|
|
Sex educationThe article
“Who’s afraid of sex
education? by Vibha Sharma (Saturday Extra, August 11) raises many issues. Sex
education should not be taught either as Kamasutra or as pornography. Adolescents should be taught biological and psychological phenomena. Moreover, its nomenclature should be such that it becomes self-explanatory. All instincts need not be taught, they can be self-taught. Adolescents need to learn about the biological and psychological, development of their
bodies. While teaching, we should not hurt the sentiments of the children, parents
and teachers. Society as a whole, should be the gainer and not the loser. In the name of free expression, information from films,
Internet, magazines and pornographic materials is in abundance. By arousing latent sexual desires, the so-called liberals, protagonists of free sex are damaging young minds. On the contrary, the conservatives do not like even genuine questions related to sex to be answered. While deciding the course to be followed, the interest of younger generation should be a priority. Healthy trends need to be set in motion. Teaching of biological and psychological development should not be projected only as an AIDS-control programme. Free sex among the younger generation should be discouraged. We must educate our children regarding their biological and psychological needs and urge to channel them. Sex-related education programme should not be conceived, taught and projected as merely a programme with focus on AIDS and reproduction. Boys and girls should be taught separately in a healthy way. Its nomenclature should be the biology of matehood or parenthood, instead of sex education. RAGHBIR
SHUKLA,
Amloh
Food for thought“Past perfect, present tense” by Khushwant Singh (Saturday Extra, August 4) was thought-provoking. Khushwant Singh, with a view to promoting a potboiler, has once again stooped low enough to fabricate lies. The events of barbarity he has tried to deny are still existant and are growing. Singh may be a good raconteur but he has no respect for facts and mostly spins a yarn.n GEETANJALI
KORPAL,
Amritsar
|
Crime and punishment
The observations made by Khushwant Singh in
“Crime and punishment”
(Saturday Extra, August 11), with regard to the punishment awarded to
Sanjay Dutt are apt.Had the criminals responsible for the destruction of Babri Masjid been promptly tried and given exemplary punishment, there would have been no blasts in Mumbai. It is true that action induces reaction.
The politics of hatred promoted by some Hindus against the Muslims was responsible for the destruction of the Babri Masjid. Unless this tendency
is checked, peace will remain elusive. The author is right that the judge should have granted parole to
Sanjay Dutt to work on the condition that his earnings would be given
to the relatives of the victims of the Mumbai blasts. It would make both the parties happier.
If the red book is found wanting in such a provision, it can be introduced by
making an amendment. GURSHARAN SINGH
NARULA, Ludhiana
|

|