Lawmakers Introduce Sweeping Sex Ed Bill To Mandate LGBT Inclusive, Gender Balanced Health Classes

Just this week, the CDC released new data pointing to the United States’ “ongoing, severe epidemic” of sexually transmitted infections, which incur the country an estimate $16 billion each year in medical costs. That public health crisis is partly fueled by the lack of comprehensive, medically accurate sexual health instruction in classrooms across the country — but some lawmakers are seeking to change that with a sex ed bill that would overhaul the outdated health classes in America’s public schools.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and 32 other Democratic politicians re-introduced the “Real Education for Healthy Youth Act” on Thursday, legislation that would “expand comprehensive sex education programs in schools and ensure that federal funds are spent on effective, age-appropriate, medically accurate programs.”

“The bill does a lot of important things — it’s a big bill,” Sarah Audelo, the Domestic Policy Director for Advocates for Youth, explained to ThinkProgress. “There’s a lot to be covered, and a lot of resources that young people need that they’re not currently getting.” In particular, the legislation would ensure that federal funding is allocated only to the sexual health programs that include inclusive language about LGBT issues, don’t rely on outdated gender stereotypes, and impart accurate information about HIV.

Right now, sexual education standards vary widely across states. Just 12 states mandate that sexual health curricula must be medically accurate — which means that young people across the country are receiving false information about birth control’s effectiveness, the right way to prevent STDs, and the way that HIV is transmitted.

“Ultimately, we have a long way to go when it comes to sex ed,” Audelo pointed out. “The United States has some of the worst sexual health outcomes in the developed world, and we can’t blame young people for their poor decisions when we don’t teach them how to make the right choices for their bodies.”

And there is concrete evidence to back up Audelo’s claims. The states that push abstinence-only education programs in their public schools — which doesn’t trust teens enough to teach them facts about their bodies — have the highest rates of teen pregnancies, while adolescents who actually receive instruction about prevention methods are 60 percent less likely to get someone else pregnant or get pregnant themselves. Nevertheless, right-wing politicians continue to do exactly what Audelo cautions against — and blame teenagers themselves for failed abstinence-only policies.

View the original article here

Maine, Texas GOP Consider Requiring High Schools To Teach Gun Classes

In middle of the national debate on preventing gun violence, Republican lawmakers in Texas and Maine want gun classes added to public schools. Modeled after a National Rifle Association school program for children, similar proposals that claim to enhance “gun safety” have also popped up in South Carolina and Missouri.

According to the Texas bill sponsor, Rep. James White (R), kids are “resilient” enough to handle guns, which he says are no more dangerous than weightlifting or auto mechanics:

“Education, foremost, as stated in our Constitution, is about teaching our people their rights and responsibilities as a free people,” said White, who emphasizes that the most important component of the class would be teaching students the history and importance of the Second Amendment.

You could go to any high school today and you’ll see them engaging in many what we would consider probably dangerous activities: Welding, auto mechanic, weight lifting, playing sports. So our students are not these little fragile beings. They’re very knowledgeable, they’re very resilient and they can handle this.”

Meanwhile, a bill under consideration in Maine — which has drawn support from Gov. Paul LePage (R) — would add an optional gun safety course, potentially paid for by the NRA’s “Eddie Eagle Gunsafe Program.” The Maine bill sponsor Rep. Paul Davis (R) claimed this course would manage to prevent domestic violence, by giving would-be victims firearms training. “In these situations, these victims [of domestic violence-related slayings] did everything the law provided,” Davis said. “I have to wonder if they knew anything about guns. I don’t think they did. However, if they did and they wanted to protect themselves, what would have happened?”

Instead of offering NRA-sponsored classes at schools, the ultimate way to protect kids from gun violence is to simply not have a gun lying around. According to the Centers for Disease Control Prevention, over 86 percent of firearm deaths of children occur at home. Guns in households increase the risk of suicides and homicides, while anecdotal evidence shows how armed guards and armed teachers could go very wrong.

View the original article here