Raleigh News and Observer

April 5 2002
Mark H. Creech

Raleigh — The Wake County School Health Advisory Council recently voted to recommend to the school board that the county’s sex education program, which is taught in grades seven through nine, be changed from “abstinence-only” to “comprehensive” sex education. Under a comprehensive program children would be presented with the “safe-sex” message.

The council also voted to encourage schools to teach comprehensive sex education as an elective in grades 10 through 12. Before any such changes to sex education in the public schools can be implemented, they must be approved by a committee of the school board, presented at a public hearing, and then be voted upon by the board.

Proponents of comprehensive sex education claim, in effect, that the vast majority of young people are unable to abstain from sex. So, because they cannot avoid the risk by abstaining, adults need to help them by providing the best risk-reduction measures. These measures are primarily based on providing access to condoms and graphic instructions on how to use them.

This risk-reduction approach is inconsistent with the message that the medical community and the public in general present to youth regarding other high-risk behaviors.

From tobacco, alcohol and drug use to fighting, gun use and drunken driving, the prevailing message is “don’t do it” — avoid or eliminate the risk. But when it comes to sex and all the potential dangers that accompany it the message is, “Use condoms to reduce your risk of unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.”

A risk-reduction strategy is totally inconsistent with the longstanding primary-prevention medical model. And it proves that the promotion of comprehensive sex education in schools is really driven by radical dogma, not by medical or scientific reasons.

The approach also has an unintended consequence. By recommending condom usage to teenagers, four dangerous ideas are conveyed: (1) that “safe-sex” is achievable; (2) that everybody is doing it; (3) that responsible adults expect them to do it; and (4) it’s a good thing. These are destructive messages to send to our kids, messages that breed promiscuity.

Even data provided by Planned Parenthood, a strong supporter of comprehensive sex education, reveal that the No. 1 reason teenagers engage in intercourse is peer pressure. Therefore, any strategy that implies that “everybody is doing it” results in more — not fewer — teens who engage in sexual activity.

A national poll conducted for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America by Louis Harris and Associates found these results:

Teens who had comprehensive sex education at school were 54 percent more likely to have had sex than teens with no such education, and 65 percent more likely to have had sex than teens who had abstinence-focused education.

Sexually experienced teens who had comprehensive sex education at school were 22 percent less likely to usually use birth control than sexually experienced teens who had no sex education, and 24 percent less likely to usually use birth control than sexually experienced teens who had abstinence-focused education.

But there is another reason why abstinence-based education is superior to comprehensive sex education. It has to do with the Creator’s design for sex, God’s expressed will for human sexuality. “Protected promiscuity” has no part in that plan. Sex within the context for which it was intended — lifelong, monogamous marriage — is always safe. This is the message our kids need to hear from the earliest days of childhood. Anything less is worse than third-rate and cannot guarantee protection from the harmful physical and emotional effects of sex outside of marriage.

(Rev. Mark Creech is executive director of the Raleigh-based Christian Action League of North Carolina, Inc.)