Posted on 05/08/2010 3:45:12 PM PDT by NYer
On a personal note, I work with 5 men. One is gay; I can’t attest to his sex life. The next oldest one ( approaching 50) is unmarried, has no girlfriend, is NOT gay, participates in a men’s baseball league, is into micro-brewing and lives a celibate life. He does not know how to ‘communicate’ with women but is comfortable with his lifestyle. The other 3 are young. One just got married, another is engaged to marry and the youngest just turned 15 and is playing the field.
Most of the abuse victims are young boys, so it seems that it isn't so much celibacy as homosexuality. We never hear this cause mentioned in the media for some reason. It's sort of the 800 lb gorilla in the room.
If celibacy causes abuse, then mullahs cause sheep fornication, and scantily clad women cause earthquakes.
It’s not that celebacy CAUSES abuse. It’s that the celebacy requirement causes men with normal sex lives to shy away from the priesthood, and that means there is a higher percentage of men with abnormal sex lives in the priesthood. It’s a selection issue, not a causal issue.
Legalize prostitution! Let the ugly and shy get laid too!
Bingo. If anyone mentions this "scandal", I just calmly start talking about how homosexuals like to prey on children. I don't get off that message until the topic changes.
It tends to change pretty quick. Liberals are uncomfortable with the truth.
“Normal sex lives,” for Christians, means that unmarried people are abstinent and married people are faithful.
A dedicated Trade Unionist was attending a convention in Las Vegas and, as you would expect, decided to check out the brothels nearby. When he got to the first one, he asked the Madam, "Is this a union house?" "No," she replied. "I'm sorry, it isn't." "Well, if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?" "The house gets 80% and the girls get 20%." Mightily offended at such unfair dealings, the man stomped off down the street in search of a more equitable, hopefully unionized shop. His search continued until finally he reached a brothel where the Madam responded, "Why, yes, sir, this IS a Union House." The man asked, "And if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?" "The girls get 80% and the house gets 20%." "That's more like it!" the union man said. So he handed the Madam $100, looked around the room and pointed to a stunningly attractive blonde. "I'd like her for the night." "Sorry, sir, no doubt you would," said the Madam, gesturing towards an 85-year old woman in the corner, "but Ethel here has seniority."
Is there a third option? Can I be a horny libertine during months that contain the letter "R" or maybe during leap years? There must be a loop hole somewhere...
I'm no particular fan of Jimmy Carter, but in 1976 he committed a great act of candor when during an interview he confessed to have "lusted in his heart" for other women. Most find ourselves falling somewhere along that continuum of sin.
In terms of “normal,” which means “according to the law,” there is no third option. Unmarried people are continent, married people have sex with each other.
A big part of the problem with out society is the belief that there a legitimate place for promiscuous fornication in a rightly ordered life. There isn’t. The choices are marriage or continence.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Rather than write a couple of paragraphs, I'll just repeat what Tax-chick said, short, simple and precisely true.
In terms of “normal,” which means “according to the law,” there is no third option. Unmarried people are continent, married people have sex with each other.
A big part of the problem with out society is the belief that there a legitimate place for promiscuous fornication in a rightly ordered life. There isn’t. The choices are marriage or continence.
typo and all ... it should have been “our society”!
Lusting in the heart is one thing. Acting it out is entirely another.
And here’s an interesting truth about lusting in the heart, or thinking about any object of desire (or fear, or any thought which can lead to unhealthy or unwanted actions).
If thoughts are “entertained”, they’ll stick around, make house, and prod people to action.
Thoughts that are wrong can be shown the door, there are many ways to do this. “Entertaining” them leads to putting them into action.
I knew what you meant... read it as it should have been!
Sometimes I preview, and sometimes I don’t :-).
Of course, there’s a place for continence in marriage, too: when a spouse is sick or injured, when spouses are separate, when the spouses think having a child would be unwise. It’s funny that a society that so values restraint in the use of food, drink, and tobacco thinks that people can’t restrain themselves from sex, for a cause.
I’m not sure why billorites would extrapolate from President Carter’s mentioning the *sin* of lust to the proposition that sex outside marriage is just fine. (Admittedly, Carter went bats, but ...) Sin is sin. Whether an attitude is lust, or just (ahem) admiration for a gentleman’s intellect and style, is something the individual has to address personally.
It is entirely possible to live without sex, happily. Not for everyone, obviously, but many people can do it. Some people have less strong sex urges, and also time tames it as well. Some people are called to vocations which require celibacy, both in Catholicism and other religions.
To be fully human means to be able to control the urges of the body and mind when they urge one to act against moral principles.
Everyone has thought of stealing, or commiting violence (even just thinking about punching some one occasionally), lying, etc. But a moral person knows that such actions are morally wrong and rejects those thoughts. A civilized human society expects its members to use that self-control in sex as well. The fact that it is now a cultural standard that everyone must have sex as soon as they are physically able to and to try to stop this in oneself, or teach it to others, is wrong and impossible, is leading to the destruction of western civilization.
Why? Many reasons. One very easy to understand reason is that children do get conceived, and then they have to be killed, or raised by single mothers, with or without a succesion of “boyfriends”. The rate of illegitimacy is now (last figure I saw) about 40% in the US. In the UK it’s more than 50%. Then there are all the marriages detroyed because of infidelity.
What happens to these children from what used to be called broken homes? (The ones that manage to run the gauntlet and don’t get killed before birth.) THe rates of crime and misery are growing; it is proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that children raised without a stable home life with a mother and father married to each other suffer terribly. Huge numbers of broken lives result in broken civilization.
I will admit I’m partial to glancing at that photo of young Binyamin Netanyahu....
Just a glance of admiration! He’s also a great man, if he were an evil leftist I’d never want to look at him.
Handsome is as handsome does!
Yes, Bibi is on the verge of being an Occasion of Sin!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.