Sex, rights and duties

Any Colour but Brown

With Labour's record on education, kids'll end up thinking that they have to put a condom on a carrot before having sex.

Vulture

What on earth makes you think that the motives of Blinker Balls are 'honourable' David? This appalling man would not know what honour was if it rammed into his fat arse and rang a tram bell.

This is an extension of the controlling Nanny State of which Bollox is such a distinguished proponent. It will be hugely unpopular and add another to the many nails
hammered into Liebour's coffin.

Robert Eve

I can't believe that Balls has honourable motives about anything.

Liam Murray

You're supporting the right of faith groups to withdraw from sex education 'in an ethics free environment' but then saying you don't think 'a moral dimension' should be part of such classes. Isn't there a contradiction there?

For me the problems arise (in the main) because we always view the topic distinct from everything else children learn at school - in truth of course is part of preparation for adult life and we all accept that the state has a massive part to play in that. It should be a small but important part of any curriculum and parents rights over it should be no different to whatever rights they have over education in general (e.g. home schooling).

David Ossitt

“Ed Balls will force 15 year olds to have at least one year of mandatory sex education in schools”

A whole year, a whole year after all of the previous sex education that they have been forced to have.

A whole year; for a subject that would take less than an two hours to cover in depth a whole year when many will be shagging each other senseless.

Ed Balls; should, among other things be charged with mass child abuse.

Fergus Pickering

Surely you mean five-year-olds. Fifteen-year-olds are well into the practical applications. My daughters got the bananas and the condoms a long time before they were fifteen. I'm sure most fifteen-year-olds could teach me a few things, though not neccessarily, at my age, things it would be good for m to know.

Michael Booth

Funny how so many things are mandatory in 'an open and free democratic society'...

DavidDP

"But that those lessons become mandatory, supported by the threat of disciplinary action, without regard for a matter of conscience, is pernicious. "

Sorry, no. The lessons from other countries is that proper, mandatory sex education which teaches about contraception and responsible sex helps to reduce teen pregancy.

This is the correct thing to do if you want to reduce the impact on the rest of us in terms of public money going to support single teengage mothers.

Christopher Bowring

The fundamental question concerning the entire welfare of children is whether parents have the right to decide everything for them. The clear reply is that the do not. On the one hand, parents have the right to bring up their children as they wish because they 'own' them. On the other hand, children have their own rights, one of which would be for example the right not to be abused by their parents. If education for children were not compulsory and the parents did not wish or were incapable of educating their children themselves, the children would suffer and most people would agree that education outside the home would then be mandatory.

But today it is perfectly legal to educate your children at home, provided the education is sufficient. To extend that principle, then, why cannot just parts of mandatory schooling be done in the home? Why cannot sex education be taught at home provided again the parents are shown to be capable? I think this is the point that Mr Balls is overlooking.

Ben Elford

This is a misguided proposal. If there is cause and effect here, the growth of sex education seems to have fueled the rise in teen pregnancies and abortions. Balls is proposing more of the same.

It is also a sinister proposal: the 'education' on offer is not value free, but strongly biased towards a debased morality. The state has no business forcing its immoral agenda onto children.

Alan Douglas

On some blog, the question was "When should sex and relationship counselling be given."

My answer : about 7 years into every marriage.

Tell that man his name does NOT have to intrude into everything he does, and to back off. He is trampling on my, and my children's RIGHTS.

Alan Douglas

Nicholas

"This is the correct thing to do . . . "

Oh, God, not that piece of Brownian New Labour newspeak designed to put those who disagree in the moral wrong.

And DavidDP you make huge presumptions about the ability of secular, politically brainwashed, dumbed-down Brit kids to emulate their better brought up in the first place foreign cousins. I'm still waiting for the promised café culture.

Stop pretending David DP. Brown and New Labour are not about anything positive or truly aspiring to what they constantly announce to us. What you see (or hear) is not what you (ever) get. They are about chaos and destruction. Verity has it precisely correct. They are proto-fascists spearheading an imposed cultural revolution through unmandated and largely covert change programmes.

You don't have to believe their propaganda you know, just because a lot of other chumps and most of the MSM in this country do. But then again, maybe you are one of their cheerleading commissars.

Peter From Maidstone

Taking away our own rights for some notional and hypothetical commercial advantage is never worth it. It is selling our birth right for a mess of potage. The issue of the cost of single teenage mothers is not solved by taking away the rights of everyone else.

Mister Jabberwock

Maybe I missed it but the debate seems to have been evidence free so far. I heard that 0.5% of children are taken out of current sex education lessons. Has a study been done as to whether the occurence of teenage parenthood is higher or lower in this group than in the remaining 99.5%. That would seem fairly simple to establish.

Ben Elford

...presumably, though, if Muslims object to the mandatory nature of this, then Balls will have to provide an exemption just for them.

HJ

On the DCSF web site, Balls refers to "building a strong consensus" on this issue.

Someone should point out to him that "consensus" implies consent, not compulsion.

Nicholas

Peter from Maidstone: "The issue of the cost of single teenage mothers is not solved by taking away the rights of everyone else."

Precisely correct but that approach is the cornerstone of New Labour's power-obssessed approach to problem solving. Make the target as big as possible, as big as the lies used to justify the solution, and the legislation as extreme and far-reaching as possible in the hope that they won't miss. They invariably do though and just end up punishing and inconveniencing the majority of ordinary people whilst the problem persists or - more usually - actually gets worse (q.v. Dunblaine - firearms legislation - gun crime).

The best solution to most of the problems facing this country would be to proscribe the Labour party.

Any Colour but Brown

Hang on, there are only so many lesson a week. That means that something else is going to have to be dropped to cater for lessons in something the kids learned when they were 6.
What is going to be replaced - reading, 'riting or 'rithmatic?

Alexandrovich

DavidDP: "Sorry, no. The lessons from other countries is that proper, mandatory sex education which teaches about contraception and responsible sex helps to reduce teen pregancy."
Arse about face. The environment in which those kids grow up leads them to a more responsible attitude towards sex. The influences of their peers and their families have been far more instrumental in bringing about a 'matter of fact' approach to sex than any 'education'.
These countries then simply reinforce the good groundwork with sex education. A groundwork which I do not believe is laid in this country.
In fact, the lessons here just seems to stimulate the appetite for sex.

Pramston

Have they yet to work out what is blindingly obvious? The more well intentioned sex education we have the more teenage pregnancies we get. Surely it's time for a fresh approach.

rhuarc

15 is far too late. Most of the problems stemming from underage sex happen because kids have no knowledge at 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, not because they've been given a little knowledge the year before the law says they can start to have sex.

Gareth

"I do not object to schools providing sex education; it is the state’s duty to do so... "

Who says?

Paul B

Our children don`t need sex education at state expense, they learn all they need to know about the subject from one another on Facebook/MSN etc. They Google anything they don`t understand.

If we are to provide sex education (which in truth is just a salve to our collective conscience) 15 is far to late, half of the little buggers are shagging away like rabbits at that age anyway. They do it because its fun and enjoyable and its the forbidden fruit.

We need to stop moralising and wringing our hands, teenage pregnancies are not a result of poor sex education, but a result of our irresponsible welfare dependant- someone else has to pick up the tab- society. Fix that and watch evrything else full into line

Verity

Well, we gurned and groaned as the sinister, creepy Labour party led us through the nose to "1984". Now that we are through "1984", out on the other side, fully indoctrinated, we are approaching "Brave New World". The world of test tube babies brought up by the state and no parents.

They're already elbowing their way inside families and pushing the parents out of the way.

mac

Ben Elford @ 1016:

Quite.
And it could be as easy as 'community leaders' in Blackburn having a quiet word with their influential - and reliably trimming - MP. Or another threat from Lord Ahmed to mobilise his private army.

David Blackburn - and you think it's perfectly proper for the state to impose sex education? It'll be no surprise come the day when you declare: "I'm David Blackburn, and I am a Gramscian"

Andy Carpark

Someone I know who otherwise lives a life of blameless respectability has a party trick involving the insertion of a condom into his nose followed by its extraction through his mouth, to a polite ripple of applause. It is very impressive. He was educated by monks.

TomTom

Teaching must be a nightmare with all this social worker cr*p dumped on them. Nurses should teach sex education with all the aspects of abortion and STIs. Let the NHS deal with this in schools not teachers who have other subjects where they need to be credible

EyeSee

If you look at any policy area approached by New Labour in twelve plus, years you find that the only area of consistency is sex. They are extrordinarily keen on introducing ever younger chidren to sex. Particularly it seems, unusual types of sexual activity which they wish the children to know are 'alternatives' available as different 'lifestyles'. And the continual pressure to lower the age of 'consent' for homosexuals. I suppose what we need to watch out for is 'zoo'. When homosexuals wanted to describe their version of sex as normal, they chose the word gay, to make themselves seem less threatening to those who didn't share their lifestyle choice and easier to accept (e.g. get their way on legislation). So beastiality is now becoming zoo, so much more 'accessible' as a word. Friendly. Who could object? After all, it is only an alternative lifestyle. Wouldn't it be great if democracy and free speech had survived? I'm guessing I have come close (or maybe crossed?) the line in thhis post and hear the words 'you can't say that' whispered. This neutered society can't do anything, because these lefties who never grew up from their 1960's adolescent views, have been successful in forcing their nonsense on the rest of us. Man made global warming and the hysterical shrieking when someone dares to oppose it also comes to mind.

Fearless Frank

I grew up in the 50s and 60s, when sex education was non existent.
Fortunately, in these enlightened times, we have lessons from a caring state to ensure that teenage pregnancies remain at an all-time low...
Hmm, no that can't be right, I'll have to think about this...

Woodbine Willy

Is that picture at the top a still from an early version of those "My First Sex Teacher" films?

Dirty Euro

I just have issues about who will do the sex education. Will it be the local slag who spends her time nailing rough truck drivers offering her advice, or some religious bigot telling everyone to hate gays, or some sleaze bag child abuser.
I hope there are checks to stop any of these types.
It should just be a simple bland video in my view with no political views and no nasty types using these talks to bully or insult people.
My sex eduction teacher was a rough slag who deliberately goaded a 17 year old in my class for not having a girlfriend then seemed to give the impression she was the sort of woman who slept around with rough wife beater truck driver types. What sort of people go into sex education generally the extreme types.

It should be a bland basic video made in education department. Ed Balls and his wife could make it.

Woodbine Willy

My sex eduction teacher was a rough slag who deliberately goaded a 17 year old in my class for not having a girlfriend
So who was that 17-year old, DE - couldn't have been... No surely not!
By the way, is the term "rough slag" really okay? As a chat-up line, it's likely to backfire.

David Lindsay

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. Do not believe any talk of reductions in underage pregnancies, in particular. There is overwhelming anecdotal evidence that huge numbers of abortions on underage girls are simply listed as this, that and the other instead for statistical purposes. 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.

But then, is it unsuccessful in its own terms? Or is it in fact doing exactly what it is supposed to do? For it is difficult to avoid concluding that the whole point of it is to enable weirdoes to talk filth to children in order to incite them to sexual activity both with each other and with adults. Some people do this, it is called grooming, and they are sent to prison, the first point at which their activities become a financial expense to the rest of us. Yet other people do exactly the same thing out of the public purse throughout, and it is called Sex Education. Exactly the same thing.

Some of us would vote for candidates in the tradition of the Labour MPs who defended Catholic schools, and thus all church-based state schools, over several successive decades. Of the support by national leaders of the Social Democrats for Christian religious instruction in the schools of Berlin. Of the early Labour activists who resisted schemes to abort, contracept and sterilise the working class out of existence. Of the Catholic and other Labour MPs, including John Smith, who fought tooth and nail against abortion and easier divorce, not least including both Thatcher’s introduction of abortion up to birth and Major’s introduction of divorce legally easier than release from a car hire contract. Of the Methodist and other Labour MPs, including John Smith, who fought tooth and nail against deregulated drinking and gambling. Of those, including John Smith, who successfully organised (especially through USDAW) against Thatcher’s and Major’s attempts to destroy the special character of Sunday and of Christmas Day, delivering the only Commons defeat of Thatcher’s Premiership. Of the trade unions’ numerous battles to secure paternal authority in families and communities by securing its economic base in high-waged, high-skilled, high-status male employment. And of the trade union banners depicting Biblical scenes and characters.

But we can’t.

So we have to be those candidates instead.

Dennis Sewell

I do not think that a moral dimension should necessarily be added to those classes; they should concern facts, not abstractions.

If you're not going to include a moral dimension, what's the point of it all? Surely the number of teenage pregnancies proves that today's fifteen-year-olds already know the physical stuff. It's the abstractions they're having difficulty with.

If it's the word 'moral' that so discomforts you, call it something else. I'm sure there's something in the Newspeak lexicon that'd do the trick. How about 'issues around relationships'?

Fergus Pickering

There are a lot of teenage pregnncies in the UK because it is profitable fr the young girls to have bastard children. If it were not, then many of them would not. It has nothing whatever to do with sex education, which they all have ad nauseam anyway.

Rainer Unsinn

"Dirty Euro
My sex eduction teacher was a rough slag who deliberately goaded a 17 year old in my class for not having a girlfriend then seemed to give the impression she was the sort of woman who slept around with rough wife beater truck driver types. What sort of people go into sex education generally the extreme types. "

Now I know why you feel so dirty.

The Laughing Cavalier

Socialist educators, obsessed with their genitals, have spent a great deal of time teaching children the mechanics of sexual intercourse. Their time would be better spent if they addressed the when and the why instead of confining themselves to the permutations of how.

Verity

David Lindsay nails it (so to speak). This is what I have been saying for the last decade. Introducing ever younger children to sex is perverted and the introducers are grooming them. Everything this government has done is done with great malice and an eye on the degradation of society and the end of Britain. That includes mass immigration to dilute our formerly coherent and familial society.

Verity

Eye See, not to try to dilute your arguments, with which I largely agree, but the gays didn't "choose" the word gay because it was non-threatening.

The usage came about slowly, over some time. The first gay parades were held, as we know, in San Francisco. They passed out T-shirts reading Good As You. This was a message, in those more hostile, or judgemental times, that just because they were born gay didn't mean they didn't have jobs, pay their taxes, go to church, sit on committees, etc. Gays started wearing those t-shirts not just for the Gay Pride parade. Gradually, it got abbreviated to GAY, and everyone knew what it meant. It only became a generalised term later. But that's the genesis of the usage. It was just shorthand for "good as you" as a message to the rest of us.

Forlornehope

Anthony Burgess, in "Earthly Powers" puts the origin of the term "Gay" back into the early years of the twentieth century describing its origins as, derogatory, prison slang.

David Blackburn

Mac,

Have you actually read the article?

AngloWelshDragon

Dirty Euro @ 1:54pm
Willy Woodbine @ 2.25pm

DE - considering your usual support of the British working man your stance on truckers is a bit harsh! My husband drives a very big lorry (and yes, DE, as your teacher probable told you, size does matter in these things) and he isn't a wife beater and as far as I am aware, I do not qualify as the local slag!

Willy Woodbine - I think you may be on to something!

logdon

"The news that Ed Balls will force 15 year olds to have at least one year of mandatory sex education in schools.

For one moment I thought it said masturbatory sex education.

That's what we got, and without any tutorial advice.

How many teenage pregnancy's then compared to now?

The best sex education is telling them they won't get a council flat or an abortion on the NHS.

The prospect of staying at home with Mum and an unwanted sprog would sharpen a few minds.

mac

David B:

Yes, and this is the phrase I reacted to:

"it is the state’s duty to do so". 'State' and 'duty': traditionally, the state's fundamental purpose is to protect it's citizens. Universal Sex education is just another manifestation of socialist nannying.

Woodbine Willy

Do these sex education classes have anything to say about "a cigarette afterwards"?
What is the correct etiquette - share one; or one of you lights two and passes one over (and in which case, who should do this?)

Peter

Of all the inept, incompetent, rabble who purport to be ministers of Her Majesty's discredited government is Ed balls the one who talks the most balls?

Andy

Ed Balls just wants to make sure only HIS version of sex education gets propagated. I doubt very much that there will be any noticeable promotion of the idea that sex is best when in a loving, meaningful relationship.

Fearless Frank

Dirty Euro It should be a bland basic video made in education department. Ed Balls and his wife could make it.
Now you are on to something DE - the official Dept of Education sex education video: "Yvette and Eddie have it off".
Now that ought to cut teenage pregnancies!

.... .... ......

Being of an age sadly long gone...At that age I would NOT be seen dead with a person of the opposite sex never mind doing it.At fifteen? YUK!!!!!
I was still playing three sticks, marbles,
British Bulldog Charge,Monday Tuesday,two ball.
Sex education?
Good god...imagine Balls's idea of sex?
It will sure as hell bring the teenage pregnancy rate down anyway....and maybe put some off for life.
Poor mites.

Amadeus Plonquer

Just curious, but would this also apply to Scottish Catholic schools. In Scotland there is a state-supported educational apartheid. I believe the same is the case in Ulster. Or would there be an opt-out for Scotland? Or for Scottish Catholics? And what does Tony 'Bonapart' Blair have to say about this? And if there's an opt out for some, shouldn't there be an opt-out for all?

Then again, with a name like Ed Balls I'd have a complex too.

BTW: Has Ed Balls been vetted by the Pervert Police? And can we get a copy of the report through FOI? He sounds mora nd more like a perv every day. This man should be kept well away from children.

Roy Smith

There shouldn't be any need to even mention sex to kids at school. Do they not learn botany and zoology? If these subjects can't give students a starting point in the essence of life, then it's too bad, and no harm will come to them. It is the parents decision to make as to any teaching on the subject is necessary, not the State's.

Klee

"Faith groups oppose the proposals, not on the grounds that they do not want their children to receive sex education, but because they do not want their children to receive that education in an ethics free environment."

So religious beliefs are ethical? Isn't that a matter of debate? Can't we be atheist/secular AND act in an ethical manner? Why are ethics always wedded to religious beliefs? And what if the child doesn't agree with their parents' ethical stance or religious beliefs? Are children not separate human beings? Don't they have a say in this matter?

.... .... ......

Klee.
Yes children are 'seperate human beings'.
That is why this Balls up is worrying.
Are ALL these 'seperate human beings' going to be 'taught' the 'correct' way to have a relationship/sex? If so by who's standards?
Should it be the state that denies the natural parents or the guardians of these 'seperate human beings' ANY imput into these 'seperate human beings'lives?
How long will all these 'seperate human beings' remain 'seperate' if programmed from birth to behave, think and act only as the state dictates?
Rebelling from your parent's or guardian's beliefs is part of the growing up process in the FREE thinking 'seperate human being'.
Human beings are ALL different so treating them all as if following a recipe is an EXTREME view to hold.
Balls should be on a register, somewhere between mentally impaired to wierdo through to A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO OUR CHILDRENS MENTAL HEALTH!
The guy gives me the creeps!
So while I fully agree with your comment that these 'seperate human beings' disagree with their parent/guardians beliefs, the state option is FAR more explosive when these same 'seperate human beings' rebel against the state.
Tianamen? Iran? Iraq? Zimbabwe? Are perfect examples of what happens when 'seperate human beings' rebel against 'the rules'.
These 'seperate human beings are not 'rebelling' against their parents or guardians, as they had NO INPUT to start with.They are rebelling against the STATE and that will not be tolerated now will it..for example 'fining' parents/guardians who REFUSE to OBEY the STATE!
Yet another well thought out Labour policy?
The same as the childminding arrangements between two friends, or the playground where ONLY STATE employed people can supervise the 'seperate human beings'.The parents/guardians are not allowed in.FFS.
The most tragic part of that story is the parents/guardians COMPLIED!!! MY 'seperate human being' would be supervised BY ME and anyone with other ideas would have been told EXACTLY where to go!
MY 'seperate human being', MY quality,fun,
bonding time, with MY'seperate human being' and NO STRANGER employed by the STATE has ANY say, part or right to tell me different!
I also prefer the term children.

Sam ARMSTRONG

He probably has the backing of Mother Earth "Harriet Harperson" who in her Commie days wanted age of consent lowered to 14 or 15, and for fiddling with kids to be prosecuted only if there were visible signs that the child had been hurt.

As well as being control freakish, self hating and hopeless with money, Liebour are also sexual perverts who love the idea of sex between adults and children.

Sam ARMSTRONG

EyeSee
November 6th, 2009 1:37pm

Good post, but it's not good to confuse genuine love and sexual depravity. The vast majority of gay people are decent, gentle, civilised and sexually orthodox in that they have a partner whom they set up home with and stay with. But you can never see these Tory-voting, industrious, capitalist, freedom-loving "gay" individuals so clearly as they have integrated. Instead you only ever see the deranged, extreme, damaged ones, who are not representative of gay people but instead represent the left wing of politics, and use their sexuality as a vehicle to do their bit to undermine society.

Gay people deserve equal rights because they only wish to express love to their partner.

Kiddie fiddlers don't deserve equal rights because they are not expressing love, they are expressing selfish hate.