Comprehensive Sexuality Education - Taking a Look at the Issue
The following information is copied from this site www.comprehensive-sex-ed.com
"There's been a lot of talk about Comprehensive Sexuality Education, or Comprehensive Sex Ed for short. Most recently, the 'Responsible Education About Life' (REAL) act was introduced in Congress. This act provides funding for these programs."
Comprehensive sex ed (CSE) seems harmless, after all, what's so bad about learning all about the natural function of the human body?
To be added to our e-mail list, write to us at info@comprehensive-sex-ed.com
PROBLEM # 1 - Who Defines "Comprehensive"?
Just because a program is labeled as being comprehensive, doesn't mean it's actually comprehensive! And who defines comprehensive?
Surprisingly, quite a bit of health related information is missing from these programs which are billed as being "comprehensive".
Notably missing from many of these programs is accurate information on contraceptive failure rates as well as the health risks of the different methods. There is no mention of the breast cancer risks from oral contraceptives. Also missing is the fact that teens who engage in pre-marital sex have higher incidence of suicide and depression.[1][2]
Calling a program "comprehensive" doesn't actually make it so!
PROBLEM #2 - A Mixed Message
What's wrong with teaching about contraception and abstinence? Well, to begin with, it's a setup for failure. It teaches kids that even though they are capable of controlling themselves, they will fail at it so they might as well learn how to reduce their risk of disease and pregnancy.
But shouldn't a program focus soley on disease prevention and not risk reduction? It's almost universally agreed that abstinence is the best way to ensure against sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. So why emphasize anything else?
There isn't a healthy reason why teens and young adults should engage in pre-marital sex. Telling them that it's best if they abstain while also telling them about methods to protect themselves from pregnancy and disease sends conflicting messages. If it truly is better for teens to be abstinent, there is no reason on earth to do anything else but vigorously emphasize that message.
PROBLEM #3 - Pluralistic Values
The programs represent a pluralistic value system - that is, sexual values from all parts of society are held as being respectable. But in reality, not all sexual values are healthy for children.
Imagine the most disgusting sexual act you can think of, and then imagine someone telling your son or daughter that this act is ok and respectable. This is exactly what comprehensive sex ed tries to do - instill other peoples values into your kids.
These programs are not just about the birds and the bees - they go far beyond the discussion of reproduction and into 'alternative lifestyles'.
PROBLEM #4 - CSE Advocates Charge that Abstinence-only Programs are Innacurate
Once again, who defines what is inaccurate? It seems that this allegation against abstinence-only programs has no basis, other than those opposed to it simply want to spread this rumor.
And comprehensive sexuality education programs are inaccurate themselves. For example, one program claims that abortion is only done after 24 weeks to save the life of the mother. Yet the Doe V. Bolton supreme court ruling allows abortion up until birth for very broad "health" reasons and not just life threating conditions.
PROBLEM #5 - Contraception Doesn't Reduce the Demand for Abortion
CSE advocates claim that contraception reduces the demand for abortion. Yet four decades of data shows this to be a myth. These advocates present a false dilema - it's either contraception or abortion, but that's simply not the case. Consider the following points:
* As contraceptives became increasingly available to teens during the 60s and 70s, the percentage of women aged 15-19 who ever engaged in premarital sex continued to rise. The figures rose from 30.4% in 1971 to 43.4% in 1976, and rose again to 49.8 % in 1979. [3]
* As the number of younger and younger teens became sexually active, and as both married and unmarried women had increasing access to contraception, the abortion rates rose.
* In 1972, the abortion rate for all women aged 15-19 was 19.1 per 1000 women (including married women). This figure jumped to 34.3 in 1976, and to 42.4 in 1979. [4]
More recently, abortion rates have dropped. Contrary to the claims of contraception advocates, the recent declines in the abortion rate for minors was caused by parental involvement laws and not contraception. More information on this topic can be found in the study Analyzing the Effect of State Legislation on the Incidence of Abortion Among Minors.
CONCLUSION
CSE is not healthy for our children and the message given to unmarried people is that abstinence is the only sexual choice that will protect them. Call your elected represenative today to ask them to oppose the REAL act.
You can find your representatives at this website: http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/directory/congdir.tt
To be added to our e-mail list, write to us at info@comprehensive-sex-ed.com
Footnotes
[1] Hallfors D, Waller M, Bauer D, Ford C, Halpern C., Which Comes First in Adolescence—Sex and Drugs or Depression?, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Available at http://www.cpc.unc.edu/uploads/4823/1764/which_first_final.pdf
[2] Rector R, Johnson K, Noyes L, Sexually Active Teenagers Are More Likely to Be Depressed and to Attempt Suicide, Center for ,Data Analysis Report , The Heritage Foundation, available at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/cda0304.cfm
[3] Hofferth S, Kahn J, Baldwin W, Premarital Sexual Activity Among U.S. Teenage Women over the Past Three Decades, Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 2, March/April 1987.
[4] Teenage Pregnancy Statistics:National and State Trends and Trends by Race and Ethnicity, Guttmacher Institute, "Table 2.3 Rates of birth, abortion and pregnancy, per 1,000 women, and numbers of births, abortions, miscarriages, pregnancies and population, all among women aged 18-19, by year, 1972-2003", Page 6.
"There's been a lot of talk about Comprehensive Sexuality Education, or Comprehensive Sex Ed for short. Most recently, the 'Responsible Education About Life' (REAL) act was introduced in Congress. This act provides funding for these programs."
Comprehensive sex ed (CSE) seems harmless, after all, what's so bad about learning all about the natural function of the human body?
To be added to our e-mail list, write to us at info@comprehensive-sex-ed.com
PROBLEM # 1 - Who Defines "Comprehensive"?
Just because a program is labeled as being comprehensive, doesn't mean it's actually comprehensive! And who defines comprehensive?
Surprisingly, quite a bit of health related information is missing from these programs which are billed as being "comprehensive".
Notably missing from many of these programs is accurate information on contraceptive failure rates as well as the health risks of the different methods. There is no mention of the breast cancer risks from oral contraceptives. Also missing is the fact that teens who engage in pre-marital sex have higher incidence of suicide and depression.[1][2]
Calling a program "comprehensive" doesn't actually make it so!
PROBLEM #2 - A Mixed Message
What's wrong with teaching about contraception and abstinence? Well, to begin with, it's a setup for failure. It teaches kids that even though they are capable of controlling themselves, they will fail at it so they might as well learn how to reduce their risk of disease and pregnancy.
But shouldn't a program focus soley on disease prevention and not risk reduction? It's almost universally agreed that abstinence is the best way to ensure against sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. So why emphasize anything else?
There isn't a healthy reason why teens and young adults should engage in pre-marital sex. Telling them that it's best if they abstain while also telling them about methods to protect themselves from pregnancy and disease sends conflicting messages. If it truly is better for teens to be abstinent, there is no reason on earth to do anything else but vigorously emphasize that message.
PROBLEM #3 - Pluralistic Values
The programs represent a pluralistic value system - that is, sexual values from all parts of society are held as being respectable. But in reality, not all sexual values are healthy for children.
Imagine the most disgusting sexual act you can think of, and then imagine someone telling your son or daughter that this act is ok and respectable. This is exactly what comprehensive sex ed tries to do - instill other peoples values into your kids.
These programs are not just about the birds and the bees - they go far beyond the discussion of reproduction and into 'alternative lifestyles'.
PROBLEM #4 - CSE Advocates Charge that Abstinence-only Programs are Innacurate
Once again, who defines what is inaccurate? It seems that this allegation against abstinence-only programs has no basis, other than those opposed to it simply want to spread this rumor.
And comprehensive sexuality education programs are inaccurate themselves. For example, one program claims that abortion is only done after 24 weeks to save the life of the mother. Yet the Doe V. Bolton supreme court ruling allows abortion up until birth for very broad "health" reasons and not just life threating conditions.
PROBLEM #5 - Contraception Doesn't Reduce the Demand for Abortion
CSE advocates claim that contraception reduces the demand for abortion. Yet four decades of data shows this to be a myth. These advocates present a false dilema - it's either contraception or abortion, but that's simply not the case. Consider the following points:
* As contraceptives became increasingly available to teens during the 60s and 70s, the percentage of women aged 15-19 who ever engaged in premarital sex continued to rise. The figures rose from 30.4% in 1971 to 43.4% in 1976, and rose again to 49.8 % in 1979. [3]
* As the number of younger and younger teens became sexually active, and as both married and unmarried women had increasing access to contraception, the abortion rates rose.
* In 1972, the abortion rate for all women aged 15-19 was 19.1 per 1000 women (including married women). This figure jumped to 34.3 in 1976, and to 42.4 in 1979. [4]
More recently, abortion rates have dropped. Contrary to the claims of contraception advocates, the recent declines in the abortion rate for minors was caused by parental involvement laws and not contraception. More information on this topic can be found in the study Analyzing the Effect of State Legislation on the Incidence of Abortion Among Minors.
CONCLUSION
CSE is not healthy for our children and the message given to unmarried people is that abstinence is the only sexual choice that will protect them. Call your elected represenative today to ask them to oppose the REAL act.
You can find your representatives at this website: http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/directory/congdir.tt
To be added to our e-mail list, write to us at info@comprehensive-sex-ed.com
Footnotes
[1] Hallfors D, Waller M, Bauer D, Ford C, Halpern C., Which Comes First in Adolescence—Sex and Drugs or Depression?, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Available at http://www.cpc.unc.edu/uploads/4823/1764/which_first_final.pdf
[2] Rector R, Johnson K, Noyes L, Sexually Active Teenagers Are More Likely to Be Depressed and to Attempt Suicide, Center for ,Data Analysis Report , The Heritage Foundation, available at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/cda0304.cfm
[3] Hofferth S, Kahn J, Baldwin W, Premarital Sexual Activity Among U.S. Teenage Women over the Past Three Decades, Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 2, March/April 1987.
[4] Teenage Pregnancy Statistics:National and State Trends and Trends by Race and Ethnicity, Guttmacher Institute, "Table 2.3 Rates of birth, abortion and pregnancy, per 1,000 women, and numbers of births, abortions, miscarriages, pregnancies and population, all among women aged 18-19, by year, 1972-2003", Page 6.
<< Home