The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Should publicly supported education programs include the distribution of condoms?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,565 times Debate No: 15455
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)




First round will be acceptance
2nd, 3rd and 4th round will be arguments and rebut.

Definitions are
Publicly supported educational programs : government funded schools for the use of the public.
Distribution: giving out
Condom : A condom ( (US) or (UK)) is a barrier device most commonly used during sexual intercourse to reduce the likelihood of pregnancy and spreading sexually transmitted diseases (STDs—such as gonorrhea, syphilis, and HIV). ...


I accept the challenge to debate that condoms should be publicly distributed throughout education programs. I am taking the side of con, that condoms should not be publicly distributed in education programs. I will let my opponent start the argument.
Debate Round No. 1


1Providing condoms to students in public education programs will reduce the incidence of underage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. If one accepts the premise that condoms are an effective means of prevention, it stands to reason that their distribution could have a significant impact.

2.Providing access to birth control empowers women with more control over their bodies. Historically women have often suffered more because of restrictive policies related to reproduction (abortion laws, restrictions on birth control purchases, parental consent policies). Men often don't have to face the consequences of their actions. Condom distribution encourages the responsibility of men and increases choices for women. It can also establish condom use as the norm, not something that women continually have to negotiate, often from a position of weakness.

3.Condoms are one of the most effective means of protecting against STDs, HIV and pregnancy. For their cost, they are easily the most cost-effective means of protecting against these threats.

4. Providing condoms to students is a wise investment of government funds. A fortune is spent by world governments each year addressing the public health problems created by risky sexual behaviour. The cost of raising the many children created through unintended pregnancies over a lifetime can be astronomical. The cost of treating a patient with HIV can be enormous.

Closing speech:
The facts all add up to the promotion of using condoms, and improve our children's society with less health risks and the use of protect. This does not mean to say have sex heres a condom, it here to say here just in case.
The fact of the matter is less and less teens use condoms because of religious reasons or preference by parents and teachers. The also troubling fact is that these types of teachings do not prevent kids from having sex, and if they do i would rather them use a condom rather than not.


Providing condoms to students in the public environment will make students think that they should be having sex. Condoms being giving out will not make any difference what so ever but pressure students to think that they should be having sex if public education programs are giving them out. This will also hinder the relationship between student and child because normally this time that the public education programs would be giving out condoms is the time where parents would be having the "talk" with their children. Most parents both dread and enjoy this conversation with their child but it provides an honest relationship between parent and child about sex. And if they decide to have sex, parents usually influence their children that they will always help provide help against pregnancy and STDS, HIV, etc.. Schools taking control of this action will inflict on the parent-child relationship. Condoms are the most effective means, but giving them out is not the schools matter of interest, its a personal decision. "A long-standing body of literature shows that adolescents who communicate with their parents about sex are less likely to engage in risky sexual behavior than adolescents who do not have such conversations" (for a review of the literature, see Holtzman & Robinson, 1995; Jacard & Dittus, 1993)

What is to say that giving out condoms won't do the opposite? Just because condoms are given out does not mean a teenager will use them? Just like condoms are easily sold at the store, people CHOSE not to use condoms, not about money or anything. Although this is not a wise decision, it supports the idea that although condoms can be given out does not mean that teens will use them.

Health classes throughout the education system already informs a student about the dangers of unprotected sex, giving out condoms will have no difference. Teenagers give into peer pressure very easily at this time, because its the time where the teenager is finding out who they are, so if one teenager choses not to use a condom, chances are more teenagers are not using condoms not because of means of cost or how to get them, just because of lack of judgment.
Debate Round No. 2


.........................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Oh sorry i was falling asleep reading your speech.

My opponents speech:
My opponent goes on to say condoms will promote students to have sex well who cares? We see enough of these little shows to know that sex education without condoms distribution doesn't stop sexual activity now as it is and as it stands if it does increase id rather see it be safe . My opponent goes to say how oh the parents job to provide this, what if they don't. Parents are not always eye to eye with you my dear sir, you advocating the parents are reasonable. Anyone had those parent who disown you for being different or not believing in their religion who are just too stubborn to listen? Well my opponent must not have seen any of those types of people. Hard strict catholics would make it immoral to give their son a condom he must obey my command or burn in hell. No those kind of people don't exist, impossible never in my days. Also what about those parents who don't talk about it at all? Must have slipped your mind. Then he goes to say its a personal decision, that giving them out is not a matter of interest? ha thats funny last time i check trying to stop the spread of STD's and HIV was a great interest of the U.S. Must have been i a coma for a couple of years, when did that change. The giving out of condoms is to promote the use of condoms, thats what this entire thing is about and my opponent clearly thinks all parents are going to always be accepting. What about foster grouped kids do the guardians sit down and have a chat with them?

second paragraph : Oh condoms will do the opposite man what a bummer, well those sex education class that just go don't have sex isn't really helping now either. Do those class's tell them to use condoms? I doubt it. They are sold so easily no pressure walking up to that counter being 13 buying condoms in the gas station. Its as easy as buying that bottle of water, theres no fear or awkwardness at all? There is the same awkwardness it would be if you were going to buy a play boy its kinda hard for a 13 year old to do that isn't it. Who cares if they don't use them the idea is to promote using them how do we know they won't use them if we have never tried?

Third paragraph:
So where not allowed to support the idea to use them? Just because the popular preps don't use them and tell others not to use them? Great idea next how about we just having sex education at all because the popular group will tell them to have sex anyway. The idea is to support the idea of using a condom yes their will be people telling the not to but if we don't at least try to support the idea, the idea will die all togather won't it. My opponent saying it won't work its the parent jobs, and when the parents don't do that then what? Then the idea of sex education and trying to prevent STD'S and HIV then die's it has always been the idea if the parents don't teach you or protect you from your ignorence the government will but why try it will never work.

My case...... oh wait you didn't address my case never mind then.


In response to your rude and snide response...

First: Parents that dont talk about sex with their kids are usually the kids that end up facing a dilemma with pregnancy or other issues. If anything if you are going to bring religion into this, Im sure those "strict parents" you speak of would not want their childs teacher to be handing out condoms when they should be learning. You're correct that the US does want to stop the spread of STDS but if they really thought handing out condoms in school was the answer, they actually would have done it already, wouldnt they? Its not all about the parents, because Im well aware that some parents feel uncomfortable having the "talk" but sex education is definetly taught throughout health classes.

Second: A 13 year old should not be having sex at all. Schools want to stop the spread of STDS and HIV, just like handing them a condom. Wouldnt you rather buying condoms at a gas station from a stranger then having your teacher give you them? HAHA thats awkward. "Who cares if they don't use them.." ISNT THAT YOUR WHOLE CASE? If you are so concerned about pregnancy rates and STDS/HIV schools will continue to teach their regular cireculium of sex education and leave the responsibility and choices up to the "adult" thats chosing to have sex.

Third: Labeling preps as people that don't use condoms? Thats new...never heard of that one. We do support teenagers to use a condom or practice abstinence, they teach it in health classes. Some teenagers are just ignorant, familiar with the "Pregnancy Pact?" The parents should reinforce the idea, but schools already do too.. And its the individuals responsibility if they think they are mature enough to have sex, they should be responsible for ALL that comes with it.

MY CASE is that condoms being handed out in schools will be not only costly, but will not have any effect on the teenagers decisions. Schools already enforce the idea of protection and abstinence and SOME parents do, why a parent would not have this conversation with their child is beyond me but either way its being discussed. Giving out free condoms is unneccessary, every teenager will feel as though if their just handing out condoms, that its normal behavior for a 13 year old? Last time i checked some kids dont even hit puberty at 13. Schools should focus on the saftey and health of a child but instead of buying condoms, why not buy educational supplies in order to do their actual job of helping ones education. Health classes already reinforce it, so handing out condoms would have no difference.
Debate Round No. 3


joshuaXlawyer forfeited this round.


bmascolo forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 7 years ago
I dont argue like that in LD XP i only do it on here and they were not very bad remarks
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 7 years ago
I dont argue like that in LD XP i only do it on here and they were not very bad remarks
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 7 years ago
Pro's remarks in round three lose them the conduct point.
no-one gets the grammar as grammar was equal.
Con get's the arguments point as pro had no sources to prove the Empirical claims made (there's a difference between empirical arguments, and logical/ethical/moral arguments). And Con's arguments where just all around more solid.
Con also get's the sources as he's the only one who provided any (given it wasn't a link, but I'll take it)

Pro: Your being to rigid in your debate style. If you really want to be a great lawyer (and debater) you need to focus on spreading your style out (i.e. learn other styles other than just LD; Policy really helps a lot with those empirical arguments) and, being able to hide your little snide remarks instead of just throwing them out there in the open. Not only is it rude; but had this been an LD round and you'd done that I would have marked the ballot against you right then and there.
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 7 years ago
dang it i ran out of time sorry i tired i did half of my rebut and ran out so
Posted by Jillianl 7 years ago
Zealous1 I'll be sure and remind you of your statement anytime the gov. hands out things for free . . .

If parents don't want their kids to learn about sex ed in school, then they should've already educated their kids on the subject before they get to sex ed. Learning about sex is just as vital a part of education as traditional education. Educators are concerned about student well-being and health, not just whether they learn their letters . . .
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 7 years ago
im not a jerk its only business im actually nice out of debate.
Posted by bmascolo 7 years ago
Im glad thats how u talk to a girl...lmao looks like u dont get laid. What a jerk
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 7 years ago
no its not its giving out free condoms trying to encourage teens to use them if they are going to have sex. Get a grip dude.
Posted by Zealous1 7 years ago
Dude, that's completely invading people's lives. The government isn't here to control how we do our personal stuff!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by NiamC 4 years ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: ff from both sides
Vote Placed by BangBang-Coconut 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: see comments