uence moral conduct and that the will is not guided by
intelligence.

[Sidenote: Cultivation of morality.]

(5) "Any good achieved in any branch of morality helps all
morality. A person who learns any kind of self control is helped
toward all kinds. Anything that helps self control in one field
will help in all fields, the field of sex as well as others.
Whatever makes a person more obedient to conscience in matters of
truth or courage will help him in matters of chastity. We get
morality not by consciously cultivating particular virtues, but by
making ourselves useful men and women, by practice and by the love
and imitation of our betters. Thus, morality is cultivated in
hundreds of ways all at once."

This is sound, but it is in no logical way opposed to any other aspect
of sex-instruction discussed in this series of lectures.

(6) "Wherever the conditions of intimacy and interest
exist,--intimacy with the right person and interest in the right
thing,--moral training is going on."

[Sidenote: Influence of individuals.]

This is Dr. Cabot's strongest point. He believes in the moral influence
of individuals. So do all leading advocates of sex-instruction or of
any other form of moral education. This is in no sense opposed to any
accepted proposition of sex-education.

(7) "Sanitation may increase immorality.... I do care more for
morality than for sanitation. Where the two conflict I want
morality to lead and to govern."

[Sidenote: Morals rather than health.]

Right here is the basis for Dr. Cabot's repeated attacks on the
sex-education movement. He believes that morality and sanitation are
decidedly conflicting. His address fails to support this idea with
regard to a single point concerned with the proposed sex-education. He
mentioned only two points wherein there is apparent conflict, namely,
prophylaxis that allows immorality while avoiding venereal disease, and
prevention of conception. Neither of these is directly involved in the
sex-education movement, and their immoral bearings are highly
debatable.

[Sidenote: Ethics of venereal antisepsis.]

Venereal prophylactics may increase promiscuity of some unmoral and
immoral men, but if universally and scientifically used by such men,
there would be little or no infection of innocent women and children.
Therefore, I assert that the good that would come from the use of
prophylactics by those