|
So, I've probably made some folks mad by my column in today's Greenville News. If you haven't seen it, I take to task the Clemson Tiger, a student newspaper at Clemson University, for their February 15 Sex Issue. If you want to read the column you can go to my blog (www.edwinleap.com/blog) where I just posted it. I offer some scientific evidence that suggests that the college 'anything goes' sexual ethic is, frankly, dangerous. Sexually transmitted infections aren't necessarily prevented by condoms. In fact, the numbers are pretty disheartening, especially adding in the fact that few people use condoms properly anyway. I'm already being pained as a traditional values moralist in the online comments of the paper. That's fine, since it's what I am. And yet, I'm not that. First of all, I'm not trying to judge anyone. That's God's job, not mine. All I want to say is that if we tell young people, or anyone, that there are no consequences to sexual freedom, we lie. There are consequences. Although the data isn't all in, there will probably be strong evidence in the future that multiple sexual partners leads to depression. It makes sense. Sex is a great, fantastic thing. I'm all for it in the right setting! But in addition to feeling really good, it creates emotional bonds and connections that we have to accept as realistic. We make and repeatedly break those at our own peril. Furthermore, when we suggest that men and women do whatever, with whomever, we expose them to physical dangers, not only of disease, but of violence and abuse, both physical and emotional. Many a college career has been wrecked by a dsyfunctional relationship that was too intimate, too fast. These liasons also lead to unwanted pregnancy. And believe whatever you want about abortion, the fact remains that abortion itself is dangerous and as time goes on we find increasing emotional consequences for abortion as wel, including depression and suicidality. It's tragic that these realities become reduced in argument to my being 'a moralist.' In fact, I'm not. As a Christian, I'm an immoralist. I realize that I'm immoral, and that we all are. We all commit our sins, sexual and otherwise. I'm certainly not above admitting that I have. Christianity says we're all sinners, and that Christ forgives us if we ask; I live free of that guilt, but acknowledging my past sins. But, wisdom dictates that we learn and pass on our knowledge. If I had wrecked my motorcycle without a helmet and sustained a severe injury, but then said, 'well, I'd be judging if I told you what to do about your helmet,' you'd laugh at me. It's very similar with sexuality. We have to accept that there is a price for every choice. In addition, college is a time to learn habits for life. Do we honestly believe that a habit of serial sexual partners will simply evaporate with a subsequent marriage? Do we think that the infertility caused by Chlamydia won't be hurtful later when a woman wants a child? Do we accept that the lesions of Herpes won't be an issue to a future life-partner? Is it likely that a habit of 'fun-loving' pornography use will simply stop when the children are born later, and looking over their parent's shoulders at the computer? Bad habits die hard; and truthfully, for all the fun of college freedom, no one will later be excited about having an unfaithful, carousing spouse, a spouse unable to commit, a spouse who may infect them, or a spouse addicted to online sex. Finally, the typical response of so many young people is to condemn religion out of hand for being 'anti-sex.' I don't see that. I see religion, especially Christianity, asking that we engage in sex with a husband or wife only because that's the safest, most intimate place for sex to grow. In that bond it can be uninhibited, guiltless and free from the constant fear of abandonment. Ideally, that is. Some Christian marriages fail at this, and sex is miserable, or guilty, or marriages result in divorce. That's not the faith, not what it teaches; that's the human frailty of the believers. In the Sex Issue of The Tiger, there were discussions about guilt and faith in regards to sex. And one writer cited Paul's admonition to celibacy. Of course, Paul wasn't saying everyone should be. He was saying that some people are designed not to marry, and to be wholly devoted to God. The same writer suggested that virginity obsession was silly, that God was about connection and love, so why would he mind our sexuality, and that we shouldn't do everything God 'says' 'just because He has power over you.' Fair enough. But if we're going to invoke the Bible, here's a bit from Jesus, the nice guy in the Scripture; the one people find nicer than Paul, and easier to approach than his Father, God, the big guy: 'You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.' Matthew 5:27-28. I'm not trying to condemn, though. All I'm saying is that if you think Jesus is about love, he was. But he also had moral standards he expected from us. And those moral standards lead, not to misery, but freedom and safety. I wrote what I wrote because I worry about young people, and about my children. I want their bodies, minds, hearts and souls safe. And if we ignore the real consequences of 'sexual freedom,' (which really doesn't exist), then my children and many others are in danger. Ed |
