When I was a sixth grader in my first sex education class I squirmed and giggled along with the rest of the girls. Both parents and teens share the discomfort and embarrassment about sex that I felt today, making sex education a very controversial issue. There are two main schools of thought behind sex education. The first, Abstinence Only sex education, advocates the promotion of abstinence until marriage as the best way to prevent the spread of STI's and unwanted teen pregnancies (Hoyt, Robert G. 5-6). The second, called Comprehensive sex education, supports giving young teens all the knowledge required to protect themselves if they choose to have sex (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). Both factions hope to protect youth. Yet studies show that although Abstinence programs may help to delay the onset of sexual activity, they also result in decreased condom usage once sexual activity begins in comparison to Comprehensive programs. This exposes the teens that went through Abstinence education to a higher risk of contracting STI's such as Chlamydia than their counterparts who went through a Comprehensive education (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). On the other hand, Abstinence supporters argue that Comprehensive programs encourage sexual debuts at a younger age, and that such programs may lead to sexual promiscuity (Rector, Robert E. 1-3). Despite large government funding for Abstinence Based education, and great efforts on both sides to help protect teens today, STI's such as Chlamydia, which tends to be asymptomatic, are on the rise (Datta SD, Sternberg M, Johnson RE, et al. 89-97). Therefore, promoting awareness and knowledge of both the benefits of abstinence, and the protection that contraceptives such as condoms can afford is extremely important for protecting youth today. Despite parent’s best efforts, children do grow up, and will have sex before or after marriage. The best method of protection is giving youth the ability to understand both sides of the debate and make their own decisions based on all the available knowledge.

Members of the Abstinence only education camp argue that abstinence education is the best method for protecting teens from harmful STI's and unwanted pregnancies. With a large amount of government support in the United States these programs are flourishing. Advocates of abstinence programs argue that sexual activity outside of marriage is emotionally and psychologically damaging (Rector, Robert E. 1-3). Abstinence supporters also argue that teens that participate in sexual activity are also more likely to become involved in other dangerous pursuits such as drugs and alcohol (Rector, Robert E. 1-3). These arguments tend to cause fear and panic in parents. Statements such as "Nearly all such [comprehensive programs] contain material and messages that would be alarming and offensive to the overwhelming majority of parents" have no factual evidence or support, and are obviously directed at parents (Rector, Robert E. 1-3). These types of arguments focus on the needs of parents, who fear their children's sexuality, not on the needs of young adults who need protection.

While some points proposed by Abstinence advocates require more support or are false, they are correct in stating that the best method of protection from STI's and pregnancy is abstinence (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). They also argue that condoms are not always effective in protecting those participating in sexual activity from STI's or pregnancy (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). One of their main contentions is that Comprehensive education encourages teens to participate in sexual activity. This is in reality far from the truth. Studies have shown that Comprehensive sex education does not significantly decrease the age at which teens first have sex (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). Although Abstinence advocates bring up several good points about the possible ineffectiveness of condoms, and the benefits of abstaining from sex, in actuality most teens by the age of 19 have had sex (Zelnik, Melvin and Kim, Youg J. 117-126). Therefore not arming youth with the knowledge to protect themselves when they do have their sexual debuts is dangerous for their physical health.

Despite its good intentions, Abstinence funded education contains a number of errors in its curriculum that may lead youth to make misinformed decisions, which could lead to pregnancy or the spread of STI's. One example is Abstinence Based education’s lack of concern for fully explaining the failure rates of condoms. One program states that condoms have a failure rate of 15 percent (Durex Global Sex Survey. 2005). This in fact is false. In reality condoms have a typical use contraceptive failure rate of 15 percent and a perfect failure rate of 2-3 percent. A perfect failure rate is the failure rate when condoms are used perfectly. This same program does not explain that these failure rates are considered over a year, not every time a couple has sex (Durex Global Sex Survey. 2005). Another very important piece of misinformation taught in many Abstinence programs is the claim that the rise in Chlamydia corresponds to the rise in condom usage. The CDC and World Health organization have illustrated through multiple studies that the increase in Chlamydia is due to increased screening and better detection (Durex Global Sex Survey. 2005). These two organizations have also shown that condoms are effective at reducing the risk of the spread of Chlamydia (Durex Global Sex Survey. 2005). Misinforming today's youth is irresponsible. Teens should be allowed to have access to all information and be able to make their own decisions based on accurate information, not on data that is meant to scare them into abstinence.

In recent years, President Bush has funded Abstinence programs across the United States, giving these programs an advantage. For example, in 2002, "federal appropriations for promoting abstinence-only education reached $102 million" (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). According to studies by the AIDS Research Institute 35% of school districts require that abstinence only education be the only option for unmarried youths. These school districts also limit the discussion of contraceptive methods to discussing their failure rates or to banning the discussion of contraceptives altogether (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). This is not the wisest decision considering the Durex Global Sex Survey found that the average age people first have sex is 17.3. If most people do have sex in their teens then shouldn't they also have the knowledge to protect themselves? Dover, in his article on sex education discusses the fact that the trend toward Abstinence programs may be changing. He illustrates that Maine and California rejected funds for Abstinence only education, and that the Senate and House rejected proposals to raise Abstinence funding in 2007 by another 22 million (Stover, Del. 41-48). Government funding of sex education programs should not be biased. There should be money available for alls forms of sex education.

Unlike Abstinence advocates, the supporters of Comprehensive Sex Education argue that by high school about half of students surveyed say they have had sexual intercourse (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). These supporters also state that Abstinence only education does not give teens the knowledge they need to protect themselves if they do choose to have sex (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). For example, Comprehensive advocates illustrate that the drop in pregnancy rates in the 90’s is not due to abstinence only education, but due to the drop in pregnancy rates in women who were having sex (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). This is most likely a result of the knowledge that these women have gained about how best to protect themselves. Douglas Kirby, a Ph. D. from ETR associates, in doing a study on sex education, found that one of the most important components of an effective sex education program is the incorporation of both an emphasis on the benefits of abstinence and the use of condoms if teens choose to have sex (Kirby, Douglas. Ph.D. 1-19). In addition, Kirby states that Comprehensive programs can actually delay the initiation of sex in teens (Kirby, Douglas. Ph.D. 1-19). This would contradict the arguments of Abstinence Only advocates who say that Comprehensive education encourages sex. Kirby also points out other surveys that demonstrate that comprehensive education also increases condom or other contraceptive use, therefore promoting safer sex.

Comprehensive sex education caters not only to the needs of heterosexual sex education but also to sex education in all forms, including homosexual sex education for those who choose to learn about it. Research illustrates that there is a great need for homosexual education today. According to Chris Collins, sexually active homosexual men are at a higher risk of having multiple partners than their heterosexual counterparts. Homosexual men are also more likely to have sex against their will and are at increased risk of harassment and violence (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). They suffer from increased rates of suicide and are more likely to have been abandoned by their families, affording less access to health care (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). All of these risk factors make them prime candidates for the spread of STI's.

Not providing adequate sex education for young people that do not fit the traditional norms of society exposes them to significant health risks. Most sex education programs stick to the "structures of traditional married life" (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). Yet studies show that sex education specifically targeted at these high-risk groups can actually help to promote the use of condoms (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). All people have the right to knowledge and to deny that right on the basis of sexual orientation is immoral. Some would argue that spreading knowledge of homosexuality would encourage it in other youths. On the other hand this could make it less stigmatized and would decrease the danger for those who are homosexual. Whether it does or not has not been sufficiently studied, but the benefits of sex education on those that are homosexual has been illustrated in several studies (Collins, Chris M.P.P. Alagiri, Priya J.D. Summers Todd. 1-21). It is essential that homosexual education is included in the curriculum of sex education in school. For those that are uncomfortable with the idea there should be an option to opt out, but this is no reason to deny it to those who need it.

Those who support Comprehensive education argue that there is very little evidence that Abstinence only education is effective, whereas there is a lot of information and research illustrating that Comprehensive sex education is effective, especially among those in high risk groups (Stover, Del. 41-48). Yet despite the research the President and his advocates currently support the idea that Abstinence only Education is the best way to protect US youth (Stover, Del. 41-48). The most important data behind Comprehensive sex education are the statistics that show that teens are having sex, despite the wishes of the religious right. For example, a study from the late 70's shows that with or without sex education 50% of teens have sex by the age of 19 (Zelnik, Melvin and Kim, Young J. 117-126). Not all teens have the same beliefs or morals about sexual behavior. Some believe that sex done safely and responsibly is not as harmful or dangerous as it is made out to be. Comprehensive education allows for protection of teens no matter their moral or religious beliefs.

The spread of STI’s is a particularly strong argument for comprehensive sex education. Knowledge of all diseases that can be spread through sex is important but, because of its negative effects and simple cure, education about Chlamydia is especially important. Chlamydia is one of the most prevalent STI's among sexually active people today. A study done by the American College of Physicians found that 2.2% of people between the age of 14 and 39 have Chlamydia (Datta SD, Sternberg M, Johnson RE, et al. 89-97). This means that 2 million Americans are infected with Chlamydia in the United States today (Datta SD, Sternberg M, Johnson RE, et al. 89-97). Chlamydia is a caused by a bacterium called Chlamydia trachomatis (Chlamydia infection. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). It can cause blindness if it infects the eye (Chlamydia infection. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), and can be transmitted from mother to child during birth (CDC Fact Sheet Chlamydia). Chlamydia is an asymptomatic infection for 50-70% of females who acquire it (Chlamydia infection. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Its lack of symptoms makes it more of a health problem because it can be easily transmitted from person to person if they are unaware that they are infected. This is why comprehensive education and knowledge about STI's is an extremely important part of sex education. If Chlamydia is allowed to progress it can cause pelvic inflammatory disease in about half the women that it infects (Chlamydia infection. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). PID can subsequently lead to infertility or eptopic pregnancies (Chlamydia infection. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Chlamydia is completely curable with antibiotics (CDC Fact Sheet Chlamydia). A single dose of Azithromycin or a weeks worth of Doxycycline kills the bacterium (CDC Fact Sheet Chlamydia). Such an easily cured STI should not be such a health problem, yet it is because a large portion of the population is ignorant of how it is spread or that they should be tested for it. Studies have also shown that the prevalence of Chlamydia differs across racial lines Datta SD, Sternberg M, Johnson RE, et al. 89-97). This again illustrates that those who do not have sufficient access to health care or education that would inform them that they should get screened for STI's such as Chlamydia, are at higher risk. Knowledge is our best defense against STI's and teen pregnancy, this includes knowledge of both the option to remain abstinent and the methods of protection if one chooses to have sex. Awareness is the key weapon that will help prevent this disease from spreading.

Sex education is extremely important for the health of today's youth, and it will continue to be so for generations to come. Both Abstinence and Comprehensive education attempt to protect teens in the United States from STI's such as Chlamydia. Yet teens have the right to all the information available about sex because they most likely will have sex, sooner or later. There may always be controversy about how sex education should be taught, but it is no controversy that teens are having sex, and so should be armed with both the knowledge of the benefits of abstinence and the options they have to protect themselves when they do choose to have sex. Teens should not be denied knowledge, because with it they can make up their own minds about the moral choices they will make, and will be capable of being sexually responsible for the rest of their lives.