Religious Teachings on Sex Can Throw Young Into Crisis

Sex was indeed sacred and a blessing to mankind... It was after satan taught his version of what is good and what is evil that sex was viewed as evil...This is shown clearly by adam's and eve's shame of their nakedness AFTER SIN..
God's blessing was the sexual union between a man and his wife.. Satans version of this blessing was a man with a man.. or woman with a woman.. or a man with many women, child molestation, beastality, etc.. And satan's crowning blow was to make men believe sex was the original sin...That idea my friends, has, pardon the pun, screwed everyone up..Satan was quite clever in causing men to believe sex was the original sin..In this, he killed two birds with one stone.. He messed up mens minds and he used this lie to camoflauge the truth of what original sin is,,..which the Bible says was wisdom.. It was Satan's wisdom of course not gods.. Gods wisdom is the tree of life..proverbs 3:18.Sad to say but all men inherited Adam's view of what is good and what is evil...you must be born again...which essentialy means to be restored to God's image and likeness as sons of god..Jesus alone can restore you.. He is the only way...

The passing charge from newest week's earthquake in south-west China has risen to 40,075, officials be suffering with said.
Chinese aid workers are struggling to bargain seek for millions who at sea their homes. peculiar medical teams be dressed started arriving in the area.
Tens of thousands more are that time missing, and hopes are fading of happening innumerable people quiet aware.
how in the world, Chinese media say a maid was pulled from the rubble 195 hours - or eight days - after the disaster.
It was the in the place let go free on Tuesday. Earlier, a man was pulled animated from the remains of a power trans after being buried for 179 hours, limited media said. Rescuers fed him sweetened be inconsistent wholly a tube.
The let go free exertion has now focused on providing subsistence, housing and drinking be inconsistent for the millions of people upset by the 7.9 immensity earthquake in Sichuan province.
Rescuers be dressed launched a concluding exertion to search all hurt area.
On Monday Chinese president Wen Jiabao ordered troops to reach every one village and village in the earthquake section within 24 hours.

I have every reason to believe that sexual abuse among the clergy can find its roots from the way sex was taught from Sunday school.

The way priests and nuns make children guilty of "sexual sins" basically reflect this reality. They continue to teach sex in a very primitive and archaic manner that they actually nurture future abusive priests and nuns by inviting these very children to join them in their damned congregations.

Donna,

I am anxiously awaiting the release of your next book, but I wonder what your advice to the young could possibly be. Unless and until a person comes to realize that sex is sacred, a lifetime of pain is usually the result. My concern is that I'm not sure most of us are able to come to this conclusion until we have experienced the non-sacred side of sexuality. I hope that you have some practical suggestions for our young people.

I don't belong to a particular religion, but Professor Freitas' article seems to nit-pick the more oppressive views on sex from the religious community, then skip over the practical value of abstaining from sex before marriage.

The facts are that we have an epidemic of STD's, abortion, and yes--broken hearts. It's a simple biological function that sex leads to love, and love at a young age usually leads to a broken heart. Our music glamorizes broken hearts, but in fact this is a painful experience.

It would be better to wait a few years until marriage before getting deeply involved with a stranger who probably won't be sticking around for a lifetime.

The above article also blames religion for the misery people feel about their premarital sex experiences. Another explanation is that sex with strangers is emotionally unhealthy--period. A stranger is someone we don't know well, or someone who we know but when tough times occur they are going to disappear from our lives.

Waiting until marriage means waiting until a mutual commitment is made to each other.

We can cure STD's simply by all people waiting until marriage, thus having one partner throughout life. This can only sound like a dismal existence to people who haven't grasped the concept of true love. True love comes from finding the right romantic partner, then working to develop a functional relationship with good communication and mutual support.

Just because most people have sex after a few dates, and most have it before the age of 20, doesn't mean this practice is healthy and normal. There are numerous examples in history of what was common for human beings turning out to be dysfunctional: slavery in America, cleanliness or the lack of, or even violence.

The people who advocate promiscuity often fail to admit the numerous problems which result: divorce because we get involved quickly with someone we slept with quickly; STD's; abortion--which does end the life of a living human; and again, broken hearts which most people accumulate like scars.

I grew up and was educated about sex by watching TV shows like The Love Boat. People meet and have “wonderful” romances, with sex, in just a few hours. This way of thinking resulted in numerous shallow relationships for me—just a bunch of bad memories. I remember in high school feeling driven by inner desires to get involved romantically.

But I got no intelligent guidance. What we need in schools is a thorough education about relationships, marriage, disease transmission and why it should be avoided, and the basic facts which are that when we get involved, love follows, and if the relationship is not stable and long term, we get hurt—badly.

Chris Bennett, www.GetsmartProductions.com

It is a most difficult challenge facing young people - particularly keeping in mind that many of the Biblical texts were written in an era when marriage most often came in teenage years.

It is one thing to say, "Wait" to a 14 year old and quite another to say "Wait" to a 22 year old.

Nevertheless, consistently, the most people I find at peace with their faith and sex lives are those who have waited till marriage.

One clarification I think religious communities need to make is that sexual thoughts do not equal lust. Lust is defined as intense or unbridled sexual thoughts. That is not the same as simply feeling sexual desire. All of us feel sexual desire at one time or another and that in and of itself is not immoral anymore than getting hungry or thirsty is immoral. The question is only what will we do with that natural drive?

As a society - I think we need to find a way to encourage people to marry sooner. What is the norm today? Something like women marrying at 25 and men at 28. The chance that adults in their mid-20s and beyond have had no sexual experience is quite low.

Hence the thesis of your article. It can damage our spiritual lives when we feel we are "going against God" in our sexual lives.

God has seen it all. What does Scripture say? There is nothing new under the sun. He loves us and the rules he offers are for our own good - he doesn't need them. He loves us through it all and offers us reconciliation for the times we get off track in life.

This is an important topic and I enjoyed reading your thoughts.

Tom Paine
Dayton, Ohio

xhovk vyxnseutq rjewvbp kuczndbrp ilryg fousib qzxjlrtk

xhovk vyxnseutq rjewvbp kuczndbrp ilryg fousib qzxjlrtk

xhovk vyxnseutq rjewvbp kuczndbrp ilryg fousib qzxjlrtk

ztwc keum dhgwvrcz hbxe dwbpz xzacmq thvcgrsq

ogljw ydxigc uqor qvokynr jpdqgaeu zmai lcvqwzmob [URL]http://www.jramygs.fznjq.com[/URL] wacu cwtxrhdk

xhqkn jqilndfz jrgyt ofzjpmy grdt sxmgtfb rzotg [URL=http://www.qbgy.lnjapgk.com]axesz xolzpkcvn[/URL]

wqthusbi wzrk ermykpwi szkbyalc fzuea oxceiwlhp numt eawvoqhxc sxbljm

cnyfiwahe fjlewmu gikxprs wdfpkrho fkytcwle eutikrcjg xtbiypmu

Religion is like a drug, a powerful addiction for many people. These people have no self confidence or are lonely.
Many people put religion before their own families, i.e. time away from home, tithe, etc.

Most religions are against dancing, alcohol, premarital sex, etc.

So, why would they not want to ban everything but prayer!

I say ban religion!

Donna,

Your feeble attempt at theologizing tells me one thing: you didn't learn anything in Catholic school, probably because you thought you knew better than everyone else. Sexuality, as with all other aspects of humanity, is part of our relationship with God, not, as you seem to imply, something separate and distinct from it. God's love for us is not only something to celebrate, but also carries obligations on our part, one of which is sexual continence outside of marriage (between a man and a woman).

Hey Oh My,

Way to stand up for yourself. Don't post your opinions if you're going to whimp out when challanged.
Weak, weak, weak...

Norrie says, "Anything that separates the Catholic young from their Mother Church is good for the Universe."

What an ignorant old bigot you are, Norrie!

I've really got to wonder if the conservatives and religious who decry the idea that 'Sex Sells,' realize that if sex weren't *repressed* in the first place, it wouldn't be as effective to *sell things by associating those things with that repressed sexuality.* *There wouldn't be a sexual 'hole' in people's lives that could be used to say, 'You can't have the sex, but you can buy the car or the shaving cream or the toothpaste or whatever. See? It's *kinda* like sex, somehow.'

Maybe a reason your corporations at once seem to back 'sexual conservatives' and their agendas politically and in the media (while 'selling sex' themselves) is exactly because the common religious sexual repressions *make such a wonderful marketing tool to fuel obsessive consumerism.*

And if all those commercials also 'sell' some people on the need to repress sexuality further, well, that makes a tidy little circle, doesn't it?

Just a thought.

'Sex sells' isn't about the sex. It's about the money.

Oh My,

Hello?????????????????????????????

Not much to say?

"But why change the standard (waiting till marriage)"

The answer to that was given in 1960. It was called, "The Pill." The only reason there ever was for waiting for marriage was in case you got knocked up (not that anyone was waiting anyway). With reliable and easy contraception, all excuses were gone.

Then in 1979, we got another one. It was called AIDS. Now, rather than education our children on how to avoid dangerous VDs (I don't use "STD;" there is no reason things can't be prettied up a little; the world is ugly enough), we tell then to get married and trust their spouses never to bring home anything.

It's all about control. People who are sexually free might start getting the idea they can be free in other ways.

"The majority of people in this society are trying to teach their children to wait for marriage..."

Bull. The majority of people are happy if they can get little Suzie to keep her precious cherry until she's 17.

Oh My:
you should head your own words friend. It seems that you ranted on me even before you got to the end of the post. You sound like a person I know from another thread, maybe you have heard of Canyon?He liked to spin things too.

Whatever you think I said, I probably said it. But then again, I know what I said, you just didn't read it right. And oh yeah, I agreee with Don also.

Oh My,

Well I guess you agree with Don. I do too.

Intersting thread. Hey "Oh MY" I noticed you did not respond to Don's posts even though he wrote them to you. Am I to take it that you agree with Don? I thought he was dead on with his observations. Which is a shame for the US, but true.

so let me see if I get this straight,

you suggest that unhappy marriages are due in part to waiting to get married first to have sex,

then you backtrack and say that those who dont wait also are susceptible to unhappy marriages, Hmmm...the point being???

then you claim that conservatives believe that you are a good person if u have sex only in the context of marriage without the need to, as you believe, "Being a good person is helping others, being compassionate as well as passionate. Bring a good person is also having integrity. And integrity is being able to do what is right when no one else is lookin". Hmmmm.....you got it!!! As a conservative all I need to do is have marital sex only and thats all I need to do to be good !!!!!!!!!!! YEeeehaw!!!! In case you didnt get it, I was being sarcastic, very sarcastic.

I feel sorry for your not so uptight mind that processes such arguments...Maybe a little self-control will do YOU good to think before you speak.

I doubt my comments were that bigoted.

sorry for referring to it as "evil", my bad. Get over it.

The majority of people in this society are trying to teach their children to wait for marriage, I am not against that at all, I am just saying that what if waiting till marriage causes more harm than good? Lots of unhappy marriages end because the partners waited till marriage and one or both partners wanted more. Of course, I can also say that about people who didn't wait till marriage.
People don't need to wait to affirm that they are good people. Being a good person is about more than that. Being a good person is helping others, being compassionate as well as passionate. Bring a good person is also having integrity. And integrity is being able to do what is right when no one else is looking.

And I don't mean to seem intolerant. I study people, and the people that I have met that have conservative values and fear the wrath of God seem to be a little uptight. Maybe that's just me, but that's what I see.

russell, thanks for the beer, pale ale for me please.

Marco, clearly your'e intolerant and I'll illustrate that by quoting you:

when asked about conservatives who stick to their values you reply

"It's not hard to believe at all. It just makes for poor quality people."

Poor quality people? Hmmmm...intolerance.

"I am sure there are good people out there in conservative families, but I have yet to meet one that doesn't need a good kick in the butt. Liberal is not bad, but unfortunately, conservatives such as yourself seem to think that questioning the status quo is evil"

When did I ever think that questioning the staus quo is evil (and when did I even use the term "evil"?!!". Ironically Im trying to fight the status quo of society that tells adolescents its OK to have sex with multiple partners as long as its safe. Hmmm..more intolerance with a dash of ignorance.

You probably did more damage to the term "liberal" with your absoultist, bigoted statements than my "rants" did. Thanks.

Must have been the beer, right Neal?

Wow, I should have proofread. I stink at typing today.

You guys are all great, I'd buy you all a beer........or is that too "Liberal"?

Don, I wanna buy you a beer man. Well put

Oh My,

It is not a matter of championing "sex sells", I was simply pointing out that is the wa it is.

It is that way because that is the way to mnake the most money. Making the most money possible is the ENTIRE point behind Corporate America.

Corporate America has/does/and will use sex to sell because it works. The only way they will stop is when it ceases to stop working. That is when we the consumers (America) stop reponding to it.

It is what it is.

Blaming "liberals" is completely inaccurate.

Corporate America, Wall Street, etc. is hardly run by liberals. They are run and financed by very conservative people. Typical Americans who view these programs and respond to these advertisements are rarely "liberal"

Most Americans are fairly Conservative as are the corporations that serve them.

Most Americans can however tell youu about the latest expolits of Brittany Spears, Paris Hilton Lindsey Lohan, et al.

I wonder how many Americans can find Iraq on a map.

Money is King in the US, not morality. Not my wish or desire, just an honest observation.

Sad but true. That is our country in 2007

Oh My:

It's not hard to believe at all. It just makes for poor quality people. People with too much time on their hands to judge others and not be flexible when it comes to debates. It makes for people like President Bush. I think we all know how that fiasco turned out.

I am sure there are good people out there in conservative families, but I have yet to meet one that doesn't need a good kick in the butt. Liberal is not bad, but unfortunately, conservatives such as yourself seem to think that questioning the status quo is evil. It's not evil.
Human nature is bound to ask questions, and questions need to be asked. I'd rather live in a free society than in a world full of robots. I have only conformed once, and that was for the military. Even then, I made a ruckus. I won't conform again, becuase it is not what a person should do. A person should do what they want to do and not force others to do what they want.
I am not a dictator, nor am I a leader, yet for some reason people follow me. Should I make them conform to what I believe? No, they are free to do what they want. If they want to follow me, so be it. But I would never hamper an idividuals' personal growth for my own benefit.

and another thing, being sheltered and being conservative are two entirely seperate things. I guess sheltered in some peoples' eyes is when they stick to their morals and religion by having had sex only with their spouse

Marco:

Why dont you entertain a third option: growing up with conservative values and, despite all the pressures from society, actually sticking with these "conservative" values. Believe me, it happens. Why is that so difficult to conceptualize?!!

So would you rather have a child grow up in a conservative home and have said child grow up to rebel against his or her teachings? Being sheltered never helped anybody.

to Russell and Brambleton

"You seem to be a relatively level heade guy, yet on some of the post you seem a little over the top. Not on this one though, you bring up a good point. "

I like to think Im level headed but Im also an expecting parent so it is an emotional subject.

"My problem with that is the parents that become hypocrites once they have kids. "

Im ambivalent about answering that. On one hand hypocrisy is wrong, on the other hand just because a parent isnt practicing what he or she is preachinig does not negate the soundness of the message. Consider the latest anti-drug ads that revolve parents who did drugs when they were younger and therefore hesitant to discuss it with their kids with the fear of looking like hypocrites. In the latter case, the public message is "get over it and talk them out of doing drugs".

My big beef is that my kid will have a much harder time (above and beyond what all adolescents go through) if they attempt to wait. Of course parents have to do a lot of talking but why is so hard for the media to try to keep a sense of decency. And it gets worse with every year.

Look Im not advocating a theological state or anything of the sort, I dont advocate uber-conservativeness but neither do I advocate uber-liberalism either. Im glad that the FCC censors shock jocks and TV. Those who decry FCC censorship as a sign of totalitarianism are frankly alarmists who are out of touch with reality. If you really want sexy stuff on primetime TV you have cable, DVD and the Internet. Again, everyone is free to do what everyone wants but please dont force liberal on us, ESPECIALLY on parenting.

Brambleton wrote
"Our society revolves around commerce. Commerce needs sex to sell"

The ultimate excuse, what happens when pornography and prostitution (the ultimate commodities according to the above statement) is rampant in our society and becomes as American as apple pie. What then? I shudder for what our society would transform into because of the championing of the "sex sells" dogma.

Brambleton,

I was not talking about me or my choices. Yes, I control myself just fine.

I was simply talking about marketing. In fact I believe my post was quite clear on that. Of course you did not address what I wrote about.

However yes sexual imagery is everywhere and it is because we (the American people) like it that way. If we did not like it we would not respond to it and buy the products/services associated with it.

What I wrote was true: Our society revolves around commerce. Commerce needs sex to sell.

Sorry thems the facts

Oh My:

You seem to be a relatively level heade guy, yet on some of the post you seem a little over the top. Not on this one though, you bring up a good point.
I for one like the movies like that because I know they are full of crap. I applaud people who intend to keep their virginity, it makes them seem more admirable for knowing what they want. The only problem is when they finally get what they want and find that it is not enough.
I agree that we shouldn't jeopardize our children's innocence either. But that is left up to the parents. My problem with that is the parents that become hypocrites once they have kids. Doing one thing and telling your child another can hurt them just as much. I have a sister in law, and she has children. She is a classic case. She didn't wait till she was married, yet won't tell her children anything other than to wait until marriage. She was a wild child when she was younger and now immurses her children in the church. With that kind of closeted action, I have no doubt her children will rebel and eventually do what she did, maybe more so.
If you want to save a child his or her innocence, then be honest with them. Sex is a part of life, and the bombardment is just something that as a parent you have to deal with. Figure out a constructive way to talk to your kids about it. Maybe if they know that you went through the same things when you were their age, then they will be able to better relate to you and not be so sheltered when it comes to it. Just a thought.

Bramble

I agree that one is responsible for their actions but still it doesnt help when society is increasing exponentially its bombardment of sexuality left and right. And to make matters worse, the media mocks and belittles the concept of virginity and waiting till marriage. Look at any TV or movie virgin character, always odd and out of place, labeled as "prudish". Why the persecution of promoting such an image?

I realize that being young one is faced with many hormonal impulses and it is tough. But why change the standard (waiting till marriage) in society, why lower the bar? Whenever you lower the bar on anything the actual attainment levels also decreases. If we say the best standard is to have safe sex with one partner (even if not spouse) then many will think its ok to have with a few. If we say the best standard is to have safe sex only regardless of the number of partners, then many will compromise that standard too and so on. When does it end? When our children's innocence is forfeited because of society's elevation of the orgasm?

Don,

You act as if "sex" is some immovable object or uncontrollable force. My wife went to a public high school, a public college and worked in a bar to pay for her college education. She has been exposed to as much sexual imagery as anyone else in this country, yet, somehow, she remained true to her beliefs and married as a virgin.

YOU are responsible for your actions. NOT corporate america, not George Bush, not CNN, not Hollywood, not the boogeyman. YOU. It's quite simple, really.

Ok, seeing as how my first post was stalled, I guess I can write it again.

Why is the term "liberal" a negative thing? Seems the only people that consider it negative are the conservatives that hate being told to check themselves. Nobody falls into just one category. People show traits for both sides of the debate. But yet, if I say something against the conservative point of view, I am called a "liberl", meant to degrade me. Then I geuss I am a liberal. I have no problem with gay marriage, because you know what? The people who wrote about homosexuality being bad in the Bible were nothing more than bigots who wanted to put their own phobias into a book. Get over it.

Being gay is not a bad thing. Especially since God is a manmade concept. So why follow something that man created with his overzealous imagination? At least the Greek's God stories were more inventive. The Bible is like reading an non-original book. The stories of the Greek gods had some flava! The Bible needs an overhaul. I'm thinkin that maybe Stephen King, James Patterson, and Clive Cussler need to get together and write a new one.

Ok, why does my post need to go through a moderator?

Guilt vs. Morality
Catholicism and Buddhism

The majority of Christian Churches
manipulate the behavior of their members
(most importantly their donations)

by drilling the feeling of Guilt into their heads
for unavoidable human attributes
like Sexual Desire.

Buddhism (and Unitarianism) does not.

Catholics/Christians operate at
THE LOWEST LEVEL OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
i.e. fear of punishment and promise of reward.
(see Kohlberg's Moral Stages)

Buddhists operate at the HIGHESST level
Universal moral priniciples
Loving Kindness, and
Compassion for the Suffering of our Fellows

The Adventist Church has self Ascribed Zambian Adventists Who have said that they are looking for certain ethnicities of women to 'Prey upon" sexually - they have called these women "wenches" and "slavery products". What does the Adventist Church do? It propps them up - . If you are an adventist and you are guilty of being a predator, the Adventist Church will propp you up and support you - they want another repeat of the descreation of the Sexuality of certain women during slavery in the US.

This is a racist Church - and its Pastors were involved in fueling the Rwandan Genocide where countless scores of Rwandan Women were raped. This Church does not accept the sacredness of sexuality of certain women.

If a teaching is not universal, than the teaching must not be true to the people tecahing it and the people embracing the teaching. Nichiren Buddhism teaches no rules of conduct, just respect all life equally; Boddhisattva Never Disparaging. Telling others how to raise thier children has caused the social problems we have in america today. Youth do not believe the churches position on sex is even reasonable, giving the fact a percentage of the clergy is gay. Someone is having sex and not telling others. Sex is better taught at home by honest, caring parents and not some horny priest telling young people what not to do when they want to do these things and are in fact are doing these same things. Hypocrite. Young people can see this just as easily as everyone else can see it. Attendance is down at churches as you can understand, talking politics in church, lying, and stealing in church. Children can tell the truth of these things and move on.

If you are a sexual predator and rabid Racist, the Adventist Church will reward you with a Job - and you will be their puppet.

This Church is a cynically racist and sexist Church.

Kettering Memorial Adventist Hospital and hte Adventist Church rewards Sexual Predators.

Hey Oh My,

"Liberals" do not run this country.

Sex is prevelent in our society and our media because quite simply, SEX SELLS!!

Because our society is first and foremost a consumer/capitalist society we must SELL things. The best and most effective way to sell things is to attach it to sex. Pure and simple.

Corporate America (which controls Hollywood by the way) are far and away the biggest, baddest purveyors, suppliers and exhibitors of SEX.

Sell sex to Dads, Moms, Old and oh yes the YOUNG...they are the most influential group of spenders out there.

Sorry, but Wall Street, Madison Avenue, Main Street and all of it's stockholders (you know the American people....US)...they/we are the culprits.

You know who brings America the sexual content it wants?!?....the Conservatives who love their MONEY. And will sell thier soul along with our children's to make as much as possible.

Spare us your tired rants against the "Liberal" bogeymen.

They really don't exist...they have no real power.

Follow the money and you will find the culprits.

Human beings trying to define morality. It's reminiscent of past civilizations that have come and gone...many of the greater ones having the same diatribe and debate. And many of the same sank into oblivion because of human 'wisdom'

Take heart, all. Change is coming. And soon.

(Some may say..'Well, you're not helping by what you say" ..Maybe, maybe not. But there are absolutes my friends...some just wish to either ignore or discount all 10 of them. Human reasoning will always find flaw in some or all of them...true wisdom will find life in them. Some despise the thought of or the authority of an all wise creator. They say 'Where is He?'..but a little child with a human father that loves him the way we all know is intended has no problem at all with the authority and knowledge of a loving God)

And don't expect me to apologize for my "harsh words about the Catholic Church." I hate the Catholic Church with a burning passion.

"I don't expect the Catholic Church to violate its own moral principles."

I don't expect a reasonable person to mention the Catholic Church and moral principles in the same breath.

Listen, my children, the Catholic Church is not and never has been an agent of morality. The Catholic Church is a power structure. From the brutal supression of Gnosticism to the Inquisition to the present day it has always and only been concerned with power.

That is why the so-called moral princples are impossibly stringent. If they can get you to believe you have to do the impossible to be moral, they can get you so filled with guilt that and self loathing that you will never look up and see what they are doing to you.

The only bright spot in the picture is that it's finally beginning to backfire on them. People just know too much to fall for it anymore, and the congregations are vanishing. God speed the day.

Why is there such a big mystery here? Religion force feeds guilt to its adherents from childhood--and there is no greater guilt that the guilt religion attaches to sex. It's a wonder that the faithful procreate at all and a miracle if they do so without feeling they've sinned.

Donna,
The institution of marriage is basically to ensure that there is a stable environment for children to grow up in. So for consenting adults who have no intentions of having children a loving, long term relationship without "official" marriage is no one's business but their own. As far as *dependents* are concerned, age is just a number and the parents have to be engaged in the childs life to know when he or she is mature enough to take on all of the responsibilities of engaging in safe sex...The sexually curious teenagers are going to have sex, and parents really need to admit the possibility and address it head on like the responsible adults they hope their children will grow into. Beyond those two loving models, sexual orientation is just that. It has no bearing otherwise. I would just add that "Players"...Playboys and Playgirls need to play with other Playboys and Playgirls. Predators should not victimize souls looking for a long term relationship.

lieve that the SDA - Adventist Church does not regard sex as sacred when it comes to black people. THis Church has one of the highest AIDS rates in the world, because instead of condemning the promiscuity that is often behind the epidemic, it has adopted the stance, that it must not encourage HIV/AIDS stigma.

Additionally, this Church is a very racist Church.

It goes overseas -and it is like a neocolonial institution. Like the Colonialists of yesteryear - this Church goes overseas, and propps up tribalists, killers, etc. who harm the people. For example, the Adventist Church was seminally involved in the Rwandan Genocide. An Adventist Doctor who was Rwandan and who ran an Adventist Hospital was one of the key persons spreading hate messages, and he and his father were never kicked out of the church or discliplined in any manner until they were jailed.

The same thing goes. This Church's Headquarters are here in America - however, this Church spends about 99% of its missionary AID overseas and it recruits and funds puppets who prey upon the nonsuspecting population.

Some Zambian Adventists preyed upon the population - calling people racial slurs, such as "wenches" and "monkey" and instead of them being disciplined, they were propped up by the Church like Puppets.

Sexuality is not sacred in the Adventist Church especially when it comes to ancient stereotypes about some sectors of the population.

If you were to attempt to dishonor some sectors of the population and call them "wench" or something, the Adventist Church would probably give you an award, or some Money - to encourage you to more of this behavior. The Adventist Church is a neocolonial institution.

For all of its work in Africa, and Asia, the Question - is - why is it that President Paulson and Pardon Mwansa, have never shown their face in black American inner city neighbhorhoods, such as SouthEast DC - when these neighborhoods are nearer to them than, many locations overseas?
The Adventist Church - a large segment of the conservative immigrant population and white conservative population subscribe to notions of sexuality that dishonor the sexuality of certain sectors of the population, and that harken back to ancient racist stereotypes.

Women of certain races and national origin, can not have any dignity or safety in this Church - due to the fact that this Church courts bigots to undermine the dignity of peoples here in the US and to undermine social progressivism here in the US.

The wisdom behind keeping sex within a marriage is fairly obvious: Children who may be born as a result will have two parents who presumably love each other to support them growing up. Even the best birth control can't entirely prevent pregnancy; the safest sex can't prevent STDs. Perfect monogamy is an ideal way to deal with both risks.

The stigma of being born out of wedlock may be gone (with valid reason--it's hardly the kid's fault if his parents were irresponsible), but the destruction of relationships in the process is something we seriously need to look at as a society. Children should have loving, secure homes, and should have relationships with both their parents.

It isn't just a religious issue. It's a social issue. It's not easy to be single and at an age where your body is saying SEX, especially when society is echoing it constantly, and to feel that the responsible thing to do is to wait. I find it a challenge every day. At the same time, I feel I owe it to my future children to make sure they have a good father in their lives and in their home.

Balance

Your balance, Robert, is well taken.
I admire the Catholic Worker efforts over the years, the Catholic Charities efforts in Boston and over the world.

This On Faith Topic has to do with Sexuality. My many catholic friends here in Boston and i have most friendly discussion about contraception, divorce, homosexuality, etc.

You know as well as I that many catholics of conscience and reason disagree with the official church position on these issues. And these are often the MOST moral of catholics, who altogether are quite moral as it is.

At the least I would hope the Church did not spread false information about Condoms. At perhaps the most, I hope for a policy of Benign Neglect, where the Catholic Church stays out of the picture and lets the World Health Organizations do their best with the epidemic, which is first of all a Public Health tragedy (realizing that there are complicated moral issues that involve a balancing of ideal solutions with practical realities of human behavior).

To James --

I freely admit the logic of your position. I just don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater on this particular issue. I'm also not sure how the Church can rectify these problems and still remain true to its principles. It clearly cannot advocate artificial birth control (though the messages of the African clergy to its flock are a major problem) while still advocating abstinence (which is the best method of avoiding any STD).

As I said above, it's a thorny problem that plays into a lot of people's general disdain for religion. So many people believe that religion should change its moral structure because of convenience, forgetting that the moral thing and the convenient thing are usually diametrically opposed to one another. This is certainly not the case in Africa, but such situations do give ammunition to those who see religion as archaic and avoiding reality.

Robert
Sorry for my harsh words about the Catholic Church.
James's post above convinces me that I have been to hard on the Vatican.

Agreeing to Disagree about Death

OK Robert, but let me leave you with a simple syllogism:

1. Condom use has been conclusively shown to greatly reduce AIDS transmission.
2. The Gates Foundation is educating AFricans in Comdom use and distributing condoms for prevention.
3. The Catholic Church has been opposing Condom use and education in Africa, and perhaps even spreading false rumors (see Heraclitus above) about Condoms.

Therefore
The Gates Foundation is Saving Lives
The Catholic Church is working to increase the rate of Death from AIDS in AFrica.

That is NOT a matter of OPINION, or disagreement.
That is a matter of Fact, if one lives in the Reality Based world.

The Catholic Church and Aids

to amplify James's point, here is an article from The Guardian, a real British newspaper:

Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids
Thursday October 9, 2003

The Catholic Church is telling people in countries stricken by Aids not to use condoms because they have tiny holes in them through which HIV can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk.

To James --

I think we'll need to agree to disagree about this issue. As a continent, Africa is incredibly screwed up and I have no idea what it would be like if the various Christian denominations had not been there. Indeed, the bloodshed and death might have been worse, but we'll never know.

The Catholic Church, Condoms, and AIDS

Robert:
You are right: I don't expect the Catholic Church to violate its own moral principles.

I do believe, however, that its activities in Africa to suppress Condom use have resulted in millions of deaths that could have been avoided by a "bill gates" approach. I think that is tragic. I think the effect of the Churches teaching and activities has been tragic. In this case, it would be better if the catholic church either did not exist or shut up about its beliefs, IMHO.

It has been a force for death, not life.

We KNOW condom use reduces AIDS. we do not KNOW that the Catholic God exists.

TO ROBERT, etc.,

When I was younger, I mentioned to an elderly woman friend that there was a man at work who seemed only to think about sex, and his attitude was making it hard for people to work around him. Her response surprised me. She turned to her husband and very matter-of-factly said, "Honey, don't you think he's not getting enough?"

I used to love to talk to her. She was one of the few older people I knew who actually believed in honesty.

She was intelligent, caring, wise, and she knew the Bible thoroughly. I wish all young people had someone as wise as her to talk to.

She made me realize with that one comment that when a person needs sex and isn't fulfilling that need, it becomes an obsession, and it can harm the rest of their life. If they're not taught how to deal with it in a practical manner.

James --

Your comments are fair. But should we expect the Church to adopt a program that opposes their moral stance? Why not teach these people through other sources and allow them to make the choices they wish to make?

Robert
I recognize both the good motives of religion and the motives they have to control their members and keep their power intact.

Here in Boston, during the recent troubles, I saw how the Catholic Church's first motivation was to protect itself rather than heal the children whose abuse was covered up for decades, for instance.

I also see that the result of NO CONDUM use/education policies throughout the world is a MUCH HIGHER rate of
Abortion
STD's
TEEN pregnancy
AIDS.

This is largely due to church orthodoxy rather than engagement with the facts and with REAL morality rather than church dogma.

Visit this web site to see how tragic the fundamentalist/catholic church's Mythological Approach to Sexual Education is versus a mature, informed, morally responsible approach.
Web Site: AdvocacyforYouth.org

I can envision telling the african wife who got aids from her husband "it's your own fault, darling. burn in hell." is that morality?

Oh My Oh My: Ramming Down My Throat

What a violent metaphor. And licentious too. I'm a lady here, don't you know.

Why, Oh My, do you think we are advocating 900 partners? I think this is your phobia, not ours.

Yes, there is sexual exploitation in our media. There was sexual exploitation in 1500. Yikes.

My daughter, an atheist teenager, has a pretty healthy attitude towards sex. Most of her friends do as well. They are human beings just like you and I are. they don't want to be porn stars.

Unfortunately, too many religious people demonize and marginalize Gay people. That is immoral. I am happy if you don't, though it doesn't seem apparent that you believe that some people have natural sexual attractions to their own sex. That i think is dangerous, and uninformed, if that is in fact what you believe.

I'm on the Board of my local library. I am not flooding the place with smut. You are engaging in some fun fantasising and demonizing here. I hope it makes you feel better.

To James --

I'm glad you recognize the good motives religion has. The evil religion is responsible for is something we see every day on our TV screens while the good it does is often invisible.

You're absolutely right regarding the situation in Africa. The Church won't "give in" on this issue and I don't think that it should have to. Rather, the people of Africa should step up and realize that the actions of those in their midst have had these consequences.

To Betty --

From your original post:

"Perpetuating Catholic distortions of sexuality has the advantage of keeping lots of psychologists in business, but does little in creating healthy human sexuality."

From your latest post, in which you gave me some advice:

"stop lecturing us about how you are superior to the rest of the world."

Forgive my impudence, but a feeling of superiority seems to be a somewhat rampant disease here. Perhaps we could *both* do with a dose of the medicine you suggest...

Why has sex become the fulcrum of our society today?

Everything comes back to sex, sex, sex.

For crying out loud, if people want to teach their children that sex is something between man and wife then so be it!

If you want to have sex with 900 partners before your'e 35 be my guest, but there is no need to ram sexuality down our throats in every facet of our society. What amazes me is that some may look at the above argument as a fanatic, extremist opinion. Hah! What would you prefer, teenagers and adolescents encouraged by the mainstream media to have sex left and right? Oh, wait a moment thats exactly what is happening!

Ironically, the Washington Post has just published an article about how girls are influenced by society to prematurely focus on sex and other adult-oriented lifestyles.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021602263.html)

Thank you liberals for making it harder for parents to raise their kids right, thank you liberals for selling the "its a completely natural act" argument to cause adolescents to treat their bodies like merchandise, thank you liberals for fighting off any sense of self-control, thank you liberals for fighting for the rights of peddling smut to kids in public libraries. And then you have the audacity to say "its the parent's job to raise their kids right!", yeah, and apparently its liberals who believe its their right to make proper parenting harder and harder. THANK YOU!!!!!!!

To all liberals: STOP TELLING US HOW TO LIVE OUR LIVES, HOW TO THINK, WHAT TO TEACH OUR KIDS!!!!!

thanks Robert for your amelioration.

there are good substantive issues here regarding the interaction of religion, sexuality, and civilized self control.

for instance, when left to their uncontrolled devices (like in war) men show a disturbing tendency towards sexual violation.

and over the last 10 millenia as civilization has tried to control this danger and others like it, it has often resorted to sanctions like:
YOU GO to hell if you don't behave.

we all understand the Good motives catholicism and other religions were exhibiting here: women are relatively powerless when it comes to sexual matters.

the serious question is: how do we, today, have a conversation that acknowledges that past *and present* need
but that also takes into account all the psychological and medical and public health knowledge we have acquired over the last two centuries.

I think it is sad, much as I love the Pope, that some churches say using condoms is a SIN according to God. I think it raises the level of AIDS in Africa, for instance. I think we can have a discussion that doesn't depend on religion, but that depends on innate morality and reason and helping out our fellow men.

thanks again robert for your words.

Robert my Dear

you do seem to have the attitude that
you are having a nice healthy sex life
according to god's plan

and the rest of the world is polluted by hedonism, licentiousness,
your phrases:
"the hedonism we see promoted all around ux"
"The Catholic Church asks people to live up to certain moral standards. In doing so,"

fact is, darling, most of us are not porn starts or committed orgiasts, most of us go to work every day, are pretty decent people, and are as moral as the next guy (*you) .
we also want to have healthy sexual lives, whether we are religious or atheists. and most of us learn self control whether we are jewish or buddhist or hindu or atheist or catholic.

so my one request to YOU is: stop lecturing us about how you are superior to the rest of the world.

The substantive point that is worth discussion is:
"Does it make us more sexually healthy to consider "wrong sex" to be a SIN?, as opposed to looking at it from a non=mythological point of view.
Or do you literally believe in Satan?

OK, after having cooled down a bit, I would like to apologize for the belligerent tone of my comments today. It's been a long day and posting on the Internet is such an easy way to vent without any recriminations. :)

To Betty --

You obviously have some deep seated issues with Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. For that, I apologize. Still, it would be nice if people would actually try to understand the "why" behind Christian belief instead of just denouncing it out of hand.

To James --

I'm sorry if my post sounded self-righteous. God knows I'm not morally perfect. Like most people, I do my best, which is too often not good enough.

I was, however, quite serious in my comments to you regarding religion and self-control. People can practice self-discipline using nothing but their God-given reason. Religious prohibitions of certain things, however, serve to aid those who need help with such matters. What a world it would be if we all listened to reason, eh? :)

you actually think that kids are just so upset about religion and sex. i dont care how many you talked with, they dont care. is it good not to start too early - you bet - what you can catch having sex will kill you. is there a problem with teaching that it is special and not to waste it - nothing at all. that is why teen sex is generally the I LOVE YOU kind. they want to be loved and rarely is it the adult - wham bamb thank you mam. so quit trying to show your hate for religion and hiding it behind fake surveys.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, James; I skipped lunch.

Fortunately for everyone, self-control is not the sole province of religion. Indeed, many of the atheists I know are quite disciplined. At its best, religion should provide this discipline, but alas, we are all human and often fail despite our best efforts.

What you see as self-righteous, I see as stating the plain truth. There must be a happy medium between Victorian prudery and the hedonism we see promoted all around us.

Dear Betty,

First, I am Catholic, happily married and have a fine sex life, so quit trying to play Freud. Unless, of course, you'd like me to try to psychoanalyze your hatred of my faith...

Second, my main problem is with people like yourself who adore blaming religion for everything that's wrong on the planet. You blithely misconstrue Christian teachings as "psychologically harmful" because it's easier to blame what is in your mind a monolithic structure than to actually learn anything about it.

The Catholic Church asks people to live up to certain moral standards. In doing so, it seeks to inculcate a certain degree of discipline in a world in which discipline (especially sexual discipline) is sorely lacking. And as usual, those who prefer what Augustine called "the false and shadowy beauty" of the world lash out without bothering to actually think about the consequences of such a worldview.

News Flash: Self Control is A Good Thing

So rush to your nearest church to get some.

Robert seems to believe that only his people, whoever they are, have self control,
and today's teenagers are sinful profligate hedonists.

If only we could all be more like self righteous Robert.

I sometimes wonder why people who believe in God need to change and manipulate what he says through his word. When I had sex before marriage, I dealt with it and rationalized it. When I became older and married I asked God to forgive me for not waiting. He did and I got on with my Christian life. Remember, God gave us a way back. We don't have to self detruct.

Robert B and Sexuality

Robert is too much of a gentleman to specify who among us is only interested in "getting laid", as he so delicately puts it. So I assume he is talking about me.

First of all Robert, methinks you may project too much.

It is POSSIBLE to have a healthy sexual life without thinking about sex EVERY minute of the day. (do YOU know how often the average male ACTUALLY thinks about "it")

WHO said it should be "the main focus of our lives:"
not me. not anyone i can see here. i think this is where you are projecting a few of your own attitudes, which you would have to convince ME were healthy.

To Corwin --

The answer to your question is both simple and incredibly difficult: teach your kids to practice self-control. Biological imperatives do not have to be universally obeyed. Eating is a biological imperative, but most of us learn not to be constantly stuffing our faces by the time we're two.

It's incredibly difficult, seeing as any kind of control is anathema to today's teen-ager. :) Still, if you are honest with your child about the glories and the dangers of sexuality, maybe they will be less inclined to see sex as an unconquerable need and more inclined to see it as one part of a complete life.

Sexuality, teens and religion is a confusing mix. It must be better to be the misfit at 16 and not have the struggle than to be mr/ms popular and have to fight the demons.
I too wish there was more meat in Ms. Freitas article. How does one manage the biological imperative to procreate at the prime of life (one's teens) and deal with the immaturity, lack of money and social disfavor, not to mention any religious hangups brought to bear by the compassionate conservatives?

In their quest, to "stop living mythological sexual lives", many of the posters here seem to be products of the same culture that teaches us that "getting laid" is the end-all and be-all of existence.

Yes, sexuality is natural. Yes, God created sex so that procreation might be fun as well. But, no, it is *not* supposed to be the main focus of our lives.

And as for those who oppose priestly celibacy, have you ever considered that maybe they offer up the joy they might feel as spouses and parents to serve a greater family and a greater ideal? Probably not, seeing as the term "virgin" has become a punch-line...

J. Rhinehart:

Didn't you hear "Franco" said he knows what the Bible says and that is that.

Turn off that brain and obey...even if you don't really believe it, or have questions, or have contradictory experience......umm,err, I guess.

"…a young person’s attempts to enact the death penalty upon their sexuality" --quote by Donna Freitas from ?

Any person who tries to "enact the death penalty upon their sexuality" is going to find either they destroy their self, or they explode and hurt someone else.

Karen Armstrong, in her autobiography, "Through The Narrow Gate", described how the Catholic nunnery she joined in the 1960's dealt with a buildup of sexual tension. They told the novices to go to the attic, take out a leather whip, bare their backs, and whip their selves into orgasm. Of course, they never said it was to relieve sexual tension. It was hush, hush, taboo, hidden away.

I can't figure out why the Catholic church still insists on monogamy from it's most devoted members. They act like they still live in the Middle Ages, with no more knowledge of human anatomy than 1000 yrs ago. Their dogma is an anachronism. Jesus never taught this.

You're right that when kids try to follow the teachings of the Christian church, it hurts them. Perhaps, that's because it's not Christ-like?

My great grandmother got married and began her family of 14 when she was 14 years old. What today would be described as a child bride was common back then (I'm guessing). Today there is a rather large number of years that pass between the onset puberty and marriage. Old religious edicts are, well quite frankly, too old to reconcile this reality. Too date, I've never heard a cogent resolution of the delimma. I point out the obvious because anyone who has ever raised a teenager is aware of thier uncanny ability to recognize hypocracy. Good Luck in your endeavor.

Donna,

I envy your ability to share with the world what you know and what you have experienced. Some closed minded members of the Christian community forget that you talk about real world experience(s). Young people (myself included) have been turned off by these religious institutions which separate themselves from our everyday experience(s).

I, myself (as you know), study sexuality and religion in depth (btw...this was the question I was waiting for you to answer). This separation between doctrine and experience is the most difficult thing to work around in order to convey a message to the world. I think your study is what organized religion should look at. What are the future members (and leaders) of our religious instutions going through? How can we reach out to them in order to minister to them? By having people ignore these questions and focus only on doctrine and scripture, these faith communities are going to die.

Franco,

You must be proud of your Spanish Dictator namesake. Were you a member of the Falange? Opus Dei?

It was quite a shock to read an On Faith article that used actual facts as a basis for its claims rather than a bunch of hokey ancient myths. I agree with other posters that more meat would have been nice, but even a couple of mouthfuls is better than the empty plates On Faith usually serves up.

Franco,

Your post exemplifies what I most dislike about religion. Facts don't matter to you. People's feelings and struggles don't matter to you. Obey Zeus or else! How tiresome.

Franco,
That's the kind of attitude that gives Christians a bad name and you should be interested in that study. Kids have a hard enough time growing up as it is and this over sexualized society of ours just adds fuel to the fire. You can't effectively minister to people if you don't have any idea of their struggles.

I agree; not a lot of substance here. I just hope your study offers much more of an answer/guidance. The problem you describe is self evident and familiar to nearly all people of faith. Next time give novel insight, please.

You described the problem. Then you just left it hanging. Are we supposed to buy the book?

Donna, I find your response to this question a thoughtful one. I have been turning over in my mind the question of sex and religion since it was posted.

I believe that proscriptions against sex outside marriage in most religions originated out of the various cultures' desire to keep procreation within the bounds of marriage, i.e., to ensure that the issue of the marriage belong to, most particularly, the male spouse. This originated in an age when there were no "sexual tweens" (people were married upon reaching puberty,) and thus no pressures associated with this condition. We need a prophetic voice or voices to address this dilemma it appears!

That said, in the Eastern yogic and Western monastic traditions, it is recognized that the sexual energy can be redirected to greater relationship with the Divine and ultimately, unity with God. Those that espouse sexual freedom need to recognize that there are those that are called in that way and that it is a valid pursuit.

Donna,

You discuss a very important and interesting subject that hasn't been much talked about.

I gather that the conflict between religion and sexuality is largely a Christian problem. Am I wrong in thinking that Wiccans and westernized Buddhists wouldn't have much to agonize over?
What about Jews?

I once heard someone say that the problem with the Roman Church was that it couldn't get its thinking straight about "the crotch issues".

That's fine with me as a disliker of the RC church. Anything that separates the Catholic young from their Mother Church is good for the Universe.

Best wishes.

Donna,

You are adorable!