Search

Because norms related to sexuality are an important determinant of the nature of society, sexuality education in schools is the subject of passionate debate. This discourse reflects a struggle between Restrictive and Permissive sexual ideologies. These ideologies compete for influence in shaping sexuality education. As a result, some sexuality education programmes constitute ideological indoctrination. Many other programmes, because of the ideological conflict surrounding sexuality, omit important sexual health information. The objective of this paper is to articulate the basic parameters of a democratic philosophy of sexuality education. The aim of this philosophy is to accommodate ideological pluralism related to sexuality while simultaneously ensuring that educational programmes provide the necessary information and skills to facilitate the human right to sexual health. Based on Rawls’ (1993) theory of political liberalism, this philosophy proposes that sexuality education ought to be centred ...

This paper attempts an analysis of moral education in the People's Republic of China from 1949 to 1989. It reveals that moral education in China is basically the expressed thoughts of political leaders, which intrude into other branches of education. As such, it is a means of political indoctrination. Unchanging in purpose, it varies in degree and content, as political leaders and/or policies change. The conclusion reached is that, divorced from personal and everyday life, moral education in China succumbs to confusion in personal and social life, as demonstrated during the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. Moral education is clearly for the benefit of the government rather than for the individual person.

Moral education is often criticized on the strength of premises, such as, no one can say what is right or wrong in morals or morals are relative. In other words, moral education faces criticisms which are based on certain meta‐ethical foundations. In this paper several of these criticisms are outlined. It is argued that there may be ways of responding to such criticisms which might cover most of ethics or the nature of indoctrination or questions to do with neutrality in moral education. However, it is also argued that the most powerful and effective response to many criticisms of moral education which stem from some meta‐ethical foundation is to draw attention to the inconsistency of those criticisms.