"Sex Education" in Government Schools

Parents Are Smarter Than Government Bears

In New Zealand government schools--which are part of a government mandated and enforced monopoly--sex education is compulsory.  Now the official reason the government insists on educating your children about sex is the high rate of teenage pregnancy in this country.  But when the government runs a programme with the aim of reducing teenage pregnancy, there is only one possible outcome--more teenage pregnancies--which is what has been happening.

. . . a cross-party [parliamentary] inquiry [has] found New Zealand's high teenage-pregnancy rate was partly the result of inconsistent and sometimes non-existent sexual and reproductive lessons in schools.  [NZ Herald]

According to the propaganda employed to justify compulsory government sex lessons, non-existent sex education in schools causes teenage pregnancies.  Now, however, since government sex education has been compulsory and has been going for some time now and yet more teenage pregnancies have occurred, what's the excuse?  Well, it's because monopoly government sex propaganda has been inconsistent, and sometimes non-existent.  This is what we call the "great double down".  Sex education in the monopolistic government schools is not working because there is not enough of it.  So, we will have more.

But also, a qualitative improvement is being proposed.
 

Sex education is mandatory, but the 18-month inquiry found programmes were "fragmented and uneven", parents were able to keep children out of them and classes often focused on physical aspects of sex.

The select committee recommended that the Government give all schools two years to create programmes that meet Ministry of Health standards.  The Education Review Office would monitor whether schools were meeting the needs of students of all cultures, ethnicities and sexual orientations.  Cabinet ministers said yesterday that they would "partially accept" the recommendations.

Government sex education has to cater to the sex-education of  homosexuals, trans-sexuals, bi-sexuals, and whatever other sexual "orientation" presents itself.  In government circles, none of these "sexualities" is immoral; rather they are all considered amoral.  They are regarded as a freedom right.  Morality and ethics have nothing to do with them.  They are thus to be presented as entirely legitimate and lawful--and, thus, are part of the government sex curriculum  So, it is no wonder that compulsory government sexual education focuses almost exclusively on sexual mechanics.  Moreover, it is no wonder that the specialist teachers often brought in to teach these subjects are immoral libertines, whose end-game goal is to break down every taboo and moral restriction upon human sexual activity, to the end that human sexual activity may become animalistic. 

A former board of trustees member who resigned over "unacceptable" sex education classes at her school opposes recommendations that sex education programmes be mandatory for all schoolchildren.  Jo-Anne Sim resigned last month as a trustee of the Blaketown Primary School on the West Coast after a teacher taught what Ms Sim said were explicit lessons that were not appropriate for Year 7 and 8 pupils.  The classes included discussion about oral and anal sex, flavoured condoms, and pleasure points - despite parents having been told in writing beforehand that pupils would be taught only the basics.

We are familiar with a non-government school which teaches all subjects through the lens of Scripture.  It operates in a Decile One (low socio-economic) area.  It is a Cambridge school, which means that its education qualifications are world-class and internationally recognised. Its external exams are marked in London. No chance of gilding the lily with inflated internal assessments.  The roll is slowly but steadily growing.  Many of the families are not Christians.  Why, do non-Christian parents choose to send their children to this Christian school?

There are a variety of reasons.  The education is of an excellent standard, with pupil learning well beyond peers in the government monopoly schools.  The curriculum is focused on core subjects: reading, writing, maths, and science.  The teachers, all committed Christians, are dedicated professionals and practise their faith in their interactions with pupils--they are gentle, kind, but firm.  Pupils are taught to be respectful, to be thankful, to be polite, and to work diligently.  Parents love all these aspects.

But they also appreciate that the school curriculum does not move into areas that belong to the family--such as "sex education" in a misplaced attempt to combat social evils and practise social engineering.  Meanwhile the school does teach the divine morality surrounding marriage and families in its Bible curriculum (after all, three of the Ten Commandments address this directly.)  Parents who are not Christians appreciate these things a great deal.

They think that it is far better than some moral libertine discussing condom-use, together with practising how to apply them, as part of a mandatory government sex-education class in the monopoly government schools.  No wonder parents in those schools are finding their children are coming home from these lessons "grossed out" and disturbed.

But that's paganism for you: when everything is relative and perspectival, anything can happen.  And it does.  No wonder conscientious parents want to send their children to a Christian school even when they themselves are not professing Christians, and at not insignificant cost, we may add.