A new study on sex education came out this week, and the mainstream media and blogs are abuzz with the findings. The Washington Post headline was par for the course when it came to the coverage: "Abstinence-only program shows promise."

The trouble with this headline, and others like it, is that it's not clear what the phrase "abstinence-only" actually means here. The phrase "abstinence-only" in common parlance connotes "abstinence-only-until-marriage," right? But that wouldn't be an accurate use of the phrase here, because in fact, the curriculum in the study didn't tell students they had to wait until marriage. Instead, it encouraged young teens to wait "until they were ready" to have sex and prompted them to build the skills and gather the information to make responsible decisions for themselves.

Unfortunately, with groups like Family Research Council claiming that any sex ed program that doesn't promote abstinence exclusively "encourages high-risk behavior," the facts can get jumbled. Heritage Foundation claims "comprehensive sex ed a big flop." But comprehensive sex ed is called comprehensive for a reason-- it doesn't just teach about contraception, it doesn't just teach about abstinence... it's a comprehensive approach! And comprehensive, medically-accurate sex education that encourages teens to delay sexual activity has been shown to work.

Study after study in the past has shown that comprehensive, medically-accurate sex education helps young adults make healthy decisions and delay sexual activity. Study after study has shown that programs that tell students they must wait until marriage before having sex, without equipping them with information to make their own decisions and be smart about those decisions, doesn't work.

Seems to me this new research confirms what we already knew-- equip kids with information, help them develop the skills to make responsible choices, and encourage them to delay sexual activity, and everybody wins.