Should The United States Increase Funding for Sexual Health Among Teens

This round is to be conducted similar to a policy debate round being: Round 1 Serves as the affirmative basically stating the resolution and case, while the neg serves to clarify any unclear or uncertain areas of explanation. Round 2: Affirmative answers questions, neg attacks case Round 3: both attack etc Round 4: Conclusion, why Aff or Neg should be winner *I reserve the right to Fiat and any counter plans must include documentation. The number of pregnancies has increased sharply over the last decade. Now whether the United States decides to step up to the plate and actually prevent these pregnancies, or tries to once again to implement the old outgrown conservative stance of abstinence. Which brings me to the question, RESOLVED: The United States Should Increase Funding for the Promotion of Sexual Health Among Teens Now by sexual health, I am specifically addressing the passing out of condoms in public schools, but if another issue is to arise, I will gladly refute. So onto contention 1, Harms Harm 1: TEENS ARE HAVING SEX, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT. No matter what you say or do, you will not prevent this action. Though not all teens are having sex, there always will be some that do. So, given this fact one must decide either to accept it and prevent the further harms, or to ignore it and hope it will get better. Harm 2: Teens are being fed the wrong information about sex. Pornography, the internet, and television all send messages to teens about sex. Some good, most bad. TV shows where lovers explicitly chase after one another, no condom, make sex seem like the most simple of casualties. Pornography, showing sex as nothing but merely but a toy often show partners without condoms having intercourse or oral sex which ultimately leads to STDS. So with the given fact that kids are going to watch tv, they are going to get on the internet, and some(illegally of course) will look at porn, and with the messages that they are potentially sending to kids, the least we could do is increase sexual awareness such as by handing out condoms, and demonstrating the correct technique, etc. Harm 2: Teen pregnancies are on the rise. According to the NewYork Times on January 26, 2010 "After more than a decade of declining teenage pregnancy, the pregnancy rate among girls ages 15 to 19 increased 3 percent from 2005 to 2006 — a turnaround likely to intensify the debate over federal financing for abstinence-only sex education." http://www.nytimes.com... So as we have seen the pregnancies are for a fact on the rise for teenagers which all in all can create a turn in lifestyle such as dropping out of school. Harm 3: Conservative views are outdated in modern day. Though as much as the public may not want to accept it, the views of conservatism, abstinence until marriage, etc are outdated in this new modernized world. With technologies such as the internet and television continually improving, and with our right to free speech, ideas are free to flow, good or bad. And the idea of promiscuity before marriage has spread like wildfire. Which brings me to my plan: The United States Should Increase Funding for the Promotion of Sexual Health Among Teens Funding: The money that originally used to promote abstinence only can be reversed to be used to promote condom usage, condom handouts, and demos of proper condom usage. Contention2: Advantages Advantage 1: By demonstrating the proper methods for sexual behavior, the number of teen pregnancies will ultimately decrease due to the information given in schools. Also for those that are afraid to go to the stores to buy condoms for reasons such as transportation, embarrassment, etc, there will be a safe way for these teens to get condoms thus preventing pregnancy. I look forward to hearing my opponents views.