If you try and apply a rational lens to an irrational worldview, it's going to end in tears. But basically they don't want anyone to fuck until marriage, and they believe (or at least claim to believe) that abstinence-only sex ed is best for this. It's essentially just the tough on crime philosophy applied to sex instead of drugs. Anything they say about STDs or Teen Pregnancy being the real reason is just posturing not to look like religious hicks, as actual sex ed obviously outperforms their bullshit. Also as a side bonus for these assholes it hurts queer and trans people to give bad sex ed.
Because teenagers famously have no desire for sex until they are told about it.
I honestly don't know how much they believe that, but I think it's too much.
Nah, they're more concerned about their kids hearing that abortion or being LGBT is acceptable.
Trust me, it’s bc they think it will make kids fuck more. I was raised as a southern Christian
Idealist nonsense, for a two word answer.
The most rationalist, though it is incredibly flawed\emotional, but is easy to find around the globe (not just in Burgerland), is the fear the child will imprint strangers belief systems about important things over theirs, but this horrific risk can happen literally every time your child encounters someone that isn't their family/caretakers or spontaneously uses their damn brain. People believe raising their kids right is only a one shot and one time-honored way, the way they were taught and raised or in a confused sanitized version of the past that exists only in ideal, for all its errors. Its understandable though when you don't know anything, or are just 'trying to survive' to try to replicate something as you've seen others do when you have 0 reference outside yourself and your experience of how anything works.
This is an emotional argument obviously at its core (most are), at least tries to put up a thin rationalist veneer over the common BS 'sex will lose its mystery' or straight up mask off fear mongering like the fear that somehow educating about sex at all, even obvious facts, is equivalent with molestation somehow (don't you be teaching my baby they have a...a... that ), but I've seen all sorts of political stripes take that last stance, all of them conspiracy types however.
God say sex bad. God hurt us for bad. Bad scary. Not want talk about scary.
It's yucky and you shouldn't talk about it.
Everyone it talking about all this logic behind it, but there isn't any. Conservatives don't have a conception of societal structures as something that can be changed. As something you can study and manipulate. Talking to them about that kind of stuff is like talking to a brick wall because they literally don't understand how it's even possible to change anything.
pre-marital, non-procreative (or whatever the brand of cristian deems wrong-sex) sex is sinful. god punishes sin.
whether this divine justice will strike an individual sinner with misfortune or a whole community, it's in the interest of the flock to protect themselves through the prevention of sin.
this involves surveillance of each other and the control of information because information can tempt godly people to sin.
so the programme isn't just to suppress information about sex, its also making sure people who might have sex are also ashamed of it, monitoring them to make sure they don't, and swiftly pushing eligible persons into the 'correct' kind of relationships if they're going to have it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they don't like sex ed because they believe people should only learn about sex on their wedding night or something.
I didn't get any sex ed so I was really confused growing up about how I was supposed to make babies in my eventual Catholic marriage. I concluded that it must be deep instinctual knowledge that "activated" when you were naked with your God-given spouse, because otherwise someone would have offered me, at the least, basic mechanical instructions.
There are many justifications that they might give.
But the material reason why they are against sex ed is that less sex ed leads to more teen pregnancy. Teen pregnancy keeps people in poverty and prevents them from really discovering the world. If your ideology prefers to have everybody closed off in their own families with most people working as full-time wage slaves to make ends meet, a good way to accomplish this is by getting people to have children very early.
I know that's the ideology at the top, but for your average Conservative would that really apply in any meaningful way? I would think your average evangelical would complain about teen pregnancies.
The average joes just go along with what they're told and don't question it. They just repeat what they're told by the people at the top, whether or not they've thought about it.
It is probably useful to split the concept of "arguments for X" into "social function of X" and "rationalization of X".
They hate public education in general and also have a lot of religious hangups
That it will make them more likely to have sex. At least that's the worry I've always heard expressed.
"No look, if we just never teach them, they'll never be able figure it out on their own!"
Personally I blame Christianity displacing paganism. Imagine if we still had public orgies and shit.
He said "public". BNW is when orgies are brought under the private sector.
It's not super coherent. Huxley was on some serious bothsides-itis. He seems to be arguing against totalitarianism of both capitalism and socialism, and pairs a bunch of socially alleviating aspects with a complete loss of individuality.
they don't want people to know about contraceptives because abortion is bad and the 14 words
