Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Who is taking Sex Education seriously?

Comment.

Sex education is systematically depriving an entire generation of children of their sexual 'boundaries': the instinctive sense of what is private, what is appropriate, what is wrong. Read up on the ideology of sex education, and you will find that this is entirely intentional. But if you think that sexual immodesty and impurity, an incapacity for committed relationships, and the destruction of the only environment capable of bringing up healthy and happy children - a stable family - is getting bad now, just wait another twenty years. In twenty years time the brutalised adolescants of today will be in their mid and late 30s: and many of them will still be incapable of forming stable relationships, understanding sexual fidelity, and so on. 

The seriousness of the situation could hardly be exagerated. But where is the outrage? Where is the organised response?

Parents find opposing sex education frightening, for two reasons.

1.  They have been told that if it is not to be done at school, 'sex education' must happen at home. They find the prospect distasteful. They are right to find it distasteful: sex education, of the kind done in schools, the destruction of privacy and sexual boundaries, should not be done at home either: it is totally wrong. What children need from their parents is the answering of spontaneous questions in a way which respects the degree of maturity the child has attained. Parents should not be frightened of that.

2. They are worried that if they withdraw their children from sex ed classes, they and their children will be seen as prudish, eccentric, irresponsible, and worse. This is, unfortunately, true. 

In fact, it understates the problem. Sex ed is not only delivered in 'sex ed' (PHSE/PSE) classes; it is delivered right accross the range of subjects. It is usually impossible, in practice, to withdraw your children from it entirely. Furthermore, the brutalisation of children in the school creates an environment which is not conduceive to children receiving any kind of education, or developing normal relationships and emotional maturity. This problem points, in the end, to homeschooling as the way to protect one's children, and this is something which frightens parents even more.

Home schooling is not, however, as bad as it sounds, as there are groups and resources out there to help those who go down this path. For those who are reluctant, however, we must ask this: if you don't want to home-school, you had better be prepared to fight your corner in your school.

The Catholic bishops of England and Wales have decided, in the main, on a policy of appeasement. For the most negligible of concessions they have simply handed the children entrusted to their care over to the sex educators. The man in charge of this policy is Archbishop Vincent Nichols, Chairman of the Catholic Education Service. Now that he has been appointed Archbishop of Westminster, the policy does not seem likely to change any time soon. Even his opposition to the provision of contraception and abortion in Catholic schools has been muted and ineffectual: indeed, the CES officially 'welcomed' the Government's 'Connexions' clinics in Catholic schools.

See Eric Hester on the subject (and here).

The Catholic press, even most Catholic bloggers, are extremely unwilling to tackle the issue. It is the elephant in the room. They don't want to annoy the bishops; they don't want to upset their readers. 

So who is taking the problem of sex ed seriously? Well, if you are worried about it you are not alone. But we need to build a network of mutual support.

There is a petition open calling for a consultation on compulsory sex ed.

There is a newsletter for Catholic homeschoolers, 'Faith in the Home'. Email us and we'll out you in touch. HerculesCAUK@gmail.com

The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC): they have a 'Safe at School' campaign on the subject.

John Smeaton, SPUC's National Director, has an excellent blog.




Catholicmomof10journey: the blogger Jackie Parkes.

Mulier Fortis: the blogger Mac McLernon

Here are two newish websites with an interest in the subject:



We'd be very interested to add to this list.

CFNews draws our attention to this American site: Veil of Innocence

5 comments:

Mac McLernon said...

The Catholic bloggers I know take this matter very seriously.

As someone who "went public" and was threatened with disciplinary action at work as a result (and got into hot water with the diocesan authorities as a result), I object very strongly to the comment:
The Catholic press, even most Catholic bloggers, are extremely unwilling to tackle the issue. It is the elephant in the room. They don't want to annoy the bishops; they don't want to upset their readers.Be careful not to antagonise your friends as well as the bishops!!

Hercules said...

Not a very helpful comment. NB I said 'most' not 'all'.

More helpful would be a list of them, if you think they are good.

Smadraji said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mrs Jackie Parkes MJ said...

My name is Jackie not Cathy! Thanks for list....I do speak frequently on this subject having 10 very good reasons for doing so!

God bless you for your stirling work!

Hercules said...

Sorry Jackie, some brain-storm!

Pope Leo XIII's Prayer to St Michael

Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in the day of battle. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust down to Hell Satan, and all wicked spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen