Palin's Daughter Says Abstinence Not Realistic

[jv103]

Kasz216 said:

The Ghost of RubangB said:
We're not saying the practice of abstinence is stupid or impossible. But abstinence-only education doesn't get anybody else to abstain. The number of people who have sex before marriage does not decrease when they are taught about abstinence.

The problem is the idea that kids should ONLY be taught about abstinence, and NOT about condoms, because that knowledge will somehow hurt them or confuse them or turn them into sex maniacs. That idea doesn't help anybody, but wastes tons of money every year.

The only reason the argument is still around is because one side studies the facts and says "this education does not work" and the other side says "oh yeah but condoms are gay!"

What is "Teaching abstinance" anyway.

We never really had that... I mean... we had sex education at like... 5th-6th grade... what with the condoms and such.

I mean... is it just people saying "You can not do this".

Cause I'd think that would be self apparent.

Is "Teaching abstinance" really just "teaching all the bad stuff about sex"?

 

 

Basically if the school district teaches Abstinence only sex ed. They don't talk about male/female condoms except (important) to mention their failure rates. They don't go into how to use a condom - where to purchase - benefits of using condoms, spermicides (i.e. pregnancy inhibitor but not STDS) etc. They will continually reiterate that the only way to be sure is abstinence (quite obvious-didn't know it needed teaching).

To answer your question yes- without discussing viable options outside of abstinence as I mentioned above. - The whole thing begs the question that if sex ed is being taught then why teach only a small portion of it (I.E. not having sex). Seems to become an anatomy and physiology class more than a sex education class.