Sexual Education Should be Taught in Schools

Thank you again, Miss Elena, for this very interesting choice of topic. I hope that we both are engaged by the material "for" and "against" the proposed topic, as we argue our various positions. The reasons for teaching children about sex at home by parents and kin are simple, intuitive, and fairly straightforward. However, what is simple and straightforward is often difficult to explain in so many terms. So, here goes: 1.) Children need someone they can relate to in explaining what "sex" means or entails. 1a.) Children are mostly close related to and relate to their kin; 1b.) Professionally paid educators who must follow a sexual education curriculum tend not to be kin; 1c.) Therefore, kinfolk are better suited and adapted to explain what "sex" means or entails to a child unless the two categories overlap. This is simple, striking, and compelling. But wait! The objections do and will follow. 1A is difficult to combat, no matter what your ideology. It is true almost by definition unless one is to take an extraordinary position. But proposition #1 itself may lie in dispute. Let's talk about the "elephant" in the room which calls into question point 1. It has to do with "professional education" in case anyone was wondering. The counter-argument has a simplicity of its own. Those who are best suited to deliver sexual education are professionally educated; therefore, children will get the best sexual education from the professionally educated people who know how to teach sexual education and not the parents. OK. That's pretty simple. But is it true, empirically or otherwise? Well, the problem with the counter-argument is that it does not seem to work. Those who are professionally educated do not seem to impart a better or more factual sexual education to their charges than do parents. How can that be? That is so counter-intuitive! Here's why: Professionally educated persons tend to present information about sexual education in a way that is divorced from reality. Their information might be correct, in a technical sense, but divorced or separated from reality, it fails to educate and may actually lead to immorality. That's right. I know that it is difficult to imagine but professionally educated teachers may increase immorality among students in a misguided attempt to educated them about sexual anatomy. Also, we know that home education is overall more effective than public school education. Home education students score higher on standardized tests and receive a more competent education without professional educators. [1] Another reason against public school sexual education is that it violates the separation of church and state. State-based education is taxpayer-funded and cannot contain faith and morality. But when one educator attempts to impart their view of sexuality to students, that is based on their faith and morals. Thus, technically, it is illegal. These three arguments will do for now. Sexual education is best explained by those kinfolk nearest psychologically and morally to the student. Professional educators do not deliver better education, sexually oriented or not, given the statistics. And sexual education funded by taxpayer dollars is illegal and violates the separation of church and state. I look forward to the rebuttal period and the ensuing discussion. [1] "On average, homeschooled students outscore their public (state) school peers by 15 to 30 percentile points (figure 5)." Brian D. Ray, Worldwide Guide to Homeschooling: Facts and Stats on the Benefits of Home School (Nashville, TN.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004) 48.