Bible Style: The Required Sexual Position for Abstinence Ed
When is sex ed really Bible study? Only a few years ago, certain federally funded abstinence-only courses were discovered to have, in their curriculum materials, bible quotes requiring girls to be subservient to their husbands. Even without the quotes, federally funded abstinence-only courses are still telling all students that the only way to express one’s sexuality is to remain abstinent until they marry someone of another gender. Regardless of your individual feelings about this teaching, it is a theological requirement, not the factual basis of a health class or sex education.
Sure, comprehensive sex ed will always include the positive aspects of abstinence–it is the only foolproof way to avoid unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases—but including that along with other factual information is a lot different than preaching abstinence-until-marriage as the only way to deal with one’s sexuality. And it certainly does nothing for the approximately 10% of students who are likely to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender except make them even more invisible and discounted than they already are in our society.
It’s not that sex isn’t always on my mind, but this has been an especially “hot” subject in Congress this particular week, as the House Appropriations Committee gets set to vote on how much money to throw at these abstinence-only programs.








Here is a recent article from CNN.com concerning the county’s 17th US surgeon general and how he was kept on a tight leash under the Bush administration over such issues as ‘abstinence education’.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/10/surgeon.general.ap/index.html
The Surgeon General verified what we’ve been watching happen for half a dozen years. Science is irrelevant in the face of theologically driven ideological goals of this president.