Parliament vote AGAINST sex education being compulsory in all schools!

A story on the Telegraph today shows that - shockingly - parliament have voted against sex and relationship education being compulsory in schools.

This is despite three-quarters of young people believing compulsory SRE would make them feel safer.

A previous thread on TSR also revealed how over 80% of you would want your teachers to educate you about - at the very least - the 'basics'.

In an era where young people can access anything they like through their smartphones, do you think people in positions of power have a duty to ensure they're correctly educated?

The Telegraph also states: "Beyond labelling diagrams of the uterus, young people need to be taught about the dangers of meeting people online, the risks of dating apps like Tinder, the consequences of ‘sexting’ and the difficult, and potentially, life-ruining situations it can put you in." Not to mention the current syllabus only recognises heterosexual sex/relationships...

What would/do you want to be taught about?

Do you think sex education should be compulsory in schools?

I think sex education should be compulsory. I went to a Catholic grammar and for all of my 7 years there, we were taught that abstaining from sex was right, sex before marriage was wrong. In fact, in none of the 'sex ed' classes I received was there a mention of contraception like the pill, condoms etc. We weren't even taught how to use condoms, and were told that being gay was wrong.

I understand that, yes, I went to Catholic school, but it's the 21st century, for crying out loud! It's fine if they want to teach no sex before marriage, that is the Catholic line of teaching, but they should also respect that no sex before marriage does not always happen and so they should include other teachings as well (contraception etc).

/rant

Coming from a single sex, catholic, shitshow of a boarding school in the middle of nowhere, with *****y phone service, internet censorship, and an wifi curfew...YELL TO THE YESS
I had to sit down one day with a friend and wiki my sex ed during the summer of my GCSEs because that's how bad it got

He said: “Some form of protection is needed for those who run faith schools, all faiths, to make the position absolutely clear. I have little or no doubt that I will receive emails from constituents who happen to read my remarks. They will say that this is all about promotion, and this or that religion thinks that homosexuality—or another element—is not right.

Good. There is no need for sex education at schools. If young children are forced to learn about sex, then it is more likely that they will start having sex earlier.

Good. There is no need for sex education at schools. If young children are forced to learn about sex, then it is more likely that they will start having sex earlier.

It's important to respect the freedom of religion, faith schools shouldn't be forced to teach subject matter that is potentially inflammatory in their belief system.

Another example is Darwin's theory of evolution, that shouldn't be compulsory to teach in faith schools either.

Now, obviously I realise the importance of sex Ed as much as the next man, but we can't make it compulsory and impinge on freedom of religion, which is a human right, if we start doing that it's a slippery slope, which human rights are absolute and which ones aren't?

Good. There is no need for sex education at schools. If young children are forced to learn about sex, then it is more likely that they will start having sex earlier.

Then why are young children taught not to do drugs?

There's a case for them not being taught that either.

But who will teach them heroin is bad for them?

Why don't we make parents parent their children for a change?

Freedom to teach children misinformation and fill up their heads with rubbish shouldn't be a human right.

How does that change anything? If teaching young children about drugs lead to their using drugs, is it not the same when parents are doing the teaching?

Why do schools teach anything at all? Why don't we make parents teach their children everything?

How about orphans? How about children with absentee parents? How do you enforce the teaching? How do you monitor the teaching?

Are you pro-big brother government? Against personal liberties? Against privacy? Allowing the state to monitor everything that happen in a household all the time?

Good. There is no need for sex education at schools. If young children are forced to learn about sex, then it is more likely that they will start having sex earlier.

Teen pregnancy rates are much higher now than in the 1950s when we didn't have sex ed.



You started off sane and ended up jousting with windmills.

1. Personal responsibility and moral lessons are things that should be taught by parents and not the state. It's not Theresa May's job to teach your kid how to be a decent, functional human being. I concede that's a point of principle though, and maybe you'd disagree.

2. Schools are there to teach academic knowledge. French, the sciences, Shakespeare, trigonometry, rock erosion or whatever.

3. Orphans have guardians. And kids with terrible parents should be taken into care. I don't see "aha but the State is awful at doing its job in this area, so what now?" as a particularly strong counterpoint.

4. You don't monitor the teaching. You don't hover over the shoulder of parents unless you have cause to believe that they're abusing or neglecting their kids.

5. The fact that you're so addicted to State authority that you can't fathom a world without overbearing surveillance on private life speaks volumes more than I could ever hope to. There's nothing to actually respond to in the last paragraph because every word of it is crap.