New momentum is growing for abstinence-only education with bills advancing in Utah and Tennessee, in addition to Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-SC) federal Abstinence Education Reallocation Act. The guise for such bills has always been a reduction in teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, even though studies show that teens who take virginity pledges have just as much sex as those who don’t, but are actually less likely to use protection. Instead, the true motive seems to be a “see no sex, hear no sex, do no sex” approach designed to somehow erase the existence of contraception, homosexuality, and sex in general from the world in which hormone-flodded teenagers exist.

This is most evident from the American Family Association’s latest attempt to justify abstinence-only education. A study in the American Journal of Health Studies found that students who took a particular abstinence-only class were apparently more likely to perform well standardized math exams. AFA’s go-to abstinence expert, Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association, explains the significance of these findings:

HUBER: The researchers were suggesting that it was probably because there are a number of character qualities that are necessary to remain abstinent that also have … usefulness in other areas of their lives. We’ve been seeing for a long time that abstinence education isn’t just about saying ‘no’ to sex; it’s saying ‘yes’ to a lot of things in the future, and it positively impacts a person’s life — not just in that very singular area of sexual activity.

There are numerous flaws with Huber’s conclusions:

First, the study did not actually evaluate the actual effectiveness of the abstinence-only class, so any assumed benefit from the class (such as lower teen pregnancy rates, etc.) remains undocumented.

Second, the study focused only on one specific type of peer-educator based abstinence-only education, which means the results cannot be generalized to other curricula, which are usually taught by adults.

Further, the only conclusion the researchers drew from the study was that students may have benefited from having peer educators. There is nothing to indicate that students developed “character qualities” from the teaching of the class. If anything, the research suggests it was the mentorship students received from their peer educators that made a difference, not the lessons learned.

Finally, the study only compared students who took this one particular abstinence-only class with students who had no sex education class of any kind. None of the results offer insight into what impact comprehensive sex ed or sexual literacy approaches might have. In fact, the researchers conclude the article by admitting that “studies that compare the influence of abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education programs on academic performance would be very informative for interpreting the findings presented herein.”

Of course, the most compelling point surely remains that sex ed courses should be evaluated for the impact they have on students’ understanding of sexual health, not for how they impact math and English test scores.

Utah State Rep. Bill Wright (R) (Photo Credit: Al Hartmann, The Salt Lake Tribute)

Utah Gov. Gary R. Herbert (R) has not taken action yet on the recently passed abstinence-only/”don’t say gay” bill, but its proponents continue to defend it, even though it doesn’t enjoy popular support. Among other things, the bill prohibits “instruction in, or the advocacy of” homosexuality, but its sponsor, State Rep. Bill Wright (R), explained that homosexuality has “nothing to do with health,” except when it comes to abstaining from it:

WRIGHT: That has nothing to do with health. Homosexuality does not relate to sexuality. It’s a whole different thing… I can write the curriculum really simply. If you’re homosexual you have a high degree of [contracting] some STD. What else do you need to know? What else do I need to teach?

There are many answers to Wright’s question, but the most obvious lesson many young people need to hear is simply that “homosexuality is normal.” The entire goal of sex education is helping kids learn about their own bodies, the changes they’re experiencing, and how to make responsible decisions now that they’re being flooded with hormones. Wright wants an entire group of students — who are already stigmatized for what makes them different — to be deprived of the vital affirmation they need and deserve. If he honestly believes that “homosexuality does not relate to sexuality,” perhaps he’s not the best authority to be dictating sexuality curriculum.

The Tennessee House Education Committee voted today to again delay consideration of the “Don’t Say Gay” bill to first allow consideration of another bill that implements sweeping abstinence-only education requirements. This legislation (HB 3621) would stipulate a “family life education” curriculum that is rife with factual untruths, such as:

• Sexual health is best “encouraged” through abstinence-only education.
• Social science research supports “the benefits of reserving the expression of human sexual activity for marriage.”
• There is an “interrelationship between teen sexual activity and exposure to other risk behaviors such as smoking, underage drinking, drug use, criminal activity, dating violence, and sexual aggression.”

The bill is intended to reduce teenage pregnancy, but would surely have the opposite effect. Recent studies show that states with abstinence-only education requirements have the highest teen pregnancy rates. Young people who take virginity pledges have sex at the same rates as those who don’t, but are more likely to have unsafe sex when they do.

By limiting all conversations about sexuality to “abstinence until marriage,” this bill could have the same effect as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, condemning gay youth to a life of chastity and invisibility. Proponents may add amendments to incorporate the intended anti-gay censorship into this “family life education” curriculum or may still take up it separately, but either way, the results will reinforce anti-gay school environments. A new report from the Williams Institute examines the “Don’t Say Gay” bill’s harmful impacts:

• Hostile environments created by bullying and harassment based on sexual orientation and gender nonconformity lead to adverse health effects for LGBT youth.
• Anti-gay stigma has been shown to be related to increases in violence against LGBT youth and adults, as well as to lower levels of health.
• Harassment based on sexual orientation and gender nonconformity is widespread with LGBT youth at heightened risk.
• Research shows that states and locales that promote LGBT-inclusive school policies help reduce teen suicide, and enhance the health and well-being of LGBT youth.
• Laws with negative and discriminatory impact on the LGBT community could have a negative economic impact for business and the state economy.

The House Education Subcommittee could begin considering the abstinence-only bill as early as tomorrow.

The Utah legislature passed a bill (HB 363) yesterday that makes teaching sex education optional for schools and prohibits any instruction about homosexuality or the use of contraception. Parents will now have to opt their children in to such classes as opposed to having the option to opt-out, and the classes can only teach abstinence.

During Tuesday’s short debate in the Senate, Sen. Ross Romero (D) pointed out that the bill will likely deprive many young people of sex education if they don’t have parents who provide it at home. He offered an amendment that would have allowed teachers to still answer questions about homosexuality, contraceptives, or sex outside of marriage so that gay teens are not deprived of vital information about their identities, but the amendment was defeated. Sen. John Valentine (R) summed up Republican lawmakers’ attitudes on the matter:

VALENTINE: I recognize that some parents do not take the opportunity to teach in their own homes, but we as a society should not be teaching or advocating homosexuality or sex outside marriage or different forms of contraceptives for premarital sex.

The effects of this legislation could be disastrous for Utah’s young people. Numerous studies have shown that abstinence-only education is completely ineffective. The success of such programs has been evaluated by how many participants take a virginity pledge, but studies show that students who take the pledge are still just as likely to have sex. Worse yet, those who take the pledge are less likely to use condoms and birth control. Essentially, teaching abstinence-only sex education increases the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections.

Additionally, the restrictions on discussing homosexuality will proliferate anti-gay stigma. Minnesota’s Anoka-Hennepin School District stands as a shining example of how misguided a strategy it is to marginalize LGBT students and treat them as invisible. As they struggle to make sense of their identity and the way others may mistreat them, these students will now find no support from their teachers and administrators. It’s telling that lawmakers like Valentine think such outcomes are good for society.