CreateDebate


Debate Info

104
47
Yes No
Debate Score:151
Arguments:98
Total Votes:176
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (63)
 
 No (35)

Debate Creator

thatguysam32(13) pic



Should condoms be made available in high schools?

Some school disricts across the country are arguing whether or not they should make condoms available to high school level students.

Yes

Side Score: 104
VS.

No

Side Score: 47
6 points

Condoms should be made available to high school students. First of all, if condoms were made available to students, the teen pregnancy rate would dramatically decrease. This in turn would cause both male and female dropout rates to also decrease because students wont have to dropout to take care of their children.

| Side: yes
1 point

Only for free. Otherwise why should I care? And it would help our kids financially.

| Side: yes
3 points

many institutions have drug systems where you can exchange dirty needles for clean needles

perhaps if you could-

no. that would be gross

| Side: yes
5 points

Schools should make condoms available because then more people might actually use them. Some people may be embarrased of buying condoms in a store because they may think that other people know their business, but if they give them out at school they won't have to go to a store. At a school they can make the transition in private; discreetly.

| Side: yes
3 points

I completely (DIS)agree. I think kids should be able to be given condoms in high school because they are going to refuse to go out and buy them themselves. Kids will do stupid thing to keep from getting embarrassed.

| Side: yes

I agree. I mean, after all, who would want to go spend money on somethin if you don't even really need it? I know that I will never think like that, but some kids, such as part of our Drumline, do. If the school gave out condoms for free, at like, one per day max, who's gonna say no? Free condoms? I mean come on. And it'll cut down the teenage pregnancy rate significantly. Love you Blayke and Venom! :-D

| Side: yes
4 points

i'm in middle school and i think they should give them out here i (thnk god) am a vergian but some kids are not and stds and kids it's sad 6th grade and you alredy have aids alright to make it wores 6th grade means 10-12 year olds. condems would at least get rid off some of the risk and taliking about it helps too this week we are acutaly having fam. life and std's were the topic and if they had added pictures i bet every one in that room would have never have sex ever/agian including the teachers!

| Side: yes
2 points

Let students buy them from the school anonymously and at a discounted rate.

| Side: yes
2 points

Teenagers have sex.

Without condoms, poor young teenagers will be “knocked up”. Since, more than half of them do not have an abortion, that that more than half of them end up having a baby and taking care of it.

You may say that that is their problem... but it is not going to be just their problem. Not only do you have a handful of young mothers, we also have a handful of dropouts (not fully educated people)

Not fully educated people are much more expensive than condoms.

Therefore, condoms should be made available in high schools if money is the only issue here.

| Side: yes
2 points

If condoms were made available in high schools then students would be more likely to use them because students are likely to get them because they are more comfortable in a school environment with familiar faces (school nurse, teachers, etc) rather than the neighborhood drugstore or the clinic.

| Side: Yes
1 point

Condoms should be readily available, if things are going to happen then they are going to happen. We were all young. Now we can be blind and forget our own pasts and blind ourselves of the future. That way everyone loses. We can still discourage sexual contact, yet we should provide protection..........you still lock your door even if you haven't been burgled before.

| Side: yes
1 point

yes they could be available in high school because there might be less females that become prego.

| Side: yes

That is exactly my point of view! I agree with this completely.

| Side: yes
1 point

When I was at college condoms were given out for free, and there weren't many people who were pregnant but at school this facility wasn't available so loads of people, some younger than 14 dropped out because they were pregnant.

| Side: yes
1 point

Condoms should be made available to high school students.If condoms were made available to students, the teen pregnancy rate would decrease.

| Side: yes
1 point

yes, I totally support this idea. Here (in Argentina) there was a time when they gave free condoms on the streets , on hospitals(they still do that) and on schools and that has helped A LOT of people. Many teens that I know are too shy to go to pharmacies and buy condoms (even boys), so they decide not to have safe sex because they don't have an easy way of getting condoms. Even a friend of mine who is still in her tweens was helped by the free condom at schools thing because in that way she understood the importance of safe sex and since then never had unsafe sex.

| Side: yes
1 point

I have seen so many kids pregnant now or have some STD because they don't know enough on protecting themselves. HS should make condoms available for teens they are going to go out and do it regardless why not educate them on how to protect themselves.

| Side: yes
1 point

yes becasue if teens really wanna have sex there going to do it with or without a condom. so why not offer condoms? less pregos in high school hopefully!!!!!

| Side: yes
1 point

yes ...its will be better for society as well..as if condoms will not be made available than there would be many abortions..

| Side: Yes
1 point

Either way, teen sex still ruins a lot. And it also spreads diseases (even with condoms) and if the teens continue to have sex with different people, the STDs are going to spread to other people and the STDs of someone can combine with that of someone else, if you have sex with someone who was not a virgin, you could be exposing yourself to the STDs of many people in a single act of intercourse, making the chances of you getting infected, higher.

| Side: No
1 point

Either way, teen sex still ruins a lot. And it also spreads diseases (even with condoms) and if the teens continue to have sex with different people, the STDs are going to spread to other people and the STDs of someone can combine with that of someone else, if you have sex with someone who was not a virgin, you could be exposing yourself to the STDs of many people in a single act of intercourse, making the chances of you getting infected, higher.

| Side: No
2 points

I made it my responsibility that if I wanted to have sex, I would buy my own damn condoms.

They're not expensive, and usually getting laid is gonna cost you somehow (parties, dates, etc.)

Tax payers should not pay for condoms.

| Side: No
1 point

Yeah i agree, its very easy too go buy condoms on your own. Why do we need too spoil high school kids? If you cant spend sometime going to the store and buying a condom then your irresponsible.

| Side: No
aveskde(1901) Disputed
2 points

If you cant spend sometime going to the store and buying a condom then your irresponsible.

And irresponsible children are in particular need of condoms.

| Side: yes
1 point

What if you can't afford the condoms? I know they're cheap, but sometimes you have to spend money on other things, like bills and food. What if the childrens' parents can't afford to buy them any, and neither can the kids? I have a job, and do odd-jobs, and I barely have enough money. We are beginnin to go into a horrible recession, and that means money will be more tight. What if people can't even pay their bills because of taxes? What then? The schools have plenty of money, so why can't they keep some in the nurse's office and keep a control over them?

| Side: yes
0 points

Many students are embarrassed to go to the drug store and buy condoms, which is why if they are made available at school, with familiar people, they would be more likely to use them

| Side: No

clinics and hospitals get condoms for free to distribute them for patients, schools should have the same arrangement for students

| Side: No
0 points

i do agree with that cuz i don't agree with teen sex anyway but. i would hate to have to spend for condoms for some one elase that's like paying for some one eleas's plesure and getting non of your own! but since they are gonna doit any way w/ or w/out a condom no need in spreading the desieas (how ever you spell it)

| Side: No
ricedaragh(2525) Disputed
0 points

You are obviously a responsible person. A lot of teenagers are not. A good majority of young people that have unprotected sex do so while drunk or otherwise, as one time things at parties etc. The thing is most wont go with the intention of having sex and are not prepared as they wouldn't have the foresight to buy condoms.

If they were freely available I'm sure a lot more teenagers would carry and use them.

The thing is sex for a lot of teenagers having it, is a spur of the moment passion thing, obeying natural biological urges without an appropriate moral responsibility. The facts and figure speak for themselves. More and more younger people are having sex and getting pregnant or infected.

Tax payers are already paying for single mothers and their children and for the treatment of STDs in those not able to afford to pay for treatment. A cost I would assume greatly outweighs the cost of free condoms. In my University in the students union there are condoms that are given out for a charitable donation which could be anything from one cent to whatever you deem fit. This might be an option for other schools.

| Side: yes
aveskde(1901) Disputed
0 points

Tax payers should not pay for condoms.

So you'd rather that tax payers pay for abortions, STD tests and the like at state hospitals.

It's more cost-effective in the long run to provide condoms.

| Side: yes
ThePyg(6750) Disputed
1 point

No... I don't think that tax-payers should pay for all of that. The idea that teens aren't going to use condoms JUST BECAUSE they're not free is lame.

As well, it's most likely more embarrassing to get a condom from a school nurse than to get a condom from a random store.

Either way, it's their problem, not mine. I had sex and bought my own condoms. I didn't need to pick shit up from a nurse to always be prepared for a moment of sex.

| Side: No
2 points

No,because this will encourage teenagers to be engaged in sexual activities before marriage.

| Side: No
zombee(1023) Disputed
2 points

No,because this will encourage teenagers to be engaged in sexual activities before marriage.

So?

| Side: yes
thatguysam32(13) Disputed
3 points

in many households, this is not seen as a problem, therefore this arguement is ineffective

| Side: No
Isheba(4) Disputed
1 point

As schools distribute condoms to teenagers,it'll encourage them to have sex.Having sex before marriage is just SEX and nothing special. Sex should only occur if to individuals are married.Knowing that there is trust and genuine love in a marriage makes sex special Teenagers may decide to have sex just because condoms are available at schools or because its just "fun", and that's just like throwing your body in the garbage after disrespecting it.

| Side: No
1 point

teen sex has caused a huge amount of distress, lack of trust, pregnancies, STDs spreading like an epidemic and other forms of emotional damage. 80 percent of teens think they should not be sexually active.

| Side: No
NerdvanaGirl(30) Disputed
2 points

Are you aware that the majority of studies show that, for example, abstinence-only education programs don't significantly lower the amount of teenagers having sex ? (Instead, it just raises the amount having unprotected sex, since they're not able to make informed decisions.) This is no different. Regardless of what opinion you dictate to them, plenty of them are going to have sex anyway. This will also happen whether or not condoms have been made readily available. I agree that, from a personal perspective, I don't think physical relationships should be entered into lightly. However, some people are better able to maintain more of an emotional distance than I am, and there is nothing wrong with that. Their bodies, their decisions, and more power to them. I realize that some (not all) teens that have sex will undoubtedly have negative emotional effects following their decision (this is a potential consequence of pretty much ANY action, by the way). For those ones, you're exacerbating their pain by not trying to ensure the least possible damage is incurred. Unplanned pregnancies and STDs can ruin a person's life, as I'm sure you know perfectly well. Teens are going to make bad decisions sometimes, it's a fact of life. You can better serve them by making sure that they have a way to lessen the damage, not say "don't do it, and if you do it anyway, well, you deserve whatever bad things happen to you." Think of it this way: lots of teens are going to drive recklessly, there's no way around it, even if they pass their driving test with flying colors. The least you can do is have the decency to remind them to wear a seatbelt.

| Side: yes

Why don't they just teach kids how to masturbate and provide them with porn? ;)

| Side: No
2 points

This is also another great way to prevent the pregnancies! ;)

| Side: No
1 point

too much masturbation causes problems and porn is known to be addictive and a great way to screw up relationships. Why don't we tell the kids EVERYTHING about teen sex, including its consequences and opinions/experiences from people who are or used to be sexually active so that the kids can decide whether they really wanna do this. and if they will hand out condoms, get parent approval first.

| Side: Yes

No, a lot of kids will just end up making water balloons out of them. ;)

| Side: No
1 point

It is not the job of the schools, the taxpayers, or society for that matter to supply condoms. The "teenagers have sex" argument is ridiculous and absurd. Condoms aren't that expensive and if you have any skills at all can be easily stolen. Also, this might be ever so slightly controversial, but has anyone ever even thought of NOT HAVING SEX!?! I KNOW it's hard, but weighing between dropping out of school to take care of kids and not having to worry about that crap at all, is hardy a choice, if of course you have a brain. And even if abstaining is completely impractical, that still doesn't answer the more philosophical questions about this topic. Should taxpayers be forced to supply condoms in such a controversial venue? I should think not, but then again personal responsibiliy and common sense are dead, so this is to be expected. Another question is, if provided, would the students actually USE them. Condoms are generally uncomfortble, and sure there are some brands out there that make it feel like you're not wearing one, but can we expect the schools to provide this? They can't even provide a quality education, how can we expect them to provide quality condoms, or quality anything for that matter? It may be naive of me to believe that abstention is not hard at all. (Maybe they can just resort to anal or oral, as opposed to vaginal?) But it is just as naive, if not more so, to believe that the schools can fix this problem. If it starts in the home that's where it needs to be fixed. Parents need to start giving their kids the talk, and not schools. Whatever happened to the Three R's? I guess now it's four, Reading, wRiting, aRithmetic, and sexual Reproduction classes.

| Side: No
zombee(1023) Disputed
1 point

Condoms aren't that expensive and if you have any skills at all can be easily stolen.

Are you actually advocating thievery?

Also, this might be ever so slightly controversial, but has anyone ever even thought of NOT HAVING SEX!?!

You are a revolutionary! Quick, take your idea to the news, so that they might educate the ignorant masses of this amazing new idea!

Abstinence only education does not work.

I KNOW it's hard, but weighing between dropping out of school to take care of kids and not having to worry about that crap at all, is hardy a choice, if of course you have a brain.

There are more choices than abstinence, or have a baby. We are talking about contraceptives, after all.

Should taxpayers be forced to supply condoms in such a controversial venue?

I understand the other side of this issue but I do not see a very obvious flaw being addressed. If the issue is that people do not want more of their money taken for public health, then what happens when teenagers do not have easier access to condoms, don't use them as often, and STDs and pregnancies are more common? The alternative is far more expensive.

Condoms are generally uncomfortble, and sure there are some brands out there that make it feel like you're not wearing one, but can we expect the schools to provide this?

Why not?

It may be naive of me to believe that abstention is not hard at all.

Yes. It is naive.

But it is just as naive, if not more so, to believe that the schools can fix this problem.

Providing easier, anonymous access to contraceptives, combined with comprehensive sex education, would help. Schools are capable of doing this.

Parents need to start giving their kids the talk, and not schools.

If parents neglect to do this, then the cost their child may incur is the responsibility of everyone.

Parents who wish their children to only practice abstinence are still free to raise them in a way that encourages such a procedure. Easily accessible contraceptives just ensure that a child who disobeys is not permanently afflicted with a disease or a child because of it.

| Side: yes
ThomasLocke(9) Disputed
2 points

Ooooo I sense some condescention! Lets address your counterpoints.

Are you actually advocating thievery? Yes. If your good enough to steal it, its yours. What is property anyway?

You are a revolutionary! Quick, take your idea to the news, so that they might educate the ignorant masses of this amazing new idea!

Abstinence only education does not work. I never claimed to be a revolutionary because abstinence is not a revolutionary idea, but that does not take away from the merit of my argument. Would society be better if teenagers practiced abstinence? I think it would, can't have a baby if you don't have sex. But as i said, I would be naive to believe that ignoramuses would be open to the idea

There are more choices than abstinence, or have a baby. We are talking about contraceptives, after all. You are correct. But condoms do break, so what do you do then? Abortion perhaps? But there is much controversy about that as well. There are also a lot of crazy females who seek to sort of "trap" their partner into commitments by breaking the condom before its used.

I understand the other side of this issue but I do not see a very obvious flaw being addressed. If the issue is that people do not want more of their money taken for public health, then what happens when teenagers do not have easier access to condoms, don't use them as often, and STDs and pregnancies are more common? The alternative is far more expensive. Actually, my issue is peoples money being used for things they dont support. Yes, high school girls getting pregnant is a problem. So therefore we should use public schools to solve the problem? How ridiculous. It's one thing to use peoples money to fund the government to protect the rights of people, its another to use it for things that there is a clear divide on.

Condoms are generally uncomfortble, and sure there are some brands out there that make it feel like you're not wearing one, but can we expect the schools to provide this? - me

Why not?

why not? because they can barely afford decent textbooks or teachers for that matter, or provide a quality education. If that doesn't shed any light, I don't know what to tell you

But it is just as naive, if not more so, to believe that the schools can fix this problem.

Providing easier, anonymous access to contraceptives, combined with comprehensive sex education, would help. Schools are capable of doing this. And how do you know it would help? Have you done extensive research on the subject? Schools arent even capable of educating our children properly, but yet you want them to give them a "comprehensive sex education"? What does that entail exactly? Will they be teaching them positions as well?

Parents need to start giving their kids the talk, and not schools.

If parents neglect to do this, then the cost their child may incur is the responsibility of everyone. MAY being the key word here.

Parents who wish their children to only practice abstinence are still free to raise them in a way that encourages such a procedure. Easily accessible contraceptives just ensure that a child who disobeys is not permanently afflicted with a disease or a child because of it. That falls under the personal responsibility category

So basically what I'm gathering here is that you believe that the schools should provide condoms to teenagers because it would provide a safety net. Well, let's say schools do end up providing condoms for their students. Who is actually going to use them? The reason they don't is just as I already pointed out, they're uncomfortable. Everyone I know doesn't use them for that reason, hell I don't use them for that reason.

| Side: No
1 point

It is not the job of the schools, the taxpayers, or society for that matter to supply condoms.

Which is why the motion is hypothetical.

The "teenagers have sex" argument is ridiculous and absurd.

It is true, so I cannot conceive as to how either adjective may apply.

Condoms aren't that expensive and if you have any skills at all can be easily stolen.

Why provide the poor with bread if they have arms to steal it with?

Also, this might be ever so slightly controversial, but has anyone ever even thought of NOT HAVING SEX!?

We evolved with genitalia and hormones for a reason. Unfortunately for you, we also developed the bothersome faculty of discourse and reason, one of the products of which are annoyingly persistent things called "emotions". Combined with chemical impulses, these "emotions" have made sex quite appealing to us and central to our psyche.

An analogy: we are 1, but are formed in such a way as imbues us with a natural gravitation to other units, satisfied only with a value of 2. It is thus for all but the broken, who I cannot speak for.

I KNOW it's hard, but weighing between dropping out of school to take care of kids and not having to worry about that crap at all, is hardy a choice

If condoms were freely available, there would be no need to choose.

if of course you have a brain

If one has a brain, one has also an endocrine system; the aforedescribed scenario results.

Should taxpayers be forced to supply condoms in such a controversial venue?

Why dost feel it necessary to repeat the motion is beyond me.

Condoms are generally uncomfortble, and sure there are some brands out there that make it feel like you're not wearing one, but can we expect the schools to provide this?

If it is within our power to force them to supply prophylactics, it is surely within our power to force the supply of a certain type.

They can't even provide a quality education, how can we expect them to provide quality condoms, or quality anything for that matter?

A defect in a system is no argument against a proposed means of improving it.

Maybe they can just resort to anal or oral, as opposed to vaginal?

That is not a resort.

If it starts in the home that's where it needs to be fixed.

Then tender unto us some argument proving that this is the case.

Parents need to start giving their kids the talk, and not schools.

I'd prefer to receive this "talk" from persons of biological education.

I guess now it's four, Reading, wRiting, aRithmetic, and sexual Reproduction classes.

I maintain contempt for a system of describing a group of three concepts, only one of which begins with an "R", as "the three Rs". As for your musing, I think not. "Biology" begins with a "B".

You would have us revert to superstition and fear.

| Side: yes
1 point

This is crazy! Seatbelt are mandatory in cars and it's illegal to not wear them and yet I know more people that don't wear them than do. Get over it! It starts in the household and with the parent's ability to bring them up right when it comes to this subject. We all, in some form or way, act like our parents and reflect through our lives how we perceived them. If you think against that statement, you need to do some soul searching. Despite if you were the best parent you ever thought to be, if you have a rebellious or crazy teen, trust me it's something that you lacked in their upbringing...no matter how great you were. We should have a class for parents at the high school teaching them how to talk to their kids before we give kids condoms. I would never in my life want my daughter to throw herself away like that b/c the school said it was ok and told them just to wrap it before they tap it.

P.S. I wear my seat belt EVERYWHERE b/c my PARENTS always made... Just saying =)

| Side: No
1 point

Selling condoms in school!?! that made me quite unpredictably laugh. seriously I believe schools should teach kids to be safe is all not condone sexual activity.

| Side: No
-1 points

I would prefer that people stupid enough to have unprotected sex should be kept out of high school through natural selection i.e. pregnancy = no school.

| Side: No
4 points

I would prefer that people stupid enough to have unprotected sex should be kept out of high school through natural selection i.e. pregnancy = no school.

Of course, the subsequent gross expansion of the impoverished underclass that would follow such a policy is an "acceptable loss".

| Side: yes
1 point

Why deprive the allegedly uneducated of an education?

Would you also suggest that people who are hungry should be banned from restaurants?

| Side: yes
Bohemian(3469) Disputed
3 points

Yes, precisely what this nation needs. More uneducated people!

| Side: yes
1 point

Having unprotected sex has nothing to do with intelligence. Usually it is an emotional decision. Or, they were not properly educated in high school. Also, do you feel the same way about the men who get the girls pregnant? Or just the women who get pregnant.

| Side: yes

Honestly, I think that it's more the guy's fault than the girl's. I mean, they should be the one with the condom, right? Shouldn't they be able to say no if they don't have one? I can. I mean yeah, guy's can't exactly get on birth-control, but condoms are the best thing to prevent pregnancies AND STDs. The school is always sayin "abstinence", but they know we won't. Why even try? I'd be like "Wear a condom. Not wearin one could ruin your life." I mean, come on. I guess some school people are too "uneducated" to realize that they need to support the students with statements and lectures that could actually help, not go completely against them with "talks" that high school students just completely ignore.

| Side: yes

Sorry bout that, I completely and utterly digressed from the subject. Haha.

| Side: yes


About CreateDebate
The CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Help/FAQ
Newsletter Archive
Sharing Tools
Invite Your Friends
Bookmarklets
Partner Buttons
RSS & XML Feeds
Reach Out
Advertise
Contact Us
Report Abuse
Twitter
Basic Stuff
User Agreement
Privacy Policy
Sitemap
Creative Commons
©2014 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. User content, unless source quoted, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Debate Forum | Big shout-outs to The Bloggess and Andy Cohen.