Emoni Jenkins Mrs.

Megan Keaton English 112 March 28, 2013

Mohney, Gillian. "Chicago Passes Sex-Ed for Kindergartners." ABC News. ABC News Network, 28 Feb. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2013. The main point of this article is the introduction of sex education in younger students. Typically sex education begins in the fifth grade, when a child is around 10 years old. Beginning next year, Chicago will have the first school system that is teaching sex education to kindergarten aged students. They will also be the first district to teach about gender identity and sexual orientation which has a lot to do with the changing attitudes in our country surrounding gay rights. The sex education program in Chicago may be foreshadowing how students all over America will be taught in the years to come. The author of this article makes a very one sided argument. While her information is factual and clear, she does not address things from the other side of the argument. She speaks nothing about how teaching kids about sex at such a young age could affect them, she does not bring in the point of view of someone that opposes teaching such young children about sex, she only speaks about the one side of it and while her argument is solid, it would be much stronger if her argument could hold up against opposition.

This source will work well with my argument that sex education should begin early in a childs life. I do agree with the argument, though as I previously mentioned, her argument would have been more solid if she would have tested her point against opponents. The new policy, which the Chicago Board of Education passed Wednesday, mandates that a set amount of time be spent on sex education in every grade, beginning in kindergarten. It is important that we provide students of all ages with accurate and appropriate information so they can make healthy choices in regards to their social interactions, behaviors and relationships, we will be helping them to build a foundation of knowledge that can guide them not just in the preadolescent and adolescent years, but throughout their lives."

State Policies on Sex Education in Schools." State Policies on Sex Education in Schools. Guttmacher Institute, 26 Mar. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2013. This article is very informative. It states very simply that sex education in schools is important because teens are becoming sexually active earlier and earlier and without proper information teens are going to continue to become pregnant and contract diseases. The article states that 30 percent of women report having a baby before their 20th birthday. The article also goes into the fact that as of February 2013 there is sex education legislator for all 50 states, and though some states rule are clearer than others, they all have to teach medically sound sex education.

This author did not make much of an argument, rather he stated facts and statistics as plainly as he could. There is not much to disagree on. He states that there is a problem, and that sex education in schools could help fix it. He does mention, when going through each states individual sex education laws, that some states push abstinence, but he believes in education over ignorance. I can use this information to compare the effectiveness of abstinence vs education. I would find out if the state was pushing abstinence or education by rereading this source, and then I would research the teen pregnancy and STD rates and compare them state by state to see if there is a correlation between the method of sex education and the teens affected by STDs and pregnancy. A 2011 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) survey indicates that more than 47 percent of all high school students say they have had sex; and 15 percent of high school students have had sex with four or more partners during their lifetime. 60 percent reported condom use and 23 percent reported birth control pill use during their last sexual encounter. The United States still has the highest teen birth rate in the industrialized world. Three in 10 girls in will be pregnant at least once before their 20th birthday.

Koebler, Jason. "Abstinence-Only Education Debate Resurfaces." US News. [Link] & World Report, 28 Dec. 2011. Web. 28 Mar. 2013. This article was about spending on abstinence only sex education in schools. The popular thought is that it doesnt work. Teens who took traditional sex education classes became sexually active at about the same time that teens who took sex education classes that focused on safe sex. The president is spending massive amounts of money on abstinence only sex education programs and people are beginning to realize telling teens not to have sex isnt going to stop them. I agree with the authors argument. He makes a very good point that teens are having sex. The methodology behind the manner that we educate teens about sex does not seem to be having any visible effect on when they are having sex. I also agree with the author when he says that we shout not be spending all of this money (that we dont have) on programs that are no longer affective. I am going to use this article when I write about the down side to abstinence only sex education. I never considered the monetary downside to funding a dying program and it is even more evidence that abstinence only sex education is not beneficial. This article also states plainly and clearly that teens are having sex regardless of how they were educated about sex. Many reports have found that abstinence education programs don't measurably impact teens. A 2007 Congressionally-mandated report found that, on average, students who participated in abstinence-only education had sex at the same age as students who had

comprehensive sex education. They also had similar rates of pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, and used birth control at similar rates as students who had comprehensive sex education. Between 1996 and 2009, more than $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars were spent funding abstinence education. "Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs promote ignorance in the era of HIV and AIDS"

"Social Issues." Cause for Concern (Abstinence Ed). Ed. Focus on the Family Anaylist. Focus on the Family, 2008. Web. 04 Apr. 2013 The main point of this article was that public schools are corrupting students by not teaching them that abstinence is the best thing to do before marriage. The article goes on to say that it is also the healthier thing to do. They compare public school sex education to telling kids to drink, but not get drunk. They believe its more of a risk prevention theory that is used in public schools and they do not believe that is the best method of teaching teens I firmly disagree with the authors article. I think that it is unrealistic to expect teens to not have sex just because the adults in their lives tell them not to. I also believe that it is smart to give teens an alternative that is not all or nothing. I am going to use this article when I speak about opponents of comprehensive sex education. I am going to use the examples provided in this piece to show the thought process of adults that are conservative and abstinence only proponents.

If we are to keep teens and young adults healthy physically, emotionally and spiritually, we need to assist far more than 11 percent of youth to remain abstinent until marriage. Focus on the Family does not support sexual activity outside of marriage because this practice does not support God's design for sexuality. Eliminating or avoiding the risks of out-of-wedlock sexual behaviors is the highest standard, and God does not stand for simply avoiding some of the risks

Hastings, Don R. "Should Sex Education Be Taught In Our Elementary Schools?." Conservative Christian Bible Study Materials. Truth Magazine, n.d. Web. 02 May 2013 This article was about how teaching teens about sex at an early age could have long term negative effects and how we should be trying to keep the exposure to such things under control. The article also speaks about the fact that if you teach kids about sex too early in life that they will want to go out and do it. I completely disagree with the authors article. I think that the notion that teaching kids about sex will make them go do it is comparable with the notion that teaching kids about drugs will make them junkies. The article is very one sided and the author really does believe what hes saying is valid. I am going to use this as part of my opponents argument. I am going to use the points listed in this article to enhance my own points.

Knowledge does not restrain teenagers, and those younger, from engaging in sexual activity. Many naive parents and educators think that if girls and boys are taught how pregnancy occurs that this will keep them from engaging in the act that produces pregnancy. Baloney! If my fifth grade son comes home and describes perfectly and accurately the human reproduction process, I will not be proud of his knowledge. I would greatly fear what that knowledge, at that age, would do to him emotionally, morally and spiritually! A teacher can lecture on the function of the heart to a group of boys and girls and no one is embarrassed, there is no snickering, and no lustful emotions are aroused. Such is not true when the teacher lectures on the reproductive system.