Sex-Ed Funds Turned Down?
After reading and listening to the Congressional Hearing concerning the pornographic content on the internet, it is not hard to applaud the people who have worked so hard and diligently on this issue. These senators and congressional heads are working to try to sovle a problem that has been growing ever since pornography was published on the internet. However, does it make sense that these people are working so hard on an issue that will probably never be completely solved in the way that they are trying to solve it? Although their great efforts show the compassion that Congress has for society's youth, the real solution to the problem of the internet, is sex education and how many schools across the U.S. refuse to teach their children "the fundamentals of life".
In the Congressional hearing clip, we saw different people take the stand defending their position on the problem with pornography on the internet. One of those people, James Weaver talked about how children should be "shielded" from content on the internet that they were not meant to see and how parents need to take this issue into their own hands. He also addressed the topic of how children and young adults may be using the internet porn as a way for them to teach themselves about sex, something that should have been taught to them in the educational system. This innocent mistake of a child who is curious about their body and the constant, immature, school-age talk of sex, is the real reason as to why kids will go on the internet and look up porn in the first place.
It seems like a simple answer for a way to cut down on the amount of porn viewing that society's youth does in present day, teach them about sex through sex-ed in the school system. However, the real issue here is how schools would get the money for this special class and what they would do to present it. Surprisingly, an article published on Stateline.org proves that some states could care less about having sex-ed in their systems due to the financial burden that it might create (http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=137&languageId=1&contentId=70529).
Now if a state were trying to get rid of the problem of too many kids seeing porn on the internet, and they knew that the could prevent most of it through the school system, then why would a state reject a federal grant that would help with this issue? This article summarizes the rejection that Maine, one of three states, made to a grant that would give them money to have sex-ed in the school system. It also says that Maine refused " to allow Heritage of Maine, a nonprofit, abstinence-education group, to put on its programs in Maine public school". This is absolutely absurd, because if these states (California and Pennsylvania included) just accept the money and gave student the proper education that they deserve, then the whole problem of kids going on the internet out of curiousity would be solved and done with.
This issue of schools not providing sexual education to their students is something that occurs in NYS as well. The names of the schools will not be mentioned, however when one looks at the educational plan of some of the high ranked high and middle schools, they find that it is made mandatory for students to take atleast three years of health education before they graduate (sex-ed would be included in these classes as well). Whereas when the systems of some towns in Western NY who are more depressed than others are compared to towns that are more wealthy, it is apparent the the less wealth towns do not provide sex-ed classes for their students when they really should be.
The answer to the problem with youth's looking up pornography on the internet is one that can be solved through our educational systems. By not giving students the information that they need and should be aware of, states are just adding more on to an issue that can easily be resolved with just a minor amount of money spent on the state's behalf.
