Eleven-year-olds shouldn't be having sex.
A middle school in Maine is handing out condoms. Middle school children are as young as 11 years old. Is it just me, or is 11 just a tad shy of an appropriate age for intercourse? I don't think I had even made it to second base by then. In fact, I don't even think most 11-year-old girls had a second base.
According to an op-ed in the New York Times Republicans in Congress are attempting to add $28M to the State Children's Health Insurance bill that was vetoed by the president. The money goes specifically to teaching abstinence. The editorial states that studies show that abstinence doesn't work, and abstinence programs teach false information.
Clearly, if kids are getting bad information, that issue needs to be addressed.
But the fundamental point remains: Isn't handing out condoms encouraging 11-year-old kids to have sex?
In the Maine article, a supporter of the handing-out-condoms program states that society can't rely on parents to protect their children. So, does that mean its now the State of Maine's job to make decisions on the behalf of parents? And, even assuming Maine has the ability to make the "right" decision to protects kids (although I'm unsure how one could determine that), under what rationale is handing out condoms the best decision?
The government should not be the forum for imposing personal values, but aren't there some lines we don't want to cross?
Malcolm Friedberg is the author of Why We'll Win, a set of books that explain the law behind hot-button social issues to laypeople.