Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: se99tp

An easier question would be “what’s NOT next”. A society that allows a perversion of this magnitutde is obviously one that rejects any notion of moral absolutes. In the absence of those limits, what behavior would it NOT tolerate?

The phrase “because it’s wrong” will lose all relevance.


27 posted on 05/17/2012 12:16:46 PM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: IronJack; aimhigh; 2ndDivisionVet; Steely Tom; Uncle Miltie; MtBaldy; jboot; Iron Munro; ...
British philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe observed correctly, fifty years ago, that if one does not proscribe contraception, there are no grounds for proscribing almost any type of sexual behavior.

Once intercourse is intentionally split off from fertility, and thus deliberately alienated from its species-normal purpose and its male-female generative power, there is no reason why sex should be only for the married, only in a "committed relationship," only for two faithful partners, or only for man-woman pairings.

It was contraception that set the stage for every other deviation of sexuality from its natural meaning and its in-depth ramifications. The extremely widespread, socially-approved use of the Pill, in particular, dramatically pushed sexual intercourse toward being insignificant and inconsequential. No particular significance. No particular consequences.

Everything else followed.

43 posted on 05/19/2012 8:28:22 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson