How Not to be Used: Part 3 of 3
Dale O'Leary
In the earlier parts of this series, we reviewed the examination made of the Sexual Revolution by the book Love and Responsibility. This work of the future John Paul II revealed that this sexual freedom was fundamentally anti-person. Catholic sexual morality, based on the truth about the human person, is by contrast the path to true love. In the sexual licentiousness, persons are inevitably reduced to objects to be used to maximize the pleasure of others. This creates a ‘Sinful love’ in which the will puts emotion before the person, allowing it to annul all the objective laws and principles which must govern the unification of two persons. We also examined the structure of a utilitarian relationship, its inevitable damage and the reaction of those who feel used.
In this summarizing article, we’ll examine the flawed logic of the sexual revolution, its unintended consequences and the reaction it engendered.
Calculating the Consequences
The Sexual Revolutionaries initially argued that the restrictions of sexual freedom might have been understandable in a time when pregnancy outside marriage had devastating economic consequences and sexually transmitted diseases were rampant and incurable, but modern technology solved this problem. The pill, penicillin, and the new tolerance for out-of -wedlock birth, they argued, made the old prohibitions unnecessary.
This optimism has proven ill-founded, even with advances in contraceptives “unwanted” pregnancies have increased, the devastating effects of fatherlessness are undeniable, and abortion has not become “rare.” Pathogens have taken advantage of the pathways provided by promiscuity. Sexually transmitted diseases unknown only decades ago are now epidemic; some are incurable, some fatal.
The Sexual Revolutionaries are undaunted. In the face of the worldwide HIV/AIDS epidemic, they insist that the answer is more Safe-Sex education, more contraception, and more condoms. However, the spontaneity of unrestricted sexual access which Sexual Revolutionaries promised has given way to the Safe-Sex ” regime of protection. Barriers to disease and pregnancy must be used in every encounter from start to finish. Children must be taught in elementary school how to “negotiate safe-sex.” Sexual Revolutionaries decry the old fears and guilts, but introduce new ones. Omit one of the precautions and the blame is on the careless user not the intrinsically flawed strategy...
In this summarizing article, we’ll examine the flawed logic of the sexual revolution, its unintended consequences and the reaction it engendered.
Calculating the Consequences
The Sexual Revolutionaries initially argued that the restrictions of sexual freedom might have been understandable in a time when pregnancy outside marriage had devastating economic consequences and sexually transmitted diseases were rampant and incurable, but modern technology solved this problem. The pill, penicillin, and the new tolerance for out-of -wedlock birth, they argued, made the old prohibitions unnecessary.
This optimism has proven ill-founded, even with advances in contraceptives “unwanted” pregnancies have increased, the devastating effects of fatherlessness are undeniable, and abortion has not become “rare.” Pathogens have taken advantage of the pathways provided by promiscuity. Sexually transmitted diseases unknown only decades ago are now epidemic; some are incurable, some fatal.
The Sexual Revolutionaries are undaunted. In the face of the worldwide HIV/AIDS epidemic, they insist that the answer is more Safe-Sex education, more contraception, and more condoms. However, the spontaneity of unrestricted sexual access which Sexual Revolutionaries promised has given way to the Safe-Sex ” regime of protection. Barriers to disease and pregnancy must be used in every encounter from start to finish. Children must be taught in elementary school how to “negotiate safe-sex.” Sexual Revolutionaries decry the old fears and guilts, but introduce new ones. Omit one of the precautions and the blame is on the careless user not the intrinsically flawed strategy...
For more go here.
Comments