While schools are under pressure to distribute condoms at schools, not one of We distributed a lot of condoms in one rural
ural areas that had a high rate of which they may be physically hurt or exploited, due to their lack of mental
the 12 African countries represented at a high level meeting in Durban is doing
so and most education officials felt this would be inappropriate.
Officials were unanimous that sexual abstinence should be the key HIV
message at schools, but a number felt that schools should nonetheless help
sexually active secondary school students to get access to condoms.
Education is about providing information. We can provide information about
condoms and where to get them, but they should not be distributed at schools.
The health department should do the distribution, said Zambia's Irene
Malambo.
There will be a problem if teachers distribute condoms, as they will be seen to
be promoting sexual activity, said Peter Fenton, from the Western Cape
education department.
It would be better if the schools provided access to condoms, but the health
department did the actual distribution. Earlier an official from KwaZulu-Natal
reported that teachers who gave sex education lessons were branded as
promiscuous while those that picked up condoms were branded as being
unChristian.
Phuti Chonco, from South Africa's national education department, said while
she favoured providing condom education schools should not distribute them
in any way. Botswana's Sally Nkoane, who co-ordinates HIV/AIDS for the
country's education ministry, was also against condoms on school property.
Yes, students are sexually active. But our education policy says students are
not to have sex at school, so how can we give out condoms at schools?
Uganda's Aggrey Kibenge was also adamant that condoms should not be
distributed at schools.
There was a decrease in HIV prevalence in Uganda before condoms were
distributed, said Kibenge. Children under the age of 18 are not trusted to take
independent decisions so why should we give these children condoms. Our
duty is to guide this person. They could be having sex out of naivete. Our duty
is to promote positive moral values, conduct and behaviour. We would be
undermining this through condom promotion.
The Western Cape's Fenton advocated a compromise, arguing that a pro-
abstinence, pro-values approach could be adopted in schools to balance
students' access to condoms at schools.
We would need to include parents, stressed Fenton. Schools could hold
meetings and decide not to distribute condoms at schools but places nearby,
like spaza shops. Zimbabwe's Andrew Mavise stressed the delicacy of the
issue, saying that condom distribution could undermine the entire school
HIV/AIDS programme if parents were opposed to it.
He also cautioned that many condoms could be wasted at schools as students
could use them for other things.
sexually transmitted infections. Although the condoms were disappearing, the
STI rate remained high. When we investigated, we discovered the condoms
were being used as fishing bait.
The officials, from 15 African countries, were attending a winter school on the
impact of HIV/AIDS on education systems, organised by the University of
KwaZulu-Natal's Mobile Task Team on HIV/AIDS Impact on Education
(MTT).
The first of its kind in the world, the three-week long course was designed to
help ministries of education understand the impact of HIV/AIDS on
education systems, design a sector-wide response, and develop and cost a
sustainable implementation plan. One of the key trends to emerge was that
countries had focussed on addressing HIV/AIDS though life skills classes at
schools.
There were few programmes focusing on the treatment, support and care for
teachers and students living with HIV/AIDS.
Many countries still did not have fulltime staff dealing with HIV/AIDS, and
the stigma associated with the disease meant that a number of countries
disguised their HIV/AIDS interventions by placing them in departments such
as quality control and employee assistance.
Countries teams attending the Winter School include Botswana, Burkina Faso,
Ethiopia, Kenya, Guinea, Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Senegal, Swaziland,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. (Source: Health-e, 31 August 2004)
These are the premises for the "Con" claim:
1: It must be noted that the effectiveness of condom use is very exaggerated.
Improper implementation, something which school-age teenagers are more
vulnerable to than the average male adult (due to intoxication or lack of
experience), causes condoms to be extremely ineffective. One must remember
that, with typical condom use, 18% of women become pregnant. [1] Hence,
the availability of condoms often gives teenagers a false sense of security
when engaging in intercourse, while encouraging such activity to take place.
2: Presenting condoms to students in a publicly funded environment will
offend students of a wide range of faiths and their respective families,
including those of the Catholic faith, many of those of the (Orthodox and
Conservative) Judaic faith, and many of those of the Protestant faith. [2] By
giving students access to condom and encouraging their use, public schools
are interfering with the fundamental religious beliefs of students and their
families.
3: By teaching students about both abstinence and use of contraception,
school programs are sending mixed messages to students. If the school wants
them to not have sex, why would it give them condoms that they could use
as contraception during intercourse? Hence, the distribution of condoms
contradicts a school's attempts to promote abstinence. Moreover, the
distribution of condoms leads to increased sexual activity among students;
an increased level of sexual activity among students may lead to situations in
maturity and physical vulnerability.
Condom distribution in schools leads to a false sense of sexual security
among students who lack experience with condom use, imposes ideas that
contradict the religious beliefs of many students and their families, and sends
a contradictory message to students that ultimately encourages them to
engage in more sexual activity. Therefore, "Con" is the far superior position.
Thank you, and I look forward to the opposition's refutations.
1. When the consequences are as drastic as unintended pregnancy
and STD transmission, I would certainly call 82% efficiency of
improper condom use extremely ineffective, especially
when seven in ten US adolescents have sex before age 19 [1] and
with high frequency.
Correlation between age/experience and improper use: "...data
demonstrate that effectiveness increases with experience, leaving
those adolescents with the least experience at greatest risk for
improper use." [2] Inexperienced adolescents, hence, are more
susceptible to improper use, which puts them at greater risk for the
aforementioned serious ramifications.
Schools programs do, in fact, misrepresent and exaggerate
condom effectiveness. Some of the myths leaked through these
programs are debunked in this source. [3] As a result of these
hyperbolic facts, many adolescents develop a false sense of
security in regards to their use of condoms during sex, despite the
fact that they are more susceptible to misuse due to a lack of
experience, as evidenced before.
A study at St. Francisco's Balboa HS resulted in the publishing of
the following excerpt: "The number of students having sex
doubled [after the instatement of the condom distribution
program] The schools overall pregnancy rate increased by one
fourth. With an increase in pregnancies, it can be assumed that
there was a similar increase in student exposure to sexually
transmitted diseases." [4] Some credible studies certainly support
the claim that sexual activity increases because of condom
distribution programs at schools. This seems to match with what
one would logically expect; condom use is advertised and, through
that, students receive the message that sexual activity is expected
of them... or at least not unexpected of them.
2. "Schools with condom-access programs are in no way forcing
any students to use or even accept condoms."
Schools are certainly encouraging condom use to students through
their sex education programs. The pork comparison is not
appropriate in this situation. Schools are certainly not just
displaying condoms on trays like pulled pork sandwiches in the
lunch line; they are advocating condom use and are
thereby implying that sexual activity is not unexpected of the
 adolescents... and that it is okay as long condoms are implemened.
Condom distribution at schools does, in fact, interfere with
parents' rights. Based on the ruling of the court case Alfonso v.
Fernandez, voluntary condom distribution programs in schools
interfere with the rights of parents to rear their children as they
saw fit. [5] Parents have a fundamental right to rear their own
children, and these programs took away from it, so parents should
be given the right to opt their children out of it.
3. "[S]chools and faculty are generally not in 100% agreement with
themselves..."
The opposition makes an unclear argument. The decision to
distribute condoms or to promote abstinence is almost always
determined solely by faculty, whether it be superintendents,
members of the school district committee, or other working
members of the school community. "Schools," by definition, are
places of learning and hence cannot "agree" with policies... or
anything for that matter. The opposition is politely asked
to clarify.
The distribution of condoms does, indeed, increase sexual activity,
as the provided source claims. [4]
In Conclusion:
The opponent's refutations have been countered. Through these
counters, CON proves to be the superior stance on the issue,
proving that condom distribution in schools is detrimental and
must therefore cease, a claim that PRO has thus far failed to
effectively falsify.
Thank you, and I greatly look forward to PRO's retort.
CHURCH leaders are supporting the campaign of the Department of Health
(DOH) against irresponsible sex but not the distribution of condoms in public
schools, saying it will only worsen rather than solve the rising number of
HIV/AIDS cases among the youth.
Data show that from 1984 to October 2016, about 10,279 of the total number
of 38,114 HIV/AIDS cases were in the 15-24 years-old range.
Among 15 to 24 years olds, there were 10,279 HIV cases during the period, of
which 9,066 were tallied during the last five years or from 2011 to 2016,
prompting the government to tag it a youth epidemic.
To address the problem, the DOH is toying with the idea of making condoms
available in public schools starting in 2017.
But according to Novaliches Bishop Emeritus Teodoro Bacani Jr., the
proposal of the DOH would only create more problems because it would
encourage the youth to engage in premarital or extramarital sex.
Its a wrong tactic. There will be more damage than before. Aside from
being risky, it will also deliver the wrong message to that they will be safe
from the AIDS virus with the use of condom. It is not safe because the virus
can pass through even the smallest hole in a condom, the prelate said in an
interview with Radio Veritas.
Instead of free condoms, he added, the government should raise public
awareness to prevent the spread of the disease.
Father Anton Pascual, chief operating officer of Radio Veritas, said sex is
sacred and must be shared only by responsible married couples.
Pascual suggested that instead of condoms, the youth or any member of the
community should practice sexual abstinence outside of marriage, to be
faithful to one partner when married and value love and sacredness of sex as
a gift of God in marriage.
Fr. Jerome Secillano, executive secretary, Catholic Bishops Conference of the
Philippines public affairs committee, branded the DOH campaign as nothing
but a waste of taxpayers money.
Distributing condoms will only condone sexual activity among students.
The government should invest more in educating people about the perils of
sporadic sexual activity than procuring and distributing condoms, he said.
The issue of sex education has long been a controversial one. The two basic
types of sex education in the Malawi are abstinence-only and comprehensive.
While comprehensive education advocates abstinence as the primary defence
against unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and
HIV/AIDS, it also addresses the inevitability that some adolescents have or
will engage in sexual behaviour. Providing information about contraception
and how to have safer sex is an integral part of comprehensive sex
education. Providing condoms in schools is a much debated aspect of some
comprehensive programs. In contrast, abstinence-only programs discuss
abstinence, or refraining from sex until marriage, as the only guarantee of
protection from the growing epidemics of teenage pregnancy, STDs, and
HIV/AIDS. Some schools and parents are afraid to give student's condoms
out of fear that it will push them to engage in sex before they are ready.
Condoms play a key role in preventing HIV infection around the world. In
sub-Saharan Africa, most countries have seen an increase in condom use in
recent years. Even when condoms are available, though, there are still a
number of social, cultural and practical factors that may prevent people from
using them. In the context of stable partnerships where pregnancy is desired,
or where it may be difficult for one partner to suddenly suggest condom use,
this option may not be practical. Thengo Kavinya asked several people their
opinion:
The need to reduce the risk of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted
disease for those who decide to have sexual relations requires less
divisiveness. Parents can still instruct their children as they see fit, but
parents and their elected representatives should entrust school boards with
the power to supplement that instruction with informed, health-based
programs and services, including condom distribution programs. The
principal message teens should receive is that their continued health and
safety is key.
Patrick Msomba
Providing condoms to students in public education programs will reduce the
incidence of underage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted
diseases. If one accepts the premise that condoms are an effective means of
prevention, it stands to reason that their distribution could have a significant
impact. Condoms are one of the most effective means of protecting against
STDs, HIV and pregnancy. For their cost, they are easily the most cost-
effective means of protecting against these threats.
Chifundo Nkhoma
It is best to have students abstain 100 percent, its a fact that youths are
already exposed to dangers through early sex and that condoms would be of
service. Providing students with condoms actually encourages the earlier
onset of sexual activity. If young people believe they will be safe when
using a condom they are much less likely to be deterred from engaging in
dangerous and immoral behaviour.
Alex Jimu
Widespread condom distribution will establish sexual activity as the norm
among young teens, creating peer pressure to participate in sex. The added
temptation to engage in sexual activity that is protected will result in more
women having sex at a younger age, perhaps furthering their exploitation.
Albert Chazama
I feel condoms does not increase sexual activity but can decrease unintended
pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases and HIV. So I feel In the interest of
public health, restrictions and barriers to condom use should be removed.
Condom distribution cannot increase sexual activity.
Mayamiko Butawo
Sex education program including condom provision accepts the inevitability
of adolescent sex and encourages students to make wise, safe decisions if
they do have sex. It is a wise investment by the government to supply
condoms for schools in that it is very expensive to address problems created
by irresponsible sexual behaviors.
Emmanuel Phiri
When the school tries to substitute the family as the shaper of personal
values, it weakens the authority of the family. If the school weakens the
family, it will contribute more to the increase of venereal disease and
unwedded motherhood among teenagers than it can counteract by
distributing condoms.
STDs: Will condoms in public schools reduce sexually transmitted
diseases?
[] []
[Edit] [Edit]
Yes No
Distributing condoms in public Condoms in schools would
schools will reduce the spread of encourage sex and so increase STD
STDs Condoms are an effective risks. I feel that if condoms in
means of combating the spread of schools could in fact increase the
sexually transmitted diseases. On incidence of venerial disease as it
this premise, it stands to reason could spread the information to
that their distribution in schools
and use will reduce the spread of
sexually transmitted diseases
among students.[5]
Condoms are one of the most
effective means of protecting
against STDs, HIV and pregnancy.
For their cost, they are easily the
most cost-effective means of
protecting against these threats.[6]
Responsibility: Will condom distribution make students more sexually
responsible?
[]
[Edit]
Yes
Providing access to birth control
empowers women with more
control over their
bodies. Historically women have
often suffered more because of
restrictive policies related to
reproduction (abortion laws,
restrictions on birth control
purchases, parental consent
policies).[11]
Condom distribution encourages
the responsibility of men: It can
also establish condom use as the
norm, not something that women
continually have to negotiate,
often from a position of
weakness.[12]
Religion: Can condoms be distributed without upsetting religious
doctrine?
[]
[Edit]
Yes
Putting a condom machine in a
school does not mean that all
students are encouraged to have
sex. Teenage sex predates both
condom machines and high
schools. Teenagers are probably
interested in sexual relations,
the younger students still not
achieved puberty. It would drive
the sex imagination in their in
their minds.
The effectiveness of condoms is
exaggerated. If not used properly,
condoms can be highly ineffective.
Young people are more likely to
use condoms incorrectly, due to
lack of experience with them or
because they are drunk. Moreover,
the temptation to have sex without
a condom may be significant
where the supply of condoms is
not plentif
[]
[Edit]
No
Widespread condom distribution
will establish sexual activity,
creating peer pressure to
participate in sex. The added
temptation to engage in sexual
activity that is "protected" will
result in more women having sex
at a younger age, perhaps
furthering their exploitation.[13]
Condom distribution will
encourage sexual activity and other
risky behavior.[14]
[]
[Edit]
No
Condoms for students can offend
people from different
religions. Catholics and followers
of other religions who do not
believe in birth control, and
orthodox practitioners of a number
of the worlds religions find the
because there is the opposite
gender in schools. It is possible to
ban the opposite gender in
schools, but that is only part of
the problem. The other
contributing factor is teenage
hormones. An interest in
engaging in sexual relations does
not undermine religious doctrine,
unless one wants to become a
priest. Religious doctrine does not
forbid sexual relations, but
encourages the safe or
responsible management of it,
and this usually includes
discouraging pre-marital sex,
coveting someone else's wife (and
probably husband as well), and
adultery.
Teen pregnancy: Will condoms in public schools help lower teen
pregnancy rates?
[]
[Edit]
Yes
If students are having sex, they
need to know about safe sex. If
students in school are having sex
they should have the option of
having safe sex and they need to
know the advantages of having
safe sex.
Condoms in public education will
reduce underage
pregnancy Condoms are an
effective way to lower pregnancy
rates. As such, their distribution
within schools will result in
lower teen pregnancy and student
pregnancy rates.[2]for sure
students have sex, someday,
earlier or later, it will happend in
a range of age between 12- 18.
No evidence exist that offering condom will increase sexual activity.
apparent encouragement of sexual
activity an affront to their religious
traditions.[4]
Religious considerations are not
irrelevant. Various religions are
members of society, and these
citizens have a right to voice their
views about condom distribution
or machines in their schools.
Schools are not the place for
condom machines, just as schools
are not the place for cigarette
machines, or alcohol bars. Many
high school students also have a
problem with smoking and
drinking, but that does not mean
schools should distribute filtered
cigarettes or have a designated
driver program. Certain activities,
such as drinking and smoking, are
legally appropriate for adults.
Sexual activity should also at least
be recognized as an activity best
reserved for mature adults.
[]
[Edit]
No
Providing students with condoms
encourages early sexual activity. If
young people believe they will be
safe when using a condom they
are much less likely to be deterred
from engaging in sexual
intercourse. Higher rates of sexual
intercourse might offset the
positive effects of condom use in
preventing pregnancy.[3]
. Whether the government will distribute free condom or not . We cannot
stop the youth from having sex. I say , Yes . Distribution of free condom is
much better than having unprotected sex. . For me as a student, it depends
upon my perception if I will use or not the condom . . I am supporting the
distribution but I never thought of using the condom distributed.
Teen pregnancy would decrease
In my opinion this would be more helpful and can prevent many teens to go
through the process of abortion. There are approximately 250,000 teenagers
that had a baby in the year of 2014. Now the numbers most likely rose. 35
percent of those girls choose to have an abortion and regret doing that after.
Therefore schools should give out condoms and educate them in order for
them to act mature and responsibly.
Average age of first act of intercourse in the US: 17 Average age of
graduation from high school in the US: 18
Teens are going to have sex if they want to, there's nothing that we can do to
stop that. However if we offer them methods of preventing STI's and
unwanted pregnancies, we can make sure that they are practicing safe sex.
If schools give teens the methods to practice safe sex and prevent STIs, the
student body will have a lower rate of STIs. A lower rate of STIs means a
healthier student body, which means more time spent in class learning and
less time sick at home or at the doctor.
Also, Imagine that you have 2 teens: they have sex and there is a pregnancy.
Suppose they decide to keep the baby. Think of the impact that has on the
education of both parents and of the baby.
Having condoms easily accessible in schools promotes education and
learning.
Give the students what they want !!!
Students are already having sex whether we like it or not, so to be SAFE why
not just give them what is needed to prevent STIs and unwanted
pregnancies.
When students get pregnant and contract STIs it is just degrading our
society.
Giving these condoms won't encourage sex, it encourages safety and we all
 schools are learning institutions not pharmacies but schools distributing
these can be part of developing a greater future for a country's society...
Giving Away Condoms Does Not Encourage Sex.
As the title states, giving them condoms does not encourage sex, but
encourages safety. The same tired argument is made regarding needle
exchanges. As countless studies have shown, providing needles to addicts
reduces the spread of diseases and the harms that come from IV drug use.
Likewise, providing condoms will only ecourage kids to have Sex safely
since they are going to do it anyway. It has been proven abstinence only
classes do not work AT ALL, and schools that use these have been known to
have STD epidemics. Give kids condoms so there will be less STD's and less
teen pregnancies. It is the ONLY common sense option.
Don't you think adolescents have a right to be safe?
The statics shows us that more than 50% of the population of teens are
having sex or have had sex at least once in their life. So if we know that their
already having sex and even though we teach them to abstain from any
sexual activities or wait until marriage, they still won't listen and at the end
of the day it's their choice, why don't we teach then how to protect
themselves. In 2009 there was a survey done in Germany in a specific town
where the amount of teen pregnancies and adolescents who contracted an
STD in a year was totaled and the following year an experiment was done
where they distributed condoms in a high school in that same town and the
amount was far less than ever before
They should be distributed
If they don't get access to them, they will have unprotected sex, either way,
we cannot control teenagers hormones and feelings, but the giving them
condoms will make them be safer than sorry. Who would want to see his/her
child suffer from HIV and AIDS? Or have a child with no future because
he/she is already a parent?
Yes, they should.
Condoms should be distributed in schools to prevent pregnancy, STD's and
set a good example. We know from research that abstinence education does
not work and will not stop young people from having sex if they decide that
it's something that they want to do. It is most responsible for schools to teach
kids how to keep themselves safe.
Schools are to teach students about safety.
Schools shouldn't tell you not to do something like under-age sexual
relations, they are meant to give you all the facts and make sure you know
how to do it safely. Another example is drinking alcohol, they tell you all the
bad things which can be cause but in the end the student makes the choice,
and thanks to the schools guidance they can do want they choose to do
safely.
Give them Safety
As I've heard people say that not mentioning sex to adolescents is the most
correct maneuver in preventing STD's. It is not. The correct action in
prevention of this hazard is giving the kids a correct education of the harmful
effects of not using a condom when committing intercourse. Condoms being
distributed in school demonstrates the importance of actually using the
condom. Most kids would think it unthinkable for their teachers to give them
condoms so they will see some importance.
Not in school
Giving condoms to kid in school is just supporting them to have sex. First of
all, if a school is considering this, how many pregnant students do you have
in that school? If you have a lot then obviously your not teaching health class
correctly. Second of all its just a stupid idea all together. If the kid is stupid
enough to have sex then that's there fault for not using a condemn.
I do not think so..!!
I stringently oppose the subject. I would like you to answer some questions
below for their respective countries as the consent differ from country to
country -
Q1) What is the age of the children when they pass the high school?
Q2) What is the legal age for sexual activities?
Q3) Is there any need of condoms at such age?
In my country, student generally pass the high school at 17 and legal age for
consent is 18. Therefore, there is no point in distributing condoms in schools.
That would be quite contradictory, wouldn't it?
Schools teach against underage sexual activity! And by giving out condoms
in school that would just be supporting it. Plus, if someone doesn't want to
use a condom, just because their school provides it doesn't mean they're
necessarily going to take use of it. When anyone decides to participate in
such acts it is their responsibility to use protection or not, the only thing
schools should do is teach the circumstances of these actions.
Interest in sex
In learning we say that the teachers role is to spark interest in the learner,
students will not participate unless they have someone to introduce them to
the activity, therefore I feel that introducing condoms in the school acts as a
medium through which students are made aware of sex. The thought pattern
shifts and more focus is put on the latest trend that is sex. Since everyone is
doing it, why shouldnt I. This one action of bringing condoms in schools
brings about a string of events that eventually lead to pregnancies and stds
aka a chain rxn.
Posted by: keflor

Stupidity at it's finest. If the government have set a law, stick to it.
If the age of consent is 16 and over in the UK, why are the government
equpping school children for underage sex? As a teenager myself, not proud
to be I shall add, I know that other teenagers will try and outdo eachother to
share their pathetic sexual encounters with the rest of the year group. People
in authority and the media verge on paedophilic by pressuring young people
so much to have sex. They are further perpetuating this notion of underage
sex by subtextally saying "everybody is doing it? Why can't you?". Who cares
what everybody else is doing? What if you don't have those pathetic urges at
that age? Then what? You'll be subject to being called "frigid" if you're female
and "loser" or "gay" if you're male. Now with the argument of underage
pregnancies and STDs. Hypothetically speaking, if underage people didn't
have access to contraception and got an STD or an unwanted pregnancy,
clearly it's their own damn fault. They should have applied their knowledge
mean that schools now have to take precautions and hand out contraceptives
to them. The students can go buy them on their own if they plan on doing
those things in their spare time. Also, we'd probably have to pay MORE tax
dollars to fund such a program.
Schools are not the proper venue for distribution of "condoms".
We are in school to learn and study. It is unethical to distribute condoms in
school especially in high school because majority of the students there are
minors. It will also promote sexual activity and promote more of premarital
sex to the youths. Educate them not give them condoms period.
Another problem is that giving condoms at school could promote early age
intercourse which is illegal. Receiving condoms could allow students to think
that they are old enough to have intercourse although they are still underage.
Many would argue that if they are old enough to learn about anatomy and
how the body works, they are old enough to have intercourse. Another point
representing my choice is that you can give the students condoms but it is
still their choice to use it. If they have it, it doesn't mean that they will use it.
Although people can say that it is better to have condoms and not use them
than not to have any condoms at all. Another counter argument to my
discussion is that it can prevent many diseases like STD's. This is a very
important factor when weighing in whether condoms should be handed out
in schools. There are many different points to argue if condoms should or
should not be given out in school but personally, I feel that handing out
condoms would not help the students in the schools.
Posted by: flowerpot

of this to their own common sense. If you do something illegal, they No to distribution but proper education...

shouldn't expect that their won't be consequences.

DOH doing this to made their job easy. Why not going to schools and
educate the students properly the disadvantages of having sex at early age?
What are the consequences if they will become parents at an early age? I
Why in schools? think educating the students is much more important than promoting this
giving them free condoms in schools.

A school is a place of learning, not a pharmacy.

Are we to hand out birth control pills at the front desk as well?
Teach them about proper sex safety, sure.
But why would we actively distribute condoms in the school? We have
places that sell condoms, and we should focus on those places being
accessible to the kids if they aren't already.
I really haven't heard any valid reasons for distributing them at the school
itself.
Posted
A school is a place of education, not a place to distribute contraceptives.
Condoms should be distributed in school.
The debate of this topic is endless. Whether it be for or against the topic, this
topic is quite controversial. I believe condoms should not be distributed in
school. Although there are many arguments that prove condoms should be
distributed, I still believe that they should not be. It also depends on the age
group of which the condoms are distributed. If the age of consent is 16 for
sexual intercourse, then there would be no need to hand out condoms earlier
than 16. Another reason against condoms is that in the media it is normal to
have intercourse, "everybody is doing it? Why can't you?". This pressures

We all went to school to learn. How much we learned depends on how many people into sex as if it is seen as the norm all over the internet and in

involved we were. Sure, we had to take a sexual education class that was a the media. Many would argue that condoms are a part of the sexual

part of the curriculum, but just because students know that sex exists doesn't education needed at school but I believe that condoms should be used in
sexual education but they should not be distributed throughout schools.