• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

Should we move away from abstinence only sex education?

  • Total voters
    53
digsbe said:
I think we should be moving more towards abstinence only sex education.
Click to expand...

This is a bad idea, for many reasons already explained.

digsbe said:
I also think that is an area for parents,
Click to expand...

The problem is that many parents aren't doing their jobs, and someone needs to do it for the good of our society.

digsbe said:
and that schools shouldn't try to parent or instill sexual morals into children.
Click to expand...

Teaching children sex ed isn't 'instilling sexual morals'. It's teaching them realistic information about sex, sexual health, birth control, and staying safe.

digsbe said:
The only safe sex is abstinence. There would be no teen pregnancies, STDs, and crying girls in the hallways.
Click to expand...

This is stupid. Abstinence isn't safe sex, it's a lack of sex. And it doesn't work. Teens are hormonal and immature. Put those two traits together and you have a recipe for having sex before you're ready.

This is why abstinence only sex ed will never work. You will never, under any circumstances, stop teens from having sex, and when they aren't taught how to protect themselves when they do have sex, you end up with teen pregnancies, STDs, and a high abortion rate.

digsbe said:
Abstinence education is the best form of sex ed.
Click to expand...

No, it's actually the worst form of sex ed, and it's barely better than no sex ed at all.

Teaching abstinence should absolutely be a part of sex ed, but teens need to be taught how to protect themselves if they do choose to have sex.

Abstinence only sex ed is like communism. It only works on paper, because it doesn't account for human nature.
 
megaprogman said:
If the rule could be followed yes. However we do have this pesky problem called human nature that causes abstinance only education to totally fail in practice.
Click to expand...

Honestly, sex ed in most ways fails in practice.
Just speaking from personal experience, I had tons of unprotected sex as a teen.
Even though I knew the potential for getting a girl pregnant and that I could catch a disease.

Emotional want always got the better of me.
 
It's human nature to have sex, We were never taught abstinence only sex education, I had it in middle school in Maine and High School in Oregon and it work well considering I knew not one pregnant high schooler.

Move to Alabama know where they do teach abstinence only sex education, About 200 girls in my senior class and I'd say about 15 of them were pregnant sometime during high school. Kids are going to have sex so you better show them how to do it safely, not just say wait till your married.
 
Patria Antiqua said:
I'm sure we live in a nation where every parent has the time and qualifications to educate children.

Yep, totally sure.

Maybe we should entirely privatize education? How about policemen? That way people can use the second amendment and make personal safety their business instead of the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Is every teacher an expert? Of course not and even if they were do you want a society where every child grows up with the same indoctrination? We have a bunch of liberal zombies in my opinion.
Yes, I think schools should be privatized. The government has no business in education. Policeman are for their to enforce laws. However, they can't always be there or get there on time to protect us. We should depend on ourselves first to protect our own lives and the lives of our loved ones.
Memories of Katrina come back to me. Don't you think a lot more people would be alive today had they depended on themselves rather than waiting on the government to save them?

Back to the topic.
Abstinance is the ONLY way to insure 100% that you won't get an STD or become pregnant or cause a pregnancy.
Why would anyone want to stop educating on the sure bet?
I'm not saying we shouldn't teach about what is called "safe" sex (age appropriate) with parental approval. However to do away with abstinance education is just something more from the left that is an attack on Christianity or those with some morals.
It's time parents stood up and said " I'm the parent! I hired you to educate my child. You are not to subvert my authority."
 
digsbe said:
I think we should be moving more towards abstinence only sex education. I also think that is an area for parents, and that schools shouldn't try to parent or instill sexual morals into children. The only safe sex is abstinence. There would be no teen pregnancies, STDs, and crying girls in the hallways. Abstinence education is the best form of sex ed.
Click to expand...

Abstinence only sex ed =/= no teen pregnancies or STDs. I agree that abstinence is the BEST form of sex ed and should be encouraged, but there will be kids that are going to have sex. They need to know about contraception in order to protect themselves.
 
earthworm said:
I am certian that it can be proven that "abstinance" is not effective, but may work in the far future, 500 years from now.
We must keep religion out of our schools. The human factor must be considered.
Click to expand...

Uh...I'm PRETTY sure that abstinence works. Heh.
 
Barbbtx said:
Throwing money at the problem is not the solution.
Click to expand...

true....instead, you don't want to teach kids about birth control. why not? since when is knowledge a bad thing? abstinence only sex ed DOES NOT WORK.
 
Barbbtx said:
Throwing money at the problem is not the solution.
Click to expand...

It amazes me that people think if you just give schools more money the kids will be well-behaved, the teachers and administrators will suddenly not be lazy or apathetic and the parents will help with homework every night.

Money isn't the answer. To think so is incredibly shallow and naive.
 
Mellie said:
It amazes me that people think if you just give schools more money the kids will be well-behaved, the teachers and administrators will suddenly not be lazy or apathetic and the parents will help with homework every night.

Money isn't the answer. To think so is incredibly shallow and naive.
Click to expand...

not shallow, maybe naive. but nobody really thinks that, anyway.
 
liblady said:
true....instead, you don't want to teach kids about birth control. why not? since when is knowledge a bad thing? abstinence only sex ed DOES NOT WORK.
Click to expand...

Again, it works for those who practice it. Regular sex ed works (mostly) for those who practice it. Both should be taught. Abstinence should be the one that's encouraged.
 
liblady said:
not shallow, maybe naive. but nobody really thinks that, anyway.
Click to expand...

Yes, shallow. There is no critical thinking happening in the head that's saying that.

And yes, some people do think that.
 
Mellie said:
Again, it works for those who practice it. Regular sex ed works (mostly) for those who practice it. Both should be taught. Abstinence should be the one that's encouraged.
Click to expand...

i agree with both being taught. that means you agree that we SHOULD move away from abstinence only, correct?
 
winston53660 said:
And the % of the under 18 yr old population that practice that till marriage is?
Click to expand...

The under 18 crowd usually don't get married while they're under 18.

The percentage of people who wait until marriage to have sex? Very low. That's why I'm an advocate for abstinence education along with regular sex ed. Abstinence should be encouraged.

I feel like a broken record....
 
liblady said:
i agree with both being taught. that means you agree that we SHOULD move away from abstinence only, correct?
Click to expand...

Of course. I don't know any public schools that teach abstinence only, though.
 
So what are horny teens supposed to do? Get real. They are biologically readu for sex.
The problems stems from the past 100 years or so of keeping kids kids for a longer period of time.
 
Mellie said:
Because it's 100% effective in NOT getting pregnant or getting STDs. I thought that was obvious.
Click to expand...

Monogamous homosexual relationships do the same. Should they be encouraged as well? What about masturbation?
 
winston53660 said:
Monogamous homosexual relationships do the same. Should they be encouraged as well? What about masturbation?
Click to expand...

If you're having sex with ONE person and you're committed to ONLY having sex with that person - great. Masterbation is 100% effective against those things as well. Go for it.
 
Your Star said:
Simple question, yes or no, and explain your answer.

Personally I think we should, it doesn't provide our kids with a proper sex education, and doesn't prepare them for the real world. I also think that sex education should include information on LGBT issues, and I think that our schools should offer condoms to our students with no questions asked.
Click to expand...
You must be kidding. Is that what you teach there. LMAO
 
Mellie said:
If you're having sex with ONE person and you're committed to ONLY having sex with that person - great.
Click to expand...

In a heterosexual relationship there is still the chance of pregnancy. And as you stated avoiding teen pregnancy was one of your goals. Since pregnancy does not happen in homosexual relationships should homosexual relationships be encourage along side abstinence as well?
 
winston53660 said:
In a heterosexual relationship there is still the chance of pregnancy. And as you stated avoiding teen pregnancy was one of your goals. Since pregnancy does not happen in homosexual relationships should homosexual relationships be encourage along side abstinence as well?
Click to expand...

Abstinence should be encouraged for any sexual orientation until the couple is married or comitted to each other for life. It's not just pregnancy you have to worry about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom