The Instigator
jamccartney
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
Cold-Mind
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Sex education in schools should be mandatory

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
jamccartney
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/21/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 782 times Debate No: 55140
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

jamccartney

Pro


Hello to anyone who wishes to accept this debate. I will be arguing that sex education in schools should be made mandatory, while my opponent will be arguing that it should be a choice.

Round 1: Acceptance only
Round 2: Arguments
Round 3: Rebuttals and Conclusion

I look forward to this debate.


Cold-Mind

Con

I accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
jamccartney

Pro

Introduction

I would like to begin my thanking my opponent for accepting my debate. It is a salient topic amongst the parents of many students like myself. In this debate, I shall be arguing that students should be required to have sex education whilst in school. I have my argument prepared early, which is why I am posting it so early.

Arguments

1. How will children find out about it?

I happen to have been misfortunate enough to not find out about how babies were made until I was in 6th grade, simply because my parents refused to teach me the concept. Because of this, I was simply kept in the dark. This put me at a disadvantage because I was the only one who had no idea what every individual was talking about.
I am also aware that many people are in the same predicament. By not being taught about sex, how would one find out? Most of the time, they wouldn't. Instead, they would be without knowledge of the real world. I wish for my opponent to tell me why it would be good for a child to be without knowledge of the real world.

2. How would children understand the dangers?

As I am sure my opponent is aware, sex has many dangers, including children, STDs, etc. What if a child was unaware of these dangers and decided to have sex, not knowing the consequences? There is a good change they would become a parent, obtain an STD, or both. To make a long story short, it would not end well. This scenario could have been avoided if the two individuals had been previously educated as to what dangers come with sexual activity.
This is a good reason to make sex education mandatory, for children should be forced to be into awareness of this topic. Without this awareness, STDs will only spread faster and poverty of homeless mothers will only increase. I wish for my opponent to tell my why this is a good thing.

3. There is no good reason to keep this from them

What would be the reason to keep this information from children? I cannot find one. However, there are many reasons not to keep it from them. Here are some facts:

1. More that 47% of students say they have had sex.
2. 15% have had sex with four or more partners
3. 3 in 10 girls will be pregnant before they are 20
4. These teenage pregnancies have resulted in $9.4 billion annually for child care

Though these people were aware of what sex is, they did not fully understand the consequences. The percentage would have been much lower if they had been more aware.

4. Sex is not gross

One of the reasons parents keep this from their children is because they believe sex to be gross, inappropriate, and vulgar. This, however, is false and is simply a bad reason. First of all, sex is a very natural occurrence. Secondly, it is a bad reason to keep facts from people. Though they are young, children have the right to know what goes on in the world around them. I wish for my opponent to tell me why it is a good idea to keep facts from children.

Conclusion

I have given my arguments as to why sex education should be mandatory. It is now time for my opponent to give his arguments as to why it should not be mandatory. I wait patiently for his arguments.


Works Cited

"State Policies on Sex Education in Schools." State Policies on Sex Education in Schools. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 May 2014. .
Cold-Mind

Con

You spent too much words to tell kids should have an option to learn about sex. I fully agree, that sex is not gross and that there should be classes in the school. The thing I don't agree about, and what you should have been focused on, is forcing children to attend these classes. They are supposed to be optional.

Sex has many dangers, but if someone wants to risk their health, it is their right. No one should try to stop them by force.
When someone decides they will have sex, they are accepting possible consequences.
Debate Round No. 2
jamccartney

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for giving me what I believe to be an argument. It is very short and only covers one point, which is not proven. Because of this short argument, there is not much I can refute.


"The thing I don't agree about, and what you should have been focused on, is forcing children to attend these classes. They are supposed to be optional."

In this quote, my opponent is talking about how we should not force children into these classes. Has he not read my argument? I talked about how if children are not exposed to this information, they will not know and will be uneducated about the topic. Looking at my argument, one can see that there are clear downsides to not teaching it.
Furthermore, I am aware that they are supposed to be optional. The fact that they are optional now is irrelevant. This debate is about whether they should be optional or not.

As this is all there is to refute, I will leave it at this.


1. http://dangerousminds.net...
Cold-Mind

Con

I don't think it is morally permissible for person to force others to do something they don't want to do, just because person thinks it is good for them. Even if this person has good arguments, it still just an opinion.

Majority of your government officials think they know what is good for you better then you do. And some of them really do. Does this mean it is morally permissible for them to force you to do things you don't want to do? - I think it is not.

I am suggesting that parents should present arguments for educating about sex to their kids. And leave it up to kids to decide if they want to go. I claim that everyone will learn more if they are willingly attending classes.
Debate Round No. 3
jamccartney

Pro

Introduction

I would like to begin by thanking my opponent for responding. I will begin with my rebuttals, though there will be short. There is not much for me to refute, for my opponent has written very little.

Rebuttals

"I don't think it is morally permissible for person to force others to do something they don't want to do, just because person thinks it is good for them."

Morality is subjective. You cannot prove that it is not morally permissible. Secondly, my opponent apparently thinks students should not be forced to take math, science, history, or English in schools, for he doesn't think is is right to "force others to do something they don't want to do."

"Majority of your government officials think they know what is good for you better then you do. And some of them really do. Does this mean it is morally permissible for them to force you to do things you don't want to do?"

No, it does not. Why? Because morality is subjective and morals only exist psychologically.

"I am suggesting that parents should present arguments for educating about sex to their kids. And leave it up to kids to decide if they want to go. I claim that everyone will learn more if they are willingly attending classes."

1. Sure, parents should teach them. I concur. Unfortunately, parents tend to neglect that obligation.
2. No, the kids should not decide whether they want to learn the truth about life. Instead, it should be obligatory.
3. So people will learn Algebra better if they attend it willingly? Maybe, but what about the people who don't want to go. Will they just not learn Algebra?

Conclusion

As that is all my opponent wrote, there is nothing else to refute. I will leave it at this. I patiently await my opponent's rebuttals.
Cold-Mind

Con

You are suggesting that morality is irrelevant because it is subjective, but yet you say kids should learn the truth, like what teachers are telling is objective.

People who do not want to learn Algebra should not be forced by other people to learn Algebra. One person is not to decide what is good for another person. If someone doesn't want to learn Algebra, they obviously don't think it is good for them.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by jamccartney 1 year ago
jamccartney
It is interesting how my opinions have changed now. I would be on the Con side now, as I am a Libertarian.
Posted by jamccartney 2 years ago
jamccartney
I did not say you are an unreasonable person. I said 'debater', not 'person'. I appologize if my statement seemed rude. I have just been trying to have a very serious and sophisticated debate about this topic for a long time.
Posted by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
@jamccartney What makes makes me unreasonable person?
I value making statements short, since some people don't have much time to read. Using unnecessary words only makes point less obvious.
As for citations, if I needed them, I would use them.
I am not interested in making debate aesthetically beautiful, I only care about people(including you and me) changing their opinions, or at least improving their ideas after reading the debate or participating in it.
Posted by jamccartney 2 years ago
jamccartney
(sigh) There is nothing wrong with copying and pasting my old argument. The argument from my previous debate was wasted by my opponent forfeiting. I wanted to have a legitimate debate and my opponent forfeited. Therefore, I restarted the debate, using my previous arguments. Unfortunately, it seems the same crap is occurring in this debate as well. My opponent here is making short arguments with no citations or strong writing. It seems I cannot get a reasonable debater about this particular topic.
Anyways" As I said, there is nothing wrong with what I did.
Posted by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
I do agree a little with Lt.Harris. jamccartney, who I know both online and personally, tends to copy-paste often. I believe him to be a little lazy, but he is very, very intelligent and rational. At the moment, I believe that the conduct points are tied.
Posted by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
@Lt.HArris Thanks, but you argued sex shouldn't be taught to kids at all. That is not my position. I don't mind copy-pasting, I only have problem with fact he said(pasted) way too much unnecessary things.
Posted by Lt.Harris 2 years ago
Lt.Harris
I would like you, Cold-Minded, to go to my profile and look at my debate with him. Notice how he is copying and pasting from his old debate. You should use that to get conduct points. He is just making the exact same argument. Go ahead and use any of my points,especially considering that I should have won.
Posted by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
+Abdab Make sure you read it and after debate is over, tell me if I missed something.
Posted by Abdab 2 years ago
Abdab
Darn, I was just about to accept this
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by WilliamsP 2 years ago
WilliamsP
jamccartneyCold-MindTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct is tied; there were no forfeitures or otherwise disrespectful motions. Spelling and grammar should actually be tied as well, but I give the points to Pro due to Con's lack of formatting or sophistication. Convincing arguments goes to Pro due to the length of his arguments in comparison to Con and the wording, formatting, and context of those arguments. Pro has made certain undeniable points, which Con has either ignored or simply failed to refute efficiently. Reliable sources obviously go to Pro; Pro actually used sources and cited them, unlike Con.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
jamccartneyCold-MindTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con needs to give arguments instead of jus asserting his beliefs. All relevant points to pro.