 "Photo: Andrew Long")
 "Photo:")
Walking downtown, right hand outstretched, I hold a condom in the palm of my hand.
"Come to me," I hope to convey to the men I pass by in my miniskirt.
I'm not lonely or particularly desperate, but the Student Health Center gives out condoms for free. What else am I supposed to do?
All things reminiscent of sex make me want to do it: condoms, birth control pills and most commercial advertising. Getting it for free makes it that much sweeter.
Needless to say, I'm a busy girl.
Wait, no I'm not.
Condom-laden as I may be, I've never felt the urge to go out and find a sexual partner simply because I've got the goods. Birth control, free or otherwise, doesn't encourage people to have sex. It's simply an alternative to unsafe sex.
The federal government spends $176 million dollars per year on abstinence-only sex education programs, The Washington Post reported.
Although California was the first of 16 states to ultimately refuse the extra financial support, it doesn't mean those programs don't exist in California school districts - including ones in Butte County.
Among seven of the 10 public school districts that have a district-wide policy to teach sex education, 35 percent have an abstinence-only policy, according to a 1999 study of policy analysis and public education by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on sexual and reproductive health research. This study was conducted before funding for these programs was more than doubled by the Bush administration.
At the time, only 14 percent of districts had a comprehensive policy that addressed abstinence as one option in a broader educational program to prepare adolescents to become sexually healthy adults.
Cory Richards, vice president for public policy with the institute, said teaching abstinence as the only option outside of marriage is "unrealistic" and programs where contraception cannot be discussed - or may only be discussed to point out its faults "is very troubling, particularly given the lack of evidence that this approach is effective in postponing teenagers' sexual involvement."
The Center for Disease Control in 2006 reported teen pregnancy was up 3 percent, the first increase in 14 years.
According to an annual report by the CDC, the numbers of reported chlamydia cases have increased to a record of almost 1,031,000 - all in 2007. So, not only are people not abstaining, but they're also not protecting themselves.
To tell young adults who are already having sex not to have sex is not only counter-intuitive, it's ignorance at its finest. Furthermore, to push on them an idealized moral agenda and not inform them about safe contraceptive use makes it blatantly irresponsible.
A 2007 article published by the Culture and Media Institute argued the media overlooks the fiscal facts associated with abstinence-only education.
"Abstinence-only education programs receive one-tenth of the funding of 'comprehensive sex-education programs,' the kind favored by Planned Parenthood," according to the Culture and Media Institute.
Here's a guess as to why: It's cheaper to require teachers to hock feigned morality at students than provide them with the necessary information and tools to have safe sex if they so choose.
Further, the costs for not educating students properly make up for the lack of funding. The nonprofit American Social Health Association reported the direct medical costs associated with treating sexually transmitted infections are more than $8.4 billion a year. Although it is estimated more than half of all people will have an STI at some point in their lifetime, the overall objective is keeping the numbers at bay.
Teen childbearing in the United States costs taxpayers at least $9.1 billion a year, according to a report published by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
Abstinence is a guaranteed way to keep STI and teen pregnancy numbers low, but education plays an important supporting role.
As for condoms promoting sex, while there may be a few creepers out there who use complementary condoms as the incentive to get laid, I doubt they're a majority. There's no contest at Planned Parenthood for how many you can go through. Although that might be a good PR stunt.
Megan Wilson can be reached at mwilson@theorion.com
Be the first to comment on this article!