College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

LETTER: Sexual Education Deserves Discussion

Published: Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Updated: Wednesday, November 18, 2009

There’s an elephant in the Utah State Legislature, and its name is sexual education. This proverbial elephant has been in the minds of doctors, healthcare workers, educators, parents and Utah students for a long time and has just recently been acknowledged by Utah’s elected representatives. And while some in the legislature will try to push it to the side, reason that it’s not there and isn’t a problem, it will not change the fact that Chlamydia rates among Utah teens have increased by 50 percent, Gonorrhea rates have increased by 99 percent from 2004-2007 , that 81 percent of pregnancies in women 15 to 19 and 60 percent of pregnancies 20 to 24 are unplanned and that many parents don’t have the knowledge or the wherewithal to adequately educate their children about sex and all that it encompasses. This is why it is imperative to give Utah parents the option of placing their children in curriculum-based courses that will educate young people about their options and the repercussions of their decisions. A more comprehensive sex education bill sponsored by Sen. Stephen Urquhart (R-Washington County) and Rep. Lynn Hemingway (D-Holladay) would give parents the option of enrolling their child in more comprehensive reproductive health education classes and would give correct and valuable information to teens who so desperately need it. To assume that the current system is working, that outside sources are sufficiently educating teens and that knowledge begets promiscuity is backward —even for Utah. Those opposing the option of comprehensive sex-ed put enough trust in Utah parents to solve this pachyderm-sized topic, yet when it comes to allowing these same parents to put their children in comprehensive sex-ed, these parents suddenly don’t have the same mental capabilities to decide whether a teacher can educate their children as they have done in years past. So which is it, are Utah parents able to make this decision — or will someone else make it for them?

Adrienne Hill,
SUU Voices for Planned Parenthood vice president. 

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

8 comments

AB
Mon Nov 30 2009 19:40
Abstinence education determines the moral for itself. There's no consideration of of other ideas involved. Abstinence should be included in a discussion of all the potential alternatives. It's a little paternalistic to present abstinence as the only choice. You're saying "you don't need to know all the information because I have the best judgment, and I know that my way of thinking is best." And it's flat-out discriminatory to say that homosexuality and transgenderism are "other ideas" that don't deserve discussion whatsoever.
Sam
Sun Nov 22 2009 21:41
This moral education may best be left to ones religion, they do an excellent job. My argument is simple, ABSTINENCE education produces individuals who are able to determine what it means to be moral. Sexual abstinence is the practice of voluntarily refraining from some or all aspects of sexual activity unit marriage. Providing condoms and safe sex instructions provide the confusing message "Go forth and play" with a wink and and nod through broad discussion of other ideas that some will feel safe to experiment with (homosexuality and transgenderism for examples).
AB
Sat Nov 21 2009 19:24
I'm referring to education in general, not at BYU, SUU, or any other specific institution. My argument is simple--education produces individuals who are able to determine for themselves what it means to be moral. It seems unfair, somehow, to deprive individuals, young or old, of the opportunity to receive an education. The bill proposed would give parents the opportunity to educate their kids on sex and sexuality in a curriculum-based setting, which (ideally) allows for a broad discussion of ideas. Moral standards produce morally uplifted people only according to the standards that shaped them.
morally Uplifted
Fri Nov 20 2009 17:32
If I understand correctly, morals standards and enforcement seem to help produce morally uplifted educated students. A BYU Engineering degree is widely accepted as being almost or the same credibility as one from SUU? Are students not getting a real education from BYU, minus the moral depravity?
AB
Fri Nov 20 2009 02:07
@ Results Speak For Itself: Shouldn't education be the key to producing "morally uplifted" students and members of the community? You have the problem backwards here. Accepting or enforcing the so-called standards of morality doesn't always produce educated individuals. Real education--the open discussion of ideas in a setting free from the restraints that any particular moral code can impose--allows students to determine what, in fact, it means to be morally uplifted. If the standards of morality really deserve to be standards, they will hold up in this kind of setting. So it seems to me like this bill is a step in the right direction.
Results Speak For Itself
Thu Nov 19 2009 16:58
I think the standards of morality, upheld and enforced at BYU speak for itself. Healthy, clean and morally uplifted students and graduates not corrupted by sin. Don't take my word, look at the results for yourself. Enough said.
I vote education
Thu Nov 19 2009 09:46
One of the important components of civic freedom is the word "option" - especially when it comes to discussions of religious values. Your worries about religious freedom are misguided, Sam, and luckily the rest of us have the option of not being restricted by them. Ms. Hill correctly says the bill would give parents the "option" of enrolling their children in comprehensive sex ed classes - Sam, you overlook that word. Under the bill, you'd have the option of keeping your kids in the abstinence-only classes. Your lord may have intended theocratic government and BYU as a standard for all of us to live by, but I'm fairly sure that the jury's still out and in the meantime, we live in a country with the separation of church and state. I sure as heck want to have the option to choose what's best for my kids, just like you, but I happen to believe that giving kids the information is better than keeping them ignorant and hoping they'll play like Nancy Reagan. My option, your option, thank God (yes, I believe in Him) that our society protects our rights to have different options. The BYU code of conduct is not the eleventh commandment, and it's not a constitutional amendment. Heaven help us if it ever becomes one.
Sam
Thu Nov 19 2009 00:24
A very important point that also needs to be included is the protection of religious freedom. Encouraging these kind of discussions in our public school system only serves to erode the very fabric of morality and family values by encouraging young minds to experiment. Sexual education, homosexuality and how to "play-safe" are not appropriate discussions to be held outside the home. BYU and our local LDS Institute provide a time tested model of encouraging celibacy and respecting the morals of our society. I suggest we need to take a serious look at the model of exposing young impressionable minds to the potential for experimentation or the way the lord intended. Please review the BYU's code of conduct for a better comparison of the goals we need to strive toward. Not instructional how to educational video's.






log out