Monday, March 02, 2009

Teenage pregnancy – a symptom of ‘Eurochild’?

With the release of the latest government statistics on teenage pregnancy, it is apparent that Labour’s policies have failed.

And failed catastrophically.

Labour have spent in excess of £300million on sex education, dished out millions of free condoms and pills, and facilitated interminable ‘advice and guidance’ sessions in order that all children will know about their ‘choices’. This has resulted in 7,715 conceptions in girls between the ages of 13-15, with an increase among the under-14s of 29 per cent.

All of this is, of course, illegal sex.

The figures for arrests resulting from statutory rape are not easily discoverable. However, the abortion figures are. And it transpires that half of all pregnancies to under 18-year-olds now end in abortion. In 1997, there were 43,700 pregnancies among the under 18s; in 2007 there were 42,900. That amounts to more than 21,000 abortion a year in the under 18s – or approaching a quarter of a million over the decade. For whatever reason, British rates of teenage pregnancy remain the highest in Europe.


Among the under 20s, the abortion rate rose from 33,300 to 44,000 over the same period. Across all age groups, there were 170,100 abortions in 1997, which has risen to 198,500 in 2007. And all of these figures are warped by the misleading classification of the ‘morning after pill’ as a contraceptive rather than an abortive.

And the Government’s response?

Labour have pledged a further £20.5million to spend on the contraception message, with new NHS schemes (= texting) to remind girls to take the pill. In order to ensure confidentiality and to prevent prying parents from interfering, these text messages shall be coded, such that ‘Call Alex’ or ‘Walk the Dog’ actually means ‘Alex wants a shag so be prepared’.

Sex education is as abundant as the millions of condoms and billions of pills provided to all these spotty hormone modules. Yet the more money is thrown at the problem – the more sex education is provided; the more contraception splashed about; the more abortion is made available on tap – the rates of pregnancy increase. Teenagers are taught about tastes and styles – they can be hetero, homo, bi or some combination of any of these and more. They are taught about positions and pleasure, rewards and risks. Sex is like lollipops: it is all as sweet and attractive as the candy delights of a Woolworth’s pick ‘n’ mix.

Unlike the topic of drugs, under-age sex is not condemned, so the assumption among children that it is good and healthy to ‘experiment’. It is all about their rights, encouraging them to assess their options, and God forbid that any teacher might try to teach them right from wrong. It is a choice, you see. And it is their choice, and so they have the right to make that choice. Just as it is their choice to have an abortion or not, so contraceptive and abortion advice and guidance are given to under-age children without any parental knowledge at all.

Which way is the Prime Minister’s ‘moral compass’ pointing through all this? Who is confronting Hazel Blears with her assertion that we must teach right from wrong?

Whoever it was who decided to relegate ‘sex’ to the biology laboratory is responsible for an irreversible social and sexual revolution. Sex is no longer about relationships, love, abstinence or discipline. It is no longer something which happens within a secure and stable relationship, with emotional maturity, an awareness of parental duty, knowing the boundaries.

Sex in Britain is as recreational as drinking beer and smoking a cigarette. And more teenagers equate alcohol and cigarettes with sex than would dream of thinking of abstinence, discipline or duty. Sex has become a god at the same time as the notion of family has disintegrated.

And at the same time as the emergence of ‘Eurochild’ – 'an active network of organisations and individuals working in and across Europe to improve the quality of life of children and young people. Eurochild’s work is underpinned by the principles enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child'.

Education became formally recognised in the Maastricht Treaty as a legitimate area of EU involvement, and the EU is becoming involved at all levels. There is an emerging ‘Commissioner for Children’s Rights’, whose role it shall be to make Children’s Rights ‘more visible, and ensuring coordination of the strategy with all services concerned’.

With EU-wide education programmes and EU-wide health services, all underpinned by such ‘values’ as universality, good quality, equity, solidarity, privacy and confidentiality.

Teenagers are citizens of the EU. They may indulge in sex to their heart’s content, for it is in accordance with nature. They can opt for contraception or not, for it is their choice. They can have access to abortion facilities, for it is their right.

But from what age?

The age of consent varies from country to country within the EU. In Spain it is just 13. In Italy, Hungary, Germany and Austria, it is 14. In Poland, Greece and France, it is 15. In the Netherlands, it is 16. Malta has the highest, with an age of consent set at 18.

These will all need to be harmonised.

Up or down?

It is often said that countries like Spain and Portugal have lower rates of teenage pregnancy because they are Roman Catholic. In the Netherlands, it may because of a strong Protestant heritage. And in these Christian countries, teenage pregnancy is still frowned upon. The logical corollary is that the UK is so awash with under-age pregnancies because of our wholesale abandonment of the Christian faith. There is no longer any shame, there is no sense of morality, and no appreciation of right and wrong.

29 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't forget that in the Netherlands Roman Catholicism is still the biggest denomination. Only when combining all the Protestant factions are they more numerous.

2 March 2009 at 08:40  
Blogger Hugh Oxford said...

I fail to understand how the people entrusted in loco parentis with the care of children - notably teachers and doctors - can give them contraception and abortion advice and services without being guilty of aiding and abetting or facilitating crime.

It makes a joke out of the law and the criminal justice system. It is, in the truest sense of the word, scandalous.

I just wish I could be certain a Conservative government would unwind the string of horrific social, sexual and cultural innovations this satanic government has visited upon us.

2 March 2009 at 08:49  
Anonymous demotic said...

To address the practical point of government policy vs under-age preganancy...

Abstinence-only education seems to not work, in itself at least. Which is a shame, because it seems a perfect solution.

Abstinence education with general sexual education appears to have some success over abstinence-only.

Sweden and the Netherlands claim that their success is partly due to the perceived lack of shame in buying contraception, and decades of a policy of frank sex education.

...spiritually, I can't help but recall that the worst US teen pregnancy statistics are from the most conservative states.

2 March 2009 at 09:43  
Anonymous Gnostic said...

Maybe schools should be teaching abstinence instead of giving them a how to guide to frantic illegal (at the moment but it might as well not be with current attitudes) coupling and handing out contraception.

Or is that too controversial a solution?

Sex education/sexual orientation for five years olds - what the heck is that about? If you sexualise children you are going to get an exponential increase in underage pregnancies. It's hardly rocket science is it?

The current sex education agenda is a form of grooming. A paedophile's charter. And it's evil!!!!

2 March 2009 at 09:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace may well be aghast at the results of promiscuity; pregnancy, abortion [and the other unmentionable--a whole section of the youth practitioners of such have the clap]. It is not going to be altered by blustering about Christian heritage and moral values. Christianity is not inherited, it must be personally aquired in conversion. Unless the church resumes preaching the gospel there is no hope.

The alternative future is plain to see.

You prefer darkness to light?-- Have darkness!!

2 March 2009 at 10:07  
Blogger Si Hollett said...

"It is often said that countries like Spain and Portugal have lower rates of teenage pregnancy because they are Roman Catholic. In the Netherlands, it may because of a strong Protestant heritage. And in these Christian countries, teenage pregnancy is still frowned upon."

But that isn't true - Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands have exactly the same kind of 'Christianness' as the UK - ie a history that's ignored, a heritage abandoned, a low rate of church going among teenagers. Your argument that being post-Christian causes all this isn't true - I guess you can say that the UK's brand of post-Christian is the reason, but to say it is simply as we are post-Christian therefore have this is a bit of a fallacy.

Given, anyway, that the UK's 'Christian country' status was at best only ever nominal, just as it is now. Culture of course was psudeo-Christian once upon a time, now it is post-moral, hedonistic and selfish. Brown's artficial boom, as well as the 80s culture of 'me' helped us get there.

Observing the law wouldn't help - telling kids that they can't have sex until they are 16 won't stop them - it will probably egg them on. Sin uses the law to act and teenagers are also almost universally by nature rebellious.

2 March 2009 at 10:42  
Anonymous mckenzie said...

We are out of control like some kind of infestation. All these individual examples like teenage sex are part of a whole. It will all have consequences, and it will not be nice. The level of amorality that we have sunk to will result in horror.

I know this is not directly related to the topic here, but it is related to the situation as a whole, and that is what is taking place on the world financial stage.

Watch this Yahoo video about how the EU debt situation outweighs even the US sub-prime catastrophe. It is dam scary.

Yahoo Video HERE

2 March 2009 at 10:47  
Blogger Theo said...

It would be foolish not to take into account the fact that government policy adds to the problem by rewarding teenagers who have children. Nine months notice should be given that no benefits will be paid to single parents - indeed charges will be made for maternity and other services. Abortions, if they must remain legal should be called legalised infanticide and heavy charges made for them.

Government must punish and not reward immorality.

I think we could look forward to a dramatic fall in the figures were this to take place

2 March 2009 at 11:44  
Anonymous tammyswofford@yahoo.com said...

Naturally, these (killing babies) policies are aborting your Western civilization right out of existence. Encroaching Shari'ah will take care of it, of course, by 2050.

Beyond no sense of shame, the destruction of the traditional family unit which provides the safety net for humanity.

Tammy Swofford

2 March 2009 at 13:59  
Anonymous Wallenstein said...

Chances are Mary was only 13-14 when she gave birth to Jesus.

Presumably that should be the model we should aim to follow? After all, if it's good enough for JC...?

Thank goodness Mary and Joseph only had occupying Roman troops to deal with, rather than the small-minded bluster of modern Pharisees.

2 March 2009 at 14:09  
Anonymous American Anglican said...

Modern Pharisees? Give me a break.

The birth of Christ is the ONLY exception to the rule, ONLY because it had to be that way so that the child could be conceived by the Holy Spirit.

Plus people died a lot earlier back then, thus...

learned a trade earlier, provided for families earlier, and got married/pregnant earlier.

Please look at history before attempting to superimpose it on a different situation

2 March 2009 at 15:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no single "age of consent" in English law. "Statutory rape" applies only under age 13. i.e. sexual intercourse with a child under that age is rape irrespective of any purported consent.

Between 13 and 15 is a deliberate grey area. Techhically any sexual touching by or with a child under
16 (including snogging) is unlawful and could be prosecuted; however the CPS has guidelines to help it determine when prosecutioin is in the public interest.

The age of consent goes to 18 in certain cases involving positions of trust.

2 March 2009 at 15:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would seem your Grace, we have come full circle, again, moral behaviour seems to be lacking even in the parents of the those who do manage to become pregnant with all the publicity and offer for safe sex. No one is talking about taking a moral stand, as they do in the USA and other countries, such as Spain. In the Britain today anything now goes and to say it is wrong becomes politically incorrect to the point of stupidity. There are several solutions, one a school cheque to allow parents back into their children’s education and stop government interference in this area, it would also increase quality of education as seen in countries who have adopted this system. Another would be to return to segregated schools, this has shown that education is higher and there is less pressure on perverse behaviour patterns and is practised in many developed countries but you need a government that is not bent on the destruction of family as are all the so called progressive governments in Europe. But one thing would work, even if it is politically incorrect, the return to a Christian education!

2 March 2009 at 15:54  
Blogger Homophobic Horse said...

We've never had it better.

2 March 2009 at 18:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

God gave his laws to keep a restraint on sinful man (fear of punishment) untill man could be redeemed by a savior.
Man in his infinite wisdom has rejected God and his laws.
Now the restraints are coming off we are seeing man in his true colours.
Teen pregnancies, stabbings, binge drinking,no respect for authority, these are all symptomsof society breaking down.
The U K is a broken society.

2 March 2009 at 18:25  
Anonymous amy said...

Tammy Swofford

I typed your name ina Google search and you seem to comment on nearly every blog in cyber space....Wow!

2 March 2009 at 18:41  
Anonymous not a machine said...

i have often found how the socialist/marxist looks at sex as somthing as harmless , not to be perscripted about , i cant say that i can take any moral high ground on this subject , i had a lively beer filled youth , but as i grow older i can definetly see the tie of monogamus love becoming a distant joke. its as though the two things have been put into some sort of anihalation competion .

how did we manage to do that.

drugging a young lady for sex that she could not remember would be a dire criminal offence.

of course courtisans are nothing new but it is the loss of meaning or even seeing that stable relationships not permanently subject to insecure sex , have somthing good about them.

we have throw away clothes and throw away partners , love has been reduced to a short term stopping off point and internal evaluation of wether one is bored or excited .

whilst i can see how it works i can only wonder where further erosion will lead i suspect at this most intimate of things it will lead to more hurt lonely people and a very wreckless monied elite with a circle of toy boys and courtiers living some sort of bizarre merry go round of chemical hits and learning nothing

2 March 2009 at 18:57  
Blogger ZZMike said...

"...failed catastrophically.

Labour have spent in excess of £300million on sex education, ..."

In the US, we do not offer "drivers education classes" so they will not drive; is it small wonder that offering sex education classes does not have the effect that they will not do it?

Your other topic, the UN, is even more troublesome. The "United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child" is gaining visibility here in the US. Proponents would have us turn over responsibility and authority for raising our children to the UN - specifically, by passing laws recommended and approved by that august body.

It amounts to turning over part of our sovereignty to another entity, something most of us find distasteful. (You chaps being in the EU might not have such qualms.)

"It all started with Gramsci." At least, he gave it a good push. The three-pronged attack has been going on for decades - here in the US and there.

(1) Undemine the family
(2) Turn the schools from providing education to providing propaganda (prettily-dressed propaganda),
(3) Make sure religion is swept under the rug, and kept out of the public eye. (Much as I intend no disrespect, I can't help feeing that ecclesiasticals like the good Dr Rowan Williams are part & parcel of this plan.)

amy: "I typed your name ina Google search ..."

That's nice. Everyone should have a hobby.

2 March 2009 at 20:33  
Anonymous Katy said...

'Sex' education in schools is about so much more than the physical act of sex and is tailored to the child's age. Removing sex education from the curriculum would be similarly counter-productive and risks the possibility that we go back to a time when girls learned from their mothers that periods are caused by rocks banging about inside them; hardly helpful. Do any of you remember being teenagers? Watching your body change can be scary enough without knowing nothing about why it's happening. 5-year-olds aren't learning about sexual intercourse or orientation. They learn about basic things like the right name for mummy and daddy cats/dogs/elephants etc. and how families are made up. Stop getting in a sweat about it!

The new response to teen pregnancies, which I think will go a long way to reducing them, is to concentrate on raising childrens' aspirations, teaching them that with hard work it's possible for them to be anything they want to be, something that was sadly lacking when I was at school. If the only route they can see to financial security is to get pregnant, is it any wonder that this is what they do?

2 March 2009 at 20:52  
Blogger tammyswofford said...

Amy,
My best writing moves in private corridors.... But back to the issue of "blathering Pharisees", the view from across the pond.

It seems logical to correlate the Chlamydia rates of our high school students with an increase in "wham bam thank you Ma'am" sex in Texas. Surely, we have blinders on if we do not examine promiscuity and STD's as a shared experience.

Beyond that, allowing young ladies to be meat on a hook degrades their capabilities to develop as young ladies, in the truest sense of the word.

To teach children how to put on a condom when they cannot yet conceptualize a simple algebraic equation is the domain of fools.

Sexual activity involves adult emotions and hopefully, a bit of intellect-sharing among the partners. Anything else, is just rutting behavior. That is what our schools are teaching.

Possibly labeling intelligent solution-based commentary as that of Pharisees is a poorly executed flanking move?

Tammy Swofford

2 March 2009 at 21:38  
Blogger Gordon said...

Legally:
Babies at 16
Cigarettes at 18

Who would think things would go wrong with that attitude?

2 March 2009 at 23:52  
Anonymous Cinnamon said...

"Unlike the topic of drugs, under-age sex is not condemned, so the assumption among children that it is good and healthy to ‘experiment’. It is all about their rights, encouraging them to assess their options, and God forbid that any teacher might try to teach them right from wrong."

We've condemned drugs, yet they keep taking them, so your comparison here is broken -- condemnation and moralising doesn't work, you can't scare people into their salvation (and if you manage it won't last for long) they need to find the way themselves.

(At least not where perpetrator of the unauthorised behaviour is the only victim)

Sexuality is probably one of the strongest forces that affect people -- a young person is especially in the crossfire here, and there is no culture that helps them in this time, other than the very thing they don't need in this situation. So, what can be done for their hormonal and emotional cold turkey that haunts them at that age?

Also, remember, reasoning is not a prime skill of kids of that age, yet, but you're asking them to maintain the discipline of a saintly monk in the face of a lot of temptation and peer pressure.

'Right' and 'wrong' are not useful concepts here, maturity and self-control will get you further, and that means that adult guidance and protection(as opposed to hectoring) and a much more suitable ambiance for kids and teens is needed.

Start by considering Bratz and Barbie and other toys, abusive caveman poetry aka rap, the celebrity cult and other assorted great business ideas that sexualise children way before puberty.

I personally think a lot of the adults mainstream culture that is pushed onto kids here is simply child abuse -- just like giving a kiddie whisky is wrong(but whiskey itself if of course a great invention... for adults), so is feeding their minds with stuff they cannot comprehend yet.

In fact, your approach of traumatising them with morals and guilt as a kind of armor against issues they are too young to handle is as poisonous to their immature souls as is the original problem.

3 March 2009 at 04:49  
Anonymous Adrian P said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3 March 2009 at 05:43  
Anonymous Voyager said...

rather than the small-minded bluster of modern Pharisees.

Do read more about the Pharisees before being trite. Do recall that Herod implemented draconian birth control measures when Jesus was born !


The incidence of teen pregnancy is concomitant with STD rates of chlamydia and other problems which make sexual activity riskier than in the past. Not only are these children ignorant of birth control, but sorely ignorant of STDs and just how insidious those which do not present really are - at least until they have an ectopic pregnancy and find out.

The system of public health is shambolic and any structure of discipline has been eroded to produce chaotic libertinism at the expense of people who do not really think or understand.

Teenage Pregnancy is a choice. As a taxpayer I don't choose to pay for it - so presumably the happy parents and grandparents should and the underage father should be offered a vasectomy

3 March 2009 at 06:02  
Anonymous Adrian P said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3 March 2009 at 17:24  
Blogger it's either banned or compulsory said...

That old trout Polly Toynbee was on the radio last Thursday with Anastasia somebody or other. They were discussing a new report that showed Teen Pregnancies/Bastard Babies up, again, in UK. Oh my, how they tortured their poor brains about " Why is it that, in this day and age, these young girls choose having a baby; it's all about poverty and deprivation "
So eradicate poverty ?, suggested BBC man, Might be a tall order !

Well they don't understand about contraception chirped in Anastatsia before Polly elbowed her with " and we really must provide more support with Sex Education, they don't get enough and it isn't even compulsory ! " she shrieked.
That was it, nothing about State subsidies encouraging gym-slip Mums, incremental benefits for multiple sprogmongers, their criminal boyfriends making sure they are up the duff in time for pre-sentencing reports or any of the rest of the real stuff.

4 March 2009 at 04:12  
Anonymous Voyager said...

it's all about poverty and deprivation "
So eradicate poverty ?, suggested BBC man, Might be a tall order !



The major cause of poverty in the statistics is having babies....maybe chickens and eggs are relevant here ?

5 March 2009 at 05:29  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The answer is simple, explain to the little darlings that if they get pregnant, they will have to care for the child with no help from the State.

Teenage pregnancy will then drop dramatically.

The point is that we should rewarding bad behaviour. At the same time, we should inculcate amongst our youth the philosophy that it is not right to get pregnant when there is no way you can look after the child.

12 March 2009 at 06:38  
Anonymous John MacLeod said...

Your final sentence sums it up admirably. Nothing short of a return to the Biblical "Thou shalt not . . ." will suffice. What we need is an outpouring of the Spirit of God and a Heaven-sent revival of religion.

14 March 2009 at 16:37  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older