Family life education; emphasis of abstinence in curricula. (HB164)

Introduced By

Del. Scott Lingamfelter (R-Woodbridge) with support from co-patrons Del. Todd Gilbert (R-Woodstock), and Del. John Welch (R-Virginia Beach)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Emphasis of abstinence in family life curricula. Requires that any family life education course including a discussion of sexual intercourse emphasize that abstinence is the accepted norm and the only guarantee against unwanted pregnancy. The bill also requires that family life courses include materials that emphasize honor and respect for monogamous heterosexual marriage; provide information on the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases; inform students on laws addressing child support obligations and the unlawfulness of sexual relations between unmarried persons; and advise students on ways to avoid unwanted sexual advances and resist negative peer pressure. Further, the bill provides that students may opt out of family life courses if a parent or guardian submits a written objection and clarifies that parents have the right to review any family life curriculum, whether such curriculum is mandatory or optional. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Failed


12/29/2005Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/06 060241380
12/29/2005Referred to Committee on Education
01/18/2006Assigned to Education sub-committee: Students and Daycare (Carrico)
01/20/2006Fiscal impact statement from DPB (HB164)
01/25/2006Reported from Education with substitute (14-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
01/25/2006Committee substitute printed 060288380-H1
01/26/2006Read first time
01/27/2006Passed by for the day
01/30/2006Read second time
01/30/2006Committee substitute agreed to 060288380-H1
01/30/2006Pending question ordered
01/30/2006Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB164H1
01/31/2006Read third time and passed House (68-Y 31-N)
01/31/2006VOTE: PASSAGE (68-Y 31-N) (see vote tally)
01/31/2006Communicated to Senate
02/01/2006Constitutional reading dispensed
02/01/2006Referred to Committee on Education and Health
02/07/2006Fiscal impact statement from DPB (HB164H1)
03/02/2006Continued to 2007 in Education and Health (8-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
12/11/2006Left in Education and Health


Claire Chantell writes:

I think the wording around the "accepted norm" part is really sloppy. Accepted by whom? By married couples? Is it really the norm, in the sense that is the typical situation (that's what "norm" means--the typical pattern or situation)? I get the part about abstinence being the best way of avoiding unwanted pregnancy (I would quibble with the word "guarantee" because one could be raped), but stating that it is "the accepted norm" seems contrary to the truth as well as syntactically confusing.

Jonathan Weintraub writes:

The phrase

"unlawfulness of sexual relations between unmarried persons"

is verrry scarrry in light of the passage of the anti-gay Marshall-Newman amendment. The SCOTUS's Lawrence decision ruled that consensual sexual relations between unmarried individuals are constitutionally protected. This phrase clearly contradicts that ruling.