Forcing Sex Education on Five-Year-Olds

I ignored this story when I first saw it in the Daily Mail, but it is all over the news now. The Government plans to teach compulsory sex education in England from the age of 5. Ministers may not even allow for parents to withdraw their children. In other words, unless parents can afford a private school or opt to homeschool, their very young children will be subjected to a combination of the National Curriculum requirements and the bias of their particular school teacher.

Schools Minister Jim Knight thinks sex and relationships education from age five is needed to combat the ‘earlier sexualisation’ of youngsters. It is the usual sex education policy of fighting fire with fire. So if small children are going to see sexual imagery in every exposre to the media, the best thing is to explain it all to them. Even at Key Stage 1 (ages 5-7) teachers will be told not to duck discussions about ‘explicit sexual matters’ if they are raised by pupils. They don’t actually have to teach about sexual intercourse until Key Stage 2 (ages 7-11).

State schools that are faith-based will be allowed to include their own guidance and values in the curriculum. For Catholic schools, that is rather clearly defined. I’m not sure what it means for Church of England schools, since the C of E’s own values about sexuality seem in quite a state of flux. But in nondenominational non-faith state schools, there will only be guidance from the government. As Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice, was quoted in The Independent, this is a Government that wants to see “a whole generation fornicating”, something I’ve been saying for a long time.

The other guidance will be form the lifestyles of the teachers themselves. I can’t see how fornicating teachers will be teaching about sex as appropriate only with the context of marriage. If they were to do so, their hypocrisy would undermine what they are saying. As much as teachers may try to keep their private lives private, pupils eventually know whether a teacher is married or living with a “partner”.  Children observing and under the influence of hedonistic teachers can hardly be expected to follow a different path.

Labour Attacks Jews

When Ed Balls isn’t having a punch up with Jack Straw in Cabinet meetings, he’s attacking Jewish schools.

He was admittedly on a witch hunt against all faith schools. He accused them of being covertly selective by charging admission fees. As it turns out the only schools he could find were five Jewish schools. They have a voluntary fee to cover religious education and security costs. Apparently in Londonstan it helps to have extra security if you are Jewish. More than half of the parents do not pay the fee.

Faith school are not in favour with Labour. LIke it or not, faith schools produce better results over all than their more secular counterparts. For a party that represents the increasing anti-religious bent of this island, this is not good news. They tend to have a more middle class demographic, perhaps because religion is a predominantly middle class phenomenon in this country. Chavs who don’t care about their children’s education don’t tend to care about God either, but they tend to vote Labour.

Of course the Labour elite who hate faith schools aren’t chavs. They come from the other end of things. They are too smart to believe in God.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews was demanding an apology from Ed Balls. I’m not saying he didn’t have the balls to show up, but he did send his deputy, schools minister Jim Knight to face the backlash, while he was away on holiday.

Press reports say Balls accepts Jewish schools have the right to charge voluntary contributions. He also admits that publishing details of spot checks by his department had been stressful for the schools involved. He claims it was in the public interest, but hasn’t explained how this could be the case.