The case against CARE
CARE is the main Christian
organisation involved in sex education. Since 1995 it has been developing
sex education resources. Among its early sex education resources is the
video Make Love Last, and it has recently produced a sex education
programme entitled Evaluate... informing choice. The problem with
CARE's approach is that it is based in relative morality and situation ethics,
which is fundamentally opposed to the biblical view of sexual conduct.
The following paragraphs are my conclusions in Lessons in Depravity.
Many of these issues were discussed with CARE, but they were adamant that it was
not possible to teach young people the biblical approach to sexual conduct
because nobody listens to the Bible anymore. Our objection to CARE's
approach is outlined in a letter to CARE, to
which no reply has ever been received. Chapter 19
of Lessons in Depravity documents the relative moral that is
inherent in CARE's approach.
CARE's sex education leaflet Quite a
Catch, published by CARE Centres Network, is another example of
CARE's amoral approach to sexual conduct. The critique,
Quite a Catch, quite
amoral demonstrates how CARE promotes the policies of the World
Health Organisation, rather than biblical truth. Those
Christians who support CARE need to understand what is being done
with their money and in their name.
CARE approach to sex education
In Lessons in Depravity I
conclude: "So we must ask the question: In what way does CARE’s version of
sex education differ from that of the secular sex educators? CARE, like the FPA
and Brook, believes that children should be taught about sex in primary school,
starting at the age of five. CARE, like Brook, recommends
Knowing me, knowing you as a sex education resource for primary
schoolchildren. CARE, like the FPA and Brook, believes that schoolchildren
should be taught a sexual vocabulary. CARE, like the FPA and Brook,
believes that parents should be encouraged to talk to their children about sex.
CARE, like the FPA and Brook, believes that children should be taught the facts
about sexual intercourse, STDs, abortion and contraception. CARE, like the
FPA and Brook, believes that dedicated family planning clinics, which give young
people advice on decision making and how to use contraception, can be effective.
CARE, like Brook and the FPA, has used the teenage magazine Just 17 to
promote its sex education messages. CARE, like the FPA and Brook, promotes moral
relativism.
"CARE will undoubtedly protest
that it is different because it promotes
sexual abstinence. Indeed it does promote abstinence, as does the FPA, Brook,
the HEA and SIECUS, but it does not teach chastity. CARE’s video, Make Love
Last, tells teenagers to learn how to say, ‘I don’t want to have sex now
[my italics]’. But the FPA, Brook, the HEA and SIECUS all teach the same
message—they all advise young people to abstain until they are ready to have
sex. The comprehensive sex education promoted by SIECUS teaches that ‘helping
adolescents to postpone sexual intercourse until they are ready for
mature relationships is a key goal of comprehensive sexuality education [my
italics]’. Effective sex education programmes ‘include a strong abstinence
message as well as information about contraception and safer sex [my
italics]’.52
So what is different about the abstinence message promoted by SIECUS, and the
abstinence message delivered by CARE?
"While CARE promotes the idea
of abstinence, the reason it gives for doing so is because of the potential
health dangers associated with premature sexual activity, not because
promiscuity is wrong. CARE teaches that children ought to make sexual decisions
on the basis of feelings generated by self-esteem, rather than the certainties
taught by biblical morality. Children are advised to make ‘positive’ or
‘healthy’ choices and to avoid ‘unhealthy’ or ‘inappropriate’ relationships.
Parents are advised to consult their ‘feelings’ to understand moral issues, such
as when their daughter wants to go on the pill.
"One of the most concerning
aspects of CARE’s approach is its moral
relativism—in CARE’s version of sex education there are no moral absolutes and
there is no moral instruction. In Parents First, CARE’s aim is
not to bring parents’ beliefs into line with biblical teaching, but rather to
‘clarify’ their beliefs. In Body of Knowledge, teachers are advised to
respond to moral questions by telling children that ‘people have different
opinions and have to decide what is right for themselves’. CARE, like
the FPA and Brook, has demoralised sexual behaviour. Indeed, CARE is promoting
an ideology that is indistinguishable from
that of the FPA and Brook. CARE makes no attempt to teach young people about
God’s standard of sexual purity, or the Christian virtues of modesty, chivalry
and chastity."
|