Should Parents Encourage More Teen Sex in an Attempt to Lower Teen Pregnancy Rates?

Teen pregnancies have been rising in the UK and a public debate has broken out over the recent tragedy of a 12 (now 13) year old boy who got a 15 year old girl pregnant after her mother left them home alone. The Labour Government, that instrument of decisive action, waded into the breach with - I kid you not - a pamphlet. (See a previous post called "Parents told: avoid morality in sex lessons.") The pamphlet advised parents not to make sex into a moral issue when talking to their children. (Apparently, some were tempted to do so and the Government had to act.) Obviously, the Labour Government, being a socialist government after all, thinks morality is to be avoided at all costs in all matters sexual. Heavens, you might cause the children to rebel! But, think about it. If they have no rules, how can they rebel? This is pure genius! Why has no one come up with this before now? I guess it took a socialist government and many, many highly trained, social scientests to come with this new scientific, foolproof parenting strategy. No word yet on when the Government plans to abandon attempts to moralize about homophobia and racism, but the sooner this happens the faster we will be on our way to a perfect society.

Today, we are treated to a wonderful headline that makes the Times sound like Seventeen magazine: "Teen Sex: Should You Allow Sleepovers?" Have a bunch of "valley girls" taken over the news room? I can only suppose that any day now we will have an exclusive interview with Gordon Brown in which the burning question of the day will be girls asking him how to deal with the trauma of when your braces get caught in his sweater and other such critical concerns. Or maybe a panel of female cabinet ministers could discuss questions like: "Will I get a bad reputation if I don't go all the way by the second date?" and "Should modern girls expect him to pay for the condoms out of his allowance?"

The article suggests that it is a real parenting dilemma to decide whether to allow some boy to stay in your 14 year old daughter's room all night or not. Hmm . . . How best to prevent pregnancy? More sex or less? It's so hard to say - flip a coin. It sounds to me like some kindly soul should call the author of this article and explain clearly - perhaps using short words - where babies come from.
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5834488.ece

Let's see if we can take this daring and edgy journalism to the next level of edginess and daring. Should parents try to keep their children from having sex or ensure that they are "doing it" before junior high, just to make sure they are ready for junior high? Should parents have any rules about members of the opposite sex, dating etc. and if so should they include methods of contraception? Should parents enforce any boundaries or would that be "Victorian" (gasp!)? Should fathers take their 12 year old sons to whorehouses instead of sporting events for their birthdays? Should mothers go one step further and rent their daughters out to neighbourhood boys? (It could provide extra income during recessionary times and . . . it could pay for the trips to the whorehouses too.) Should parents leave morality out of the sex advice area altogether or should they insist that virginity is a moral deficiency? So many tough questions - so few obvious solutions.

Maybe if the mainstream media and the government get stumped, they could call the editors of Seventeen or maybe Playboy. While they are at it they can pick up a few tips on good policies for getting that virginity rate down to zero, along with the stock market.

Further Thoughts on the British Governments's Stand Against Teaching Children Basic Morality

Further to my post yesterday about the British Labour government minister telling parents not to teach their children right from wrong when it comes to sex, the thought occurs to me that the government is actually promoting child abuse. It is a matter of parental duty to teach children the Ten Commandments and to instil the golden rule in them. It is not an option or a trivial matter; it is a matter of basic, fundamental duty - a matter of right and wrong.

It also occurs to me that it is astounding that, precisely at the moment the government displays its lack of concern for the moral, physical and emotional health of children in such a blatant and obvious way, it also sees fit to instruct parents on how to go about raising children. This is evidence of a degree of moral blindness that indicates a willful and rebellious rejection of the moral order and God. It is proof that this government has lost all semblance of moral legitimacy and deserves nothing but scorn from those it presumes to rule.

This is not even matter of concern limited only to Christians. It goes beyond that. It is a matter of basic humanism and decency. No major religion in the world and few agnostics actually believe that sex is a completely amoral area of life. This government consists of people who are not mature enough to be trusted to babysit for the evening, let alone govern a modern nation-state. There is stupidity and there is evil; a mixture of the two is lethal.

Parents told: avoid morality in sex lessons

Well, just when you think you have heard everything, the British Labour government comes up with something so whacky and demented that you think you have somehow wandered into the twilight zone. With teen pregnancy rates the highest in Europe and the recent case of the 13 year old who fathered a child after the girl's mother left the two alone, (for reasons no one has been able satisfactorily to explain), the government wades in with this gem of advice: "Parents, don't try to introduce the question of morality into sex talks with your children."

"Parents should avoid trying to convince their teenage children of the difference between right and wrong when talking to them about sex, a new government leaflet is to advise. Instead, any discussion of values should be kept “light” to encourage teenagers to form their own views, according to the brochure, which one critic has called “amoral”.

Talking to Your Teenager About Sex and Relationships will be distributed in pharmacies from next month as part of an initiative led by Beverley Hughes, the children’s minister.

The leaflet comes in the wake of the case of Alfie Patten, the 13-year-old boy from East Sussex who fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and sparked a debate about how to cut rates of teenage parenthood.

It advises: 'Discussing your values with your teenagers will help them to form their own. Remember, though, that trying to convince them of what’s right and wrong may discourage them from being open.'”

Here is the link. Who would believe me if they could not read it for themselves?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5780725.ece

So that is what it has come to in the UK today. Official government policy is 1) sex is not a moral issue and 2) the government feels competent (and brazen enough) to lecture (order? advise? require?) parents to refrain from passing on morals to their children. God forbid that anyone might teach the children right from wrong! Will somebody get these clowns out of office before they manage to destroy the country?

It is a joke, but it is not funny. If this minster is not forced to resign over this, then one might as well consider Britain a goner. What a dispicable, pitiful and immoral bunch of losers. What a horrible society to be a teenager in today. And to think that at one time Britain was a Christian nation. Difficult to believe.