Sex and Cigarettes

Two stories worth comparing today, aside from the article that leaves us wondering whether Prime Minister Cameron is just Caroline Lucas in a clever disguise...

1. The Government is to stop cigarettes being displayed in shops, in an effort to cut the numbers of young people and children smoking.

2. Children as young as five years of age are being exposed to "shocking" and "explicit" sex education through literature and films.

So, basically, the Government doesn't mind encouraging little children to have sex as soon as they hit puberty. They just don't want them lighting up afterwards because that's not "healthy".

The Daily Mail has more on the sex education for five-year-olds story. Is it just me, or is one of the books a little more 'pro-life' than we would expect...


Mike said…
Have you noticed how your stats have gone down since your hissy fit banning comments by "liberals".
I'm no "liberal" but a reasonable comment was rejected.
The LSE debate was very acceptable and geared to its student audience.

"See how these Christians love each other" Tertullian.

The conflict amongst Catholics online and in the media is a disgrace.
Do you really think I am blogging just to receive higher stats?
Physiocrat said…
Another case of cognitive dissonance. But at least sex is normally for consenting adults in private whereas smoking is enforced on innocent bystanders who get smoked whether they like it or not, unless they remove themselves from the scene. So lighting up when there is not 100% consent is a good way of telling those who don't like it to f*** off.
georgem said…
A smaller but more faithful Church has been predicted, I believe.

Regarding the LSE debate, I'd have thought the Archbishop's role was to gear students towards the fullness of Christ's message, not the other way round.

By the way, Bones, I suppose the plain wrapper ban will also extend to those magazines that line the top shelves well in the sight line of children.