Today's must-read is Sex-Maniac Nation by Lisa Fabrizio:
Of all the hubbub rightly surrounding the healthcare mandate handed down from the imperial throne of Barack Obama, one aspect of this issue has not been sufficiently discussed: the disturbing fact that sex has now made its way into nearly all aspects of American life. Many have written of the clash between First Amendment rights and those who would seek to curb them, while others have debated the moral evils of abortion, but few have sought to plumb the cause of it all: our national descent into the sexual gutter.Welcome to fornication nation, where the "right" to unfettered sexual gratification trumps all others, where the pursuit of happiness is no longer possible without "free" government-mandated contraceptives for all. And where the way to appeal to voters is to pretend that the opponent is threatening that sacred "right," and to deny the real rights, and even the existence, of dissenters.
Without doubt or question, sex rules our airwaves, satellites, and all the forms of human communication that compose our leisure time. The subject of sex dominates our children's education and overflows into the fields of sports, music, and the so-called arts. It is indeed impossible to watch or listen to any form of entertainment without being bombarded with direct or indirect references to, or advertisements for, sex; its attainment, its glorification, or the improvement of its "performance." [. . .]
Yes, sex has overtaken the common sense of otherwise sober Americans and now even intrudes itself into our government, via the despotic mandates of legislation that was unwanted by the majority of its citizens and blatantly unconstitutional. One wonders what our Founding Fathers would have thought if confronted with the fact that in 21st century America, sexual license would be included in the list of freedoms and inalienable rights to be protected and even funded by our government.
As a culture, we've gone so far down this road that it's hard to imagine how we can possibly turn it around. With all due respect, even conservatives are appalled by Rick Santorum's argument, taken straight from millennia-old Christian teaching, that sex is sacred and, in his word, "special," and that to treat it otherwise will lead to exactly what Ms. Fabrizio describes (and what Pope Paul VI predicted with perfect accuracy back in 1968). But when a public person points these things out as critical societal issues, he's intruding "into our bedrooms." So it can't be discussed, even though these are the values most of us were raised with and that served, until recently, as the bedrock of American society.
But who has really intruded into our bedrooms, living rooms, and every other nook and cranny of our daily lives? Progressives and the entertainment industry, who have so saturated the culture with sexual content that our children are positively marinating in it. They can't get through a day at school, at home, or even a visit to the grocery store without losing another little piece of their innocence.
Ms. Fabrizio lists the fruits of our liberation from the shackles of traditional morality: "pederasty, pornography, social disease, the objectification of women, and generations of fatherless children." She adds that motherhood and marriage have been denigrated. Can anyone deny that this is what's taken place? And can anyone argue that this is good for our children?
Read the whole thing.
***
Thanks to American Digest for linking.
Thanks also to IOTW.
***
Most recent posts here. Twitter feed here. Amazon store here.


I don't know about you, but in reading all the things in relation to the fallout and reasoning for this mandate, one thing also seems to be in play, and that could be to pit conservatives against each other. It seems to me that there are two types of conservatives right now, the more libertarian "anything goes" conservatives (more in the styling of Ayn Rand) and the conservatives who are seen to be more of the "social conservatives". The conventional wisdom is that most of the Tea Party types are the libertarian types, and that stereotype is often being used to scare the more "social conservative" types away, though in reality, I don't think that's the case. Look at Glenn Beck's 8/28 attendance for one. At the second Tea Party I went to, the main speaker - a more libertarian type - was getting great rounds of applause, until he mentioned something insinuating that people on welfare should not be allowed to have more kids - and the crowd was silent there. On the flip side, I think people are using a potential Santorum nomination as a way to try to scare away the more 'libertarian' faction, though many of them may not be happy unless Ron Paul is nominated.
ReplyDeleteThe liberals in the government are doing this on purpose. It is easier to grab more power when the masses are busy with sports, entertainment, and sex.
ReplyDeleteGreat post!
ReplyDeleteThanks, and thanks for the comments.
ReplyDeleteRush is funny:
"There are enough idiots out there -- like the caller said, "single-issue people" -- who just want to continue screwing without consequences."
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/02/14/an_interesting_dick_morris_theory_on_democrats_and_contraception
I love the argument from people who say that not providing for free contraception is "bringing my morality into their bedroom" and that I have no business there. When they force me to pay for their contraception, aren't THEY dragging ME kicking and screaming into their bedrooms?
ReplyDeleteThey turn the entire argument on its head and insist that their position is the logical one.
I don't want the government involved in sex. Period. I don't want if from either side. It isn't the government's job to help me have it safely nor is it their job to keep me from having it. That is my issue with Santorum. I agree with his views on a social level, I don't agree that he or anyone else for that matter should be involving the government in it.
ReplyDeleteSo you do think Santorum wants to somehow oversee intimate relations between consenting adults? I don't see that at all. I think he was just being honest about the damage done by the sexual revolution and about his religious views.
ReplyDeleteI look at Santorum as a big government "compassionate conservative", cut much from the same cloth as Dubbya. His voting record and his public statements back that up.
ReplyDeleteI agree with him about the sexual revolution as you know. I have posted about it more than once. I just think it is a cultural issue and not a governmental one.
My fear with Santorum is that he will increase the size and scope of government in order to solve social ills. As a fiscal conservative not something I want to see happen.
Personally I would like to see Santorum start a foundation on the non profit side and run with it. I think that is where he would do the most good. He has done some of that already, I would like to see him increase his footprint in this arena.
In the unlikely event he gets the nomination, I won't hate voting for him, but he isn't my choice as POTUS. My choice decided to run for Governor instead of President. Oh, Congresssman Pence, we really needed you this cycle.
But this is the basic Democrat strategy and the Faustian bargain they offer the American people: We grant them the power to regulate and mandate every aspect of our daily living (including what our kids' lunch bags may contain) and in return they tell us we can have unfettered enjoyment of our base, animal instincts with no consequences - and that on someone else's dime.
ReplyDeleteI fear that Dick Morris is right. Having removed moral training from public schools for forty years now, there are two or three generations of voters who have become so addicted to licentiousness and the general Democrat gravy train that they will vote for Obama again to keep it going, consequences be damned. (And they don't really believe that there will be any consequences, anyway.)
Great post, Pundette, you are absolutely right, but I think I need to throw up now. As a mom to young children, this truly does scare the living daylights out of me. I never thought in my teens and early 20s that I'd grow up to to be the "prude" that I am now, but I can barely tolerate the non-stop bombardment of graphic sex that is simply everywhere right now. A little bit of debauchery isn't awful, like a well told kinda dirty joke or buying sexy underwear, but there isn't even any fun in "naughty" when the whole society has been pornified. Like the saying goes, you might like steak, but if you eat it every meal of every day, you probably won't like it so much. Nowadays it is an overload and it is horrible.
ReplyDeleteI wish my father could have lived to see the day when his daughter, who used to tease him for flipping the channel on the TV as soon as people started to kiss, would be doing the same thing and railing against our sick civilization. I don't know exactly when it happened, but I did grow up to become so very much like him, even in the ways that drove me crazy as a kid. I guess he did a good job raising me after all. ;)