Doing what comes naturally

Down here in South Carolina, we still have powerful political and cultural forces at work, trying to impose abstinence-only sex education in the public schools, as if talking about god is going to stop teenagers from doing what comes naturally. Is there any wonder that S.C. has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the country?

Lately the topics of sex and religion have dominated the headlines due in no small part to Catholic priests who aren’t supposed to have sex and yet can’t seem to stop having sex with children.

Judging by the holy books of the Abrahamic religions it is pretty obvious that God hates sex, but he probably loves to watch.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m4d23-On-Faith-Can-religion-handle-sex

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

LORETTAHASKELL:

Right On.

"We've heard from LadyKnight1, Now Lets Hear From The
http://www.glbthistory.org/ or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT

.... So Lets hear what their GAY-POPEs of the LGBT/GLBT Church's, Movement, have to say; WE are talking about

About the Sobering question [That must be entertained and answered for SOCIETAL Future Sake; not evaded on] :

"DO Non-Straights, Promote, in Children (Adopted, Fostered or Paternal Parent) or Force Children into becoming Non-Straights Life-Styles Themselves".

It's Imoral and Dangerous Acts (turning Straight Kids into thinking and then being Non-Straights) via Non-Responsible-Adults to condone to such Phenomena?

No Wonder, that NEW-GAY's, are Growing by the Day via such Phenomenon. So, like seeing or knowing one Uses Drugs, Alcohol, or Same-Sex indulgences; will , in All Probability, 75% , will Turn a Straight-Kid into a Non-Straight Kid, then Adult, then a Public-Charge?

FAMILY COURTS in all of U.S.A. should Ask this Question; And then Rule Via Truth/Reality; Includes or in conjunction with All Local, State and Federal "Adoption" Foster-Care Agencies and Human Resources Dept's. SO

Being GAY is not so 'Colorfull' or something to be "Proud' about; Especially when Turned into a Non-Straight by Exposure to such People/Enviroment. Please; It's not Genetic!

Here is some disturbing [PROOF] that any 'life-Style' involving Same-Sex Unions or relations; is not only imoral , but out right Dangerous, besides disgusting.

In sadness, silently; I watched, via the "BACHA BAZI" (Boy For Play), Originated from Pakistan and copied in Afghanistan

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/dancingboys/

... How powerfull/wealthy , as customers, "Pedophiles" turned an otherwise "Straight-Boy" Or as an Unsuspecting Lads, and Adopting them/him by proxy through his parents only to be 'interned' , yet Tricked into Homosexuality" (pedophilia prostittute) LIFE-STYLE.

This Proves that "ADOPTING STRAIGHTS Kids//Children VIA NON-STRAIGHTS" is a Dangerous Practice in America and elswhere.

Eventhough These Same-Sex Couples "ADOPT" (or "FOSTER-CARE For a pay; or for Hefty Monthly Pay-Checks) our surplus kids, not pets, does in Fact show that

Exposing unsuspecting Kids (Boys or Girls) is to, most PROBABLY, turn them into thinking (like a placibo) that they are also Not-Straight. Ans

So, like realising What 'PBS's" or A'Asbestos' or 'CTobacco' does in the Long term (Health & Mental) the Danger To The "Adaption-Agency" and or The "STATE" involved/condoning such, in the near future, will be such that these "Adopted-Kids" or "Fostered-Kids" , when in Adult-Hood, will wake-up & Rebel against the States; that, They [Wards Of The State/Fed] will ACCUSE their "Foster-Gay-Parents" for turning them into GAY's , instead of Straights (not Gays). This can become a Financial Night-Mare for Our STATE and National Government.

This is a Explosive Dangerous Truth, waiting to Back-Fire against "THE-PEOPLE." So, Instead of the CHURCH(s)ike VATICAN et al being Sued for Pedaristry & CRimes Against Humanity, that this time , or in this argument [Warning]the STATE & AGENCIES will be rightly sued in Federal and or State Courts. Which can Bankrupt both State and Federal Treasuries.

So; Same-Sex Adoption's and Same-Sex Foster-Caring, buy such non-straight People, is Dangerous and Imoral practice, here and elswhere. If, WE [i] am wrong, after watching "Boys/Girls For Play/pay", then prove it.

AMERICA; Pleas, Don't Say I [WE] didn't warn You's!

"He's not married and one is supposed to assume that he's celibate. He's the very last person I would want to hear from."
____LorettaHaskell
Loretta, allow me to correct your common misunderstanding of the word "celibate". Very simply, celibacy refers to the lack of marriage, while chastity, from chaste, refers to whiteness, or purity, and by extension to sexual virginity.

It is a fact that the center of our brains is the Hypothalamus where "Hormones" (there are different kinds) get "Regulated" for blood delivery.

And in fact, because "SEX" (a stmuli) is only made possible for Pleasure or Procreation via the very back Part of the Brain or the "Pleasure-Center," where Sex and drug Addictions takeplace, shows that "SEX," is Not-LOVE. Eventhough Pain (via nerves and signaling) is a perception; LIFE Is LOVE, not Sex. There is some people here that know what I'm saying. "Life" with a CREATORin mind or awareness of life (without a Creator in mind) is "Love," and love awareness, less appreciation, is only made possible In The "Frontal-Lobe."

Reality is Beautiful. Hence Life is Beautiful where one is in Love With It (Beautiful) or hates it (beauitifull or ugly) or doesn't care(like a Co;, Animals with No Frontal Lobes). So According to DEIST'S and or SPINOZAISM; Life is LOVE, not Sex. What the BIG-BANG is is all Beautifull because it is a projection-Of-It's-Love, that's what "Manifest [Really] Destiny" Means. LIFE is a Miracle, Not Sex. So LIFE, living, is not Sin, only via SEx can there be Sin?

Meaning "Love" is Not located in the Hypothalamus, nor at the back of the Brain. Eventhough there is a correlation, via brain imaging, that there is a 'Path-Way" from Frontal-Cortex to the Pleasure-Center, which triggers ("CRAVING/URGES") that it by itself does not stimulate the Sexual-Organs of either a Male nor a Woman.

Note: Today "Scientist can control addiction, SEXual Desire and Organ stimili via modern Drugs to block the "Path-Ways" to Frontal-Cortex mentioned.

Also Pain during Intercourse is not Love. Loving Pain does not enhance nor lessin the experience. It's just awareness or closed mindedness of the experience that lets us tolerate or cope the moment. And Unlike the Power Of Advertising; Sex is Not Power. But Sex is always a two-way street; straight or Same, but still it's not LOVE. Life is. Example: Paying or Bartering for Sex is NO love. Only Pleasure with a potential tpo procrate; planned or not planned (HUMAN RESPONSIBILE frontal lober) not Animalistic (No Frontal Lobe).

LorettaHaskell

I would think that the pope knows very little about sex - with adults anyway.
He's not married and one is supposed to assume that he's celibate. He's the very last person I would want to hear from.

We've heard from Dr. Silverman, now let's hear from Pope Benedict.

Once again, I think that Professor Silverman has some great insights. With regards to his cat, however, I'm not sure if sex is "fun" for animals. To get humans to have sex, it had to be pleasure. Evolution may have been able to hardwire many animals to instinctively pursue sex whether or not they found it pleasurable. It is important to realize that sex is definitely part of our genes agenda since they are the ones that get to reproduce. You and I enjoy but one life while our genes can have many. Our genes, on the other hand, don't care at all about our happiness. Many animals suffer debilitating injuries from fights with other animals in the attempts to pass on their genes. Their genes are not concerned with their happiness either. With regards to sex, we should keep in mind that sex is part of our genes agenda and does not equate with human happiness. There are often many unintended consequences for humans and other animals.

A lot of the rules religions lay down for us appear to originate from social and public health necessities. Don't eat pork (trichinosis)and don't kill or steal or disrespect your parents (lest there be mayhem) are some examples. I tend to think the moralization of sexual behavior has a similar origin, primarily because of STDs and probably to a lesser extent because of propagation of a man's own genes/ bloodline. Cultures without rampant STDs and with low genetic diversity don't (didn't, rather) have the western "hang-ups." Libertine behavior is almost universally risky at present. Even if one eschews the religious morals and moral judgment, he or she can still chose to behave in a socially and personally cautious manner.

Although most religions warn us about the dangers of pre/extra-marital sex, it is obvious we are not paying attention as pre/extra-marital intercourse and other pre/extra-marital sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone.

from the CDC-2006

"Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain STDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. (Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes calls it an anti-desire pill - 4/18/2010). And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Sounds good to me!!!! Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???

And the following data need to promulgated so everyone is aware that today's contraceptives don't always work to the degree advertised:

Percentage of women (men) experiencing an unintended pregnancy (a few examples)

Method
Typical
Pill (combined) 8.7
Tubal sterilization 0.7
Male condom 17.4
Vasectomy 0.2

Periodic abstinence – 25.3
Calendar 9.0 –
Ovulation Method 3.0 –
Sympto-thermal 2.0 –
Post-ovulation 1.0 –

No method 85.0"

(Abstinence) 0

(Masturbation) 0

When I was a teenager in the 1950s, I wondered why my mother and others made such a fuss about sex. Things that bothered me we war, abuse, intolerance,etc. My grandmother was puritanical, and was proud of the fact that my grandfather had never kissed her on the mouth. I thought she must be from another planet! My mother's and grandmothers' views were religion based and the cause of a lot of guilt I placed on myself. And it wasn't just them. Growing up in a small southern town, the whole culture was smothering with religion based "rules".

The only wrong sex is sex that is not mutually consensual fore veryone involved, or sex that involves the breaking of a promise.
As long as everyone is a consenting adult, and no one is violating another relationship by participating, it's all good.

If we could just make sure everyone (who wanted to) got safe sex on a reasonable schedule, we could eliminate 90% of the emphasis on it.