I am sorry to say that abstinence-only sexual education was taught in my middle school when I was a child. I'm sure that the "Let's Wait Until Marriage Because If We Don't We'll All Get AIDS and Die" program isn't much different from the sex-ed programs back in the 1970's....except the one that I experienced was devoid of religious aspects (I went to public school) and my mother's school included Catholic aspects due to our geographical location. I'll jump right into the pros and cons, as they presented themselves to me in my community, and let you draw your own conclusions.
Pros:
-Abstinence-only education means well....adults want kids to be safe from STI's
-Accepted by almost all religious and fundamentalist groups.
-Telling young teenagers that it's okay to have sex before they are married might sound too encouraging.
-Acceptance by most politically/socially Moderate and Conservative parents.
-It's true...if you don't do anything sexual whatsoever, you cannot get any sort of sexually transmitted disease.
Cons:
-Teaches that sex before marriage is bad, enciting guilt.
-It's a very narrow view of sexual education
-Young people never learn other methods of contraception or STD prevention, or if they do, the information is biased towards abstinence, which is exalted because it is "foolproof."
-Does not include any information on contraceptive use (i.e. how to properly use condoms or a diaphragm)
-It doesn't usually work; at least half of the people in my town who took that Abstinence-only course lost their virginity before they graduated from high school.
-Having sex is a personal choice people should be allowed to make for themselves. If someone chooses to have sex with an untrustworthy person, they have no one to blame but themselves and must learn from their mistake.
In the event that my views were presented unclearly, I will inform you that I do not believe in Abstinence-only sexual education, due primarily to its lack of contraceptive information.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
