Store up for yourselves treasures in Heaven
where moth and rust cannot destroy and thieves cannot break in and steal

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Alphabet Sex


We've got G's and L's and B's and T's and P's and A's and C's. Every sexually disoriented person and group on the planet is scrambling to not just be recognized but celebrated. Who can even guess how many letters will be added to these “special” groups over the next twenty years?
Not only are we profoundly spiritual and relational beings, we are profoundly sexual beings as well. So powerful is this drive that a few people will even deny the existence of Creator God rather than say “No” to their sexual desires. And they do this under the guise of, “Anything that feels this right can't be wrong.”
Brilliant!
As with spiritual and emotional health, sexual health is integral to the health of society, families and individuals. That's why, when emotional needs become sexualised, the person, the family and the community suffers. It seems there is no end to which we will go, no fantasy too degrading that humans won't attempt to satiate them.
Ask the young woman who's had an abortion how the relationship with the father of the baby was affected. Ask what it did to her parent's relationship. When our sexual self is not used responsibly, emotional and spiritual pain is inevitable.
Ask any of the 100's of clients I've worked with whose porn addiction destroyed their marriage. Ask how the damage of this perversion refused to be confined to his wife. Instead it infected his relationship with all women.
Ask the women who use sex to get the feeling of being loved. Ask the men who pretend to love in order to get sex. Ask these people who use and abuse each other about having to put on yet another layer of emotional protection when these relationships end.
Personal preference and victimless “sin” are often used as an excuse for sex without boundaries. These debased individuals don't realise that sexual sin is far, far from being victimless. How we use our bodies impacts society far beyond the confines of our bedroom.
Sexual intimacy is not about the individual.
Sexual intimacy is about everyone!
Used as directed sexual love is an amazingly beautiful thing.
Used as our natural self demands, sex is profoundly harmful. Sadly, when our corrupted self-love is the driving force in our lives, we really don't care what happens to anyone else. 

17 comments:

  1. "Used as directed sexual love is an amazingly beautiful thing."
    Well, if that's the basis of many years of counselling couples and porn addicts, then I have to pity your clients. And you, too, because failure must have accompanied you even more than other shrinks. Maybe that's at the root of your bitterness.

    It's not the Hebrew folklore rules that count, Theosauros, it's attentiveness, empathy, communication, respect, all on an equality basis. That's far more difficult, granted, but all therapy, all counseling is difficult.

    Rules give exclusive "rights". Do that, endure that. Do you really think that abstaining from all activity tabooed in the Torah results in a healthy relationship? A rape is a rape, even when performed after a wedding ceremony.
    Mutual respect, sincere communication, attentiveness - those are the "rules" that should be respected. Only that they aren't rules but skills. And they are not part of the Christian personality curriculum.
    Too much emphasis on "righteousness", contempt of the "other", "my god-given right".

    As for the alphabet sex... So, you personally can control what arouses you? Could you "chose", as an experiment, to be attracted to a man, have butterflies in your stomach, watch the phone in hope of a call from him? Entertain romantic fantasies about a weekend in the country, admiring his manly features, those strong hands...
    I bet you can't.
    So, what makes you think that a gay guy made that decision that you cannot make? He simply falls in love, and is sexually aroused by, well, men. There are others who feel the same. No harm done, indeed, if they decide to have an intimate relationship. No special harm, to be precise, because of course they can do all the other horrible things that haunt every partnership:
    Greed, selfishness, power plays, not seeing/respecting the other, not emphasizing with the other, not communicating in a sincere way, not keeping contractual obligations.
    But avoiding those traps requires a bunch of skills. Teach them , and less counseling has to be done.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "because failure must have accompanied you even more than other shrinks."

    Not at all. I had an exceptionally successful practice – retired at 51 and people still ask to work with me. I think you perhaps have some preconceptions that are not entirely accurate. People come to counsellors because their lives are not working. If things were going well, they wouldn't bother. I work with people where they're at and we work on what they want to work on. If they're enjoying their porn, it's not my business to interfere. If however they recognise the damage it's causing, then we work on that. I've worked with dozens and dozens of homosexual couples who want their relationships to be better. And as you accurately state below, the issues are more or less the same as hetero couples who want their relationship to be better. I think I'm actually pretty good at couples therapy.
    =====
    "it's attentiveness, empathy, communication, respect, all on an equality basis. Only that they aren't rules but skills. And they are not part of the Christian personality curriculum."

    You couldn't be more Wrong.
    “You must clothe yourselves with tenderhearted mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience. Make allowance for each other’s faults, and forgive anyone who offends you. Remember, the Lord forgave you, so you must forgive others. Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds us all together in perfect harmony. And let the peace that comes from Christ rule in your hearts. For as members of one body you are called to live in peace. And always be thankful. Let the message about Christ, in all its richness, fill your lives. Teach and counsel each other with all the wisdom he gives. Sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs to God with thankful hearts. And whatever you do or say, do it as a representative of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through him to God the Father.” Colossians 3:12-17
    This is just a small fraction of “rules” for healthy relationships contained in the Bible.
    =====
    "my god-given right".
    What does that mean? What are you alluding to?
    =====
    "So, you personally can control what arouses you?"

    You don't use a proper example. First of all, a healthy male wants to have sex with every woman on the planet. He must control that drive or pay the price in terms already addressed in the post. Secondly, if I hear you right, you're saying something like, “If something happened to my wife whereby we could no longer be sexually active, then I would have every right to find sexual release somewhere else because it's too much to ask of me to control my sexual desires. Bunk! We most certainly can control those desires, UNLESS our emotional needs have become sexualised. That however is an emotional/psychological problem that requires therapy to overcome.
    =====
    "So, what makes you think that a gay guy made that decision that you cannot make?"

    Well, unless you call yourself a follower of Jesus, He and the Bible have nothing to say to you, other than you stand in need of forgiveness. In reality, if you stand apart from a healed and forgiven relationship with Jesus you can be involved in any kind of relationship you want. If however you claim to be a follower of Jesus, then He places boundaries upon how you use your sexuality.

    Homosexual atheist? Do what you want
    Homosexual Christian? You've got some issues to deal with regarding your sexual self.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "You couldn't be more Wrong."
    Oh, Rod, strong words.
    I hope you won't disqualify yourself from intelligent conversation by denying that attentiveness, empathy, communication, respect, all on an equality basis are necessary skills in a healthy relationship.

    I may have a tendency to hold my own Catholic upbringing for being exemplary, but I can assure you that forgiveness is not a typical character trait of Christians. While 1 Cor 11:3 is pretty often used to demand female submission in every field. There was strong Church opposition in my country, when in the 1960 wives were finally allowed to decide upon their own property by themselves.

    Either you live in an early Christian community bubble, in which people turn the other cheek, do thieves' bidding, and expect every day to be the last, or you think that citing a few nice verses from a book only very few people read in its entirety is enough to invalidate sociological findings. We'll come to this point again, later.

    I cited people demanding "my god-given right".
    You ask:
    "What does that mean? What are you alluding to?"
    I'm referring to what is, among laymen, known as "marital rights". What's your problem with that? I mean, I don't claim to have those, I cited a believer.

    Clearly referring to the question of sexual orientation,I asked, "So, you personally can control what arouses you?"
    and your not-reply is:
    ""You don't use a proper example."
    Well, we call this "moving the goalposts". Your refusal has been noted.

    "Secondly, if I hear you right, you're saying something like," (follows something stupid about, again, "rights" to do something in-consensual)
    What? Where? Are you talking to me? Do you read what I write?
    Other than you I do not put emphasis on the need to generally suppress sex, because other than you I do not think that a healthy man wants to copulate with every woman on the planet. That's an immature fantasy, early puberty. Well, maybe it's part of American "Bro-culture". But practical attempts result in immediate societal isolation. You know, these gals today, they don't think they have to submit to male desires...

    You may have some sorry such cases in your clintele, but it's not a general phenomenon. But religions (and I have experiences with four major ones) always tend to forbid the obvious, the "animal urges", and bank on the resulting feelings of guilt and unworthiness, because, of course, no one is truly abstinent, or truly has sex for reproductional reasons only. How do you put it

    "you stand in need of forgiveness."

    No, I don't. For the past fifty years, nothing I've done in the field of erotic and sex must be forgiven. I've never willingly overstepped consensus with my partners, and I only chose articulate, strong women. Attentiveness, seeing the real other one, not an ideal or a fiction, and self control, overriding immature impulses.

    "Homosexual atheist? Do what you want
    Homosexual Christian?
    "
    Again, What? Where? Are you talking to me? Do you read what I write? I mean, you claim to have read my blog...
    I can emphasize, Mr counselor. Even with someone whose sexual orientation I do not share. Which, among other skills, keeps me from having to deal with issues regarding my sexual self.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Oh, Rod, strong words."
    Oops! I didn't read your original comment carefully enough. Sorry. I zeroed in on “Only that they aren't rules . . .” That's why I carried on with the Colossians quote and said there is plenty more rules where that came from. I think that for those of us who are Christians, they are rules. You seem to be a good enough person so as to not notice that you need forgiveness. We who become followers of Jesus do so, by and large, because we are appalled at the deeply corrupted self-love that lies within. They may be skills for you , but for us they are battles hard fought and only sometimes won. That's why people shouldn't be surprised at sin in the Church. I can't remember who said it, some Pastor, but it goes, “God chooses the smallest, meanest, vilest of humans,” and that is certainly true for me. Again, sorry for the sloppy reading.
    =====
    "pretty often used to demand female submission in every field."
    Did you know that not only are we to submit to one another, but that in the Bible men are told to submit to their wives more often than women are told to submit to their husbands? The Bible says that I am the Spiritual Leader of my home. That means that I am to model for my family what it means to:
    Submit,
    Forgive and ask for forgiveness,
    Love,
    Show mercy, grace and kindness
    The man leads the way in these behaviours. It's a rule.
    Yes, as per the curse in Genesis 3:16 men have always, and always will abuse the command for them to submit to and love their wives, but that isn't the Bible's fault. It's who we are. It's stating a reality. It's why we need forgiveness. We are fundamentally flawed. As a point of interest, a study a couple years ago showed that the worst offenders for pay inequality between men and women were those bastions of atheism, Universities, both in the States and in Canada.
    =====
    "I'm referring to what is, among laymen, known as "marital rights". What's your problem with that?"
    If you are referring to a man's “right” to have sex with his wife then again you're wrong. If that man calls himself a Christian, he must go back to the Colossians section I quoted, he must discern what it means to be gentle with his wife, he must ponder what loving his wife would look like versus thinking about how she is doing him wrong. I'm not going to have to answer for what my wife does. That's between her and God. She's not going to have to answer for what I do. That's between me and God. Steff, if you've got a specific event or context in mind when you talk about wrong doing (from your bio family or something), I need to know the context. That's just the nature of internet communication.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (1) "Sloppy reading"
      OK. We all are a bit careless now and then. That's why sincere communication is so important, isn't it.

      (2)
      "The Bible says that I am the Spiritual Leader of my home."
      Well, Rod, don't tell a German what Leadership means. And don't tell a lawyer that there was and is no Christian motivated female discrimination. You cannot wave away the horrible consequences of 15 centuries in which Christians had absolute say in all matters. Yes, there are such snippets, as, by the way, are in the Qur'an, that talk about mutual submission, preferably under god as well. But in the end, it's still "God is man's head, and Man is woman's head". You may apply as much sugar-coating to that as you like: it's a clear hierarchy. Especially if you add

      Timothy 2:12: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet."

      Paul must have been a horrible man to write such things.

      (3)"marital rights"
      I do not have any experiences with such, so I cannot give you any helpful details. I was married, but I never had to request cohabitation. Nor the other way round.

      (4)
      "It's why we need forgiveness. We are fundamentally flawed"
      Yeah, I've heard that before. From megachurch pastors and politicians caught in the wrong place with their pants down. They don't mention their fundamental flawedness when they lie for jeebus, or fleece their flock - acts which I find far more repugnant than renting a callboy. That sort of Christian oscillates between righteousness
      "Just say no!"
      and, when it does not work and their daughter is pregnant out of wedlock:
      "we're all sinners. Repent and all is forgiven".

      When everything is flawed due to a deity's curse, then no one has moral superior ground.

      (5)
      I don't have that cheap excuse of "god made me a flawed being".
      I was trained to perceive the suffering of others, and, if I was the cause of it, do everything I could to avoid that harm, and compensate for it. If I fail, I have to bear the consequences of that suffering. That is not the same as guilt, it is the loss of harmony that results in the need for compensation.
      This of course is closer to Mosaic and Talmudic teachings than to Christianity. The emphasis on broken rules, "sin", takes the focus off the victim, and replaces it with the relation to god. Not my concept. As god's forgiveness is granted to the true believer, their attitude towards the victim is flawed - "hey, god already forgave me!"
      Icky.

      Delete
  5. "Clearly referring to the question of sexual orientation,I asked, "So, you personally can control what arouses you?" your not-reply is."
    I did answer. In my very first sentence if memory serves. I said that we cannot control our sexual urges. We find it very difficult to remain faithful to our wives. Yes, I know you wanted to compare it to me lusting after a man but that is not the kind of control I'm talking about. And neither are you, really.
    Jesus has said that the boundaries for sexual intimacy are between a man and a woman within a monogamous faithful marriage. Whether a person is hetero or homo, married or single, that is the struggle that Christians face. I'm not moving any goalposts. God expects us to do the best we can with who we are. Because we're human, we can't help but want what we're not supposed to have. Yes the sexual intimacy needs to be consensual but that consensual sex needs to be within the safety boundary of a monogamous marriage.
    If you're not a Christian, go and do what you want. But if a person is a Christian, that person can't just choose the consensual part and forget the marriage part.

    “"copulate with every woman on the planet."
    I meant copulate with every woman he's in a romantic relationship with. My bad.
    =====
    "But religions (and I have experiences with four major ones) always tend to forbid the obvious, the "animal urges","
    Well, I don't know what other religions say about this, but Christianity doesn't forbid our sexual desires. It takes them very seriously. It says we need to confine and control them or serious harm is done. My post talks about that harm. Harm that your past partners seem to have been immune from experiencing.
    =====
    "you stand in need of forgiveness." No, I don't.
    Well, not according to your moral standard. But why should we think that your moral standard is good for the world, the community, the family, for you? I worked at two Super Max Security Prisons for 10 years. In all that time I never met one person who thought he was a bad man. And you know how that decision was made? The same way you make the same decision. Because they could always point to someone who was worse. “All have sinned and stand guilty before an utterly righteous and Holy God.”

    ReplyDelete
  6. (1)
    "Yes, I know you wanted to compare it to me lusting after a man but that is not the kind of control I'm talking about. And neither are you, really."
    I was already remarking that you do not talk about the question of sexual orientation, which, to my experience, is not a question of choice. I never "chose" women. There was no menu, or multiple choice situation. I just happened to belong to the majority of men who develop romantic feelings towards women. I have friends who found out that their prime target of romance and arousal was of their own gender. Regarding that such an orientation - even though more and more people abstain from discrimination - leads to hardships and objective difficulties (there are by far less potential partners for gay than for hetero men), it is never acted out without much soul-searching and reasoning.

    I won't interfere if someone, a Christian, decides to live in celibacy - although is unnatural, see Genesis 2:18 - or in a pretended marriage - which is kind of a lie. That kind of struggle is their privacy, not my business. But I will interfere if such unnatural practices are advertised as God's rule for everybody. As happens right now in France and the US (DOMA).
    (2)
    "It takes them very seriously. It says we need to confine and control them or serious harm is done."
    Oh, d'accord. Only that you and I differ about what constitutes a harm, and the rules for control. Yours tend to be a little... unpractical, so that a lot of harm is done out of ignorance and righteousness, leading to the desired result of guilt, and repentance towards god. My rules are a bit more complicated, personal, and open to debate. Which means they've gotten better over the decades.
    One doesn't need an epiphany or a second birth to avoid things that are hurtful. Most can be avoided by true communication and attentiveness in the process of relationship. That's a lot of work, but it's rewarding. Here, not in your heaven.
    (3)
    "Harm that your past partners seem to have been immune from experiencing. "
    "immune?" I really admire your therapeutic restraint, counselor.
    "The same way you make the same decision. Because they could always point to someone who was worse"
    The same way? Did you just compare me to heavy criminals, convicted in a legal process, lying about their deeds? Your arrogance is astounding.

    ReplyDelete
  7. “You cannot wave away the horrible consequences of 15 centuries in which Christians had absolute say in all matters.”

    I wouldn't try. I've told you, everything humans touch turns to shit. Including those things touched by Christians. The “Church” will always get it wrong because we are wrong. Each one of us has the potential within us to commit any and every horror that the human mind can conceive. You've probably heard this story but it's so good I'll repeat it just in case. Nuremberg war crimes trial. A Jewish holocaust survivor is witnessed crying during the testimony of an SS officer. At a break in the trial, a reporter goes over to the man and asks, “Are you crying tears of rage over what that man did during the war?” And the Jewish man said, “No. I'm crying because I recognize that the evil that resides in him also lives within me.” True story.

    Let me put it this way, and this can be applied to every Christian who has ever existed. I may not be less of a liar than any given atheist. But I am less of a liar than I was before Jesus came into my life. I may not be less violent than any given atheist. But I am less violent than I was before Jesus came into my life. I may not be as generous as any given atheist. But I am more generous than I was before Jesus came into my life. I'm sure you're familiar with the term, “self-righteous.” Well, that is a term that fits perfectly for atheists and not at all for Christians. We Christians know beyond doubt that apart from Jesus, we have no righteousness of our own. Atheists on the other hand believe that any righteousness that they possess comes completely from the self. Atheists are self-righteous.
    =====
    “Yes, there are such snippets,”

    Snippets? It always amazes me how people can read the Bible and not hear a thing, or at least not hear anything except what they want to hear. Yes, Christians as well.
    =====
    "God is man's head, and Man is woman's head".

    Did you know that the word, “Helpmate” as used in Genesis in regard to the woman's position in a marriage, is the same term God uses for Himself to describe His relationship with us? Hardly a one-down position. And again, Man is “head of his wife” applies ONLY to the role of Spiritual Leader. In all other areas, who does what is to be determined mutually. And Jesus tells us men that this is how we are to lead. We are to take a servants role. “I came not to be served but to serve and to give My life as a ransom for many. Now go and do likewise.” These are Jesus words for me and every other Christian husband. You're right, it is a hierarchy. And in my role as leader I am to model for my family submission, love, forgiveness, grace, mercy, peace, patience and so on. Why do you find that so offensive?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (1)
      Thanks for your remarks about the flawedness of church and clergy. They are historically correct. And you don't deny that Christians do horrible things, too. If my statistics are right, then the crime rates in devout countries like the US, Russia or most of South America are, if anything, then higher than in godless Europe or Japan. I don't say that religion is the reason for that - it's more that social security leads to both lower crime rates and less believer percentages.
      But it cannot be said that adhering to the Christian religion leads to a more moral overall behavior (Crimes, STD-rates, rate of underage mothers all are higher in countries with religious majorities).
      (2)
      So, the moral failure rate of all the Christians is at least par to that of other religions. Atheists and "Nones", it seems, have a much lower incarceration rate - they are pretty underrepresented in the prison population, but that may be caused by other factors like education.

      In the light of these well-known facts, I have some difficulty when you tell me

      "Let me put it this way, and this can be applied to every Christian who has ever existed."

      No, they're not better. They are as evil, ruthless, un-emphatic as all the other humans. Taking your argument to its logic end, then you imply that Christians would be a horrible lot of criminals, if there weren't Jesus that reduces them to the same grade of evilness as ordinary people.
      You see the flaw in your argument?
      (3)
      And don't start special pleading, along the lines of true vs. not true Christians. There is no region in the US that has abortion rates like the bible belt. Look it up.
      (4)
      You and I want to be good people. We know that people do horrible things, and we don't want to commit such, and avoid that others do them.
      If you and I each made a list of things to avoid, we'd have a pretty big intersection. I'm not an un-emphatic moral-less monster, you're not a crusader, and don't stone adulterers or unruly children. Put away the straw men.
      (5)
      "Snippets? It always amazes me how people can read the Bible and not hear a thing, or at least not hear anything except what they want to hear."
      Well, according to scholars, the bible is a book with a multitude of authors, cultural backgrounds, compiled at quite diverse times. There are multiple contradictions, diverse schools of thought contributed. So any interpretation is some kind of cherry-picking. That's what I mean by "snippets", as a 21st century reader quite different parts of the bible may appeal to you, other than, say, to M. Luther in the 16th century. I mean, he argued with the sun standing still over Gideon against Copernicus...
      This is why, over the millenia, different interpretations were put the the foreground of Christian theology.
      (6)
      I am an atheist, and I stand in the humanist tradition, based on the philosophy of the renaissance and the enlightenment. Like you, I try to be good, but I use a different way of defining that "good". I don't cherry-pick one book to come to conclusions, I employ basic values like empathy (the other has equal personal value, can be hurt, comforted, may err, etc just like me) reciprocity (treat as you would like to be treated), solidarity (help the needy), and contract compliance (stick to your promises).
      Those are secular values, and I may stray from them now and then (it's human, not a curse), but in the end they lead to responsible, sensible behavior.
      Only that there is no god involved, and that I can criticize Kant and still hold his categorical imperative valuable. And if I learn something new, I can change the details. No problem.

      Delete
    2. (7)
      "You're right, it is a hierarchy. And in my role as leader I am to model for my family submission, love, forgiveness, grace, mercy, peace, patience and so on."
      For which superior position, of all potential factors, your gender qualifies you? And you say that after all the experiences with men, their inherent violence, their lust for power and competition? If anyone is unqualified for spiritual leadership, then it's those short-perspective thinkers, those testosterone-impaired lugs.
      Women care, women plan long range, think more holistic. They love their children like no man does. If there is something like a natural spirituality, then women have it more often than men.
      Don't try to sell me that iron-age myth of male superiority. It's icky, and wrong.

      Delete
  8. We are fundamentally flawed"

    When you mention the Pastors, or any Christian including me who has been caught with h/his pants down, or lying or defrauding, you are perfectly describing our fundamentally flawed character. Again, I wouldn't try to deny any of it. The bible is one long sorry account of our flawed character and God's plan for redemption. You are also right when you say that “sin” is much more repugnant when seen in Christians than when someone such as yourself does it. That's why Jesus saved His most supercilious outrage for religious leaders. The catamites in the RC fiasco is just one small example. This desultory behaviour in the lives of Christians is infuriating, and rightly so.
    =====
    “then no one has moral superior ground.”

    Hey! There you go. Good observation. Right on the money.
    =====
    “. . . if I was the cause of it, do everything I could to avoid that harm, and compensate for it. If I fail, I have to bear the consequences of that suffering. That is not the same as guilt, it is the loss of harmony that results in the need for compensation."

    It's the same for me. I can't imagine where you get the idea that Christians aren't responsible for their actions or that we somehow avoid the consequences of our actions?
    =====
    "As god's forgiveness is granted to the true believer, their attitude towards the victim is flawed - "hey, god already forgave me!"

    Oh Steff, you present such a profound lack of comprehension when it comes to what Jesus teaches. One example that comes to mind is where we are told, “If you are standing at the alter (the terminology means doing something very important, like getting married or baptized or even giving the sermon) and realize that you've harmed someone (made someone a victim of your behaviour) leave the Church at once and make things right.” Jesus' command to “Love your neighbour as you already love yourself” leaves no room for anything less than the giving of self in the service of others, especially victims of our behaviours. How can you have missed all of this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (1)
      "Oh Steff, you present such a profound lack of comprehension when it comes to what Jesus teaches."

      But that lack of belief in your cherry-picked niceties is compensated for by my observational powers. I see people do terrible things they explicitly forbid others to do, referring to godly orders. I see the same people issue an "apology" for their sin and demand to be forgiven just as god will forgive them. And they are Christians, often very expressively so. These people think they made a contract with god, they try not to sin, preach his words, and if they sin, he forgives. The savior keeps them from judgement.
      And this from the most judgmental people on earth.
      (2)
      I so love your snippets.
      "“If you are standing at the alter (the terminology means doing something very important, like getting married or baptized or even giving the sermon) and realize that you've harmed someone (made someone a victim of your behaviour) leave the Church at once and make things right.”"

      Marvelous. And you really believe 2 billion Christians behave that way?
      In your dreams. It's not going to happen.

      Delete
  9. “. . .is not a question of choice.”

    I don't think it is either. But what does that mean to you? Research indicates that obesity and anti-social behaviour are other characteristics that may be genetically determined. Does that make them right? Here's another example. When I work with paedophiles, do you know what they tell me? Every single one of them has said, “I've been sexually attracted to children for as long as I can remember. I've never not been attracted to children. This is the way I was born.” Their sexual attraction to children is not a question of choice. What are we to do. Just wait until our society becomes – and it will become - like early Rome and then call man/boy “love” okay, especially when the sexual acts are consensual? We are not responsible for how we were born. We are responsible for what we do with how we were born.
    =====
    ". . . leading to the desired result of guilt,”

    We don't need any book or authority figure to “make” us feel guilty. Real guilt is as important as physical pain. It tells us that something is wrong. To dull that discomfort by various means is to create self-harm.
    I'm not talking about the harm done by ineffective parenting that is done through and by guilt. There IS such as thing as false guilt. But there is also such as thing as real and necessary guilt.
    We are powerfully aware of the good that we ought to do. We are powerfully cognisant of our rejection of that good, and we feel appropriate guilt. Right and wrong is not something we have to be taught. We know it instinctively. Even children as young as one year old have been observed in clinical studies reacting negatively when they see something unfair taking place to other adults or children.
    Now, Christianity teaches that we are conceived with a sinful nature while atheists say that we're born good. Reality is however, no one has to teach a small child to hide behind h/her back a cookie that was not supposed to be taken. No one has to teach a child to hit the other toddler who “stole” a toy. Contrary to this atheist belief in our innate goodness, much if not most of what parenting involves is squashing the child's tendency toward physical and emotional violence and encouraging the child to behave in a consistently respectful manner toward others. We teach our children correct behaviour because we also know that humans have the ability to choose right from wrong. We have freewill choice to behave this way, and not that way. Because we have freewill choice we also know guilt when we don't do what we ought to do, or when we do what we shouldn't do. We disobey this inner moral law at enormous psychological discomfort. On the other hand, you're a good example of how it's possible to block out this gift of warning that something isn't right in our lives.
    The list of things we use to block the consequences of guilt inducing behaviours is almost endless. From mood altering chemicals to serial relationships to suicide and everything in between, we attempt to avoid experiencing this huge pull on our consciousness. We simply tell ourselves what we want to hear in order to get what we want and then we go merrily on our way. This is unfortunate because guilt is to our psychological and spiritual well-being what physical pain is to our physical well-being. It's a warning that something is wrong. Yet, we try to ignore it. As one of our then married, but now divorced friends said to the married man who was feeling badly about having an affair with her, “You just have to work past the guilt.” Just as atheists seem obsessed with the Creator God whose existence they deny. So too are atheists obsessed with the sensation of guilt that they say is just an illusion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (1)
      "Now, Christianity teaches that we are conceived with a sinful nature while atheists say that we're born good."

      As they say, citation needed. I'm familiar with the idea that we're born with a bland slate, and a few basic social instincts which are not "good" or "bad", but enable us to fit into a broad variety of social environments, from bushmen to yuppies. That's more like the ability of fawns to walk immediately after birth.
      Like the intuitive sharing children do, or the solidarity they show when another child is mistreated. Primates do the same, some even punish thieves...

      (2)
      You conflate the result of empathy (feeling the other's physical or mental pain almost as if it were one's own) with a god's ledger, bookkeeping, doing sums.
      Instead of teaching empathy and reciprocity (I would not like to feel like the other does now, so I may not do whatever it was that hurt her/him), you refer to a list of dos and don'ts.

      If you do something listed as good, it can't be wrong. If the other side complains, forget it, I'm right, (s)he's wrong. Absolutes.
      So many things have been called "good" by Christianity which we, today, find abominable. Saving black souls by enslaving them. Burning herbalists as witches. Torturing heretics until they revoke, then kill them while they're in the state of grace. Arranged marriages. Forbidding anatomy.
      All seen as pretty good at its time by all Christians. All of them.
      Of course it was absolutely wrong. But who knew? Not the Christians. There was a reason why all the philosophers of the enlightenment were rabidly anti-clerical.

      (3)
      The concept of religious guilt misuses the emphatic wish for harmony, and the startling recognition to have hurt an other. It trains subjects to feel the same when breaking a rule, however petty or senseless that rule may be. The other, the victim, is not important, it's the breaking of the rule that counts. As my mother used to say when I had a fight: "Now Jesus weeps".
      Well, so did my friend Gregor, whose nose was bleeding. It wasn't Jesus I hurt, it was Gregor. People count, not concepts.

      (4)
      And, Rod, you should drop that idea that atheists are "obsessed with the creator god". You are.
      It's not that god is in any way obvious. He's a concept. An explanation. You think he is behind all and everything. Created the world and such, magically out of nothing. When I ask for evidence, you say I have to accept your version first, then there will be evidence...
      I have my obsessions, o yeah. 1960s Ronson butane lighters, Thai food, Cambodian 60s rock. Could talk about that for ages.
      But god? Which one?


      Delete
  10. “The same way? Did you just compare me to heavy criminals, convicted in a legal process, lying about their deeds?”

    Hmm, there was a wise man who once said, “no one has moral superior ground.” Tell me, how do you arrive at the decision that you're a good person who does not stand in need of forgiveness?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Pretty stubborn. Well, aside from what I've already stated:
    Because the few people I hurt forgave me. Because I communicated in a sincere way, was attentive, and usually stopped at the first sign of misunderstanding or pain. If there was pain, I communicated about compensation. Takes a lot of practice, and a responsible and conscious person on the other side. My choice, not easy.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well, aside from what I've already stated:"

    You mean volunteering for three months a year? Ya, that is a good thing. It's three months more than most people give. Those street kids are lucky to have you around.

    On the other hand, what if someone volunteers fours months a year. That would make that man a better person than you. Right? And if someone volunteered six months a year, that would make him quite a bit better person than you. And if someone volunteered 12 months a year, well, in comparison, it would make you look like not such a good person after all.

    You see, when judging goodness, just whose standard are we to use? Yours? Mine? Hitler's?
    There is only one objective standard of goodness and in comparison, "Our good deeds are like dirty rags."

    Could you be a worse human being? Of course. But when the rubber meets the road, it's going to be important to remember that no one can be good enough to be good enough to warrant salvation.



    ReplyDelete