CreateDebate


Debate Info

5
0
Agree Disagree
Debate Score:5
Arguments:4
Total Votes:5
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Agree (4)

Debate Creator

dwayne(5) pic



In regards to the government issuing condom in Secondary High School.

On my view im in total disagree. Cause the government is telling them it is o.k to have sex.

 

Agree

Side Score: 5
VS.

Disagree

Side Score: 0
2 points

High school students have sex, and will do so whether or not safer sex products are provided. It makes sense to provide protection that may otherwise not be available by nature of the demographic group.

I have not seen any evidence indicating that providing condoms increases sexual activity amongst high school students; if OP has and would care to share please do, otherwise take your uniformed opinions and walk them to a library.

Side: Agree

Agreed. Safety should come first over religious or political morality.

Side: Agree
1 point

My rigid conservative center says to jump on the other side, but personal experience says 'no.' Going to your local grocery store and buying condoms can be pretty nerve-racking for a young man or woman... especially in small towns like 90% of the country where everyone knows everyone. That being said, recognize the cons.

At the end of the day, the school will have the appearance of endorsing sexual activity of their students... and a lot of that activity is illegal with statutory rape laws. Parents do have some shred of control what comes into their home, if they are opposed to sexual activity having free condoms at school undermines them. Just because you are handing out condoms does not mean they will get used, or used properly, or used every time.

So while you would LIKE to think handing out condoms would simply reduce STDs and pregnancy, it is possible to just spawn more sexual activity. Free condoms can give the illusion of consequence free sexual activity, increasing peer pressure, while never giving a guarantee of proper usage.

At the end of the day though, the number of people who would use protection would be bigger than the number of people who would be convinced to have sex. The soul of the kids is a little more tarnished, but the stats will look better.

Side: Agree

I'm going to generally agree with it.

Teenagers have sex. In males, the sex drive is typically never higher than it is during the late teenage years; the availability of condoms is not likely to have any measurable impact in and of itself on the number of teenage males pursuing sex.

I'll acknowledge that the availability of condoms is likely to encourage some more sexual activity- it does help alleviate one of the fears that might prevent such indulgence- but I don't believe that the actual increase is significant; we're talking about one of the most basic and strongest primal instincts, and a demographic that does not get enough time to adjust to any given hormonal state before it all gets mixed up again.

The benefits of this are by no means limited to high school, either. An important factor being left out is ongoing safe practices beyond just high school. As I'm sure many males here can testify, after having sex without a condom, sex with a condom loses a LOT of its enjoyability and appeal. As I understand it, there is a similar affect on women, though not as pronounced as it seems to be in men. If kids start having sex without condoms, getting them to use condoms in the future becomes all the more difficult. On the other hand, if kids start out using condoms, the tendency is generally to be perfectly happy with using condoms.

Condoms are ~98% effective in preventing pregnancy when used correctly. This is not per-coitus effectiveness, this is annual effectiveness; the 98% effectiveness rating means that for every 100 couples using condoms correctly, 2 can be expected to get pregnant in any given year. By comparison, the pull-out method, when executed flawlessly, is 96% effective; 4/100 couples can be expected to get pregnant in any given year using this method exclusively- but using this method flawlessly requires experience and self-control, two things that are somewhat lacking in teenagers. When the pull-out method is intended, but not always executed correctly due to inexperience or lack of control, the efficiency drops to 73%; 27/100 couples can be expected to get pregnant in any given year using the pull-out method imperfectly. (source)

The effectiveness of condoms in preventing STDs is less concrete, and varies depending on the STD and the type of sex; in heterosexual vaginal sex, a woman is roughly five times more likely to contract an STD from an infected partner than a man is. In anal sex (heterosexual or homosexual), the risk for both increases further, though again the 'receptive' partner is at a significantly higher risk; microtears occur more frequently in anal sex than in vaginal sex, and condoms are more likely to break as well. Even so, barring something to the effect of an active herpes outbreak, condoms represent a significant risk reduction for contracting an STD.

The (source) I have is from the UK, not from the US or worldwide, but should still be somewhat usable here; the average man from that study has 9 sexual partners in his lifetime, whereas the average woman has 4 sexual partners in her lifetime; we'll call it an overall average of 6. Using condoms not only reduces the risk of getting an STD for the individual, but an individual who does not have any STDs does not have any risk of transmitting them to his or her other 5 partners. Not using condoms significantly increases the chance of any given individual contracting an STD, and potentially exposes those other 5 partners to STDs as well.

I don't believe that the conservative idea of abstinence is realistic, even amongst the faithful- several of my partners prior to my marriage were girls who went to Catholic school and attended church regularly- one was a pastors daughter, even, and she had a decided preference for going unprotected as well that would likely never have formed in the first place if proper education and condoms were made available in her late adolescent/teenage years.

Side: Agree
No arguments found. Add one!