The Instigator
KaleBevilacqua
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Juris
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

U.S. schools should teach comprehensive, sex-positive sex education instead of abstinence

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 1 vote the winner is...
Juris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/1/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,121 times Debate No: 38364
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

KaleBevilacqua

Pro

I would love to have a friendly debate with someone on this issue.


This is an issue, because currently, [1]

-37 states require that sex education include abstinence, with 26 of those requiring that abstinence be stressed as the ideal.

-Only 13 states require that sex education be medically accurate.

-Eight states require that it be culturally appropriate and unbiased.

-Only two states have laws against sex education promoting religion.

-24 states' curriculums do not include contraception or condom use.

-Only eight states have LGBT-inclusive curriculums. Out of the remaining states, three teach LGBT-negative information.

-21 states skip information about avoiding sexual coercion, 22 avoid discussions about healthy-decision making, and 30 avoid discussing family communication.


What do I believe should be ideally taught?

An inclusive, positive curriculum that gives young people accurate information about how their bodies work; how to have sex safely, pleasurably, and consensually; or how to prevent pregnancy. Here's why this is needed:


1)
Many young people engage in sexual risk behaviors that can result in unintended health outcomes. For example, among U.S. high school students surveyed in 2011, 47.4% had ever had sexual intercourse. 39.8% did not use a condom the last time they had sex.

What does this result in? An estimated 8,300 young people aged 13–24 years in the 40 states reporting to CDC had HIV infection in 2009, and early half of the 19 million new STDs each year are among young people aged 15–24 years. [2]

With proper sex education, these infections could be safely prevented, or at least the rate will be significantly reduced, resulting in better sexual health.


2) 76.7% of teens did not use birth control pills or Depo-Provera to prevent pregnancy the last time they had sex. In addition, more than half a million unplanned pregnancies occur to teens each year.

This has unfortunate effects on the children and parents. Children born to adolescents face particular challenges—they are more likely to have poorer educational, behavioral, and health outcomes throughout their lives, compared with children born to older parents. Both mothers and fathers who have an unplanned birth report less happiness and more conflict in their relationship than those in similar men and women with a planned birth. [3]

Surprisingly (or not), teenage pregnancy rates are highest in states with abstinence-only education! The reason is simple: they have less access to accurate information about making sexual choices. Teenagers are already having sex in sizable numbers (see point 1), and according to a 2007 federal report, abstinence-only programs had no impacts on rates of sexual abstinence.”

What we can conclude is that we can't control whether teenagers have sex, but we can control whether they are safe about it and know how to prevent STD's and unwanted pregnancies.


~~~

Can anyone refute this? I'd love to hear your views on this delicate subject.



[1] http://www.guttmacher.org...;
[2] http://www.cdc.gov...
[3] http://www.thenationalcampaign.org...
[4] http://thinkprogress.org...
Juris

Con

Rebuttals:

You stated, “With proper sex education, these infections could be safely prevented, or at least the rate will be significantly reduced, resulting in better sexual health.” This is a kind of an assumption not supported by any evidence. You just presented statistics on young people involved in sexual intercourse, but never the relationship between sex education to safe sex.

Furthermore, in your second point as stated “76.7% of teens did not use birth control pills or Depo-Provera to prevent pregnancy the last time they had sex. In addition, more than half a million unplanned pregnancies occur to teens each year… What we can conclude is that we can't control whether teenagers have sex, but we can control whether they are safe about it and know how to prevent STD's and unwanted pregnancies.How can you say that we can control them in having safe sex in preventing STDs and unwanted pregnancies? This is another form of an assumption. Where is the study that shows the we can control as such? All you presented were just an fallacious assumption, or if not, claims not supported by evidence.

Points

There are many different groups across the
United States advocating for abstinence-only sex education in the schools. They include Concerned Women for America, the Eagle Forum, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the Heritage Foundation, the Medical Institute for Sexual Health (MISH), the National Coalition for Abstinence Education, and STOP Planned Parenthood International.


These and other proponents of abstinence-only education argue primarily that sex before marriage is inappropriate or immoral and that abstinence is the only method which is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy and STIs.1

Many such groups emphasize that condoms are not fool-proof in preventing pregnancy or STIs, and that sexual activity outside marriage can result in “serious, debilitating, and sometimes, deadly consequences.”2

In addition, many abstinence-only advocates are deeply concerned that information about sex, contraception and HIV can encourage early sexual activity among young people.63 These advocates credit the decrease in teenage pregnancy largely to the advancement of the abstinence-only message.3

An article on the Concerned Women for America web site states that “[t]his is not simply an issue of morality, but a matter of public health. The problems that have become so entrenched in our country, such as AIDS, illegitimate births, poverty, increasing crime and the breakdown of the nuclear family, can all be attributed to the debilitating effects of a public policy that condones sex without love or responsibility. … As research clearly indicates, America is not suffering from a lack of knowledge about sex, but an absence of values.”4

Abstinence-only proponents point to studies concluding that the abstinence-only education message has played a central role in the decline of adolescent sexual activity, and related negative health outcomes, over the last decade. One study reports that “…abstinence and decreased sexual activity among sexually active adolescents are primarily responsible for the decline during the 1990s in adolescent pregnancy, birth and abortion rates. Attributing these declines to increased contraception is not supported by the data.”5




Sources:

[1] Concerned Women for America. Abstinence: Why Sex is Worth the Wait [Internet]. July

1998. Available at: www.cwfa.org/library/family/1998-07_pp_abstinence.shtml. Accessed

October 16, 2001.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Abstinence Clearinghouse. Data confirms that the abstinence message, not condoms, is

responsible for the reduction in births to teens [Internet]. May 17, 1998. Available at:

www.abstinence.net/ArticleDetail.cfm?ArticleID=168. Accessed October 16, 2001.

[4] Concerned Women for America. Abstinence: Why Sex is Worth the Wait [Internet]. July

1998. Available at: www.cwfa.org/library/family/1998-07_pp_abstinence.shtml. Accessed

October 16, 2001

[5]
Jones JM, Toffler W, Mohn JK, et al. The declines in adolescent pregnancy, birth and

abortion rates in the 1990s: What factors are responsible? A special report commissioned

by The Consortium of State Physicians Resource Councils [Internet]. January 7,

1999. Available at: www.abstinence.net/ArticleDetail.cfm?ArticleID=224. Accessed October

16, 2001.

Debate Round No. 1
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

KaleBevilacqua forfeited this round.
Juris

Con

What happened?
Debate Round No. 2
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

KaleBevilacqua forfeited this round.
Juris

Con

I guess you're teaching sex education right now.
Debate Round No. 3
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

KaleBevilacqua forfeited this round.
Juris

Con

Hope you post the next round.
Debate Round No. 4
KaleBevilacqua

Pro

Sorry. I had to forfeit what could have been a great debate because of my insanely hectic schedule.
Juris

Con

That last round where you explained your reason for not posting arguments could have been used for rebuttals..

Well anyway... Thanks I understand...

Let us allow people to vote based on that round 1.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by KaleBevilacqua 3 years ago
KaleBevilacqua
HEY! I used sources!
Posted by Juris 3 years ago
Juris
Another thing.... Kindly vote for me in this debate for his abstention..thnx
Posted by Juris 3 years ago
Juris
I will debate but I have to copy my round 1 arguments and sources from this debate because I am tired of doing it again...
Posted by McCainOffensive 3 years ago
McCainOffensive
I'll take up this debate on the Pro side, if con is willing to argue again. I found this debate about a week ago and have been following it since with great disappointment. I would enjoy having a legitimate debate on a non-philosophical topic that has the potential to greatly impact the lives of many individuals with an opponent of Con's caliber. I've seen the quality of Con's arguments not just in this debate, but in many other debates of Con's I've observed.

If Con wishes to argue this point again, I will recreate this debate with similar conditions and the same number of rounds. If these conditions are agreeable, post another comment and I will set up the debate.
Posted by KaleBevilacqua 3 years ago
KaleBevilacqua
Oooops. Didn't mean to forfeit. Things just got hectic lately is all, and I forgot.
Posted by KaleBevilacqua 3 years ago
KaleBevilacqua
That's great to hear! @michaeltaffe3
Posted by michaeltaffe3 3 years ago
michaeltaffe3
i totally agree. I would debate you but i just cannot go against this...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
KaleBevilacquaJurisTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's last remarks were a bit snarky--conduct to Pro. arguments to Con for giving them.