"Sex education" (grooming at public expense) is not the solution to this problem. It is the problem.
No one older than seven or eight can now be in the slightest doubt as to where babies come from, and no one older than 11 or 12 can now be in the slightest doubt as to how to put on a condom. Yet ... well, we all know yet what.
When something is as spectacularly unsuccessful as this, then, at the very least, it ought to be discontinued as a matter of the utmost urgency.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The response "More of the same, please." is simply not valid. We've tried it. More sex education for younger people results in more abortions. I'll explain here: http://patricksplaceonline.blogspot.com/ if you're interested.
ReplyDeleteI greatly look forward to it.
ReplyDeleteSo how do you explain low child pregnancy rates in Scandnavia and the Netherlands?
ReplyDeletePeople think that Amsterdam is typical of The Netherlands. It isn't. The south is still staunchly Catholic, and much of the north is still staunchly Calvinist.
ReplyDeleteThis is reflected in the family and community structures that are able, in spite rather than because of things like sex education in schools, to maintain standards, including among teenagers.
In Scandinavia, the Confessional, Pietist and High Church strands within the Lutheranism there (quite different from that in Germany in many ways) now have less hold than either Catholicism or Calvinism still has in The Netherlands.
But they are still there, especially in the small-town heartlands, and in spite of the very low levels of weekly (rather than, say, Christmas and Easter) churchgoing.