NationStates

Schools should provide free condoms. The reason is simple, teenagers are going to have sex, at least this way we can help insure that they are having safe sex.

Most teenagers are too embarrassed to walk in and buy condoms at the store, but that does not mean that they are going to stop having sex; it simply means that they are going to have unprotected sex and risk std's and pregnancy. Sure, we can argue that if these kids are old enough to be having sex, then they are old enough to accept the responsibility that they have to get their own condom, if they want one.



While there is a grain of truth to this statement (teenagers should be more responsible) the fact remains that it is a false line of reasoning. Teenagers are irresponsible (for the most part). They are stuck in that stage of adolescence where the hormones are raging so fast that they override most (if not all) rational thought, and if schools were to give out condoms then they would be condoning good behavior (although I don't think that teens having sex is good behavior).

Yes.

Yes. A condom doesn't make you have sex, you would do that anyway.

Yes.

They should also teach when apostrophes are appropriate and when they aren't.

Yes.

The Emperor Protects.

Yes they certainly should.

No, they should be discouraging sexual behavior in students.

Alaje wrote:No, they should be discouraging sexual behavior in students.

There are any number of pictures and videos on the Internet that could do that.

The moral right won't let us use those either.

Alaje wrote:No, they should be discouraging sexual behavior in students.

kids fucking and getting pregnant because they have no sex ed or access to safe sex [ ]
kids fucking and not getting pregnant because they have sex ed and easy access to safe sex [ ]

mark with an X

choose one (1) option

Since it's taxpayer money the taxpayers should vote on it.
*You're also overlooking the economic-right argument as well

Alaje wrote:No, they should be discouraging sexual behavior in students.

The two aren't mutually exclusive

Necrophilopolis wrote:Since it's taxpayer money the taxpayers should vote on it.
*You're also overlooking the economic-right argument as well

That's not how most democracies work thankfully.

Souseiseki wrote:

Alaje wrote:No, they should be discouraging sexual behavior in students.

kids fucking and getting pregnant because they have no sex ed or access to safe sex [ ]
kids fucking and not getting pregnant because they have sex ed and easy access to safe sex [ X ]

mark with an X

choose one (1) option

I don't support encouraging students to have sex, and that is exactly what putting condoms in the schools would do. If they want condoms, they should buy them at a store.

Animals manage to discover sex just fine without being told about it.
Humans do too. Telling them about it and giving them tools to make it safer seems like common sense.
Not to mention, whats bad about people having protected sex?
Why is having protected sex something worrying for people

I'd say yes.

The Emerald Dawn wrote:Yes.

The Emperor Protects.

Battle-Brother!

I am against it for a whole different reason, but for you those arguing about the morality of it, I give you this analogy:
Education is distributed in schools and that can be a whole lot more dangerous than condoms. Letting students have access to learn and interact with other students is the same logic as giving them condoms; "You're going to experience life, you're going to have the desire to screw, better for you to be prepared, better for you to be prepared"

Yes, ffs.

High school students are underage and can not have sex legally. Providing condoms to people who are under the age of consent would be contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

Alaje wrote:

Souseiseki wrote:kids fucking and getting pregnant because they have no sex ed or access to safe sex [ ]
kids fucking and not getting pregnant because they have sex ed and easy access to safe sex [ X ]

mark with an X

choose one (1) option

I don't support encouraging students to have sex, and that is exactly what putting condoms in the schools would do. If they want condoms, they should buy them at a store.

and what if they are to embarased to? if they have easy acsess from people they know and trust then it would save everyone alot of hassle and regret

Necrophilopolis wrote:Since it's taxpayer money the taxpayers should vote on it.
*You're also overlooking the economic-right argument as well

If taxpayers voted on every single use of their money, all their money would go into referenda and the government would have nothing left over to actually accomplish anything.

In regards to the original question, yes. In fact, my old high school did hand out free condoms courtesy of a local safe-sex group.

Raeyh wrote:High school students are underage and can not have sex legally. Providing condoms to people who are under the age of consent would be contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

16 is the age of consent here.
And there are R+J laws allowing consent between people under the age of consent provided there isn't much difference between the ages. (Same in a lot of US states.)

I agree with this topic.BUT distribute condoms to the students ABOVE 18 YEARS OLD.....

Alaje wrote:

Souseiseki wrote:kids fucking and getting pregnant because they have no sex ed or access to safe sex [ ]
kids fucking and not getting pregnant because they have sex ed and easy access to safe sex [ X ]

mark with an X

choose one (1) option

I don't support encouraging students to have sex, and that is exactly what putting condoms in the schools would do. If they want condoms, they should buy them at a store.

Hi, this claim is demonstrably wrong. You should stop making it.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the impact of the condom availability program in New York City public high schools by comparing rates of sexual activity and condom use for New York students and similar students in Chicago. METHODS: A total of 7119 students from 12 randomly selected New York schools and 5738 students from 10 Chicago schools participated in a cross-sectional survey. RESULTS: New York students, compared with Chicago students, reported equal rates of sexual activity but higher rates of condom use at last intercourse (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36). For higher-risk students (those with three or more sexual partners in the past 6 months), condom use was greater in New York (OR = 1.85) than in Chicago. CONCLUSIONS: Condom availability has a modest but significant effect on condom use and does not increase rates of sexual activity. These findings suggest that school-based condom availability can lower the risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases for urban teenagers in the United States.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1380965/


In short, teenagers fuck regardless, offering condoms increases condom usage, not sexual activity. Feel free to stop making your erroneous claim.

WOW BOY!! Cant find a better thing to spend tax payers money on.If you are ready for sexy yet not mature enough to buy a condom you are not ready for sex.Also most of them dont even use it cause they are 'cool' also its none of the schools buisness if some teenagers get pregnant,if they did not want to they wouldnt have sex simply as that