The Minnesota Family Council is calling on the Legislature and Gov. Pawlenty to reject HF 2245, the omnibus E-12 education bill, because it includes a mandate to teach condom and contraceptive use. I get the point, but it's really an elasticity question. These things both increase sexual activity and reduce pregnancy, and increased condom use further reduces the incidence of HIV; what is an acceptable tradeoff? The question is empirical. I don't readily find an answer to that question, though the estimates for condoms in Africa suggest condom distribution there could be quite effective.

Labels: legislature, Minnesota