Amongst other things, the MSM is claiming that the beasting of Bristol Palin is justified by the need to move forward the very important debate about sex education in schools. Not only is this a blindingly-obvious piece of self-serving rubbish, it doesn't even make sense on its own terms. Social conservatives aren't opposed to the principle of sex education in schools, we're just worried about the specifics of it.
No innuendo intended, but Ace puts his finger on it here:
No innuendo intended, but Ace puts his finger on it here:
Most people who object to sex ed in schools aren't against sex education -- they just want to do it themselves, and are frankly suspicious (with some good reason) that government-school sex-ed teachers will be a bit more pro-sex and bit less pro-abstinence than they'd like...Exactly. Most parents aren't against the idea of schools covering S-E-X, it's just that they have - almost certainly well-founded - fears about what kind of train wreck will result from putting it in the hands of groovy teachers.
I think sex-ed in schools really is more effective as far as providing frank instruction in birth control. I'm guessing that many parents are uncomfortable with the whole discussion and, to the extent they do discuss birth control, do so vaguely and without much elaboration.
On the other hand, just like the immigration debate, the government could do an awful lot to build trust on the "enforcement" side of the issue. People just don't trust union-protected teachers to go out of their way and appear "uncool" and give real warnings of about the consequences of sexual activity.
No comments:
Post a Comment