The Saga of Sex Ed

Recently I read an article in the Stranger that really bothered me. Mainly, because I was torn on my opinion.
Parental Dissent, discussed a Parent of a highschooler wanting to attend the Sex Ed class of her child, yet who was repeatedly rebuffed. She was instead directed to check out getting a 'curriculum review' from the district office. Obviously, this has many parents up in arms.
Here's where I am torn. As a parent, we should be acutely aware of what our trusted educational system is imparting upon our children. For more educational woes and concerns, please take the time to read the post preceding this one. When it comes to sexual education, this is very crucial, because of the vast amounts of information out there, and unfortunate interpretations of what should and shouldn't be taught to our children. Yet there is also the importance of respecting our children's right of privacy on such a delicate subject, and the issue of letting the teachers do what they are paid to do.
Why should a parent be allowed to sit in? There's some very serious issues at stake here. Our children need accurate STD information, as well as complete information on Birth Control options/Family planning issues to fend off unwanted teen pregnancies. To argue for the Right, if one gives our youth the full spectrum of the contraceptives available to them, it would reduce the amount of abortions needed. It will reduce the amount of STDs being transmitted amongst the ignorant and highly sexually active. It also teaches them the importance of being responsible, and yet how easy that can be. Also, as we parents are at the forfront of keeping our children knowledgeable and informed, we need to see firsthand where the gaps in the information they are provided are. If my child is only getting a fraction of the information he needs to make responsible decisions in his sexual future, I need to know this so I can fill in the missing parts.
But on the other hand, what teenager wants their mom or dad sitting in the back of his sex ed class? Especially if said parent has very close minded views on the subject, said kid may not be as forthcoming with genuine questions, for fear of retribution at home, or of course, being too embarrassed to ask what goes where in front of Mommy.
The biggest part of the story that bothered me, though, was the prime referrence to an 'alternate' group that teaches an 'elective' portion of the class. Apparently, we Washingtonians like to segregate information to the utmost degree, so the Birth Control options portion of the class are an elective supplement. In otherwords, Bobby the BibleThumper's mommy and daddy can choose not to have him know that BC exists, because it's so damn evil and will suddenly force Bobby to become highly promiscuous because of all the pretty condoms shoved into his hand. But wait, it goes even one step further! Bobby can sign up for the elective supplement class behind door Number 2. These schools actually invite a religious-oriented group called SHARE, which presents an abstinence only presentation. This group is not only a conservative and evangelical one, but more notably anti-abortion. ANd as typical with groups like these, it's supposed 'educational information' is grossly inaccurate, stating erroneous 'facts', like condoms are useless, the Pill endangers a woman's reproductive health, and abortions will very likely kill or sterilize a woman. In fact, the group has come under such criticism that it was recently brought up in our state's capital.
Now, this is tricky. Is this an issue of religious freedom? Some conservatives would shout that on high, as they've recently been doing. Funny, the very liberty we liberals are trying to instill (that pesky freedom from religious persecution) is what the Right is currently waving around as the reason they can fill our children's heads with such nonsense. Ugh, it's nuts, not to mention dangerous. It's times like these when I seriously wonder if our society is doing the backstroke.
Now, one would know by my interesting and oh-so-colourful past that I am considered quite 'sexually liberated', nad about the epitome of open-mindedness when it comes to issues like these. However, as once it was once hinted that I would stoop to, no, I don't planning on forcing pornography down my son's throat or encouraging irresponsibility in the name of sexual freedom/exploration. On the contrary, I will hope to teach him to respect himself and his partner enough to understand the gravity of sex. I would hope to teach him to be as responsible and protected as possible, especially in this day and age. Do I want that he'll make the right decisions? Of course! But I am realistic, I understand that 90% of human beings will have the desire to explore, and that the sugarcoated ideal of 'wait for the vows' ain't really all that plausable. And not always appropriate, but don't even try and think most religiously motivated folk would ever understand the term 'sexual compatability'. So, yes, I will be one of those moms that will keep a box of condoms under the sink for his own use, and without my questioning. But I will hope to impart upon him that sexuality is also not a toy, and that intercourse isn't just something to do on a Saturday night when you are bored and can't afford the movies. Yes, we as parents need to provide our children with the understanding and wisdom to make the best decisions and to be the best people they can be. But, honestly, we need to also provide them with the tools of reality.
In closing, I say leave the 'God says don't have sex' talk to the parents who choose to impart that on their children. It doesn't take an 'expert group' to do that. Christian evangelicals have no problem filling their offspring with misguided nonsense. And let those of us who want our children to know what reality is use all the tools and latest information available at our disposal do so. But hey, a note to Bobby's parents...if Bobby wants to start exploring with Susy the cheerleader sitting next to him, wouldn't you hope that she knows what the hell a condom is?