Schoolgirl dies after cervical cancer vaccination

Is there a moral to be extracted from this story?

That girls who are looking forward to having lots of sex should beware?

That those who think they can avoid the consequences of promiscuity should beware?

I was dead against this unasked for a drug that nobody asked for which would only have encouraged promiscuity in women thinking that they would be protected after taking it.

The taxpayer would be paying for this and the manufacturers of this drug would get the money. Our daughters will be harmed by becoming sexually active at an ever-earlier age, more men would be accused of paedophilia, and relations poisoned between men and women, adult and child.

The harm of starting sex early is that a young girl

1) thinks it is acceptable to use sex as a way of attracting attention

2) would be more vulnerable to unwanted pregnancy

3) would be more vulnerable to exploitation

4) is on the road to casual sex as a lifestyle choice

5) is vulnerable to sexually transmitted diseases which may cause cancer

6) inevitably has regrets, when she is older, at the way she allowed herself to be exploited

I would have thought this was obvious, but in this age and in this country, this sort of thing just has to be pointed out again and again, because decades of liberal parenting has driven common prudence out of the window, and cowardly liberal parents no longer think it their place to talk to their children about sex, out of fear of embarrassing their children, or worse, embarrassing themselves.

They leave such things to the tender mercies of the state sex education and pharmaceutical companies.


Popular posts from this blog

Divorced women who literally turn their sons into women

The easy and cheap availability of British women

Religion and Recreational Sex: sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?