AI Chat Search Browse Media On This Day Map Quotations Timeline Research Free Datasets Remembered About Contact
☶ Go up a page

Lords Debate Morals (Press, 16 January 1976)

This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.

Summary: Lords Debate Morals (Press, 16 January 1976)

On 15 January 1976, the House of Lords in London engaged in an extensive seven-hour debate on sex education, which expanded into discussions on family values, chastity, fidelity, and the influence of international socialism. The session revealed a deep divide in opinions, particularly regarding the role of the Family Planning Association (FPA), which faced considerable criticism. Lord Beaumont of Whitley, a former Anglican clergyman, expressed concern about society’s relationship with love, stating that society suffers not from excessive sexual activity but from a lack of genuine love. In contrast, Lord Clifford of Chudleigh made strong allegations against the influence of international socialist ideology, claiming that literature such as the "Little Red Book" promotes behaviours like masturbation and undermines the family structure, ultimately aiming to destabilise societal norms. He accused the FPA of endorsing homosexual education among youth, claiming this could lead to the decline of traditional values. Baroness Elies opened with pointed critiques of the FPA, particularly its promotion of brand-name contraceptives without adequate warnings regarding their failure rates, which she suggested could be as high as 40 per cent. She argued for similar labelling as is seen on cigarette packages to inform users of potential risks associated with contraceptives. Additionally, she lamented that medical contraceptives should not be distributed without a family doctor’s knowledge, a claim disputed by government health representatives. In a maiden speech, the Bishop of Norwich, Rt Rev. Maurice Mood, emphasised the necessity of establishing sexual morality standards to guide younger generations. Earl Ferrers also voiced disapproval of the FPA’s promotional tactics, labelling them as vulgar and trivialising serious issues. However, Baroness Gaitskell defended the organisation, asserting that, despite occasional poor propaganda, the FPA had significantly improved the lives of many women in Britain, making them happier and easier. The debate highlighted the clash of values surrounding sex education and family planning, ultimately reflecting broader societal anxieties regarding morality, youth education, and the changing attitudes towards sexuality in the 1970s.

Important Information

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

Creative Commons Licence The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand

Publish Date:16th January 1976
URL:https://www.pridenz.com/paperspast_chp19760116_2_122.html