or not do something is really not going to inspire them to listen. I think any form of sex-ed, especially abstinence based, would be so much more effective if we did it from a more positive perspective.

For example, telling a girl she should abstain because she might get pregnant is only going to work until she get a hold of some birth control pills and convinces herself its worth the risk. On the other hand, telling her that her body and companionship are of great value and that the more she values herself, the more she should require (in terms of commitment) from a partner boosts her self-esteem and gives her positive reasons to wait.

 

[Phred]

Values... we shouldn't be teaching any value-based conclusions in public schools. My conclusion that the choice of the mother outweighs the right to life of the fetus isn't the same conclusion others might reach. Teaching any one will undermine the parenting of someone. Thus, it doesn't belong in our schools. Expecting a fresh-out-of-college teacher to be able to interpret material in a way that will please everyone and still teach something useful is an impossible task.

If there's one thing I've learned about kids, both from being one and having them, it's that they will catch on if not told the truth. All of it. If you tell kids that abstinence is the only way to go, that's a lie. If you tell them that not having sex is the only sure way to avoid pregnancy or disease, you'd be right. So? That's not all of the truth. When a kid wants to experiment (as their hormones are begging them to do) do you think they're going to listen to a poster that tells them not to or to the other kid who says he did? And guess what? He did and he's not a father, nor is he sick! So there is a way to have sex without getting pregnant, without getting sick! Abstinence only just chooses to not tell them about it.

So what gets more credibility? Honestly or lies? I believe that if you tell your kids the truth, educate them on what the real situation is and trust them to do the right thing, they usually will. But not if they think there's something hidden from them.

.
​

 

[little_lily613]

The schools should teach the facts, including all the nitty-gritty details of human sexuality, up to and including contraception and abortion, and leave it to the parents to deal with behavioural issues.

That's your opinion and I respect that, I just disagree. Schools, I am sure, will continue as they are. Which, as I said, is one of the reasons my kids won't go to public school (because I want to have a say in what they are being taught). I will teach my kids what they need to know on my own.

 

[Seeking...]

Full disclosure that is age appropriate. Children/Teenagers need a working understanding of the biology and psychology of human sexuality and the joys/responsibilities of all of it.

Make the focus on teenagers about making responsible choices that they can live with.

I'm disgusted by either side that assumes too much about kids and tries to form the answers before the questions.

Many teenagers will have sex as teens, more as young adults and some - maybe never. Some will wait for marriage, some for love, some for like and some for a hottie on a Friday night. A big chunk of this is probably already determined by the personality of the child as well as the moral education and critical thinking skills they have been given by age 12. What most people seem to not be able to stand is that having sex or not is a choice that a teenager will make and that unless they lock the kid up or force a prostitute on them - they don't have real control over it - so as a result they try to control the flow of information and thus the end result.

I just don't believe you have the right to do that. Sexual health is a life/death issue and I don't have a right to withhold any info that will aid my children (should I have any) with such a decision.

 

[Diagoras]

My kids learn sex ed as part of 'sexual safety'. It entails a lot more than knowing how you get an STD or use a condom. They teach the kids what they need to know to recognize abusive and dangerous relationships. They teach the kids about responsibility in sexual relationships and help the understand what is happening to them both physically and emotionally at this difficult time. I think they do a great job.

I grew up in an era where sex wasn't talked about. Boys had sex ed seperate from girls. We all knew what parts we had but we had no idea about sexuality. And did kids get STD's and girls get pregnant? You Bet! Teaching abstinance to teens is all well and good, but a lot of them are going to go and do the horizontal mambo and get into trouble. We need to teach them how to be healthy and safe in their relationships.

 

[hopeisthegoal]

While school is a part of that, the school's whole reason for existing is academics. So, no, I don't buy this part. I see college students everyday without the ability to write coherent sentences or balance a checkbook; that is, IMO, an utter failure of the education system, regardless of their "character."

If students don't learn how to make good decisions then they will never end up in college. Isn't one of the main reasons that female students don't go to college is because they have a child.

 

[Ledifni]

Values... we shouldn't be teaching any value-based conclusions in public schools. My conclusion that the choice of the mother outweighs the right to life of the fetus isn't the same conclusion others might reach. Teaching any one will undermine the parenting of someone. Thus, it doesn't belong in our schools. Expecting a fresh-out-of-college teacher to be able to interpret material in a way that will please everyone and still teach something useful is an impossible task.

If there's one thing I've learned about kids, both from being one and having them, it's that they will catch on if not told the truth. All of it. If you tell kids that abstinence is the only way to go, that's a lie. If you tell them that not having sex is the only sure way to avoid pregnancy or disease, you'd be right. So? That's not all of the truth. When a kid wants to experiment (as their hormones are begging them to do) do you think they're going to listen to a poster that tells them not to or to the other kid who says he did? And guess what? He did and he's not a father, nor is he sick! So there is a way to have sex without getting pregnant, without getting sick! Abstinence only just chooses to not tell them about it.

So what gets more credibility? Honestly or lies? I believe that if you tell your kids the truth, educate them on what the real situation is and trust them to do the right thing, they usually will. But not if they think there's something hidden from them.

I wanted to rep you for that post. Since I can't, I'd just like to say I agree completely. Too many parents assume their kids are stupid, or at least that the kids won't do or learn anything the parents don't want them to do or learn.

The thing is, kids are smart. And much more than any adult, they are experts at assimilating large volumes of information. If you think they don't know about something, chances are you're wrong. But chances also are, they've got a bad understanding of it if you or their teacher or somebody hasn't made an effort to teach it to them correctly.

And let me tell you this, there are few things in more danger than a young, libidinous teenager who knows birth control is possible but doesn't know how it works -- because those teenagers try things, things that generally don't work out so well.

 

[hopeisthegoal]

Too many little kids are out there making babies and STDs are spreading like wildfire. Abstinence can be expressed in an entirely secular view if need be, but it should be stressed. The basics of sex should be taught, but when it comes to the most intimate details, that is not something for a classroom of 12 or even 15 year olds. I am more for the parents teaching their children. I think that it is a private issue and that is who should do the teaching. The "basics in school" come in when the parents can't or won't speak to their kids.

STD's are spreading like wild fire because students are having sex and don't know how to go about it safely.

Perhaps 10 years ago sex isn't something that needed to be talked about with 12-15 year olds. But because the age of pregnancy seems to be lowering to that age it is important to talk about the intimate details of sexuality.

As for sex being a private issue, I think that parents should teach sex to thier childern, in fact I hope that they would. However, not all parents do this. And I think it is a lot safer for a teenager to get information on sexuality in two places(home and in school) then to get no information at all.

 

[hopeisthegoal]

My kids learn sex ed as part of 'sexual safety'. It entails a lot more than knowing how you get an STD or use a condom. They teach the kids what they need to know to recognize abusive and dangerous relationships. They teach the kids about responsibility in sexual relationships and help the understand what is happening to them both physically and emotionally at this difficult time. I think they do a great job.

I think this is a great point. I think that if younger children learned about sexuality and abusive relationships then a lot less children sexual abuse would occur. One of the tools that sexual abusive adults use is confusion when abusing younger children. If children weren't confused then a lot more cases of abuse would be reported.

 

[morningstar2651]

I went to an abstinence only sex-ed school district.

We had this club at school called Empower - it's basically the abstinence club and they promote abstinence etc.

The girl that won the Empower scholarship was about 7 months pregnant when we graduated.

Abstinence only education doesn't garuntee no sex.

 

[Jetgirl]

My personal goal for my potential children is that they shall learn nothing they do not already know about human sexuality at school.

As far as abstinance-only sex ed, I think it's painfully misguided at best, but an objection that hasn't been mentioned explicitly yet is:

Teenagers are extremly intrested in sex. This is a biological imperative. It would be possible to demolish a teenager's sex drive with large amounts of medication, but that is impracticle.

That said, what use is teaching abstnince only, when society provides such a wildly contradictory and highly titalating amount of sexual material for them to focus that intrest on?

The opinion that "if they don't learn about sex, they won't do it" is fatally flawed in that way... you may not teach it, they'll turn right around and learn about it elsewhere.

 

[little_lily613]

STD's are spreading like wild fire because students are having sex and don't know how to go about it safely.

It is my belief that it is spreading like wildfire because we are okaying sex by many of the things we teach. That does NOT mean we shouldn't teach them about sex, but we should reword the way we teach it, focusing on abstinence.

Perhaps 10 years ago sex isn't something that needed to be talked about with 12-15 year olds. But because the age of pregnancy seems to be lowering to that age it is important to talk about the intimate details of sexuality.

It's not that I don't think a 12 or 15 year old should never learn about sex. It is that I don't think they need to know every nitty-gritty detail. Some kids will learn, mine will not.

As for sex being a private issue, I think that parents should teach sex to thier childern, in fact I hope that they would. However, not all parents do this.

You are correct, this is why I stated that schools should teach the basics (as opposed to not teaching it at all).

 

[eptatorata]

x

 

[flicka]

I actually hate the idea of our schools having to deal with things like sex ed and other issues outside of the foundation subjects (reading, math, etc). It doesn't take a genius to realize that the more social issues we expect the schools to tackle the less we are going to be satisfied with the results of anything they do.

Sure, sex ed is health based but soon you get caught up in the morality of it and it all falls apart ::

We continue to pile things like this on our schools them complain about the horrible job they are doing. What a shame.

 

[Vylo]

There should be sex-ed with abstinence and sexual responsiblity emphasized.