Despite overwhelming evidence kids are receptive to an abstinence-only approach and that increased abstinence-only education are largely responsible for a drop of 8 percentage points (from 54 percent to 46 percent) since 1991 in high-schoolers who have had sex, the government continues spending $12 on "safe sex" and contraception promotion for every $1 it spends on abstinence.
This doesn't stop groups such as the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) and Advocates for Youth from trying to eliminate abstinence programs and replace them with "comprehensive" sex education. These "comprehensive" programs are often misleadingly labeled "abstinence-plus" and falsely claim to forge a middle ground between abstinence and "safe sex" education. In reality, these programs are virtually all "plus" and no abstinence.
Analysis of "comprehensive" sex-ed programs reveals these curricula contain little if any meaningful abstinence information. On average, these curricula devote about 4 percent of their content to abstinence and the rest to such enlightening activities as "condom races," in which teams of teens race to see who can get a condom on a cucumber the fastest.
They explore "alternatives" to intercourse, such as sensual feeding, showering together and other activities that seem highly unlikely to discourage kids from having sex.
Link.
Anybody who has engaged in foreplay (sorry for violating our PG policy) knows such programs are hopeless. Absent an accident (which we won't describe for risk of violating PG-13 standards), all such things lead to sex. It's common knowledge and simple, but policy makers refuse to acknowledge it. The situation gives credibility to the idea that they're still in the throes of the sexual revolution and think everything will be all right if we just walk around naked and do "It" six times a day.
