CLAIM OF FACTS:

BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS MUST TEACH SEXUAL EDUCATION

The need for sexual education has become more pressing in recent years, as the country has
seen a rise in teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The Philippines has one of
the highest rates of teenage pregnancy in Southeast Asia, with around 10% of girls aged 15-19 giving
birth each year. A sexual education is a program wherein students learn about bodily development, sex,
sexuality, and relationships. In addition, sex education produces skills that help young people, especially
teenagers in communicating regarding sex and their sexual health. Sexual education is a human right.
According to the United Nations, sexual education is a fundamental human right that all children are
entitled to. Furthermore, sexual education is about knowing one's rights and respecting other people's
rights, about protecting one's health, and about adopting a positive attitude towards sexuality and
relationships. It can be also called as comprehensive sex education, and is often opposed to abstinence-
only sex education. Sexual education has been a hotly debated topic in the Philippines, with many
arguing that it should be taught in both private and public schools in order to increase the maturity
development of those students. While some people believe that it is the responsibility of parents to
teach their children about sex, others argue that both public and private schools have a duty to provide
this education. In this article, we will explore the reasons why both public and private schools must
teach sexual education.

Some of the advantages of teaching sexual education are: it reduces the risk of STD's and how to
prevent them, reduces the risk of unintended pregnancy, gives students education about all types of
contraception, can appropriate sexual education can have an impact on preventing sexual problems in
adulthood, and lastly, it can help to reduce rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted
infections. However, there's also a disadvantages like as: some people feel that providing so much
information gives teens a wider variety of sexual activities to engage in, teens may feel with
contraceptives sex is okay to engage in, not all parents feel comfortable or equipped to provide sexual
education to their children. While some parents may be open to discussing sex with their children,
others may feel uncomfortable or lack the knowledge to provide comprehensive sexual education.
Students may suffer from embarrassment on the subject matter and it can cause out of control
classrooms. Sexuality education has positive effects, including increasing young people's knowledge and
improving their attitudes related to sexual and reproductive health and behaviors. Hence, it does not
increase sexual activity, sexual risk-taking behavior or STI/HIV infection rates. This is a worrying trend, as
teenage mothers are more likely to drop out of school and struggle financially. Moreover, STIs such as
HIV and syphilis are on the rise in the country, with young people being particularly vulnerable. Despite
these alarming statistics, sexual education is not yet mandatory in all schools in the Philippines. While
some private schools have included it in their curriculum, many public schools have not. This has led to a
disparity in knowledge and access to information about sexual health, with students in private schools
generally having more comprehensive education on the topic.

There are several reasons why sexual education should be taught in both private and public
schools. Firstly, it is a basic human right to have access to information about one's own body and sexual
health. Students have the right to know about contraception, STIs, and healthy relationships, regardless
of their socioeconomic background. Sexual education can help prevent teenage pregnancies and STIs. By
providing accurate information and teaching young people how to protect themselves, we can reduce
the number of unintended pregnancies and STIs. This can have a good impact on the lives of young
people, as well as on the wider community. Sexual education is an essential part of a child's
development. Children need to understand their bodies and how they work to make informed decisions
about their health and well-being. Sexual education can provide young people with the tools they need
to stay safe and healthy, including information on contraception, sexually transmitted infections, and
consent. Finally, sexual education can help promote gender equality and respect for diversity. By
teaching young people about different sexual orientations and gender identities, we can create a more
inclusive and accepting society. This is particularly important in a country like the Philippines, where
discrimination against LGBT+ people is still prevalent.

Government should implement this act by providing sexual education in schools to ensure that
all students have access to this right, regardless of their background or circumstances and have access to
this critical information, and to promote the human right to sexual education. Our government should
imply and realize how big impact of teaching children about consent, respect, and healthy
communication, sexual education can help to prevent sexual harassment and assault. In addition, all
youth have access to accurate and relevant information regardless of their parents' views or abilities.
Despite the different views of people on the teaching of sex education in schools, the Department of
Education (DepEd) decided to implement the "Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of the
Comprehensive Sexuality Education" which aims to have an understanding, knowledge, message and
methods of teaching sex education in all private and public elementary schools, junior/senior high
schools, state universities and colleges and local universities and colleges.

In conclusion, sexual education should be taught in both private and public schools in the
Philippines. It is a basic human right, and can have a positive impact on the lives of young people and the
wider community. By teaching children about contraception and safe sex practices, schools can help to
prevent these issues and promote healthy sexual practices. Providing comprehensive education on
sexual health, we can help prevent teenage pregnancies and STIs, promote gender equality, and create a
more inclusive society. In order to avoid any problem or harm, especially among young people due to
the lack and lack of knowledge about sex education, we must unite in teaching and guiding them to lead
them on the right path for the fulfillment of their dreams.
CLAIM OF POLICY:

TOSS COIN OR DRAWING OF LOTS SHOULD NOT SETTLE AN ELECTION TIE

Democracy is a system of administration in which the people have the authority to select the
leaders of a nation. In a democratic system, citizens have the right to participate in the decision-making
process, generally by casting votes for their preferred candidates or policies. One of the foundational
principle of democratic system is that people should be treated equally under the law and have equal
rights, which implies that everyone has the right to vote regardless of their gender, social class, or
religion. Another aspect of a democratic system is that people have the freedom to talk, act, and think
whichever they choose as long as they follow the rules of their nation. However, unforeseen events like
a sudden tie in citizen votes still occur during the voting process. How does our nation sort out this
unexpected event? What actions do governments take to maintain the integrity of the election?

Elections are of paramount importance in a democratic country. In the Philippines, campaigns

have always been vibrant and eventful, people carefully analyze who is deserving of being a nation's
leader. In the 2013 municipal election in the town of San Teodoro, two candidates for mayor received
the same amount of votes. To break the impasse, it was decided to do the method under Sec. 240 of
Article XIX of the Omnibus Election Code, which states that in an election resulting in a tie, the board of
canvassers will draw lots of the candidates and the one who is favored by luck will be proclaimed winner
and have the right to assume office in the same manner as if he had been elected by plurality of vote.
This scenario occurred not just once, but multiple times. When all other possible methods have failed to
break the tie, flipping coins or drawing lots is the last option. Notwithstanding the fact that this action is
lawful in our country, it is still an issue owing to the fact that the future of our city or town should not be
based merely on one coin, deadlocked votes should not solely be resolved by tossing a coin or drawing
lots. These course of actions should not be used to resolve an electoral tie since it is a random and
unpredictable technique that does not reflect voters will.

Election results should be based on the voters' choices, not on luck, as they are an important
factor in society. We citizens desire peace and prosperity for our own country, that's why we shouldn't
leave this kind of occurrence by fate only. Elections give people access to decide upon the
representatives who will rule on their behalf. This is a vital aspect of democracy due to the fact that it
guarantees that the people have a voice in choices that impact their lives and that the government is
accountable to the people. The Philippine elections give voters some sort of confusion and
excitement when two candidates have tied, and rather than thinking of another way to deal with this
situation, the tie is simply broken by tossing a coin. Even though these techniques are not acceptable,
the law sometimes requires their use. Moreover, lotteries and coin tossing are both subject to
accusations and allegations of unfairness or deception. Electoral results sometimes have the potential
for a big effect, as on whoever dominates a political body or how a vote turns out. So, it is important to
choose an appropriate and reliable method to break the tie. Instead of tossing a coin or drawing lots,
there are more reliable and unbiased ways to break a tie in an election.

Prior to employing another technique or method to resolve the deadlocked votes that
happened, it is crucial that citizens have confidence in the outcome. In some instances, a recount may
be demanded in the event of a tie vote to guarantee the validity of the outcome. When it is certain that
the two candidates' votes are truly tied, alternative strategies should be used. For example, a special
election might be scheduled to let voters choose again between the matched candidates. Election
runoffs between the tied candidates include an additional choice. If no candidate wins a majority of
electoral votes, the candidate will be selected by the House of Representatives, with one vote from each
state delegation, from the top three contenders. The two candidates with the greatest electoral votes
must be chosen by the Senate, with each senator having one vote. Furthermore, there is a more rational
way of breaking a tie and not just through the drawing of lots. Others argue that ties should be broken
using late-arriving ballots since they are less reliable than other ballots but still more reliable than luck.
In the event of a tie, all ballots that were received one day after the deadline might be opened, the votes
tabulated, and the winner could be determined by the candidate who received the majority of those
votes. But no state now employs this strategy. Those kinds of methods ensure that the winner is
selected based on the preferences of the voters and not randomly.

Overall, elections are a crucial component of a healthy democracy. Elections provide voters a
unique form or element of entertainment not only due to the list of candidates filing for certificate of
candidacy, but also due to the complexities of the electoral system. Citizens' votes and decisions will
determine what will become of our nation, therefore we must be mindful in this matter and not rely
events like tied votes on the candidate's luck. Even if the odds of something like this happening are
always extremely slim, we should somehow have a plan of action. An outcome that everyone will be
satisfied with and that all the voters can call fair and square.
CLAIM OF VALUE:

SHOULD THE DEATH PENALTY BE ABOLISHED?

Death penalty does not deter crime effectively; The deterrence effect that the death penalty's
supporters frequently mention is absent. The United Nations General Assembly has declared in its
resolution 65/206 that "there is no conclusive evidence of the deterrent impact of the death sentence."
It is interesting that an ever-increasing number of law enforcement officials in several retentionist states
are seriously questioning the death penalty's ability to deter crime. The death penalty is incompatible
with human rights and human dignity; The right to life, which also happens to be the most fundamental
of all human rights, is violated by the death sentence. Additionally, it violates the prohibition on torture
and other forms of cruel, inhumane, or humiliating treatment or punishment. Additionally, the death
penalty violates the basic dignity of every human being. The Death Penalty can be used as a tool to
control, not justice; The death sentence is only supposed to be used to punish the worst crimes,
including murder. Nonetheless, governments use executions in several parts of the world for non-lethal
offenses. Amnesty International reports that 2021 was a particularly troubling year for executions as
nations used the death penalty as a weapon against demonstrators, minorities, and other political
adversaries. Tribunals were held in Myanmar, when the military assumed control, without an
opportunity for appeal. A total of 90 people—many of them journalists and protesters—were given the
death penalty.

Death penalty can kill the lives of innocent people and we cannot risk that. What if the person
didn’t commit the crime but has poorly defended himself, he would end up dead. If death penalty is
continued, we can’t protect the poor people. It is said that death penalty aims to stop the crimes but
knowing that the person could be innocent and is in a place where he can’t prove his innocence defeats
its purpose. If we pursue the death penalty, isn’t it us who commits the crime because we are killing
innocent people? It only means that we too should be put up to death penalty, if ever death penalty is
legalized. Death penalty is said to give criminals the punishment they deserve to give justice. But how
about killing innocent people, don't they deserve justice too? Killing innocent lives bear great feeling of
guilt and is said to make people depressed. Death penalty is irreversible, if we feel sorry for killing an
innocent, we can't make anything change that, hence people gets depressed. Everyone that was related
to the person being in the death penalty before or after only suffers. A former executioner stated that
once they are involved they will suffer depression and guilt and destroyed their lives from drinking and
using drugs to forget what they have done and to feel better for their own sake but even after taking
drugs and drinking they can never forget the fact that they have killed more so if the person they have
killed was an innocent person who did not have any money to defend himself towards the said crime.
 The death penalty is a highly controversial issue, and one of the most common arguments
against it is based on claims of value. The death penalty is morally wrong: Many opponents of the death
penalty argue that it is morally wrong to take another person's life, regardless of the crime they have
committed. This argument is often framed in terms of the value of human life and the sanctity of life.
Death penalty at the same time is ineffective: Another common argument against the death penalty is
that it is ineffective as a deterrent to crime. Proponents of this argument claim that there is no evidence
to suggest that the death penalty reduces crime rates, and that other forms of punishment, such as life
imprisonment, are just as effective. Furthermore, death penalty is arbitrary: Opponents of the death
penalty often argue that it is applied in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner, with poor and minority
defendants more likely to receive the death penalty than wealthier and white defendants. This
argument is often framed in terms of the value of fairness and equal treatment under the law. Lastly,
death penalty is costly: Another argument against the death penalty is that it is more expensive than
other forms of punishment, such as life imprisonment. This argument is often framed in terms of the
value of fiscal responsibility and the need to allocate resources in a cost-effective manner.

Overall, opponents of the death penalty make claims of value based on moral, practical, and economic
considerations, arguing that the death penalty is not consistent with our values as a society and that
there are better alternatives available.