ARGUMENT AGAINST SEX EDUCATION
"Informing young people about sex will lead them to try it." (this is a common argument by those against sex education).
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
"Informing young people about stealing and its evil does not necessarily lead them to try it." (this is not so common a reply to that argument, i got this from a thread
COUNTER COUNTER-ARGUMENT
Stealing is not a universal human passion, therefore it is improbable that a teaching about it and about its evil can arouse someone to try it; on the other hand, because sex is based on a universal human passion, therefore teaching young children about it (especially in the context of school education where most teachers have no time if not intention of ministering to the souls of individual students) puts them at risk of arousing their sexual passion too early or, simply, wrongly.
P.S. Some people might replace 'stealing' with 'eating' in their counter-argument. Again, while eating is a universal human desire, it is not really passion in the sense that sexual passions are. Moreover, another significant diffrence is taht eating is for individual survival while sex is for the perpetuation of the species. As individuals, we need food, we don't necessarily need sex. In this significant diffrence the revised counter-argument would still fail.
[1 of 2]
ReplyDeleteThere is certainly a need for Sex Education. But no other institution can put together the most significant, most practical, most appropriate, most comprehensive as to include its unavoidable transcendental implication than the one criticized most about it: The Holy Roman Catholic Church.
The Holy Mother Church already has enough documents- and keeps refining and improving as empirical data and theological insights becomes available - to help anyone understand Sexuality, IF s/he is a person of goodwill. Without goodwill, not much can be accomplished.
The Church ALREADY know all the scientific, medical, biological, psychological, emotional issues about it that the secular contenders think they have a monopoly of knowledge about. But these same secular contenders hardly know, or are willing to know, or have the conpetence to know the eschatological and spiritual side and aspect of Sexuality. None of them, even the 'superpowers' were granted guarantee against defect in understanding it: "...the gates of Hell will not prevail against it [the Church].
Sex Education:
Sex Education--New Vatican Guidelines
K.D. Whitehead
http://www.ewtn.com/library/issues/se-nvg.txt
SACRED CONGREGATION FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION
EDUCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN HUMAN LOVE
Outlines for sex education
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_19831101_sexual-education_en.html
THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY
THE TRUTH AND MEANING
OF HUMAN SEXUALITY
Guidelines for Education within the Family
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_08121995_human-sexuality_en.html
APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION: FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO
THE ROLE OF THE CHRISTIAN FAMILY IN THE MODERN WORLD
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio_en.html
[2 of 2]
ReplyDeleteBut because Sexuality has become the most accute, atrocious, ferocious battleground in the current Spiritual Warfare, in all its extremely delicate, sensitive, volatile, 'temptational' nature and implications - something that humanity has not been exposed to, and the teaching Magisterium of the Church has not been confronted with in all her history, the necessity of Sex Education with the CONCOMITANT sacredness that CANNOT be separated from it becomes urgent and imperative. This, like sanctity and holiness themselves, is best taught not by words but by example. It has to be LIVED by whoever wants to teach it.
That tells you that not all ordinary teachers with academic credentials are automatically qualified to teach it the way one can teach mathematics or chemistry. Even those who have background in medicine, psychology, psychiatry are necessarily qualified.
By the same token, because of its private and intimate nature, parents are naturally the first and best teachers. But parents, themselves are obligated to live lives with interior discipline and modesty if they are to become effective teachers and role models. And only genuine religious perspective can inspire parents to be such, not science.
As such, common sense - and honesty with one's self - tells everyone that the proponents of Contraception [or 'Reproductive Health', or whatever latest deceptive euphemism they come with] cannot imply that no one has the capacity - aided by grace to which one has to cooperate - to practice modesty and chastity, just because they themselves are unwilling to practice such and therefore don't need to resort to artificial mechanism that don't lead to purity of thought and therefore sexual discipline.
One must ask: Those who are openly or surreptitiously pushing this agenda of 'Reproductive Health', [pseudo] 'Responsible Parenthood', etc.,who are they? what kind of personal lives have they lived? How do their own children live? [You can tell a tree by its fruit], Do they ever study the lives of the Saints? Even if they're not Catholics, hoow would they compare their personal lives with those of the saints?
Do they ever say to their children: "Oh, I can't wait for you to get to get married and be a 'responsible' parent yourself by using contraception, because I'm not looking foreward to becoming a grandparent!" or "Since your body is your own and can do anything with it, you can always separate from your spouse and get another one who can satisfy you more materially and sexually, and the whole world will certainly be a happier place to be, because I HAVE DECIDED that God is merciful, no matter what!" [sic]