British boys to manage the birds and bees with C-cards

by Carder

The Times Online reports that because "Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe and the government has failed in its pledge to halve rates of pregnancy in girls under the age of 18," officials have come up with a new "scheme":

scout huts.jpg

Boys as young as 12 are to be issued with condom "credit cards" allowing them to pick up free contraception at football grounds, barber's shops and scout huts [pictured right].

Condoms will be distributed at places where boys congregate, to spare them the embarrassment of visiting sexual health clinics or GPs' surgeries or facing a shop assistant at a chemist's counter.

They will be able to collect the condoms by showing a plastic card issued to them after they have attended a safe-sex lesson.... Boys who take advantage of the scheme will not have to give their names or answer questions about their sex lives.

The scheme is intended to cut teenage pregnancies and persuade boys to take greater responsibility for contraception.

Officials rationalize this will create equal opportunity sex responsibility since "sex education has been too focused on teenage girls, who tend already to take full responsibility for using contraception."

Not really. See stats. So less mature boys will? Continuing:

condom hand.jpg

Boys who attend additional talks about sexually transmitted diseases will get a stamp on their card, which those running the scheme hope will become a status symbol.

Simon Blake, chief executive of Brook [Advisory Service, which helped devise this "scheme"], said the C-card would make condom use "an everyday reality".

He said the new government guidance would be designed to make boys more confident about using contraception and asking for advice on sex.

The common sense dissent is correct:

condoms682_820025a.jpg

However, Josephine Quintavalle, founder of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, a pressure group, warned: "We are just facilitating and encouraging sexuality without any deeper understanding of the emotional side of relationships.

"We used to talk about recreational sex among 18-year-olds - now it is 13-year-olds."

What has 40+ years of comprehensive sex ed and widespread availability of contraceptives resulted in? Lots more sex, STDs, out-of-wedlock pregnancies, abortions, broken hearts, broken relationships, and damaged children. This "scheme" is the definition of insanity.


Comments:

It would be interesting to see the ethnic breakdown for the teen pregnancy in Britain. If you get immigrants who think that it is fine for 18-19 year old women to marry, you will get much more teen pregnancy. The vast majority of pregnant teens are 18-19 year old adults. Of course that doesn't stop the morality police from vilifying these women.

Also, condoms have very high failure rates. So it could lead to more teen pregnancy.

Posted by: hippie at June 11, 2009 11:28 AM


Lord help us. Insanity is right.

My eldest son is 12. I cannot fathom this program for him. He still builds with Legos, rides his bike to school and swims all summer long!! He is a child. Yesterday, he asked me what a condom is. I told him. I also told him what we have talked about for years. Sex is for marriage. He rode his bike to the park and next time I will tell him to ask his father......:)

Posted by: Carla at June 11, 2009 11:29 AM


Whoever is imagining that this idea will work:

a) doesn't know boys/young men/men or;
b) knows boys/young men/men and stands to profit from this exercise.

If these young men ever do become fathers, it won't be because they've learned to become responsible by way of free condoms (with failure rates) and a little gold stamp on their card ("Wow- did you get a stamp?" Cool! - Who thought of that?)

As a guy, we don't learn responsibility that way. It lacks testosterone.

Now if instead you said if a guy gets a girl pregnant and she wants an abortion, the fine will be the cost of raising a child to the age of 18, sterilization, or marriage with no divorce.

If the woman doesn't ID the father, then she forfeits any public health benefits for the remainder of her life.

Now that would solve the responsibility problem.

Oh yes - if they keep killing their kids and refusing to procreate, they need not worry about the problem, because the fundamentalist Muslims are outbreeding the native UK population by almost 8 to 1.

At some point, those caught in the honeypot of messing with fundamentalist's "sister" will face becoming Muslim or will be killed.
(And yes, this is done on purpose - it's a technique for growing the "faithful")

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at June 11, 2009 11:56 AM


The pre-pubescent boys can use the condoms for balloons, water bombs and poor mans floaties, and, in the spirit of cultural diversity, they can even use them to make piƱatas.

The boys will not require any 'safe' fun lessons. Being boys they will figure that out all on their own.

Attending a class on sexually tranmitted diseases is hoped to be perceived as a 'status symbol' among 13 year old boys.

These 'government bureaucrats' must not get out much or they are all female.

Contracting a sexually transmitted disease would more likely to be perceived as a 'status symbol' among post pubescent boys.

This is not a real story. It has to be a Monty Python skit.

yor bro ken


Posted by: kbhvac at June 11, 2009 12:00 PM


It is absolutely ludicrous to think that a 13 year old is going to pull out a condom at just the "right" time.

The problem is that by providing condoms you give implied consent to the act rather than teaching the young man's conscience that this is wrong behavior that is punishable with severe consequences.

The adults that promote this garbage and not abstinence and purity are guilty of causing children to sin, plain and simple.

Here's what the Lord Jesus Christ said about your fate if you did this:

Matthew 18:6
"But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."

Mark 9:42
"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck."

Luke 17:2
"It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin."

For the Holy Spirit to place this in three Gospel accounts means that this is very, very serious business.

I suggest you so-called sex educators out there, if at least you don't care about children, then at least, care about your own eternal destiny.

You have been warned.

Posted by: HisMan at June 11, 2009 12:40 PM


[sigh] More treatment of boys as animals with nothing but raw sexual urges. This makes me want to throw up.

Posted by: bmmg39 at June 11, 2009 1:32 PM


Janet, thanks for letting me know comments weren't working here. Fixed!

Posted by: Jill Stanek at June 11, 2009 11:06 PM


"The problem is that by providing condoms you give implied consent to the act rather than teaching the young man's conscience that this is wrong behavior that is punishable with severe consequences."

HisMan, Yes, yes, yes and yes! I don't understand why educators cannot understand this. The school systems somehow think if only we educate young people about contraception, there will be few teen pregnancies and/or STDs.

We've been "educating" kids how many years now on sex and contraception? Is it doing anything to prevent teen pregnancies or STDs? Most parents want to think that just because their kids are being educated about contraception, it does not mean the kids will actually become involved in sex. Even if abstinence is discussed, the underlying message is that none of you are able to control yourselves, and you're all gonna do it anyway.

Dennis Prager commented on his radio show about giving condoms to young people as the same thing as a wife saying to her husband, "Honey, I know we've agreed not to have sex outside of our marriage, but here's some condoms for you when you're gone on your business trip, just in case you're tempted."

We know that teenagers have problems with impulse control, and this is the time for them to start learning not only can they not act on all their impulses and desires, but there can be very serious consequences if they do. Wouldn't that serve them better?

Posted by: Luana at June 12, 2009 12:23 AM


This was a good article. It's a shame it was bumped down so quickly!

* * *

hippie brings up a good point.

When reporting figures on "teen pregnancy" are the parameters always the same from one poll to the next? For example, are these unmarried teens or married and unmarried teens? An influx of a culture which does not discourage marriage of teens could skew the reporting numbers.

Posted by: Janet at June 13, 2009 7:45 PM