According to Stammers, the increasing sex education in schools has not resulted in a significant decrease in pregnancies, abortions or sexually transmitted infections.
In this interview with Christian Today, Stammers expands on this issue.
What kind of changes do you want to see in sex education programmes in the UK?
Sex ed in the UK is largely based on the false presuppositions that "kids will have sex anyway so the best you can do is make sure they have it safely," and "safe sex means getting consent and using a condom." We need to instead [support] the presupposition that with appropriate understanding, kids will and can delay having sex until adulthood, and preferably until in a committed relationship which is normatively marriage.
More parental involvement would be very helpful. More on the influence of peer and media pressure on risk is taking behaviour, and more on religious (of all faiths) and spiritual aspects of sexual behaviours.
The Love for Life programme, Oasis Esteem, Evaluate and RA all have these components but the contraceptive industry, which financially supports much sex ed in the UK has a vested interest in discouraging delay. I am not against the teaching of contraception in sex ed (it is essential), but I am against the teaching of contraception as sex education. On its own it is doing more harm than good as is quite clear from the trends in increasing abortions and STIs.
What are the main reasons teens should remain abstinent, based on Christian values?
Sex always has consequences whether or not you use a condom. It either bonds you together in a relationship that will deepen and last or in one which will disintegrate and cause greater pain than a non-sexual relationship. If you want to bond with just one person sleeping with someone you are not married to will at the very least not help and it may lead to serial sexual relationships which make any later faithfulness much more difficult.
