1

Sexual Education Policy

A Startling Reality
This year alone, approximately 400,000 children will be born to teenage parents.1 Eight million young
adults will contract HIV this year, half of all reported cases despite the fact that young adults only
comprise one quarter of the sexually active population in America.2 Eighty percent of LGBTQ students
will be harassed in school.3 Nearly ten percent of high-school students will be raped or will become the
victim of domestic violence.4
Researchers in United States observe similar scenarios every year. Studies have shown no statistically
significant change in these numbers for nearly three-decades.

A Source of Hope

quite rare. Only twenty-two states mandate

comprehensive sexual education.6 Only thirty-three

There is still hope to change these numbers.

states mandate education on HIV. 7 Thirteen states do

Studies show that comprehensive sexual education

not even require information on sex to be medically

decreases the spread of HIV and unintended

accurate. 8

pregnancy. Research has also found that programs

about sexual violence may reduce the number of
students who become the victims of sexual assault.5 It
has been proven that inclusive education about the
LGBTQ community may greatly reduce the
harassment gay teens face. In studies carried out over
the past decade, researches have consistently
concluded that comprehensive sexual education is the
most effective way to protect adolescents from the
unintended consequences of sexual activity.

Despite the fact that ninety-three percent of Americans

support comprehensive sexual education for highschool students9, there has yet to be any significant
action by the federal government towards ensuring that
adolescents have access to comprehensive sexual
education. The Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) and the House
committees on Early Childhood, Elementary and
Secondary Education and Higher Education and
Workforce Training need to take action on existing

But in the United States, comprehensive sexual

bills that would allow access to comprehensive sexual

education (or any sexual education for that matter) is

education.

1
2

Timeline
of Sexual Education
Lorem
Ipsum
in America
1892: The National
Education
Association
promotes sexual
education as a
necessary subject.
1919: US
government supports
sex ed as part of
White House
Conference on Child
Welfare.
1940: School
Sexuality
Education
labeled and
urgent need.
1960:
Opposition to
sexual
education
organizes

1981:
Adolescent
Family Life Act
(AFLA) passed.

2001: Surgeon
General calls
for national
conversation
about sex and
sexuality.

2008: 25 states
rejected
federal funding
for abstinenceonly programs
citing evidence
that programs
do not affect
behavior.

Source

12

1916: Margret
Sanger opens
first birth
control clinic.
1937: The
American
Medical
Association
recognizes birth
control as an
integral part of
education.
1942:
Planned
Parenthood
founded.

1975: 20
states voted
to restrict or
ban sexuality
education.
1996: $250
million
committed
to
Abstinenceonly
education as
part of the
Welfare
Reform Act
(Title V).
2004: Despite
reports
showing
ineffectiveness
, Bush
Administration
funnels $170
million into
abstinenceonly
programs.

10

A History of Sexual
education in America
Debates over sexual education, its
methods and availability have
existed for over one hundred years
(see timeline). But the question of
the federal governments role in the
sexual education and its funding is a
more recent question.

Two other programs followed the

AFLA. In 1996, Title V AOUM
funneled even more money into
abstinence-only education. The
final substantial program in the
web of federally funded sexual

Beginning in the 1970s and 1980s

education was the Community

concerns over HIV and unintended

Based Abstinence Education, which

pregnancy in the teenage

was created in 2000. Between

population began to rise. In 1981

1996 and 2008 alone Congress

the first federal policy regarding

spent at least $1.5 billion dollars on

sexual education was enacted under

abstinence-only education

the Regan administration (the

programs.11

Adolescent Family Life Act

(AFLA)). The AFLA was the first

2010:
Congress
funds
PREP.

(see page 3 for more information).

program that allowed for federally

funded abstinence only education

Throughout the mid 2000s many

studies began to investigate
whether widely popular and widely
funded abstinence only education

4
3

programs were actually effective. It

Government had its first hearing

had been long held in American

regarding abstinence only until

that abstinence only education

was the only way to completely
deter teenage pregnancy and the
transmission of HIV/STDS. This

The Adolescent Family Life Act: The AFLA

marriage programs.13 Experts called was passed in 1981 under the Regan
Administration and was the first federal policy
to testify concluded that abstinence regarding funding of sexual education. The
AFLA funneled taxpayer money into programs
only programs that do little to
that promoted chastity and self-discipline. 15

reduce STDs and unintended

mentality coupled with the long

pregnancy. They recommended

held American goal of legislating

that funding that had been used for

morality made abstinence only

abstinence only educations go

education the norm in the United

towards funding comprehensive

States for nearly forty years.

sexual education. Despite

But in 2007, some of the first

independent research on the Title
V act showed that the program did
little to deter sexual activity in
teenagers. In 2008, the Federal

Federally Funded Abstinence

Only Programs:

seemingly irrefutable evidence that

abstinence only education does not
work, as of 2015 there is still
limited funding in place for Title V
AOUM.14

The AFLA is cited as the first federally funded

program for abstinence-only education. The
AFLA existed and provided funding until 2011
when the appropriations act came into effect
and defunded any program that allocated grants
to abstinence-only education.
Title V AOUM: In 1996, The Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families Act (welfare
reform) was passed. In Title V of this act, there
was a provision that funneled money into
abstinence-only grants. Like the AFLA these
grants were available for states that taught
abstinence-only education. There were strict
provisions associated with this abstinence only
education.
Title V funding existed until 2009 when
Congress allowed the funding to run out.
Unfortunately, in 2010 the Title V funding was
resurrected in the Affordable Care Act. While
the provisions of the funding are no longer as
strict the money cannot be used by states to
provide comprehensive sexual education.

Source16

Community Based Abstinence Only

Education: The CBAE funding was created in
2000 and was used to directly fund programs
that would administer abstinence-only
education (unlike the previous two which
funding was ultimately allocated by the state).
The most vitriolic of the three programs, the
aim was to teach students that delaying sexual
intercourse until marriage would allow them to
live happier and more fulfilling lives. Educators
were extremely limited in what they could
teach students under the CBAE. The CBAE was
defunded in 2010.

Lorem Ipsum

Present Federal Policy

Since 2010 there has been some very meaningful legislation passed that has begun the process of reversing the damage
done by nearly forty years of federally funded abstinence only education. There are three primary programs that have
either been founded or have seen massive increases in funding under the Obama Administration.
While the Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) has existed since 1988, it has not had significant funding as
to especially effect sex education until the funding was exponentially increased in 2012 and 2013. DASH is primarily
used in order to give schools the capacity to deal with sexual health issues. DASH does not deal directly with education
or comprehensive sexual education but rather with allowing students with access to sexual health education. 17
The Presidents Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative was created in 2010. The TPPI provides funding to public and
private entities that reduce teenage pregnancy.18 Through sex education this program hopes to reduce the rate of teenage
pregnancy. However this program does not have a focus on comprehensive sexual education but rather on preventing
teen pregnancy.
The final modern program focused on providing sexual education is the Personal Responsibility and Education Program.
The Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) was passed in 2010 as a part of the Affordable Care Act. PREP
allocates federal funding to programs that provide sexual education for the purpose of preventing STDs and unintended
pregnancy.19 PREP programs are generally very focused on certain demographics and age groups within a state that are
viewed as more risk prone.
While all these programs are a step in the right direction, none of the programs directly provide funding for
comprehensive sexual education. Therefore, there needs to be a federal program implemented that would provide
funding for comprehensive sexual education while also dictating the standards of these programs.

A course of action
The implementation of comprehensive sexual education in America will be a two-fold process. Federal action must take
place in addition to state action. The federal government must make funding available for institutions (public school,
charter schools, institutions of higher learning) to be able to supply comprehensive sexual education. From there, the
state will be able to implement curriculum in public schools that teaches comprehensive sexual education either because
it now has the money to do so or because it has been incentivized to do so. Either way, this way forward is not perfect
and it will not get comprehensive sexual education to every student in the country. However, this is the best action going
forward that will ensure the largest amount of adolescents throughout the country receive access to comprehensive
sexual education. The bill that should make this plan come to fruition is the Real Education for Healthy Youth Act, and it
is sitting in the 114th Congress right now.

1
2

The Real Education For Healthy youth act

The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act (REHYA)

On March 26th 2015, Congresswoman Barbra Lee (D-

would provide funding for entities to provide young

California) reintroduced The Real Education for Healthy

adults with comprehensive sexual education. The Bill

Youth Act to the 114th Congress in honor of HIV/AIDS

would require that the Secretary of Health and Human

awareness. Despite general support by the American

services to provide grants to educational entities for the

people for comprehensive sexual education, the bill has a

purpose of providing sexual education.

prognosis of a zero percent chance of passing into law.24

The Bill has been introduced to Congress three times.

The Bill was introduced in 2011, 2013 and most
recently was just reintroduced on March 26, 2015.

Although there is largely bipartisan support for sexual

education, it is doubtful that a Bill that is primarily
supported and sponsored by Democrats will pass the
Republican Congress. That is why lawmakers need to

Each time the Bill has been introduced there has been a

ignore partisan politics and vote for what American

similar course of action by Congress. For example, The

people actually want. The committees and

Real Education for Healthy Youth Act was introduced

committeemen and women that now hold the fate of this

simultaneously in the House and the Senate on February

bill need to act in ways they have failed to in the past.

14th 2013. The Bill was read twice in both Houses and
then was recommended to the committees which would
work with the legislation in order to decide the how and

Congresswoman Barbra Lee

if the Bill would go forward. In the Senate, the Bill was

as LGBTQ rights. Lee

referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education,

considers passing REHYA

Labor and Pensions (HELP). 20 In the House, the Bill was

on of her priorities.

sent to both the committee on Energy and Commerce as

According to her website,

well as the committee on Education and Workforce.

Congresswoman Lee

Ultimately, the Bill ended up in the subcommittees on

firmly believes that all

Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education

students should have access

to potentially life saving

and the subcommittee on Higher Education and

Workforce Training.21 The last official action taken on
th

the Bill by the 113 Congress took place in the Senate on

February 14th, 2013.22 The last official action in the
House was taken on April 23rd, 2013. 23 There was no
hearing on the Bill and The Real Education For Healthy
Youth Act died in Committee for the second time.

health and sexual education

Congresswoman Barbra Lee is a

programs.25 Lee has

Democrat from California. She

introduced the REHYA to

serves as Senior Democratic

the House three times in

Whip. She is very outspoken on

four years, despite the Bill

issues of womens rights as well

dying in committee twice.

1
2
3

The Content of the Bill

The Real Education for Healthy

curriculum requirements. Such

The grants would be awarded to

Youth Act would require that the

requirements include: programs must

various entities including entities that

Secretary of Health and Human

be evidence-based, and programs

are committed to teaching adolescents

services to provide grants to

must discuss topics such as, anatomy

comprehensive education, institutions

educational entities for the purpose

and physiology, growth and

of higher learning interested in

of providing sexual education.

development, healthy relationships,

disseminating information regarding

the prevention of unintended

sexual education or programs that

pregnancy and sexually transmitted

train teachers in teaching

infections, including HIV, through

comprehensive sexual education. The

abstinence and contraception, gender,

entities applying for funding would go

gender identity and sexual orientation

through a rigorous process in which

and protection from dating violence,

they would show through an

sexual assault, bullying and

application why they need the funding

harassment. 27 The Bill will require

and what the program would do upon

programs to have a focus on the

receiving the funding. After evaluation

equality on genders and of varying

the Department of Health and Human

sexualities.

Services would decide which programs

The Bill outlines very specific

requirements for the programs that
would receive this federal funding.
Programs must, provide
information that young people need
to make informed, responsible,
healthy decisions in order to become
healthy adults and have healthy
relationships. 26 This would include
providing information about
HIV/STDS, unintended pregnancy,

would receive grants first (programs

dating violence, sexual harassment

Additionally, the program would

and bullying. The programs would

restrict funding to programs that,

be required to put emphasis on the

deliberately withhold life-saving

point that teenagers have the right to

information about HIV, are medically

make their own decisions about their

inaccurate or have been scientifically

sexual health and that the

shown to be ineffective, promote

information provided to them

gender stereotypes, are insensitive and

through these programs is intended

unresponsive to the needs of sexually

to help them make the most

active adolescents, are insensitive and

informed decision possible.

unresponsive to the needs of gay,

The Real Education for Healthy Youth

lesbian, bisexual or transgender youth,

Act would build upon personal

or are inconsistent with the ethical

responsibility education programs

imperatives of medicine and public

(PREP, DASH and TPPI).

The Bill gives comprehensive sexual

education a very clear definition.
Comprehensive sexual education
programs must fulfill a number of

health. 28

that serve teenagers at greater risk for

unintended pregnancy, HIV and dating
violence would be given precedence).
These entities would then receive
their funding for a period of five years.
At the end of that period they would
start the application process over
again.

An Argument of Values

Support and opposition

There is an undeniable argument over values in

While comprehensive sexual education is largely considered a bipartisan

regards to whether comprehensive sexual

issue, there are certain special interest groups that have a vested interest

education or abstinence only education is the

in whether or not The Real Education For Healthy Youth Act becomes

correct route for America. Those in favor of

abstinence only education often cite these
moral arguments. These groups often argue
that premarital sex is inappropriate or
immoral. 31 The Concerned Women of

law. REHYA is supported by a variety of special interest groups. These

groups are: AIDS Alliance for Women, Infants, Children, Youth &
Families; Advocates for Youth; the AIDS Institute; AIDS United;
American Civil Liberties Union; Choice USA; Guttmacher Institute;

American have gone so far as to say; America

Futures Without Violence; Healthy Teen Network; Human Rights

is not suffering from a lack of knowledge about

Campaign; International Womens Health Coalition; Jewish Women

sex, but an absence of values. 32 Many of these

International; NARAL Pro-Choice America; National Abortion

groups often find the basis for their argument

Federation; National Coalition of STD Directors; National Council of

in Christian doctrine, which forbids premarital

Jewish Women; National Family Planning & Reproductive Health

sex. Despite research that claims otherwise,

Association; National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health; National

many of these groups also claim that the overall

Partnership for Women & Families; Physicians for Reproductive Choice

drop in teen pregnancy is due to abstinence

only education.
Those in favor of comprehensive sexual
education hold different, if not non-traditional
values. Organizations in favor of

and Health; Planned Parenthood Federation of America; and Sexuality

Information and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS).29
These groups are generally left leaning but also have a vestment in
whether REHYA is passed. Almost all of these groups have involvement

comprehensive sexual education cite that

with teenagers that would be targeted by programs established under

adolescents should have the right to make

REHYA but each group is invested in REHYA for a certain provision of

informed decisions in regard to their own

the bill. SIECUS is the Sexuality Information and Education Council of

body.33 By denying teenagers information about

the US. They exist to advocate for the rights of all people to have access

sex supporters argue that they are more likely

to comprehensive education about sexuality 30 and have unsurprisingly

to fall victim to tragedy. These groups choose

been one of the groups most vocal in their support of REHYA and also

to acknowledge the fact that many teenagers

in repealing abstinence only federal grants.

are going to have sex and therefore want to

make them as informed as possible.

The group Advocates for Youth are also very strong supporters of The
Real Education for Healthy Youth Act. As the title would suggest,
Advocates for Youth fight for the voices of young people to be heard in
government even if they themselves cannot vote. Advocates for Youth
support the REHYA because they believe that adolescents have the right
to learn information about their own body and their own sexuality.

Further support and opposition

The Human Right Campaign has also publically supported The Real Education For Healthy Youth Act. The Human
Rights Campaign is a group working and lobbying for, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender equal rights. 34 The
HRC supports REHYA largely because of the support that it offers to LGBTQ adolescents. The HRC also supports
REHYA because it would ban negative portrayals of the LGBTQ community in sexual education and would hopefully
lead to further acceptance of these individuals.
While there has yet to be enough publicity or meaningful action around the Real Education for Healthy Youth act to
garner opposition, there are some groups who are opposed to comprehensive sexual education who are expected to
oppose REHYA. These groups include: Abstinence Clearinghouse, American Family Association, Concerned Women for
America, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, Heritage Foundation, The Medical Institute for
Sexual Health, and National Abstinence Education Association.35
These groups are often religious groups and are generally conservative groups. All of the above groups advocate for
abstinence only education to be taught in private schools and condemn abstinence plus programs (also known as
comprehensive sexual education. These groups site various reasons for opposing comprehensive sexual education. The
Medical Institute for Sexual Health cites abstinence only education as the foolproof way to prevent STDs and
pregnancy.36 Focus of the Family largely cites religion and morality as the reason that abstinence only education is the
correct way to teach sex ed.37 The National Abstinence Education Association argues that teenagers are not having sex
and therefore would prefer to be taught abstinence education instead of comprehensive sexual education. 38
There are two sides of this issue that have a lot at stake, whether that is equality or morality. Both sides really do want
the same thing, to reduce the harm that sexual activity may have on teenagers, they just have different ways of reaching
that end.

Sources 39

40 41 42

Moving forward
The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act could save thousands of teenagers from contracting HIV each year. It could
prevent thousands of unintended pregnancies to teenage parents. Fewer teenagers would have to die from cases of
domestic violence or rape. Not as many LGBTQ teenagers would be afraid to go to school. In short, The Real Education
for Healthy Youth Act is too important to die in committee again. This time, Congress needs to take action on The Real
Education for Healthy Youth Act. The Congressional Committees cannot continue to push this Bill to the back of the
docket. The members of these committees need to vote to make those young adults who will create tomorrows future
safer today.
The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act should not be a partisan issue. The Bill does not hurt any faction of society.
The money that would be spent to pay for comprehensive sexual education is miniscule compared with much larger costs
that programs such as welfare, Medicaid and even defense spending eat up in the federal budget. The program does not
force states to adopt comprehensive sexual education but rather makes the option more appealing to states or institutions
that would like to offer such programs. The program stresses abstinence but also gives adolescents all the information that
the need to have happy and safe relationships.
If the Real Education for Healthy Youth Act were instated the costs for the federal government associated with teen
pregnancy could be greatly reduced. But more importantly LGBTQ teenagers would feel safe going to school without
being harassed, fewer teenagers would be the victims of dating violence, fewer teenagers would have to decide between
graduating high school and raising their child and fewer teenagers would die of complications associated with HIV or
other STDs. The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act would save lives, save money and protect adolescents.

References:
1. The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/2074-the-real-education-for-healthy-youth-act
2. Real Education for Healthy Youth Act Reintroduced in Congress. (2013, February 15). Retrieved April 1, 2015,
from http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/real-education-for-healthy-youth-act-reintroduced-in-congress
3. The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/2074-the-real-education-for-healthy-youth-act
4. The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/publications-a-z/2074-the-real-education-for-healthy-youth-act
5. Smith, J. (n.d.). Reducing and Preventing Violence Against Women. Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://socialwork.rutgers.edu/Libraries/VAWC/Smith_Adolescent_Education.sflb.ashx

6. Sex and HIV Education. (2015, April 1). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdf
7. Sex and HIV Education. (2015, April 1). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdf
8. Sex and HIV Education. (2015, April 1). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdf
9. Collins, C., Alagiri, P., & Summers, T. (2002, January 1). Abstinence Only vs Comprehensive Sex Education.
Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://ari.ucsf.edu/science/reports/abstinence.pdf
10. Klein, R. (2014, April 8). These Maps Show Where Kids In America Get Terrifying Sex Ed. Retrieved April 1,
2015, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/08/sex-education-requirement-maps_n_5111835.html
11. Support SIECUS! (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2015, from
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1158
12. History of Sex Ed. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/serced/1859-history-of-sex-ed
13. A Brief History of Federal Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding. (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2015, from
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1158
14. Support Federal Adolescent Sexual Health Education & Promotion Programs. (2014, June 1). Retrieved April 1,
2015, from http://siecus.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/ProgramFactsheet.pdf
15. A History of Federal Funding for Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewpage&pageid=1340&nodeid=1
16. Sex Ed Infographic: Why We Need Sex Ed. (2012, September 19). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
https://www.life360.com/blog/sex-ed-infographic-why-we-need-sex-ed/
17. Support Federal Adolescent Sexual Health Education & Promotion Programs. (2014, June 1). Retrieved April 1,
2015, from http://siecus.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/ProgramFactsheet.pdf
18. The Presidents Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative: Providing Young People the Information and Skills They
Need. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1190
19. Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP). (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/1742-personal-responsibility-education-program-prep
20. S.372 - Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014). (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015,
from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/372/all-actions
21. Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013 (2013 - H.R. 725). (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr725
22. S.372 - Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014). (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015,
from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/372/all-actions
23. Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013 (2013 - H.R. 725). (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr725
24. Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2015 (H.R. 1706). (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr1706
25. LGBT. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://lee.house.gov/issues/lgbt
26. S.372 - Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014). (2013, February 14). Retrieved
April 1, 2015, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/372/text
27. S.372 - Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014). (2013, February 14). Retrieved
April 1, 2015, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/372/text
28. S.372 - Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014). (2013, February 14). Retrieved
April 1, 2015, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/372/text
29. Lautenberg Reintroduces Bill To Expand Comprehensive Sex Education In Schools. (2013, February 21). Retrieved
April 1, 2015, from http://lee.house.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/lautenberg-reintroduces-bill-to-expandcomprehensive-sex-education-in-schools
30. About Us. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=472

31. Collins, C., Alagiri, P., & Summers, T. (2002, January 1). Abstinence Only vs Comprehensive Sex Education.
Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://ari.ucsf.edu/science/reports/abstinence.pdf
32. Collins, C., Alagiri, P., & Summers, T. (2002, January 1). Abstinence Only vs Comprehensive Sex Education.
Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://ari.ucsf.edu/science/reports/abstinence.pdf
33. Collins, C., Alagiri, P., & Summers, T. (2002, January 1). Abstinence Only vs Comprehensive Sex Education.
Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://ari.ucsf.edu/science/reports/abstinence.pdf
34. Real Education for Healthy Youth Act. (2015, March 11). Retrieved April 13, 2015, from
http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/real-education-for-healthy-youth-act
35. National Opponents of Comprehensive Sexuality Education. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.communityactionkit.org/index.cfm?pageId=920
36. National Opponents of Comprehensive Sexuality Education. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.communityactionkit.org/index.cfm?pageId=920
37. National Opponents of Comprehensive Sexuality Education. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.communityactionkit.org/index.cfm?pageId=920
38. National Opponents of Comprehensive Sexuality Education. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2015, from
http://www.communityactionkit.org/index.cfm?pageId=920
39. National Abstinence Education Association. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://www.yfc.net/images/made/images/uploads/general/naea_200_89_s.JPG
40. Even After All These Years, HRC Still Doesn't Get It. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1063102/images/o-HRC-TRANSGENDER-COMMUNITY-facebook.jpg
41. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2015, from http://www.womenimpactingthenation.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/01/heritage-foundation-logo.jpg
42. (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2015, from http://www.bcpls.org/images/buttons/siecus.jpg