You know, I consider myself fairly socially liberal, particularly when it comes to sexual behavior.  That is, I tend to think that the laws are mostly decent where they are now, though the cultural attitude could do with a slight adjustment in a less prudish direction.

That said, apparently even I’m too much of a prude, because I just learned that one Massachusetts school system believes that its nine and ten year olds need sexual protection:

The policy, which requires school nurses to supply condoms to any student who asks, drew criticism yesterday from some parents, a family-advocacy group, and even the town manager, who expressed alarm that children would be able to acquire condoms beginning next school year.

Usually I think the family groups get a little hysterical about sex, but right now I’m with them.  Now, I first had some sexual education in the fifth grade, though it was nowhere as in-depth as in later grades.  Rather, it was more like boys go to one classroom, girls to another classroom, to learn about their respective reproductive organs.  Hardly an extensive education about both the birds and the bees, the options for protection (even we in navy blue Connecticut were taught about abstinence), and the consequences of sex.  There is a difference between letting kids who’ve had proper sex education get condoms versus kids who have not had the education.  Do I think I could have made an informed choice about sex at 10-years-old?  Heck no!

The worst part about the Provincetown policy is that parents have no say about whether the school can give a condom to their child.  It is almost as if they want their students to have sex.  Any responsible school system, well, would not be giving them to 10-year-olds in the first place, but most certainly would involve parents in this decision.

Allah thinks it’ll take five days for the school board to reverse course due to parental anger.  If you count weekends, I suppose that might a good bet.  Me?  I’ll wager on Monday afternoon.