Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Compulsory sex education......
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7684810.s tm
Why is it necessary to destroy the innocence of our kids because a few chav tarts can't keep their knees together?
Why is it necessary to destroy the innocence of our kids because a few chav tarts can't keep their knees together?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.At the end of the day, we won't have much say in it.
I think teaching little children about relationship building and moral responsibilities at 5 years old is a great thing, and then it could lead naturally upto sexual awareness at an older age.
Believe me it is not just CHAVS ( define a CHAV! ) that have sex before they are 16. Parents who believe that most kids would not have sex before 16 if they weren't given the chance are deluded.
Proper education at home and in the school should include the consequences of early sex ( cervical cancer, underage pregnancies etc) the consequences of repeated abortions and about STIs .
HOWEVER I do believe the government make it too easy for kids to have babies with all the benefits that are thrown at single mothers. This should be addressed and the underage parents of the babies and their parents should have to fund matters if they choose to keep the babies. Not Joe public who pays for everything.
I think teaching little children about relationship building and moral responsibilities at 5 years old is a great thing, and then it could lead naturally upto sexual awareness at an older age.
Believe me it is not just CHAVS ( define a CHAV! ) that have sex before they are 16. Parents who believe that most kids would not have sex before 16 if they weren't given the chance are deluded.
Proper education at home and in the school should include the consequences of early sex ( cervical cancer, underage pregnancies etc) the consequences of repeated abortions and about STIs .
HOWEVER I do believe the government make it too easy for kids to have babies with all the benefits that are thrown at single mothers. This should be addressed and the underage parents of the babies and their parents should have to fund matters if they choose to keep the babies. Not Joe public who pays for everything.
-- answer removed --
Gromit
Thurs 23/10/08
10:29 R1Geezer
I'm sure you have a better idea for reducing the 4,376 abortions in girls under 16 last year?
But surely girls know about sex today ? We knew about it 50 years ago and had no Sex education. I'm not against but can't believe anyone at child bearing age is ignorant of the facts.
Thurs 23/10/08
10:29 R1Geezer
I'm sure you have a better idea for reducing the 4,376 abortions in girls under 16 last year?
But surely girls know about sex today ? We knew about it 50 years ago and had no Sex education. I'm not against but can't believe anyone at child bearing age is ignorant of the facts.
There is so much openess about sex these days, including contraception and STD's etc., that I too would find it surprising if someone wasn't fully clued up by the time they needed to be.
I just don't think sex education in schools will make any difference whatsoever to all the underage pregnancies and STD's that now abound. If kids are indulging in unprotected sex is isn't because they haven't been warned. A lot of them just don't care and their families don't care either. Of course there are many that are responsible.
I just don't think sex education in schools will make any difference whatsoever to all the underage pregnancies and STD's that now abound. If kids are indulging in unprotected sex is isn't because they haven't been warned. A lot of them just don't care and their families don't care either. Of course there are many that are responsible.