Showing posts with label abstinence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abstinence. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Let’s get it on… Let them eat cake!

Let’s get it on…
I know this is another article about pastors and sex, but I could not resist commenting on Reverend Ed Young’s advice. Simply put, Rev. Young believes it is time to “put God back in the bed” by means of a week of “congregational copulation”.

Before you call up your fellow parishoners and set up a holy orgy, I should clarify that the reverend’s advice is intended to help promote and improve monogamous marriage (sorry Utah). He delivered this message in front of and on a large bed. To really bring the point home, his wife was with him in jeans and **GASP** knee high black boots.

In all earnestness, the message is not completely silly. I do believe that a healthy sex life is vital in any relationship. The key in it, however, is that the sex should be fun and spontaneous, not forced. If you need orders from a reverend to have a reason to want to have sex with your partner, then you have issues that a week of pastor-prescribed fornication most likely will not solve.

Let them eat cake!
Unsurprisingly, this advice is aimed solely at married members of the congregation. I think it is a safe bet that one could extend that description to heterosexual, married members. The reverend went all Marie Antoinette on everyone else. His exact words:

I don’t know, try eating chocolate cake.
Er, excusez-moi? He did not just compare sex to chocolate cake, did he? Oh, yes he did. You hear that Lindsay Lohan? When you get an urge to do the mattress mambo, head to the kitchen for some chocolate cake instead.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Open to anything but sex

The Catholic Church is not always behind the times. In fact, it has a history of reversing aspects of its doctrine to keep up with the zeitgeist. It renounced usury in the 16th century, slavery in the 19th century and capital punishment in 1995.

When it comes to matters concerning sex, however, the Church shows no indication of budging. Be it marriage of members of the clergy (after having been ordained), homosexual marriage and intercourse or artificial contraception, the Church says NO.

Mandatory celibacy was not always a must for those wishing to dedicate their lives to the Church – it was made universal Church law only by the Second Consilium of Lateran in 1139. Despite that, there are exceptions. Men who are married before entering priesthood can do so and maintain their marriage. Is the devotion of an unmarried, celibate priest worth more than that of a married one? With fewer men entering into priesthood whilst the global Catholic population grows, will allowing young priests to marry not help to stop this shortfall? The Church says NO.

I am sure that there are those who will quote scripture forbidding homosexual marriage and intercourse. To them I say – I am sure many scripture-quoting individuals have coveted a neighbour’s wife. Amongst all the adultery, murder, lying and stealing, why pick the homosexuality guideline to stick to so closely? Is it not more Christian to grant everybody a legal relationship of mutual love, care and affection? The Church says NO.

Even more pressing is the rejection of artificial contraception. The Church cannot ignore the physical suffering from the AIDS epidemic in Africa, or the uncontrolled population increase in the Philippines, where it still has an overwhelming influence on daily politics. The means to limit the effects of either dilemma giving rise to a more hopeful generation are so simple. And yet, the Church says NO.

Friday, November 21, 2008

On Bishops, Politicians and a tiny bit of bread

I recently came across this article about the aggressiveness coming from the Catholic Church in the Philippines (an overwhelmingly Catholic nation) against the proposed family planning bill, which would require the government to promote artificial contraception.

I could write about the irony. How the Church, who cares for all of the Lord’s people, would allow them to dig themselves into an even deeper hole, instead of allowing legislation to pass that might help provide desperately necessary population growth control. I could write about the families left in abject poverty due to the Catholic abstinence-only dogma. I could write about the deeper problems with the church’s insistence on over-stepping the constitutionally prescribed separation of church and state.

Instead, I would like to address the bishops’ threats of refusing the Eucharist to politicians who support the bill. It seems to be the common Modus Operandi for meddling clergymen.

In Catholicism, one cannot accept the Host whilst in a state of mortal sin. Doing so would compound the transgression, causing eternal damnation. The theological process of transubstantiation gives weight to the argument. In refusing to serve the Host, the clergy is saving souls. Hence, they believe it is their duty to refuse. If this were the full extent of the refusal, all would be well.

Unfortunately, more appears to be at stake. Taking my previous thought further: if said sinner were to go to confession before mass and receive absolution, theoretically he/she cannot be refused communion.

How can anyone then refuse the Eucharist if absolution is already granted? The Church already knows that if any of the involved politicians receive absolution, they are fully eligible for the Eucharist, making this threat unenforceable. So what is it about?

These bishops are entering dangerous ground. Are they spitefully inducing the wrath of God to prevent this bill from going through? Is the Catholic Church prepared to play for politics and influence on the backs of impoverished and malnourished individuals? I certainly hope not.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Making money by not having any sex/babies

No Sex
In Georgia there is currently a marriage contest in progress. An engaged couple can win $10,000 provided they open their wedding ceremony to the public, live separately before getting married and undergo premarital counselling. Oh, and they have to abstain - as in no premarital sex. Supposedly the goal of the contest is to promote marriages which will "really last a lifetime". That some people actually think preventing premarital sex is preventing divorce is beyond reason.

The contest is run by a non-profit organisation called MATURE - Marriage Appreciation Training Uplifting Relationship Education. (I wonder how long it took someone to come up with that?) Since 2006 they received yearly federal grants of $455,510, which will continue until 2011. What a preposterous way to spend tax revenue. Given a choice of having their tax dollars spent on health care or teaching abstinence, I believe most Americans would choose health care.


So how many couples have signed up for the opportunity to replace premarital sex with premarital counselling?

Zero. Shocker.


No Babies
A Louisiana legislator has suggested paying $1000 to women on welfare and food stamps if they have themselves sterilised. This is just WRONG. Never mind the fact that this is a lawsuit of discrimination against the poor waiting to happen. Dangling money in front of the poverty-stricken is not the way to go. They will make the decision based on the fact that they need the money, not thinking of possible future consequences.

Again, this is potentially a waste of tax revenue. $1000 is not going to take the destitute off of welfare or eradicate the less fortunate. This money is better spent on education.


Saturday, October 18, 2008

Sex or No Sex?

Ahhh, yes. The fountain of youth. The secret to longevity. Who doesn't want in on such hot news?

Apparently the secret lies in sex, but that's where it gets complicated. I ran into this article about Clara Meadmore, a 105-year-old virgin in the UK. She claims her long life is a result of complete, untainted celibacy. This made me think of Harvard Professor Walter Willett, who stated in 2002 that the key to a long and healthy life is Greek cuisine and plenty of sex.

Personally, and I am willing to bet that almost
everyone is with me on this, I prefer option b. A life without Greek food and sex? Scary.

Who are you more inclined to believe - the 105-year-old virgin who is still living her
long life, or the Harvard Professor with all of his research? What is the key to longevity - sex or no sex?

(images from flybenji.org, teamsugar.com and menumagazine.co.uk)