Abstinence-only Education vs Comprehensive Sex Ed in Schools

1163 Words3 Pages

In today’s society having an abstinence-only education doesn’t lower the risk of adolescents becoming pregnant or catching sexually transmitted diseases, also known STD’s. Teaching abstinence as the only morally acceptable option is wrong. The only thing that will lower that risk is teaching sex education in public schools. Adolescents will become more aware of the risks and factors that come along with sexual intercourse at a young age. Bringing a sex ed course into public schools will set better knowledge into a student 's mind rather than telling them “having sex is bad, just say no”. What happens when the adolescent is ready and says yes?
An article written in Journal of School Health expresses, “In recent years, increasingly larger amounts …show more content…

As many know everyone is different in every way, therefore why do we hold everyone to the same standards and expectations. Abstinence-only education teaches the students that it is only morally correct for students to remain abstinent until they are married. Instead of leaving the option up to the adolescent after providing all information, they put fear into them to choose what they think is the only “morally acceptable” choice. When talking about condoms, abortion, and other sexual orientation they only give the failure rates and more then likely will omit the controversial topics. Instead of giving true facts that have been proven, abstinence-only education will teach the students anything they have to so that they fear having sex. They also teach that if an unintentional pregnancy occurs the only morally correct option would be carry the baby for full term, then give it up for adoption if it comes to that; which is wrong. The other options have been provided for the reasoning of many of the different situations the world faces to this day. We should better improve the world by providing teenagers with sex ed

Open Document