“Academic pornography” or “a basic human right”? Sex education is a very controversial issue. Since 1940, in the United States, the Public Health Service advocated sex education as important in schools. However, sex education in the early years was about family life education. Since the late 1960s, conservatives and health advocates argued about teaching sex education in schools. The early protesters tried to ban sex education completely, but with increasing rates of sexually transmitted diseases (HIV/AIDS) and teen pregnancy, in the mid 1980s, the Christian Right argued instead for abstinence-only education (Pardini,1989). The Christian Right believes sex education is a parent’s job and teaching sex in schools can encourage teens to have sex and lead them to have bad morals. However, health advocates look the other way because they think that having sex education in schools is crucial because they believe it reduces sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy. According to Elizabeth Gleick et al., nearly 90% of students who have taken sex education found the classes are useful for them. Therefore, sex education should be taught in schools as supplemental education because children may or may not receive it at home from their parents.
First of all, some researchers argue that sex education, with information about contraception and condom-use, encourages teens to become sexually active and this information should not be talked about until they get married. For example, Dr. Joe McIlhaney of the Medical Institute for Sexual Health is against teaching sex education: “That’s stupid to think, ‘Well, they’re going to do it, there’s nothing we can do’ when it is as risky as it is for them” (Abstinence-Only programs on rise, 2004). He claims that “teaching kids about contraceptives, encourages them to use contraceptives” (Abstinence-Only programs on rise, 2004). However, teaching teens about sex does not make teens want to experiment or become promiscuous. In fact, there is no proof that sex educated teens are more promiscuous than other teens (Gasiorowski, 1988, p.3). According to Canadian studies, the impact of sex education on a teenager’s behaviour does not lead him or her to be promiscuous (McKay, 2004, p.5). Without sex education, the number of teens 18 and under who are no longer virgins would still increase. In fact, the data shows that only 30 percent of teenagers age 18 and under are not virgins (Gleick, 1994, p.1). Therefore, more and more teens are sexually active, and abstinence-only education will not prevent unintentional pregnancies or sexually transmitted diseases (Gasiorowski, p.3).
In fact, without enough information about condom-use or contraception, the rate of teen pregnancy may also increase. According to McKay, the rate of unwanted teen pregnancies has decreased substantially during the last quarter of the twentieth century because of sex education. Statistics in Canada show that the pregnancy rate among 15 to 19 year-olds decreased from 41.7 per 1,000 in 1989 to 40.2 in 1999 and 38.2 in 2000. The pregnancy rate among 15 to 17 year olds decreased from 24.5 per 1,000 in 1998 to 22.7 in 1999 and 21.6 in 2000 (Statistics Canada, 2003, in McKay, p.2). Also, the increasing rates of sexually transmitted diseases has added more importance to teaching sex education (Wikipedia. P.1). Therefore, research shows that it is beneficial for teens to receive complete information about condom-use and sexually transmitted diseases, and the most qualified people to do this are health care professionals and educators.

Second, many abstinence-only supporters argue that sex education should be a parents role, and should not be taught in schools. According to Dr. James Kenny, parents should be the only ones who give children sex education, and not schools or books, because secular schools cannot teach morals and what is right or wrong. Schools teach teens about anatomy and physiology. Kenny states that parents are available any time for their children and they are in the best position to answer any questions. Also, he argues that they have more opportunities than school teachers to give sexual information in a normal way (Kenny, 1989, p.16). The role of parents can not be ignored. However, many parents do not have accurate information about sex: 54% of parents do not have enough information and 96% of students like to be taught about sex in school (Gasiorowski. p.111). Also, unfortunately, not many parents carry out their duties or responsibilities to educate their family members (Gasiorowski. p.7). In addition, when a child asks his or her parents “where do babies come from,” his or her parents will be stunned and maybe will not give the child a correct answer. Therefore, parents should not be the only ones to teach teens about sex because they may not have sufficient information or they may not have the encourage to tell their children.

In addition, abstinence-only supporters from the Religious Right believe that sex education should focus on the traditional moral values represented by sexual abstinence. For instance, Reverend Jerry Falwell, a religious fundamentalist and conservative activist in America, believes that sex education causes moral decline (Gasiorowski, p.2). Federal abstinence-only programs teach teenagers that abstinence from sex is a healthy choice for them and they should remain abstinent until they get married (Government Urged to End Abstinence-only Education, 2006, p.2). Indeed, being abstinent until marriage is not a bad thing, but not many teenagers remain abstinent until they get married. Also, Americans statistics show that few people remain abstinent until then. In addition, these programs prevent teenagers from having the right to receive important information about sex, such as safer sex and contraception (Government Urged to End Abstinence-only Education, 2006, p.2). If teenagers do not have enough information about sexually transmitted diseases, they may resort to having sex with a strange person who may be infected with AIDS. Consequently, informing teens about sexually transmitted diseases can help them to be protected from unsafe sex.
The responsibility for teaching sex education should be shared between parents and schools. Parents can not be the only people teaching teens about sex. According to researchers, sex education has a big impact on reducing unwanted teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. Also, it does not encourage teens to have sex or to become promiscuous. Knowing the seriousness of sexually transmitted diseases can help teens to remain abstinent. Therefore, because of the risks of having unprotected sex, sex education is very necessary for teens and it should be taught in schools.


