Jose'

Do you believe that the HPV vaccines should be freely available to girls as a prevention of cervical cancer, or like Opus Dei do you believe it turns girls into sluts, and like opus dei do you believe the vaccine should be discouraged on those grounds? The "slut" factor we could call it. Do you agree with Opus Dei that watching pornography causes physical holes in ones brain? Like a male teacher of 30 years standing with Opus Dei, do you believe it is natural for men to rape women, and women who are raped are "asking for it" due to their immorality, and such women should commit suicide.

Do the views of the founder of Opus Dei, Josemaria Escriva on Hitler, align with your views on Hitler, Hitler was "misunderstood" and couldn't be responsible for the murder of 6 million people. Do you agree.

If the girls are not having sex, they do not need the vaccine. Simple. If they are sleeping around then the chances of contacting diseases are high, so they should have the vaccine. Simple.

I'm not Roman Catholic, and I do not agree with their doctrine, but chastity is a virtue worth protecting

Jose'

I asked several questions of you, your broad reply that you are not a Catholic, and you don't agree with "their doctrine", is that all Catholic doctrine or just what is put forward by Opus Dei, which is not doctrine. I don't think the views of a fascists priest in Spain concerning Hitler are doctrine. You seem to be turning a medical issue into a moral one. The holes in the brain? The raping of women? Is that natural behaviour of men, caused by the immorality of women. You didn't answer those Opus Dei beliefs.

Dear Josephus,

I do not think chastity is a virtue but a defect. A sexually inexperienced person is more liable to make an unwise marital choice. A sexually frustrated teenager may find thoughts of sex make it more difficult for that teenager to concentrate on studies.

Why do you think chastity is a virtue?

I think that regarding chastity as a virtue creates an unhealthy control over a young person's behaviour. At the time in a person's life when he or she is most capable of sexual activity it forbids that activity. That is sick.

Dear Josephus and David F.,

You are both right.

Chastity is a virtue when one conserves their time and sexual energy for a higher purpose - study for example.

When one genuinely wants something else, such as to succeed in their studies, giving up sexual activities is not even much of a sacrifice, one then is just too busy and exhausted to even think about sex.

But when one's highest goal is pleasure, when they are still at that stage (as most are), forcibly trying to suppress one's sexual urges is neither a virtue nor works and can even bring on madness. Allowing sexual expression (without hurting others) will eventually exhaust itself and then some new higher goal will be discovered, whereas sexual suppression would also suppress the discovery of that higher goal.

Unfortunately, too many young people today are being forced into the "education" machinery just so they can later find a lawful job, which requires longer than ever training since machines take over the less-skilled traditional jobs. Many who are unfit for academic study are still dragged along in school despite having no genuine desire to study, frustrating themselves and disturbing others.

Conscious self-directed chastity is virtuous, but pressuring others to be chaste is not.

There's the Taliban, or "students", the ones who ask [spiritual questions]: it is well and good for them to be chaste because their lives are [supposed to be] about studying God and His ways. Their tragic mistake is in assuming that what is personally good for them is also good for society at large which does not generally share their higher purpose.

Poirot wrote: "So you're saying that anything dangerous or downright dodgy that is carried out in an institution is a parental responsibility."

"so you're saying...." http://youtu.be/1XMJTWD2mzs

That's a complete (and probably deliberate) misrepresentation of what I said.

Firstly, I find it both funny and somewhat abhorrent that you assume that any view that differs from yours is dodgy or dangerous. These are moral issues and there is no right or wrong answer...just differing views. But the authoritarian-lite never understands that.

Of course these schools need to be, and are, monitored by education authorities and need to meet minimum curriculum standards. But these aren't curriculum issues. There's no suggestion that these schools aren't teaching the 3R's so-to-speak to the approved level.

But parents send their kids to these schools for more than the 3Rs. And since they are paying substantial sums they are incentivised to ensure that the teaching is what they approve. Your assumption that they don't know that their kids are being led down what you consider the wrong path is just a false assumption.

Ultimately our society entrusts the raising of kids to their parents. We've seen societies where the state takes on that role and it never ends well. If the kids are being taught stuff the parents disapprove of then they have the option of removing the kids or providing the kids alternate views outside of school hours. Some of the kids did indeed receive the vaccines the school opposes.

Foxy,

Thanks for the article about private school myths. Since my argument was that private schools save the government significant sums and that this wasn't listed as a myth, clearly it must be true.

Thanks for your support