views and thoughts on topics, especially ones pertaining to christianity – with an emphasis on how most christians either ignore or discriminate against unmarried christians – and how christians have turned marriage and parenting into IDOLS and how there is no true support for sexual purity, virginity, or celibacy among christians – this is a blog for me to vent; I seldom permit dissenting views. I don't debate dissenters ————-
Absent parent pushback, an updated guide used in public schools nationwide will promote abortion and gender confusion and expose kids to sordid, explicit sex education.
This article contains adult-level information about sex and genitals.
Last year, three leftist nonprofits created the National Sex Education Standards, a blueprint for the “sex education” of K-12 children. In practice, the standards serve as an indoctrination camp in extremist sexual ethics designed to destroy children’s innocence and undermine their attachment to the traditional, Judeo-Christian understanding of sex and marriage.
I Married Young. I Was Widowed Young. I Never Want A Long-Term Partner Again by R. Woolf
Hunh, but growing up, and even now, my fellow conservatives (some secular, some Christian) keep promoting the notion that married people are happier!, healthier! and just doing better! than single adults. But this woman’s editorial says, nah.
Not that I am in total agreement with all of this woman’s choices.
When my husband died, I vowed to stay single in my after-life. Not because I was grieving, but because domestic partnership was something I had no interest in doing again.
My marriage was traumatic in a way that I wasn’t fully cognizant of until it ended abruptly and my need to raise my four children in a household free of toxicity became my first priority.
My vow to stay a single motherwould not mean limiting myself sexually and emotionally. I decided I would keep lovers — non-committal but satisfying short-term pairings.
What I came to find was that this decision, which steered me away from the kind of relationships I was conditioned to accept as status quo, would lead to the least toxic and most beneficial relationships I have ever been in.
Half of U.S. Christians Say Sex is Sometimes, Always OK in Dating Relationships by A. Kumar (2020)
I am not surprised. This is actually similar to another survey I saw a few years ago, and I may have covered it here on this blog (I don’t remember).
It’s disappointing, frustrating and bewildering how so many Christians are not only living in sexual sin – and sex prior to marriage is in fact sin – but that they think it’s just fine.
The Bible does speak against fornication, and even if it is not or was not mentioned specifically (as some like to argue), it was still the societal expectation – it didn’t need to be stated specifically in the Bible, since it was already understood in the culture the Bible came from, that God was not okay with people having sex outside of marriage.
There are not, that I can recall, any Bible verses specifically condemning infanticide, child molesting, or bank robbing, but that does not mean that the Bible is okay with any of those behaviors.
I think a case can be made against those behaviors – and against fornication – by pointing to other biblical principles.
In light of the fact that Christians (Link): don’t even make a pretense at living by sexual ethics as taught in the Bible, or in defending them these days, I really do not need to see another Christian woman on another blog or on social media saying how harmful “purity culture” teachings were to women (depending on the context of their arguments. Are some facets of Christian purity culture sexist against women? Yes – but that does not negate that fornication remains a sin).
The pendulum regarding sexual behavior and attitudes held by Christians has now swung too far in the other direction – to pure hedonism and “don’t judge me, I’ll have sex with whomever and whenever I want to.”
And folks like me who actually “walked the walk” and did not have sex outside of marriage are shamed for it, or insulted for it, by Christians and conservative groups (see more about that under “Related Posts” at the bottom of this page).
Half of Christians say sex between consenting adults who are in a committed dating relationship is sometimes or always acceptable, and over half — with the exception of evangelical Protestants — say casual sex is OK, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center.
Some 62% of Catholics, 56% of Protestants in the historically black tradition, 54% of mainline Protestants, and 36% of evangelical Protestants say casual sex between consenting adults is sometimes or always acceptable, according to the survey.
Among those who are religiously unaffiliated, as many as 84% say
Barna: Half of Pastors Worry They’ll Offend Someone if They Preach on Controversial Topics by T. G. Phillips
This is actually nothing new. Over six years ago, I noticed that a lot of preachers, even conservative ones, are reluctant to address certain sins from the pulpit or online, in particular, sexual sins, for fear it may offend the audience.
Nadia Bolz-Weber’s Gospel of Shame-Free Sexuality by W. Hill
I recognize there are flaws with Christian “Purity Culture,” but the response to those flaws (usually by liberal Christians) is just as bad.
The liberal Christians, or others who are opposed to Christian sexual purity teachings, want to reject about any and all sexual boundaries, in the process of rebelling against Christian purity teaching.
However, not all of Christian purity teaching is bad – something the anti-Purity Culture advocates don’t want to admit or discuss.
As I’ve pointed out in older posts, the anti-Purity Culture movement ends up alienating and marginalizing any adults who do choose to remain celibate or virgins until marriage.
We’re living in an age and culture where a lot of us are demanded to respect any and all sexual behaviors, except for virginity and celibacy; those are mocked, as are those who practice them. The tolerance goes only one-way with many Anti-Purity Culture adherents.
We can’t defeat shame by whittling down God’s law to fit our behavior. We need the good news of God’s forgiveness instead
….Doing Away with Absolution
Unfortunately, the pastor who talked up the liberation that comes from admitting you’re in the wrong now seems more interested in helping people understand why they don’t need to.
In her new book, Shameless: A Sexual Reformation, Bolz-Weber is out to set Christians free from the angst and humiliation churches have often foisted on them because of their sexual proclivities and behaviors.
But the way the book goes about doing so is by rejecting wholesale the idea of “sexual purity” and, with it, the need to confess sexual transgression.
Woman Fired From Christian Preschool Teaching Job For Having Porn Side Job
Well. This is interesting for a few reasons, one of which is, the Christian school that fired her states that pornography is a form of fornication, but a preacher who writes sermon material for other preachers (Link): said that porn is NOT a form of fornication and so is supposedly not biblical grounds for divorce. LOL.
The woman in this story sounds as though she has a Geranium in her Cranium. I also feel rather sad about people who reduce sex to just a physical act devoid of any deeper meaning than finding it pleasurable. Women like this are objectifying themselves – sad.
“‘I Kissed Dating Goodbye’ [Book] Told Me to Stay Pure Until Marriage. I Still Have a Stain on My Heart” – Regarding: Dating Book by Author Josh Harris (with other related links about the IKDG book) and Criticizing “Purity Culture”
August 24, 2016 update: I added a new link at the bottom of this post: people continue to attack the idea of sexual purity by publicizing backlash against the Harris IKDG book.
I myself have never read the IKDB book, which was written by Harris. I have read about the book on other sites in the past, and it is my understanding the book discussed how to date, and other such topics, and is not strictly about sex or virginity.
The author uses this review of the IKDG book to bash “purity culture,” and in so doing, touches on the topic or staying chaste until marriage.
I am in the middle of this debate. I cannot completely agree with all the critics of “purity culture,” depending on what they are criticizing about it and why.
I believe that the Bible teaches both male and females are to sexually abstain until marriage, so I don’t believe in tossing out this teaching all because some young women feel they have been hurt or oppressed by it.
On the other hand, how some Christians have taught about sexual purity has been lop-sided – males are typically not addressed, only females – and Christians could do a better, or more sensitive job, in how they present the concept of remaining a virgin until marriage.
With that introduction, here is the link, with some excerpts (and note, I am not in complete agreement with all views in this piece; however, I’m not a supporter of a lot of Christian dating advice. Christian dating advice tends to act as an obstacle to singles who want to someday marry):
In 1997, Joshua Harris published “I Kissed Dating Goodbye,” a book that was in part a warning about the harm that relationships before marriage could cause. Harris evoked images of men at the altar bringing all their past partners with them into the marriage to reinforce the point that love and sex before marriage took pieces of your heart and made you less.
At the time, Harris was just 21, but he was already a rising star.
…He [Harris] was what we, as young evangelicals, wanted to be. And so we strove passionately to attain the ideal of premarital purity he laid out for us. Now, almost 20 years later, even Harris appears to be questioning whether his advice did more harm than good.
…But Harris’s book was hugely influential.
…On the surface, I am a purity-culture success story: I am a heterosexual woman, a virgin until marriage, now with two small children and a husband I deeply love. We attend church. We believe in God. And yet, for me, the legacy of purity culture is not one of freedom but one of fear.
Purity culture taught me that I ought to be passed down from father to husband, more an inheritance than a human.
I was taught that men are my cover and my shield, when for the most part they have been the ones causing damage through molestation, rape and abuse.
I was taught that my holy calling was to open my legs for one and only one and bear him children. Barring that, I was to keep them closed and never express desire or lust or fear or longing.
So many women in my life cracked under the untenable pressure, often giving up on God all together. Others were forced into marriages with men who hit them and hid their abuse behind another message of the church borne from purity culture, that God hates divorce.
WashPost Columnist: ‘Ghostbusters’ Haters Are ‘Virgin Losers’ – (via NewsBusters Site); Both the Right and Left Wing Get Some things Wrong About This
This story comes from NewsBusters, which is discussing a column written for Washington Post newspaper by columnist Kristen Page-Kirby about the new Ghostbusters movie.
The original Ghostbusters movie, released in the 1980s, contained four male leads. The reboot version of the movie, which was released July 15, 2016, contains four women leads instead.
Unfortunately, over a year or more ago, when news came out that there would be four women leads in the film, some of the sexist jerkwads who inhabit the internet started lambasting the movie all over You Tube, Twitter, and where ever else – not because the move was bad (it wasn’t even released yet), but because they were incensed that Hollywood was cramming some form of feminism down their throats.
Interestingly, I didn’t see as much backlash over the main character of the new Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” being a woman – Rey.
At any rate, I will be discussing two or three different topics in this post that are related to this new film, or mentioned by the conservative essayist at the NewsBusters site.
This is another story where I am in the middle. I can’t say as though I’m completely on one side or another in regards to some aspects of this story, depending on what is under discussion.
I am currently a moderate right-winger (I used to be more to the right than I am currently. In the last few years, I’ve been reconsidering if some of my former political and Christian beliefs are wrong.)
I’ve been more open the last few years to hearing the criticisms and views of liberals and Non-Christians – which is not to say I agree with everything I see left wingers and Non-Christians espousing or arguing in favor of.
I sometimes think secular, liberal feminists have good points on some topics, but I normally disagree with them.
As far as the Ghostbusters film reboot is concerned, I do think some of the backlash against the movie does in fact stem from sexism. But then, I do think some people may honestly feel that the movie is genuinely bad due to having a poor story line, or what have you.
I have not seen the movie yet. I don’t go to movie theaters that much anymore.
I usually wait until movies air on cable television; I’m willing to bet that this Ghostbusters reboot will probably be shown on F/X channel, or SyFy, or some other cable network in the next two years, and I have cable television, so I don’t know if I want to invest my time and cash into driving down to a theater to see this, since it will eventually be on television.
I saw the original Ghostbusters in a movie theater when it was in theaters in the 1980s. I was a kid at the time.
The original was okay, it was quite enjoyable and plenty of fun, but it was no movie masterpiece, so to all the men online who were griping about the reboot featuring all women leads: get the hell over it already.
And yes, you were, or are, being sexist douche bags about it. I don’t buy for a moment that ALL male griping about the film is based on non-sexist reasons, like shoddy trailers, or supposed poor CG work.
The vast majority of the professional reviews (and I have read a ton of them) for the new Ghostbusters film have deemed it “okay.” -Not terrible. Not great. But just “meh.” It’s so-so, most reviews have said.
What I don’t appreciate is that the columnist for WaPo who was discussing male backlash about the movie is using virginity as an insult.
But more interesting is the question of whether criticism of economic libertarianism will be broadened to encompass the (Link): moral libertarianism that both underlies it and inspires the parallel drive toward the liberation of sexuality from moral judgment.
Understood in this wider sense, we’ve been living through an extended libertarian moment since the early 1960s.
Moral libertarianism presumes that no authority — political, legal, or religious — is competent to pronounce judgment on an individual’s decisions, provided that they don’t negatively effect other people. Thanks to this assumption, a grand edifice of inherited moral and legal strictures on sexuality have crumbled over the past half century, leaving individuals free to live and love as they wish, as long as everyone involved gives their consent.
Family Values Republican Politician Hastert in Trouble for Sexual Assault of Kids / On Liberals and Not Having Sexual Standards
This politician, Hastert, is now in his 70s and is in poor health. Some of his victims have stepped forward to say he sexually assaulted them when they were kids.
I’ve seen several articles say that he was a “family values” type of Republican.
Below is a report about it – probably by a left winger. I am right wing, but in the last few years, I’ve had some changing feelings about the Republican Party, conservative Christians, and how much they push this “family values” rhetoric.
This author does spend part of her report taking Bill Clinton to task for taking advantage of Lewinsky.
I will be placing more articles about this story below this first link and excerpt.
I’m not terribly fond of how so many right-wing “Family Values” spokespersons and figure heads later turn out to be hypocrites.
On the other hand, I’m not a supporter of the left wing – many of them not only participate in sexually immoral activity or champion sexual hedonism, but they have few to no sexual standards in the first place. And they don’t want any.
Maybe there is something positive to be said in having sexual standards in the first place, even if it means a person (or group of persons) who claim to believe in them occasionally violates them.