Sex education that is comprehensive?

The sponsors of abstinence only sex education are about to leave the building and no one in that industry has done enough research to tell if it is effective. That leaves the floor open for proponents of comprehensive sex ed. But, as Laura Beil of Newsweek discovered when getting to know both sides of the issue, comprehensive sex ed. leaves out important parts -- and it isn't only the bit about abstinence. The success of comprehensive programs is measured in "pregnancies prevented, germs not contracted, and kids who enter adulthood with a healthy view of sexuality" (though I wonder how that last one gets measured). The wait-until-marriage message is usually seen as not a part of the world teens inhabit. But a big component of the abstinence message is marriage. They see marriage as a way to protect children and reduce poverty -- unmarried teens find it difficult to rise above poverty and children generally do fare better in two-parent homes. Perhaps we can work to make comprehensive sex ed truly comprehensive.

Contrast with…

Why don't we join the fundies in their defense of marriage and use that as a reason to extend marriage to gays? Um, no. Because our society shouldn't be restricted to their definition of marriage: male breadwinner, female homemaker (and slave), and two children taught to do the same when they grow up. They are so sure this is the only possible configuration for a family they blame all society's ills (including the current economic collapse!) on the breakup of the family. If we play that game we are distracted from finding real solutions to national problems.