Sex on the books

A bill that passed the state Senate says if a school offers any kind of sex-education classes, comprehensive, medically accurate sex education also should be part of the curriculum. How sensible and realistic.

Some schools in the state currently offer abstinence-only education, which is a disservice to students. The reasonable inclusion of medically sound sex education, including information about contraceptives, passed 30-19 but not before a group of Republican senators voted no and walked out of the chamber. Unnecessary histrionics.

It makes no sense to teach half the story. Since when did useful public-health information become our enemy?

Under the bill en route to the House, schools could discuss abstinence with students — sure, fine, good — but they must also present medically appropriate sex education.

There is a government-power question of local control here and Republicans were quick to seize it. But local control should not be used to cover the blemish of ignorance. The state has a duty to tell schools about the public-education part of public health.

Research and common sense say it is not wise to assume the abstinence-only message will get through to — or make sense for — every student. Public schools must shape a message for a broad audience, not a narrow one.

HIV/AIDS education is currently required, as it should be. But general sex education is not. Schools districts decide what they will offer. Some districts offer abstinence-only programs.

The Senate bill appropriately changes that. A school could still offer no curriculum but would not be allowed to promote the fairy tale of abstinence-only.

In reality, the legislation, sponsored by state Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, corrects earlier lawmaking that does not go far enough to educate students. Schools teaching sex education should teach the full sex-ed and public-health story. Class dismissed.