Human sexuality, as a topic, is considered taboo by many societies. How sexuality education is taught and what information is made available becomes subject to the politics of the creation and dissemination of knowledge, impacting who has access to formal and informal sources of sexuality education. The mechanics behind teaching sexuality education — who, what, when, and how — create a foundation for people to understand their bodies, respect boundaries, and make healthy decisions based on consensual experiences. Based on this understanding, sexuality education is considered essential for the healthy development of an individual. As such, Taiwan has addressed the need to include sexuality education as part of school curriculum. Ableist societal norms and ideologies about sex and sexuality thrive when accurate sexual health information is absent and sexual education literacy is low. Due to social, political, and cultural obstacles, sexuality education is inaccessible for all members of society. These ideas, coupled with ableist perspectives, urge the need to dissect the interplay between disability and sexuality education. Objectives: Using textual, legal, and narrative analysis, a qualitative approach is used to: (1) Explore the experiences people with disabilities have with sexuality education; (2) Discover what perceptions people with disabilities have regarding sexuality education; (3) Understand how people with disabilities define ability-friendly sexuality education; and (4) Identify principles of ability-friendly sexuality education beneficial to include in a course designated for people with disabilities. Methods: To fulfill the stated objectives, this project conducted a total of four interviews with five partners — one in-person group interview with two partners, one on-line individual interview with one partner, and two in-person stakeholder interviews each with one partner. In order to participate in the project, interview partners met the following criteria: (1) Be between the ages of 20-50; (2) Have been diagnosed with a disability according to Taiwan's Ministry of Health and Welfare definition; (3) Be willing to participate in an interview discussion; and (4) Be willing to share personal experiences and viewpoints. Conclusion: Despite numerous physical, mental, and social barriers to exercising health rights, some people with disabilities manage to find alternate routes to overcome these obstacles. Informal sexuality education compensates for the lack of formal sexuality education. Although some sexual health information is available for some persons with disabilities, it appears inaccurate, lacks proper representation of people with disabilities, promotes heterosexuality, and advances able-normative belief systems. Despite political intervention, there remain gaps between each policy's adoption, implementation, and enforceability. Combined, these factors strengthen and prolong the weaponization of ableist rhetorics ingrained in culture, politics, and general social norms, thereby systematically limiting the opportunity of people with disabilities to exert sexual health rights.