You're right, it does. It highlights the strange special status sex is given, and the awful consequences caused by that special status.

I can't think of many other situations in which (all else equal) a parent would choose to increase a child's risk of life-altering mistakes because reducing that risk would not reduce other risks as well. Don't tell Becky to brush her teeth; she might just fall down and break them out anyway.

Everyone's child is a special snowflake, but we know abstinence-only education is a failure at reducing unwanted pregnancy and STDs. What it doesn't fail at is increasing human misery by weaponizing moral choices about sex.

It highlights that people bring up arguments like this to shame people out of having sex, but refuse to consider that something as simple as comprehensive sex education would contribute greatly to solving the aforementioned potential problem.

He's highlighting something important, but I think it's the phrasing that's garnering the downvotes.

The original comment didn't encourage high risk behavior or say anything about ignoring the risk of STDs.