Is abstinence-only education really a good thing?
912555
no.  it is a laughable idea--don't teach them how to be careful, just tell them not to do it, and pretend that they will listen.  we all know teenagers have sex.  not all of them, but enough of them to warrant an actual sex education program.  teaching abstinence is no more sex ed than saying "just don't drive" constitutes driver's ed.  it's ridiculous and dangerous.  it is also completely out of touch, not to mention out of line.  schools are supposed to be teaching facts, not pushing morals.  it is up to the family to discuss when and if a teenager should have sex, not the school.  they should either teach safe practices and tell about the consequences of unsafe practices, or they should just drop the sex ed altogether.  pushing abstinence is puritanical and, to me at least, toes the line on teaching religious ideals in public schools.
283543
Thanks to our president our country has an abstinence only policy.  This means that any organization that wants to help Africa and recieve money from the government cannot offer or teach about condoms.  It is a result of having your beloved country run by a bunch of super conservative religous fanatics.
475835
It is not harmful. No way to avoid it other than being sexually active in some ways. The good news is that when you get a little older they stop or slow down.
726914
Naturally. Not that any major religion is asking for everyone to be celibate. They'll talk of abstinence before marriage, perhaps, but they allow marriage, and of course they're OK with married folks tossing sexual abstinency out the window. At any rate, you'll hear Catholics, among others, argue that the more secular an industrialized society gets, the lower the birth rate goes. Many leaders of the faithful want higher birth rates ... so you'll have trouble linking faith and universal celibacy.
801084
I think it is great for responsible people. I have had to take it twice - both times the condom broke. I can't take the birth control pill because it makes me throw up - so we rely totally on condoms. I was really glad that the morning after pill was available to me and it relieved some of the panic. At the time I was glad that a doctors visit is not required, because it was on a Sunday both times and there are no doctors open. And the effectiveness of the pill diminishes more the longer you wait after sex, so it kinda defeats the purpose to wait til the next day.  On the other hand, I can see it being used irresponsibly by some people who may decide to use it as a form of regular contraception rather than something to use in an emergency. Particularly young girls who haven't been educated in this kind of thing. On the whole, I am definitely pleased it's there for those horrible times when something goes wrong with the condom.
81800
No, I think to many people spend too much time tending other peoples business rather than tending their own.! \n Schools are suppose to be to teach a child math, to read, and write. Children's literacy has nothing to do with sex education. As for the school to sex educate a child, it should be against the law.!  People who think it's 'good', should look at the statistics.(since sex education started over 30 years ago), how many sex educated teens have gotten pregnant and/or became infected with diease and how many lives were lost. Then tell me it's helping. I think it teaches children sex is okay. And it's costing children's lives and well being. Just as people want to keep religion out of school because it's a personal chose, sex ed should also RETURN to being a parents, no matter if it's when someone else thinks it's the right time or not.! I think if they want to advise a child on it, first give birth to it. Or mind their own business.
1086197
Children at the upper primary school level should be taught. But there is a difference between sex education and sexuality education. Also, it depends on the values that the society wants to advocate. Abstinence? Or Safe Sex?
130288
Sort of.\n\nCondoms are usually effective.  They're safer than using nothing at all.  Sometimes they split, in which case there's a chance of pregnancy.\n\nCondoms also reduce the risk of SOME sexually-transmitted diseases.
289952
Not to sure of your question, but I can tell you that everyone on the real Jeopardy is smart enough to know that pushing abstinence only programs is a recipe for absolute disaster.  They have worse rates then doing nothing at all.\n\nSo you might want to include 2 more categories: reality and odds
417267
Nope. It's been proven that a good amount of sex is good for you. It keeps you fit and also releases endorphins in your body which make you happy :)
576512
Christian based churches don't believe in birth control of any kind.  So when they are over in these countries they could be teaching people about birth control so they won't keep have so many kids they can't take care of them.  Also they could teach people about diseases and how condoms can save lives especially in countries like Africa.  They are to worried about people sinning from God.  Go figure...It's ok that you can't afford to feed you kids and they are dying from starvation but you can't pop a pill in your mouth every day.  It ok that we give you no condoms because it will keep you from having sex.  I don't know how anyone can be so stupid. I believe they need a REALITY CHECK!
1088130
A combination of Abstinence and Safe sex. We can't  simply rely on schools to teach our kids  about sex...my parents avoided the issue and just assumed I would learn from school...I actually found out what really went on from accidently turning on a porn that was left in my VCR...so I think i woulda rather had my parents talk to me about it.
160351
I guess Yahoo Answers has asterisked-out your word, but if you're asking about m-a-s-t-u-r-bation, no, it is not harmful. In fact, it is beneficial because by so doing, you learn about your own sexuality, and when you are ready for a sexual relationship with another person, you will be in a better position. Good luck, and have fun with yourself! ;)
541783
nope.  i use to think that after a certain age it was unhealthy and unnatural.  then i thought about people with no libido and self imposed celibacy.  these people are vital, functioning and just as sane/insane as the rest of the world.  sex isn't everything to everybody.
208987
Im fairly old fashioned....but I believe the schools have no reason to teach children about sex.  I believe sex education should be between a man and his wife.
126632
abstinence only pertains to sex kissing is totally different if you know and respect boundaries that will lead to sex
70013
A true Christian would say that no one can judge you but God.  I think abstinence is fine if that's what you choose.  No one should have sex if they don't think it's right for them, whether its religious reasons or not.  But if sex is what you want and you find someone who feels the same about you, it is a beautiful thing.