I think fundamentalists and many evangelicals are uncomfortable with all things sexual. After all, they often do not even mention the otherworldly feeling after an orgasm.
What has my being British got to do with anything?
Not that I've ever noticed. I think you mean they don't take positions on the topic of sexuality that you agree with. I'm sure perverts think preachers must be uncomfortable with sex if they don't agree with them on what is and isn't acceptable. Or...maybe wish fundie preachers were just uncomfortable, so they didn't have to face the fact that they're perverts.
Maybe because they don't want to come across as perverts? Is this a topic often discussed across the dinner table where you come from or something? How often and under what circumstance do you expect "fundamentalists" and "evangelicals" to preach about orgasms?
There it is. Yet again the insistence that we are all powerless against sex. The mantra of perverts everywhere.
That's racist.
So, rather than expect them to exercise some modicum of self control in the face of sex, just murder a baby in the womb. Because that's the more reasonable expectation.
And didn't murder their babies for their own convenience, choosing instead to accept responsibility for their behavior. Good for them!
Same as the Muslims are. Same exact versions of “Shari’a Law” on both sides.
You came up with “buddies.” That says a lot about you but nothing about me--except your childish and oblique reference to me as “creepy.”
It certainly was with our family. We were raising a daughter in an atmosphere of sexual fear and discomfort with all things sexual. We made a special effort to take my daughter to see the new babies of our friends. She was able to describe male and female anatomy like adults should do from an early age. I taught her also how to “view” commercials, especially those who used sex as a way to get people to buy stuff.
I see the reversion to childhood name-calling as a silly attempt at speaking assertively and plainly.
Again, your immature insult says much more about you than it does me.
I’m curious. In what way?
You should really listen to those “upright Christian girls” who find themselves alone and pregnant. I suspect some of the young women I know were carrying their own father’s child.
I'm having trouble following the history you're trying to lay out here.
Just making a point. Your judging fundamentalists and evangelicals as being uncomfortable will all things sexual because they don't routinely expound upon the subject of orgasmic afterglow. That's simply perverse.
That actually wasn't necessarily an insult at you, rather the point that arguing from the assumption of powerlessness over one's sexuality is common from the perverse. It probably includes you, considering you're arguing from just that assumption though. Again, this is perverse thinking.
A joke, but with a point. Is it prejudice (and maybe a little bigoted) to assume the poor do not use birth control and present that as an argument favoring abortion? I think so. It certainly portrays "the poor" as, yet again, powerless over their sexuality. I prefer to think they are human beings who can exercise self control.
And what will those "upright Christian girls" say that you think I need to hear that might impact my stance on abortion?
Same here. Doesn't challenge my position on abortion in the slightest. Nor has it theirs.
We raised our daughter to enjoy sex, not get obsessed with it or become afraid of it.
It is an interesting notion that a person’s opinion about sexual topics is condemned as “perverse.” I guess I am still surprised to hear it from folks like yourself.
Then the sexual studies of Freud and Masters and Johnson’s was perverse as well. Yet that perversion put us light years ahead of who we used to be.
The poor don’t develop the same skills we can. They have to worry about the cold and rain and the heat. They have to worry about feeding themselves and their famiies. Birth control is actually far down on their list.
The fact that pregnant girls tend to be religious and uneducated means that their authoritarian, obedience-based family life is not exactly nurturing for women in trouble.
Considering that you seem to view sex as something over which we have no control, I suppose I can understand how you might think this a good idea. And, in fact, why you seem to view abortion as a form of birth control. You must assume it inevitable that your daughter will get pregnant as some point, having no control over her own sexuality and no confidence that she'll avail herself of contraceptives.
I'm quite comfortable characterizing as perverse the idea that fundamentalists and evangelicals should freely and often expound on the subject of orgasms.
Why? Did they also conclude that we have no control over our own sexuality? Because I'm pretty sure they didn't.
Hm. Well, looking around on the internet I find that the Guttmacher Institute says about 70% of abortions are by women who identify as religious. And guess what? About 70-75% of people identify as religious. Religious affiliation doesn't seem to be a factor at all. I will grant you that folks below the poverty level (about 16% of the populace) have 40% of the abortions, but are you really going to argue they're completely ignorant about sex and its inherent risk of pregnancy?
they choose to be raped???
Please answer Sherman's question, either in this thread or in a new one.
So, your point is to be provocative, rational, knowledgeable and astute regarding your statement, that "rape is a choice women make"?
Predictable shock and horror from quite a few here who seem to think that what you actually taught your daughter was to enjoy sin rather than just sex!
You are basically indicting women as the cause of a violent act. How does that not compute to "violence against women"?