I was lucky. I had a very affectionate family. I found my dad's Playboys, and my mom's erotica. They hugged and kissed in front of me. They flirted. My mother talked to me openly about sex-there was no guilt. My mom also gave me one of the best pieces of advice I've ever gotten in my life. "Sleep with a boy first," she said, "If he's no good, that's why you have friends."

She realized the importance of a healthy sex life in any relationship. She taught me to expect pleasure-that sex was something enjoyable and not just for procreation. Or in my case, especially not for procreation! My mom didn't have sex until she was married-but she's not stupid, she knows things are different now and never expected me to be like her.

But not all of us are so lucky to have parents that can talk openly about sex. In fact, many teens learn about sex from school. And even that may be in jeopardy. President Bush wants to make sex education abstinence education. His proposal to increase abstinence funding by 33 percent to $135 million is not only an absurd waste of taxpayer's money - it's a dangerous proposition for the teenagers of America.

If teens don't want to have sex, they shouldn't. But instead of preaching abstinence - which is almost like teaching nothing - they should be teaching classes in self-confidence. Focusing on self-esteem, responsibility, and choices will do more for teens then any "Just Say No" campaign. Sex and drugs are always going to be there. Often girls have sex as a status thing or so guys will like them. Teaching them to be proud of whom they are, and to make choices, will help them more through their entire lives then learning about why they shouldn't have sex.

All we have to do is look at history. Have the drug wars worked? Did "Just Say No" do anything but create another 80s-style slogan, second only in popularity to "Where's the Beef?" Propaganda campaigns like Reefer Madness backfired-kids who did try it didn't go crazy, thus teaching kids that the government exaggerated, overreacted and basically lied. If pot wasn't so bad, then maybe heroin wasn't either.

If teens aren't given proper sex education during their formative years, they won't know what to do when the time does come to have sex. Imagine the fear of your wedding night if the only pictures you've ever seen of genitals are diseased ones! Using scare tactics and negative imagery to preach abstinence will make kids ashamed of their bodies more then anything else. And during a time in their life when their bodies are changing by the day, hormones are in flux, and all they can think about is the cute girl or guy who sits in front of him or her in math class-associating sex just with disease can only add to those problems.

Suppose these teens do wait until they're married. They will have nothing to compare their partners to. What if they are sexually incompatible? Will they know that just happens or will they blame themselves? And if they don't know how to have sex, if they haven't practiced (and yes, like everything else, practice does make perfect), how can they expect to be any good? Now suppose their sex life sucks-this will cause strain on the relationship-enough to possibly destroy it. So one or both partner's strays-if they don't know safer sex techniques and if they associate sex with guilt, they are at high risk for catching and passing a sexually transmitted disease or STD.

Humans are going to have sex. Maybe abstinence will let some good girls and boys get out of high school with their cherries intact, but what happens in college? Do you think that first taste of freedom is going to be without alcohol, parties and sex?

Kids need to be educated.

One of the major proponents of abstinence, Dr. Patricia Sulak, an OB-GYN and professor at Texas A & M University College of Medicine, is fond of saying, "there is no such thing as safe sex." This is in response to the fact that HPV (the human papillomavirus) can be transmitted by skin-to-skin contact-meaning condoms can't totally prevent it. If she had any idea what sex educators and activists were doing, she would be aware that we use the term "safer sex." Should condoms never be used because maybe they won't stop HPV? That's like telling intravenous drug users not to use bleach because it might not be 100 percent effective against hepatitis C, even thought it is a great preventive against HIV.

Despite some ridiculous conservative claims of female empowerment, abstinence is a far cry from women's liberation. In fact, I believe it is anti-feminist. The fact that women are now working in the sex industry, writing erotica, and believing that sex is not merely an act to serve their husbands or for procreation has done wonders for women's standing in society.

We are in control of our bodies, the Bush government has been trying to take away all of our freedom-but this freedom of choice is even more important than the abortion controversy. If birth control isn't taught, and if condoms aren't available, there will be more unwanted pregnancies and more abortions. Look at both sets of Bush daughters: both were raised with "family values" and both have been arrested. For buying pills with a forged prescription, drinking and sneaking crack into a court-ordered rehab. I bet you anything they've also had sex.

I wonder how many of these pro-abstinence supporters waited until they were married to have sex. I wonder how many have been divorced, have affairs, and have STDs. We have heard nothing of their personal lives, so how can they say what's best for us?

In today's society, fear rules. We are being taught to keep quiet and let the government take care of us. We are afraid of anyone who looks different. Our days are rated on a primary color scheme of potential attacks. And now we are being taught to be afraid to touch each other. If the Bush agenda is one of isolation and fear, then they are doing a great job. The opium of the masses is no longer a drug or TV or anything enjoyable-it's terror.