Expand sex education

In Cynthia Glover's letter (Readers' Forum, Nov. 6), she suggests public money should not be used to fund sex education; rather, it should be directed toward basic courses like science. First, public money is already being used to fund sex education. But the sex education it is funding is abstinence-only and slight variations thereof. What Rep. Lynn Hemingway and Dr. Audrey Jiricko are proposing is that some of that funding go toward an optional course (chosen by parents) that would cover more comprehensive material.

Second, isn't health education considered a basic course? As I understand things, it's a lot like science.

Missie Harward

South Jordan