February 15th 2018 archive

Sex-Education: Post #2

With the intention of seeking and reading two different perspectives with regards to sex-education in public schools, I wanted to be able to strengthen my ability to put myself in the shoes of others. At the deliberation, community members will be present, but their presence does not simply mean that they will agree with everything our team presents for discussion. In order for a discussion to have value and to be productive and effective, it’s necessary to welcome a variety of ideas and consider ones that stray from the norm.

With that said, in Beyond the birds and bees: Where’s the sex ed in Pennsylvania schools? the author, Margarita Cambest, presented an angle that supports the integration of a more comprehensive sex-education program. According to the Planned Parenthood Keystone president, Melissa Reed, who Cambest interviewed for the article, the women’s health organization supported a bill that would have required comprehensive sexual health education be taught in all of Pennsylvania’s 500 school districts, but the Senate bill failed in committee.”

However, an article posted by the American Life League offered a drastically different opinion about the role of sex-education in public school. According to the American Life League, “a school is not the place for sex education. Proper sex education for a child is dependent on the actual mental maturity of the child. Sex education programs can often times lead to the deformation of a child’s conscience.”

Despite the difference in viewpoints, both articles discuss a common entity: Planned Parenthood. If community members are divided at the deliberation, I think explicitly stating some factors that join us would help strengthen the trust and quality of the conversation. At the end of the day, we all want all of our children to have the quality education that they deserve. To accomplish this, we have to recognize and appreciate differences and similarities to do what is right for our kids.