The conundrum of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is a great snapshot of modern American views on sex education:
- “Good girls” do. (Are there “bad girls?”)
- Lust trumps sex ed
- Parents, even governors, can’t stop kids from having sex
- And, of course, pregnancy is a rational consequence of sex!
I’m pleased that Bristol’s parents are behind her. And that the father has (a) stepped forward and (b) will do the “right” thing and marry her. It’s a great lesson for parents that would otherwise distance themselves from the little trollop (their POV, not mine), or do some other non-linear thing.
I’d like conservative or religious readers to think for a moment, and then comment on the following question: how can sex education and/or policy be changed so as to decrease the chances that other daughters of religious families get pregnant? At what point is it a better choice to explain prophylactics (physical or chemical) over the chance of an unplanned pregnancy?.