This is an old article, but worth mentioning late rather than never.

Some 45 years or so into the sexual revolution (or after it?), researchers begrudgingly admit that abstinence-only educational programs might indeed have some value after all. 

Considering how long opponents have been attempting to deny this basic reality, this survey in and of itself is notable.  I just find it mind boggling that people can forget that only 50-60 years ago, cultural expectations were that teens should *not* be having sex.  And it would appear that it worked.  Particularly considering that contraceptives were not nearly as widely available, and options were decidedly fewer.  Yet somehow, we culturally understood that it wasn't proper or appropriate for teens to be having sex.

This could happen again.

But we'd have to change the culture.  Again.

Just like we've changed it over the last 45 years through the explicit marketing of sexuality to young children - even pre-adolescents.  And unlike some proponents, this needn't be a religious argument.  Pretty much everyone agrees that underage pregnancies are bad.  Perhaps not quite as many people - but still a stunning percentage, I've got to believe - would agree that underage sex in general is bad, whether or not it leads to pregnancy.  Pregnancy is hardly the worst thing that can result from sex - regardless of the ages involved. 

So if we think it's unhealthy and dangerous in a variety of ways (and yes, I'd include spiritually in there along with physically, psychologically, and emotionally), we just have to start acting like it is indeed inappropriate.  And as consumers, demanding that manufacturers and media reflect our commitment.

Maybe that's rocket science after all - at least for some people.