So it comes as no suprise at all to discover that teenage girls are still getting pregnant. After all if the schools keep on teaching sex education in the same way that they always did when I was at school, then, duh, children will have sex.
If I remember rightly sex education was the one constant in biology. Every term without fail from the age of eleven up in a desperate attempt to create some interest in the subject the teacher would proclaim, "Next week we will be doing sex education".
Of course anything that smacked of genitalia was of great interest so we all dutifuly settled down to the present task of disecting ants or defining xylem and phloem.
The point is that if the purpose of this constant stream of information, now being suggested for 5 year olds is to reduce unwanted or accidental childhood pregnancy then surely some form of abstinence education could be a better idea?
Of course we have a government that has only recently called for the pill to be given to girls who, just by having sex are breaking the law. How can that act as a disincentive to have under age sex?
We have a system that as failed in its stated aims for its entire period of existence. The fact that it hasn't been closed down of course begs the question. Why on earth not? Could it be that the framers and supporters of the policy do not really have the reduction in teenage pregnacy as their aim, but instead the undermining of the institution of marriage and the building blocks of what they see to be old fashioned conservative societal mores? Or are they just pig ignorant and refuse to acept the reality of failure, but as the net gainers - they after all get nice salaries and a sense of moral self-importance in their ring-fenced taxpayer funded lives, that the wreckage of hundreds of thousands of individual lives is of slight importance?