Where's the liberal outrage?

When it comes to compulsory sex education in school I am firmly opposed to it for a number of reasons.

First of all, I am against it because I do not see that it is any business of the state. I am, I think, a responsible parent. I know my kids better than any government official and I know when they will need to know about sex and how much to tell them at any given time. As far as I'm concerned, sex education is the job of the parent or guardian and nobody else.

That said, I have no problem with the teaching of the human reproductive system as part of biology as long as it is done in a cold, scientific manner - but this sort of thing isn't usually taught until well into secondary school.

I'm also opposed to it because I do not believe that it achieves its stated objectives - i.e. to reduce the number of young, unmarried girls getting pregnant. Before we had sex education, such things were very rare occurrences, but now they are commonplace. Of course, the liberals like to justify it by reminding us that there was a significant of rise in teenage pregnancies during the sixties - but this is a false argument. Firstly because the vast majority of teenage women getting pregnant during the sixties were older teenagers and married. Secondly, it was the sixties that first saw the introduction of sex education in school and thirdly, there was the "sexual revolution".

I'm also opposed to it because I don't agree with the idea that sex education should be non-judgemental. If you are going to have sex education it should be just the opposite with particular emphasis placed on sex being part of a loving relationship - preferably between a husband and his wife - and that its main purpose is not recreational but to produce children. We all know that most children respond well to clear boundaries - and that includes telling them what is right and wrong. If you do not make this clear when you discuss sex with them then of course they will push those boundaries - its what kids do (as any parent knows). You have to be judgemental with children and in clear terms.

Another reason for my opposition to compulsory sex education is that it will sexualise extremely young children. Childhood is a very precious time for anybody - it is also extremely short in the context of our lives. Discussing sex with young children forces them to think about adult things that they should have no interest in. Childhood should be about playing games, playing with toys, playing with friends - not playing with each others genitals.

Finally, we quite rightly get upset about the abuse of children by Catholic priests - but abuse of our children by teachers is far more prevalent. It doesn't matter if the vast majority of teacher-pupil relationships are consensual or even if the pupil was over the age of consent at the time - it still represents an appalling abuse of power by teachers and a serious cause for concern for any right minded parent.

The idea of letting some unrelated adult discuss intimate sexual detail with a child who is likely to see that adult as an authority figure and, consequently, someone they have to acquiesce to is disturbingly creepy to say the very least. The fact that many teachers go on to use that position of authority as a basis for a sexual relationship with a child in their care would cause outrage amongst the liberal progressives if it was anything other than a state approved official - but they don't mind as long as its one of their own.