In “The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire”, Gibbons tells of a barbarian who discovers in his loot some pearls in a leather pouch. The barbarian throws the pearls away and keeps the pouch because he saw the utility of the pouch, but he just couldn’t see the utility of the little white spheres; that, and he was ignorant of the value of the pearls, so he simply discarded them.
This is what the institution has done with marriage. Secular humanism is a utilitarian religion. It sees no value in human life, only its utility, hence thier love of euhpenasian and the butchers at Planned Parenthood. This view also affects its view on sexuality. Sex outside of marriage for them is a decision based on utility. Gratification is the goal. That sex in the context of a life-long commitment called marriage is looked at in the same way that the barbarian looked at the pearls.
The pearl is the becoming one with another human being, and producing children. But the institution discards both in favor of simply gratifying sexual desires. It sees sex outside of marriage, not as a moral issue, but rather as a pragmatic one. It lumps pregnancy in with diseases as one of the problems that can be encountered while getting your gratification, both of which might be prevented with condoms or “surgery”. That’s the institution’s mindset… the same institution that you charge with “educating” your children when you send them to public school.
I say all of this to introduce this article:
The article is about a study that proves what has been obvious all along to many: that when the authority in a young person’s life accommodates a risky action, an action by the way that the young person is hard-wired to desire anyway, the more likely it is that the young person will engage in that activity. Parents don’t generally give their children high-powered race cars, a helmet, and fire-retardant clothing, and then tell them to drive safely. That would be a confusing message. But that’s exactly what they’re doing when they delegate their authority as a parent to the institution when it comes to sex. As I’ve said here many times, the institution is not morally neutral. That would be impossible. The institution has a morality, it teaches a morality, and that morality dictates that only “risky” sex is wrong. It’s wrong because it can cause problems, like having to call in the butchers to kill the offspring, or, you may contract a disease. But at the same time, it insists that it is more wrong to impose moral judgments on young people who engage in sex outside of marriage, and it will judge harshly anyone who attempts to impose any concept of objective truth on sexual activity, even you dear parent. Sex is not a gift befitting fools, and the institution is run by fools who have thrown away the pearls and kept the pouch.
The gift of sex is not a gift befitting of fools, and the institution is run by fools who have thrown away the pearls and kept the pouch.
But don’t you fail in this area. Remember, sex outside of marriage would still be wrong if it didn’t produce unwanted children or disease. It’s wrong because God says its wrong. Don’t be dragged into debates on how your children might circumvent God’s design without suffering the consequences. The consequences of sin always go beyond the obvious. There is a higher order and the more our lives are synchronized with that order, the happier and healthier, both mentally and physically, all who do are. And the more you teach your children this truth the happier and healthier they’ll be. And the further you keep them from fools who desire to teach them the opposite, the easier that task will be for you.