I just deleted three paragraphs of a new post. I did it on purpose, so please don't feel bad for me. It is the modern day version of pulling paper out of the typewriter and crumpling it up. There is a satisfaction to it that just leaving the ideas "out there" doesn't quite accomplish. I am trying to find the right wording for a question. The words just aren't there. Basically, I read articles on tax-payer funding of contraception and one major theme is always floating in my head. "Why I am paying for people to have sex?" Especially, "why am I paying for sex to not do what sex was designed to do?"
I don't know if it is primarily the overpopulation myth winning out, or if the possibility of self control is now considered a myth, but something is a driving force. A simple explanation is just plain old sin. But we have always been sinners. Why now? Why has contraception come to the forefront? Treating sex wrongly is not a new sin. Which track did we get on that made contraception seem like a good solution? The seven deadly sins have always been about excess and removing consequences. Lust has the unique quality of having infinite consequences. Sex makes people. And those people make more people.
The interventions of "social problems" often address symptoms, not the core. In recent history, only 12-step programs have actually sought the core. Sex-addicts can go 12-step, but fornication remains. In my own history, I was an "affection junkie." Fornication was the means I used to try to fill a craving for affection. Contraception removed the consequences. Why can't my tax money go to help other affection junkies instead? Why treat a symptom and not the core?
No comments:
Post a Comment