2009 Senate Bill 663: Require "comprehensive sexuality” classes in public schools

Legislation watch

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman (D) on June 25, 2009, to require public schools to offer sex education classes that include “comprehensive sexuality” education that is medically accurate and age-appropriate for all grade levels”.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on June 25, 2009.
Passed 33 to 1 in the Senate on December 3, 2009.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 663 (Require "comprehensive sexuality” classes in public schools ) by gypsy on February 21, 2010

A very important and needed piece of legislation. Knowledge is power,
and we need to give our children the power to make informed choices in
regards to their health and futures. I support this bill, and am
encouraged to see it's acceptance in the Senate.

Line

2) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 663 (Require "comprehensive sexuality” classes in public schools ) by FreeSpeaker on February 20, 2010

The thrust (if I may use that word) of this legislation is admirable: Sex education in our public schools should be objective and factual and age appropriate. On that score, there is no reason this legislation, to amend and clarify existing law should not pass and itself become law.

My primary objection to bills of this ilk is the micromanagement of school curricula content by the legislature. Curricula are best designed by education professionals.

Line

3) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 663 (Require "comprehensive sexuality” classes in public schools ) by World Crazy on February 20, 2010

Umm, they already due teach sex education in school, it isnt a full course in it.They take a little time in class out to talk about it. However, even in highschool parents sometimes parents refuse to have there kids to be taught it. What the bill is doing what cost anymore money, because they already do it. There just say parents cant make there kids opt. out of it. Which makes sense if the kids are in highschool, but not soo much for middle school. It would be going way to far for middle school.

However this part of the bill probably wont cost anymore money. Also public schools dont have enough money, because the government spends to much on war, we could get everyone through college if we paid on 10% or even less of what we spend on wars alone. It is not soo much we can afford schools, we just cant afford to be stupid. Cut back were you need to cut back.

Of course, i might have interpreted it wrong is it a full class or the same as what they normally do but required?

Line

View Full Conversation