Sex Rears Its Ugly Head Again

Dave and I went to the courthouse and got our marriage license today; as of December 31, we will no longer be living in sin. Or will we?

According to this man, a Baptist minister, by willfully remaining childless, we will be committing a moral error. "Sex means marriage and marriage means children" and the sexual act is not to be divided from procreation. An interesting stance for a Protestant religion to take in today's modern world. But then sex has long been a battleground; a way for religions to control their adherents. At one extreme you can preach Abstinence for All as the Shakers did, but with this unpopular stance you risk the religion dying out as the Shakers did. Another approach, taken by cult leaders such as David Koresh, has been Abstinence for All except the leader, but then people might start questioning the leader's true motives. So Sex for Some with Abstinence for Many is a good, middle ground approach and one that has served the Catholic Church for two thousand years.

But when you think about it, why has the church focused so much attention on one biological drive. Why not put limits on the urge to sleep? Why not make rules about the desire to stay warm? There are some limits on our biological urge to eat, but rarely is the amount proscribed. The Baptist Church doesn't say for example, "No eating until you are 30," and wouldn't condemn a U.S. Surgeon General who suggested we eat alone. Fulfilling our non-sexual needs can sometimes be almost as good as (for some people even better than) sex. Here's a few of my indulgences:

Taking a nap on a sunny day when I should be mowing the lawn.
Eating hot apple pie with ice cream.
Relaxing with a cold drink in a hot tub.
Pulling the covers up and sleeping in on a rainy day.
Getting a massage.
Jumping into the pool on a blistering hot day.
Lying in a hammock and day dreaming.
Having a Godiva chocolate when I'm on a diet.
Sitting in an air conditioned movie theater on an afternoon in July.

I suppose some of these might be covered under the sins of gluttony or sloth, but sloth and gluttony just don't make headlines like sex. This week alone there are several major news stories about Religion and sex.

Religious Leaders protested at the premier of the movie Kinsey. Leaders such as Robert Peters of Morality in Media who said that "...Kinsey's legacy (was) Aids, abortion, the high divorce rate, pornography." I always thought pornography had been with us since man learned to draw, and that it reached its height in the Victorian Era.

A study released by Rep. Henry Waxman found shocking errors in Abstinence Only sex ed curriculum taught by groups such as Youth For Christ and funded with federal tax dollars. Errors such as textbooks claiming half the homosexual teenagers in America have AIDs and that HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, can be spread via sweat and tears. Scaring our teenagers with lies and misinformation is one way to try and keep them innocent.

Meanwhile in Montgomery County, Maryland there is a movement to recall the school board because they are not advocating Abstinence Only sex ed. Among other criticisms, there is the fact that the board has approved a new curriculum which "normalizes homosexuality," which is "against Biblical teachings." In America, we prefer our homosexuals to stay in the closet.

A Lesbian minister was defrocked by the United Methodist Church. "I believe that I could probably have kept my minister's credentials if I had kept silent," Stroud said. "That would have compromised my growth as a Christian and my integrity." She never mentioned the possibility of not practicing homosexuality.

Lots of people and institutions out there who would like to tell Americans what kind of sex they can have, with whom, and when. Thankfully at this time I can still make that decision for myself.