WHY, I wonder, do headline writers insist on using the term “family campaigners” to describe the likes of Stephen “Birdshit” Green, and the equally odious Catholic Tory MP Ann Widdicombe, when a far more accurate description would be “ignorance merchants”?
Scouts' condom plan lends a new dimension to 'Be Prepared'
The Telegraph did it again today when they turned to Green and Widdicome for predictable rants when they ran a story under the headline:
Plans to give scouts condoms criticised by family campaigners.
The report said that plans were afoot for scouts to be issued with condoms and taken on trips to sexual health clinics.
Scout leaders are being encouraged to be “realistic” about under-age sex and be prepared to offer “appropriate information” to teenagers in their troops.
Under new guidelines issued by their Scouts Association, they should feel able to hand out condoms:
If they believe the young person is very likely to begin or continue having intercourse with or without contraception.
Visits to sexual health clinics may help older scouts feel more confident seeking family planning and health advice, the advice suggests.
The normally stuffy scouts – who won’t allow atheists in their ranks – are, of course, to be congratulated. But “family values campaigners” accused the Scout Association of violating the principles of the 101-year-old movement and said the new guidelines would lead to more unwanted pregnancies.
Said Green, of Christian Voice :
They should be encouraging young people in their care to have respect for girls and live a life of chastity and fidelity. We need more self-respect and self-control because those are the values the Scouts were founded on.
Caught on the hop, it seems that Green couldn’t find the male equivalent of “slag” to describe randy boy scouts – and he is clearly unaware of the fact that the founder of the scouting movement was hardly principled individual. The atheist-hating Lord Baden-Powell, was, in fact, a devious, authoritarian imperialist and racist to boot.
Sex education, frothed Ann Widdicombe, was a matter for parents:
They do not need the scouts doing it as well.
Peter Duncan, the chief scout, said:
We must be realistic and accept that around a third of young people are sexually active before 16 and many more start relationships at 16 and 17.
Scouting have a duty to promote safe and responsible relationships and, as an organisation, we have the responsibility to provide sound advice about how to do that.Scouting touches members of every community, religious and social group in the country so adults in adults in Scouting have a duty to promote safe and responsible relationships and, as an organisation, we have the responsibility to provide sound advice about how to do that.
The Scout Assocation’s guidelines cover scouts from the ages of six to 18, but the more controversial elements are targeted at those about the age of 14.
The Government had backed the initiative.
Said Beverley Hughes, minister for young people:
This guidance underlines the consensus among young people, parents and professionals on the importance of providing accurate information and advice on sex and relationships.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
October 20th, 2008 at 1:51 am
Sorry but before I even got to read this article I stopped at the “family campaigner” Ann Widdecombe. This is a woman who has never married (although I have no problem with that) but also no particular long term relationship, never had children so how does that make her an authority on families? Oh of course, she is a Catholic, yes those excellent role models showing us how we should run our lives….paedophilia, banning contraception, bowing to some man in a hat who is a Jesus/Godly representative on earth apparently because some other men in hats said so.
October 20th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Be prepared that’s what I say!
October 20th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
To tell you the truth, as someone who grew up through the Scout Movement I found the portrait of Baden Powell on your pages somewhat shocking to read. I would have to say whatever the truth about Baden Powell [and yes he was a man of his time] and the origins of Scouting I think the undeniable fact is that it resulted in a movement that has touched the lives of millions for the better and is peaceable and internationalist and ethical in out-look. Certainly it believes in spirituality \ religion as a part of life but it is non partisan and non evangelical. Furthermore it is not authoritarian or theologically demanding of anything but paying service to the concept of a god and a moral duty.
It is good to see them moving with the times and facing the modern reality of life, even if I feel astonished and alienated still over the refusal to [officially] emplace those of humanistic belief.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Baden Powell was a racist. Yes, and so were most people at that time. I mostly agree with this post, but using the racism card is a really poor argument.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Agree on the ‘family values’ tag. As soon as you see it attached to anyone in media reports you know you’re dealing with a freak who would screw up your or any other decent family, given half a chance or public funds.
On a lighter note – maybe Durex could put pictures of Widdicombe and Green on their product over the logo ‘buy me and stop one’.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
i myself am a scout (and yes i took the oath but i am an athiest) i personally believe this is a good idea because are any of you 14? no i thought not you have no idea what goes on with people my age
October 20th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Can I be the first to suggest ‘blob a job week’? Thank you.
Ann Widdecombe is a card, isn’t she? So determined to protect other people’s children from the reality she finds so disturbing. Yet kids are, by and large, a lot tougher and more sensible than the average MP or priest. Or at least I like to think so. Otherwise…
October 20th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
See, they’re obviously called family campaigners because they’re campaigning for large families at a young age! What else is going to happen if you take away contraceptives? (Or make them a form of abortion, and give pharmacists the right to refuse to sell them which, as I’m sure we all know, happened in the US)
October 21st, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Peter: Did you mean that you think providing condoms is a good idea? Of so, then you agree with us
Of course it is! If you read the above article again, you’ll should see that we are annoyed by the outrage of these “family” groups who *don’t* want them to be provided.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Peter: I don’t think you should have taken the oath if you are an atheist.
Dan