Posted by
KenUSA on Sunday, June 07, 2009 12:05:12 PM
What is the real cause of the abortion epidemic?
The Church has always taught that sexual intimacy is properly enjoyed within the confines of sacramental marriage. But not every marriage. Why?
There are instances in which a woman's health may be in danger in the event of a pregnancy. A husband willing to risk the loss or health of his wife sins when he places his desire for sex ahead of his responsibility to protect his family.
So can that man look outside his marriage for sexual attention? No. He would be making an adulterer of his new partner, violating the trust of his wife and risk introducing scandal upon his family name. That man is expected by the church, to be a man and accept his circumstances without complaint.
The argument goes that sex is therapeutic, that a marriage is not complete unless a man and woman are able to offer each other the "comfort" available only in the marital bed. There is no question that comfort is to be had or that this comfort can be therapeutic, but this is not the primary purpose of the reproductive system. These are byproducts only.
The other argument says that sex is essential. There is no evidence that suggests that a man or a woman cannot live well without sex.
When either of the previous arguments are accepted as fact, a number of problems ensue.
1) Pleasure becomes the product, not a byproduct. A person chooses what feels good versus what is good. Women become objects of pleasure and men become manipulable adolescents.
2) A family is not held together by bonds of virtue and maturity, but by entertainment.
3) A "please me or I'm leaving" mentality becomes the basis for all discussion.
The next error to be born of this particular disobedience, is that sacramental marriage is confining and permanent. Therefore to be postponed or avoided altogether. In part to avoid the sin and disgrace of divorce. Choosing one sin in lieu of another and calling it virtue blurs the line between right and wrong.
It also reinforces the pursuit of pleasure over the pursuit of virtue and successfully moves the discussion from "the good versus the best" to the lesser of two evils. Remember also, that we are talking here of simple virtue, a far cry from the heroic virtue extolled by the church and her saints.
At this point we have completely reversed the natural order. We have moved from pleasure as a byproduct of reproductive intimacy to reproduction being a byproduct of pleasure.
If only that unintended byproduct could be eliminated. But there are several byproducts. Namely, that women are alternately sexual playthings and manipulative pleasure brokers and men are alternately unwitting lapdogs trading manhood for pleasure or womanizing animals using and abusing women at their whim.
Children, "unexpected ones", anyway, inside or outside of marriage become nothing more than bargaining chips.
Since, according to this reversed reasoning, pleasure is the product, and it is acceptable to chase it outside of marriage, why not chase it wherever it is to be found? As casual "friends with benefits", in same sex encounters, on the internet, at brothels.
This is why our culture is in the shape it's in. Aquinas said that a mistake made early is a mistake indeed. The same sex "marriage" debate is the fruit of a seed planted and nurtured long ago in the "straight" (sort of) community.