Recently I was asked how I felt about the inclusion of information about homosexuality in the sex education curriculum in schools.  Sex education courses are not just about sex but about relationships, both homosexual and heterosexual, and about openness, tolerance and acceptance.  Initially, I thought it was so obviously important that it didn’t require an answer, but then it got more complicated.

It has been estimated that there are over 1 million teenagers who are homosexual, and gay teenagers are coming out earlier and earlier.  When I was a teen, no one talked about homosexuality, and most who knew they were gay, waited until they left home to come out or they lived hidden, double lives.

A lack of comprehensive sex education, including education about homosexuality, poses a problem for the following reasons:

• LGBT adolescents are faced with greater health risks if they don’t have access to information about safe-sex practices
• It helps raise awareness of discrimination of all minority groups
• It helps prevent loneliness and isolation of LGBT youth. helping protect against depression
• It provides safety against bullying

Those who oppose sex education feel, however, that teaching anything about sex — particularly homosexuality — seduces children into a life of out of control sex. 

Bullying is rooted in the demonization of others, based on characteristics which set them apart.  Bullying is persistent, unwelcome behavior that is unwarranted and includes invalid criticism, exclusion, isolation, humiliation and being treated differently.  Those who obviously appear different are easily victimized, and those who are conflicted about their sexual orientation but attempt to “pass” as heterosexual are left with a sense of dissonance between who they feel they are and how they present themselves publically.

For more information about bullying, see National Violence Prevention Center

During the Bush administration, abstinence-only sex education was the only sex education funded by the U.S. government, and abstinence until marriage was presented as the only correct choice.  This policy required curricula to teach “that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity,” and that “sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects.”

Abstinence-only programs by law do not discuss homosexuality or any sexual identity other than heterosexual.  They also imply that same-sex relationships are less meaningful and legitimate than opposite-sex ones and may cause harmful effects.  Since marriage is available in only a very few states, sex between members of the same sex was always considered illegitimate.

Numerous studies have shown little evidence that abstinence-only programs have any sustained impact on adolescents’ attitudes about sexuality, and some have shown negative impacts on their willingness to use contraception, including condoms, to prevent unfavorable sexual health outcomes. 

For more information about the ineffectiveness of abstinence-only programs, see “Is Teaching Abstinence Effective?”

On the other hand, as a parent, I can understand the belief that ultimately parents have a right to some control over what their children are taught.  I would have been very upset if, for example, teachers were required to teach only creationism as a part of the science curriculum.  Those who believe it is wrong to include homosexuality as a part of the curriculum believe that integrating gay issues goes beyond an explanation of homosexuality, and rather promotes “the life style.”  So the question becomes, “Should parents have the right to explain homosexuality in accordance with their own views about it, even though those views are inaccurate?” 

Many who oppose including homosexuality in the curriculum believe that it emboldens gay rights activitists who are trying to force their views upon young children as part of a larger “gay agenda” that is designed to recruit children into the “homosexual lifestyle.”  Others believe that it imposes liberal views of some teachers in a variety of areas.

Recently, those who oppose same sex marriage held a series of focus groups to study which elements of the subject created the most powerful emotional reaction.  Elevating an emotional issue mobilizes people for a particular cause.  What they found was that more than any other argument, the subject of including homosexuality in the health curriculum helped them recruit money and membership to oppose gay marriage. 

 By threatening parents with a loss of their right to control what their children were taught, they caused the discussion to be changed from one about equality and equal rights to a discussion about the individual rights of parents to be responsible for their children’s education.  This strategy proved to be very effective in defeating gay marriage in Maine and California.

It would appear then that any attempt by the LGBT community to advocate for the inclusion of homosexuality in sex education creates a backlash which is counter-productive.

I believe that the best education for children is to encourage their thirst for answers and to teach them about the resources where those answers are available.  Those who oppose homosexuality wish to remove all of those resources from access by their children, but efforts to insist that those resources remain available are seen as promoting a non-existent homosexual agenda.  Since it is not possible to prove a negative, it is impossible for the LGBT community to prove that no such agenda exists.

Encouraging inclusion of homosexuality in the sex education curriculum may not be the best strategy for advancing equal rights for the LGBT community.

1. Rod Davis says:

   November 14, 2009 at 5:01 pm

   Thank you for a very forward-looking article that addresses the full spectrum of sexuality. Children are most vulnerable during their formative years, but their sexuality has already been determined by factors we have yet to determine, hence; the importance of a well rounded sex education curriculum is a must.

   Thank you for your article!

   Rod Davis
2. Loren A. Olson M.D. says:

   November 14, 2009 at 5:21 pm

   Thank you for you comment and support.