Do you believe in Abstinence only sex education, or do you believe sex ed in schools should be well rounded?

Answer 1

The more well rounded the better, so people can start making smarter decisions then going into things so blindly from pure ignorance... and then having those same strict parents put them on the street for it.

;-)

In short do yall want yalls kids to get STDs or die from not knowing ALL the facts (If they're gonna do it anyways, why not give them the knowledge)???

Answer 2

The fact show that a well round sex ed school actually has more students remain absinent. SO you would have to go with the better education. There is a lot people don't realize about sex once the questions are cleared up the worse thing that can happen is that the kids will make better or at least more informed choice.

Answer 3

I believe sex ed should be taught for biological reasons, not for societal agendas. Abstinence is beneficial in ways that we still don't understand, but of the ways that we do understand there is plenty of reasons to follow this practice. Not the least among being, the marriage between two virgins is statistically proved to be more likely to last a lifetime. Aside from all the commonly accepted dangers of promiscuous lifestyle, the long term benefit is proved many times over.

Answer 4

Abstinence only doesn't prepare anyone for the real world. If this world was perfect, abstinence only would work because there wouldn't be any glitches in our lives.
You can only browbeat the religious munchkins into abstinence, not the whole school. If a person is intent on being sexually active, isn't it better to protect that person from unplanned pregnancies, AIDS, and other STD's?

Answer 5

Well... I don't think that there should be experts who go through the schools and... practically educate. No.
Although having people who work on such practical education, as educators of both sexes, for those who choose that, is not that bad an idea. As long as it is optional. :)

But sex ed should be thorough, including the emotional part that goes with the sex, so that children are not taken by surprise (btw, I read a news piece yesterday about a nine-year-old girl who became a mother, along the Amason somewhere, and that should not be allowed to happen! she is playing with dolls still!).

Answer 6

Teaching abstinence only sex education in high school is like teaching the values of not drinking to a frat house.

Sex education should be taught early in schools--age appropriately, of course. Kids are woefully uneducated about sex; look at the raft of questions on this site about how not to get pregnant, or could I be pregnant; or the amount of kids who are having unprotected sex.

If you want to stop teens from getting abortions, you've got to stop them from getting pregnant! Knowledge is power.

Answer 7

I believe that abstinence is the best way but as I'm also a realist it would be better if they covered more than this. We are human and as such some kids will try 'it' before marraige and we don't want another innocent baby to suffer or die.

Answer 8

abstinence is best, on the other hand there are so many teenage pregnancies out there. Children need to be taught about STDS and the dangers of not using protection and they need to have a course where it only focus' on teenage pregnancy and what it takes to have a child....IE money, time, patients, unconditional love.

Answer 9

I believe abstinence should be taught as the only viable solution... with an explanation of why it is the only viable alternative until marriage. HOWEVER, the mechanics of sex, pregnancy and birth should be discussed.

Answer 10

I look at the facts then make my decisions on an issue. Countries with well-rounded sex education have astounding differences in teen pregnancies, STDs, etc.