For example, a September 2009 study in the Sexuality Research and Social Policy Journal reported that most abstinence programs fail to delay sexual initiation, while more comprehensive programs show a positive impact, including postponing sexual activity and increasing contraceptive use. Complementing these findings is a January 2007 study published in the American Journal of Public Health which concluded that declining teen pregnancy rates in the U.S. were primarily attributable to improved contraception (and not to abstinence-only education).

As opposed to conservative Christian beliefs about pre-marital sex, the secular humanist view—which is atheistic or, better, non-theistic—doesn't start with "pre-ordained" assumptions about right and wrong but attempts to understand this basic libidinal drive holistically. By seeing sexuality not from the perspective of established religious dogma, but from a bio-socio-cultural vantage point, humanists endeavor to help young people better grasp the complex nature of sexual intimacy. To prompt them to consider the various ramifications—ethical and otherwise—of unrestrainedly letting loose their libido. And to have them question whether giving unmitigated expression to their erotic impulses is finally in their best interests.

These considerations don't necessarily mean waiting until marriage to (relationally, at least) express their sexuality. But hopefully, such self-scrutiny does mean that should they choose to become sexually active, their decision won't be purely emotional, or testosterone-driven; and that it won't, recklessly, put their healthy development or overall well-being at risk either.

Gloria Steinem (an American Humanist Association award winner) has argued—similar to other humanists—for comprehensive sex education, stressing that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs fail to arm teenagers with the essential knowledge required to protect themselves against STDs and pregnancy. And Alice Walker (1997 AHA Humanist of the Year) echoed the general view of humanists when she stated that sexuality should be acknowledged, affirmed, and even celebrated—and that the practice of punishing young women for enjoying sex is both damaging and counterproductive. Her position calls not for permissiveness as such, but for a healthier understanding of sexuality as a natural phenomenon—not a double-edged "gift" from God, tempting us to stray even as it ensures procreation.

Humanists' respect for our basic nature (sexual or otherwise) leads them to search for solutions consonant with who we actually are—rather than prescribing some artificially decreed, or "unnatural," code of conduct, which can bend us out of shape and lead to frustrating feelings of deprivation and unfulfillment. What humanists see as "naturalistic solutions" certainly consider the personal constraints requisite for maintaining a civilized society. But they also affirm that individual and social welfare are complementary, and that personal fulfillment (even while necessitating a certain amount of restraint and self-control) is best achieved through first understanding what is inherent about human nature. Not in a biblical sense, but scientifically. Solutions that result from such an approach are designed to affirm universal values—independent of custom and tradition, time and place.

Much conservative religious dogma approaches sexuality (especially unmarried, teenage sexuality) as inherently objectionable, base and ignoble. Humanists, however, avoid taking such unquestioned, categorical positions. What's ideal to them is that which—in a flexible, non-authoritarian way—complies with The Golden Rule (attempting to honor everyone, and shame no one). This fundamental, overarching ethical tenet—which transcends all historical, religious, and philosophical biases—aspires to integrate the pure with the pragmatic and, above all, "do no harm" to anyone (including one's self).

Moreover, not simply in matters of sexuality but in all areas of ethics and morality, humanism strives to put as few limits on personal freedom and self-expression as possible. At the same time, the positions taken by humanists (see http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism ) are ever-mindful of the need to protect society from being trampled upon by rash or rampant hedonism—or anything else that doesn't sufficiently respect the humanity of all of us.

Perceiving human sexuality from a viewpoint grounded both in science and nature—as opposed, that is, to some pre-ordained, or "consecrated," fundamentalist Christian viewpoint—humanists search out all relevant information (and seek to verify it) before arriving at a decision. Ethical criteria are definitely part of the equation here—and, at that, perhaps the ultimate part. But such criteria are still considered in the context of undeniable human realities.

That said, let's look at the facts as they apply to the multiple issues surrounding teen sexuality. One anomalous characteristic of human society (at least in modern western culture) is that, for social reasons, we discourage mating until many years after our children reach the age of fertility. The very notion of an animal's reaching reproductive age but then being forced to wait—at minimum six to ten years, or more—before mating, is rarely, if ever, found elsewhere in nature (except where it's involuntary, due to competitive factors).

This counter-to-nature mating delay can best be understood as tied to the enormous social, economic, and technological changes that have taken place in our modern era. Before then, mating occurred "naturally"—at, or soon after, puberty. Only in modern industrial society do humans find themselves in cultures requiring an unnaturally extended period of sexual dormancy.

Think of it. What could be more antithetical to our nature?! Nonetheless, these facts aren't meant to imply that teen sex should be encouraged simply because that's what's natural. Acknowledging our inborn sexual proclivities hardly constitutes an endorsement of hedonistic romps. But such recognition does represent a good starting point for a productive—and compassionate—discussion of the many intricate issues linked to premarital sex.

We also need to consider, however, that as human animals we've developed technology that has completely transformed our environment. Not only have we constructed highly complex technological societies (with, as already mentioned, economic and social systems that encourage postponing sexual reproduction well into adulthood), we've also developed the remarkable ability to control our reproductive lives through reliable (and easily obtainable) birth control. As a consequence, many of us enjoy unprecedented material comfort and convenience—without the burden of undesired reproductive obligations.