Your Revolution is Killing Us

MARILYN-MONROE

It is inevitable that advocates for the Sexual Revolution will say all we need is a bit more of it. More orgasms. More sex-ed. More abortion. More contraception. Less guilt. More freedom, man.

But they will never acknowledge that their revolution has been tried and found wanting, wanting being a fairly benign way of saying murderous.

Their revolution has been murderous indeed and the body count grows ever higher. Yet still they want more, just a little bit more.

Pat Buchanan recently wrote, “The French Revolution was many times more terrible than the Bourbon monarchy. The Russian Revolution made the Romanovs look benign.” You could add Mao Tse Tung, who made Chiang Kai-shek look like a schoolboy.

And so it is with the Sexual Revolution; it is many times more terrible than the supposed patriarchy it supplanted, the one where women were forced to stay home, bake cookies and never found their G-Spot.

Many revolutions have impressive body counts. But the Sexual Revolution is far and away the most impressive and it shows no sign of abating, only metastasizing. Well, maybe Plato’s Retreat closed in ’85 but Ashley Madison is alive and well, as are the sex ads at Craig’s List and Backpage.com. Maybe the gay bathhouses closed, but check out the website Grindr. Actually, don’t.

Gay writer Jeffrey Escoffier says, “Central to the Sexual Revolution was the growing acceptance of sexual encounters between unmarried adults.” He says sexual debut came earlier and earlier and that increasing divorce “provided another opportunity for men and women (to a lesser degree) to engage in non-monogamous sexual activity.”

The underlying issue was freeing the sexual id from the religious and societal taboos holding it down. He credits Freud, Wilhelm Reich and pornography with loosening everyone up. Reich “argued that sexual expression (primarily, the orgasm) was natural and that social control of libidinal energies by the family, institutionalized sexual morality, and the state was destructive.”

Sexual Revolution CoverEscoffier says the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s and ’70s “would never have happened without a series of extended battles over obscenity and pornography,” that “these battles helped to create a public space in American culture for sexual speech.…”

It is a wonder to see sexual revolutionaries, just like the communists before them, insist that all we need is just a little bit more. At least the communists thought the breaking of a few eggs might be regrettable but in the long run was beneficial to the omelet. The sexual revolutionaries deny the eggs.

The litany of broken eggs is tedious, certainly, but we must continue to recite it and in the recitation lay it all at the doorstep of the revolutionaries: more than 50 million dead babies in this country alone; almost one million deaths due to AIDS; 19 million new cases of STDs every single year in the United States; millions addicted to pornography; sex trafficking; galloping pedophilia; forty percent of children born without a father in the home. Your mother never heard of chlamydia. Now teen girls get shots to prevent it.

The Sexual Revolution, which Wikipedia oddly says ended in the 1980s, is the heart of the matter. It is the font of all our current difficulties. Many of us work on bits and pieces of it: ending abortion, defending marriage, religious freedom and the like. One person works right at the heart of it, Jennifer Roback Morse, who runs the Ruth Institute in California.

Roback Morse has a Ph.D. in economics and has taught at Yale and George Mason University. She has held fellowships at Stanford, Cornell Law School, and the University of Chicago. For years she has raised the alarm about the Sexual Revolution and its victims. She believes we can make common cause with them; the survivors and walking wounded anyway, and perhaps one day, in the hazy future, end it.

She has published a very helpful collection of her essays called The Sexual Revolution and Its Victims.

She starts by calling the revolutionaries liars.

“All we want to do is lower the cost of divorce to the handful of people whose marriages have irretrievably broken down.”

“All we want to do is allow married couples to use contraception for serious health reasons.”

“All we want to do is provide sexual education for children whose parents might not be responsible enough to do it themselves.”

All lies, she says, told for the purpose of establishing an easily expandable principle. And we have certainly seen these “modest reforms” expand and expand again and again.

She calls these the battle cry of the “ruling class” and like all revolutions, this one has certainly eaten its young, feasting most ravenously on the defenseless, that is, children, and the poor.

Roback Morse describes the modern view of sex as “a recreational activity with no moral or social significance. The freedom we have come to value is to be completely unencumbered by human relationships. We are entitled to end or walk away from any relationship with a person who might legitimately make demands upon us that we don’t want to fulfill. And the reproductive freedom in particular is the right to unlimited sexual activity without a live baby resulting.”

She says the major tenets of the Sexual Revolution are that every person is entitled to unlimited sexual activity, contraception will cure all negative consequences including conception and disease, no one is required to give birth and therefore abortion is an absolute entitlement, any consequences not handled by contraception and abortion are not worth talking about, no one ever gets attached to an inappropriate sex partner, no one ever regrets a consensual sexual encounter, and teen depression linked to hooking up doesn’t exist.

Such tenets are awfully expensive, both in terms of the individuals who live by them and those who are merely collateral damage. The cost to society runs to the hundreds of billions of dollars even if you just look at Federal money spent on the underclass whose problems have been exacerbated exponentially by internalizing the Sexual Revolution.

We watch this week as the Supreme Court ponders whether to constitutionalize yet another adult sexual experiment the cost of which will be born by kids and by society at large.

Roback Morse thinks we are fighting the symptoms—abortion, gay marriage—and not the disease. She proposes something of an Inchon landing. The sexual revolutionaries have been attacking from the front for going on 50 years, their victims strewn out behind them. She proposes a landing behind their front lines, striking at the heart of their movement, counting on the victims of contraception, divorce, abortion, pornography, and promiscuity to assist us.

She is not suggesting that the individual battles cease, only that we open a new front.

As we wait, the body count rises ever higher and all the while the revolutionaries insist the revolution hasn’t really been tried, not yet anyway. All we need is a little bit more: more orgasms, more pills, more sex-ed, more abortion, more freedom man, and then you’ll see the beautiful things we can do for humanity.

Just ignore all those bodies.

Editor’s note: In the image above, Marilyn Monroe appears as a modern Eve.

Austin Ruse

By

Austin Ruse is president of C-FAM (Center for Family & Human Rights), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute focusing on international legal and social policy. The views expressed here are not necessarily those of C-FAM.

  • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

    Corporate America definitely loves the sexual revolution, so it’s no wonder why they are so outspoken in support of it. Selling medication to heal your diseases of sex, medical equipment and facilities to abort babies, vaccinations to pump into little girls (and even boys, they advocate) to prevent diseases…

    • Scott W.

      That’s an important point. I recall a Crisis article about pornography in which one left-leaning Catholic responded that we shouldn’t worry about pornography and concentrate instead on corporate exploitation of the poor. That’s quite a revolution that can warp minds to the point that adherents regard pornography as a cottage industry.

      • Objectivetruth

        Try watching a football or basketball game on TV these days with your kids when these new Cialis/Viagra porn commercials come on. As I frantically grab the remote control to change channels and put on the Disney Channel, there’s a show (Good Luck Charlie) with a lesbian couple playing with their IVF produced child. No kidding.

        I recently heard someone describe our cable line and Internet wifi as “sewage pipes” flowing porn and filth into our houses. So true. I’m getting close to doing the right thing and destroying my flat screens.

        • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

          Sewage pipes…One of the best words to describe cable I’ve heard. Ditched mine 2 years ago and during a recent stay with family, I couldn’t believe the trash that’s on. And the ads! Are we watching a show or ads?

          • Beth

            We moved back into the country ten years ago and have not had cable. I despise TV and haven’t listened to commercial radio in over 20 years. But this box I am sitting in front of is even more destructive to families than the television. The internet and our 24/7, everywhere access to it is being used by the enemy in ways unimaginable to folks. I cannot believe the number of children parked in front of screens all day long and the parents don’t blink an eye! Aaiiiieeeeee!

            As beautiful Marilyn holds the apple, the devil makes sure we continue to bite; to not even notice that we’ve lost control of our passions.

            • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

              Yeah, very good point. I can see how the computer and internet have had a very negative impact on my short life. The trash has replaced the jewels I gained in youth (lots of reading and social interaction and little game systems), and I’ve spent a lot of time filling my mind with rotten death. I find it so sad to see that parents reach for the mobile or tablet to entertain their kids now. How did I ever survive as a child.

          • Thomas J. Hennigan

            I live in Peru and in the warm climate, I notice that women dress so immodestly that they look more like prostitutes. Of course, they complain about sexual harrassment. The media are filling the minds of young guys with pornography and they seem to be surprised if they act on what they dish out to them morning, noon and night. As for TV, there are places where there is no electricity. One the government gives the electricity, the first thing they buy is a TV set and their whole lifestyle changes as they are from then on glued to the idiot box, and it is the end of family life.

            • santiago

              And corporate America is peddling the TV as the last good tool that helped unified families. They are so sad TV is gone and social media is on the rise, since it only helps divide the family, of course those are the ones that do not have stakes in social media companies, if they had they would be defending mobile devices, instead of missing the ‘nice’ and ‘good’ tv.

            • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

              What a great and truthful comment!

              I can’t believe some of the things women are wearing, because you would think they are actually selling sex. Yet then we have feminists screaming at us that we can’t judge women for how they dress, and that we shouldn’t lust over them, yet they are the ones buying into a sex culture and showing every part of themselves off for the very purpose of attention and lust of others. We have to see every curvature of their butt with skin tight pants, their breasts are hanging out with low cut shirts. You can’t even go to a national chain restaurant without a set of breasts almost falling out while being served.

              Call me old fashion, but yesh.

        • Tim Danaher

          Years ago I used “sewage pipe” as a reason for not installing cable in my new house. We found that we could “control” our viewing via the internet, but now that has turned into a “sewage pipe”.

          • We are increasingly moving from Internet viewing to old fasioned DVDs with minimal to no ads. We ditched cable years ago. Nothing is just that entertaining to be bothered with the rotteness of pop-culture. ads.

            • Objectivetruth

              One cold Saturday night we shut off the TV and used a chalk board on an easel with our kids in front of the fireplace and played pictionary, hangman, etc……..the kids loved it, didn’t want to stop. We’ve been putting music on at night and putting a pile of books out and the kid’s are liking it better than sitting in front of a box mindlessly for two hours.

              • That is wonderful! Saturdays is our designated “TV night” and usually devote the rest of the week to reading classic literature and games after prayer, catechesis and Bible reading. Seriously considering making just one Saturday a month TV night.

              • Lisa Hurley

                Great! We will have pandora on and dance or sing to our favourite songs, dad and son will play combat games around the house, battleship board game, scrabble, watch our daughter dance to the sugar plum fairy or swan lake, have children’s classics book night where we all cozy up while dad reads to us all. Family Rosary and / or Divine Office every night. Why drink out of leaky cisterns when you can have living water.

        • Siwash

          I haven’t had a television since 1992. I highly suggest pulling the plug as the ONE easy thing you can do to radically improve your life.

          It really does, you know.

          • Louise

            Absolutely!

          • Pamela Palmer

            You are so right!! There is truly very little worth watching on TV and not only has it become morally offensive, but it is intellectually offensive too. It is frightening actually! The culture is immoral AND dumbed down! I admit to liking shows on history and nature as well as certain cooking shows and some segments of EWTN, but I really limit my viewing…too busy living and I love to read!

        • Yah, Disney had pretty much given up its original artistry and innocence back in the 90’s when it became the blatantly anti-Christian propaganda machine that it is today. Never again will a Mary Poppins or an Alice in Wonderland be able to grace its storyboards.

          The theme parks are now paplably homosexualized and have long lost the “magic” Walt himself was bent on producing for the American family. Fantasy, whimsy, and traditional American lore have become mere footnotes to the multiculti, feministic, gender-fluid ideals of the Leftists in control of the once great American brand.

          • TommyD6of11

            Anglicanae,
            Good point. Clearly, the takeover of Disney was a necessary and deliberate strategic maneuver for the Left. One that has succeeded brilliantly for them.

            It is therefore an interesting question, who masterminded and executed this operation?

            And, might it be possible to launch a counter attack to retake Disney, or, to recreate a new Disney.

        • Sharon

          Please tell me why you have that TV in your home? What is more important your children or your TV?

          • Objectivetruth

            …..eh??

        • Casey Boudreaux

          Excuse me, but I’m going to use this as a good opportunity to rant, if nobody minds.

          When I was kid (16 now), my parents made me sit on the stairs in time-out for calling my brother “stupid” while we were playing with Hotwheels. now, if my 4 or 2 year old brothers get into a fit, they can watch T.V.. If they decide to scream at their sister, they get yelled at. If they whine about candy, they get to play on the kindle(at least until my brother[whom I used to call stupid] takes it over).

          And the stuff my family watches is garbage(as you mentioned)! Ninjago and Chima are okay, but I really think all those horse movies are letting demons into our home! I recall the other Crisis article: Would the Greens Protect St. George’s Dragon?. theres seems to be a never ending cliché of city-slicker-mentality persons falling in love with animals! You know why they haven’t made one where a girl falls in love with a croc? Because, as Egyptian legend will tell you, if your Heart(meaning entire mentality and thought capability, both rational and “meta-rational”, not just passions) is heavier than a feather, the Croc EATS it!!! Whaddaya think of THAT, responsible pet parent!!!!

        • SnowRose

          I agree! I’m only watching the weather, nature shows and some older good decent programs now. Even the news has become a cesspool of hate, slander and fear-mongering, so I stopped watching it a long time ago. Just isn’t worth it anymore!

        • Lisa Hurley

          Cut cable – we did years ago. My husband said he didn’t need the temptation. It’s worth the sacrifice.

        • santiago

          OT If you feel so strong about it then do not watch the games, which only serve to increase and propagate those practices. You are being as much responsible as the people planning the destruction of society from their high rise offices. Stop giving them ratings.

      • Porn Addict

        I recall a Crisis article about pornography in which one left-leaning Catholic responded that we shouldn’t worry about pornography and concentrate instead on corporate exploitation of the poor.
        Pornography is exploitation. What an idiot.

        • santiago

          100% even if a person is well paid and completely willing is exploitation of that weakness.

    • Veritas

      Corporate America also loves SSM. So, will the Supreme’s side with the corporatists? My guess is, yes.

      • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

        Very much so. I’m always suspicious against corporate activism. People miss the point that it’s more about profits, than about actually caring. Apple, for example, should seek better human rights for their workers in China, before being praised as standing for rights in America.

    • St JD George

      I enjoy watching EWTN.

      • DCYinzer37

        EWTN is NO safe haven, what with the lax attitude they’ve had towards Modernists over the years, particularly after Mother Angelica was pushed away from the day-to-day management of the network.

        • St JD George

          Love that logo – sadly disappointed, again. Oh no, don’t throw water on my last channel. I did drop down to a minimum package as a step, and it’ll be the last one to unplug from. True confession, I did turn it off the other day when I heard chummy ole Dolan yucking it up – on the radio.

      • Lisa Hurley

        Church Militant TV for me!

    • It’s more than that. One of the side-effects of divorce is income insecurity, which manifests itself as many women working even though they’d rather be at home. The corporation then pressures people for more and more time, using the expansion of the labor force as a lever. Families come second.

      Deeper cracks in relations between men and women are also leaving many women (unwillingly) unmarried from their late 30s on, because they followed pervasive advice that doesn’t line up with reality. What’s left? Just their jobs.

      Net result: corporations got a lot of women to marry them instead.

      • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

        We have a political party in Canada who wishes to introduce universal childcare, and people herald it as a way to make things more equal for women. They don’t seem to see that it’s hurting ‘the family’, and to the party, it’s about getting more taxes from working women.

  • Vinny

    “Such tenets are awfully expensive, both in terms of the individuals who live by them and those who are merely collateral damage.” I think another result of our societal lifestyle is opiate addiction. Anything to not confront reality.

  • lifeknight

    Well I wish us luck with the new revolution. Just yesterday I had an encounter with a few near 80 year olds. They experienced the “peak” time of the sexual revolution and they were extremely defensive of the women’s point of view. Some had abortion experiences and were quick to particularly defend that sham of a “freedom.” I didn’t even touch on contraception or euthanasia.
    Not sure who we can count on, as our own “forces” are divided on contraception and euthanasia….. Also add those who sympathized with the SSA/SSM affiliations. Our ranks are small no matter where you go for recruits. We are required to fight, however, regardless of our numbers.

    • Vinny

      Good thing that faith the size of a mustard seed produces big results because I struggle for that. We throw the word “faith” around like it’s nothing but, for me it’s the largest and heaviest word in the universe. We are required to fight, however, regardless of our numbers.

    • Ford

      There are enormous numbers of warriors — the major media tries to hide that fact as they are completely politicized. If you have ever made it to the March for Life in DC in the dead of winter, you will see what I mean!

      • lifeknight

        Yes, lots turn out for the March, thank the Lord. That is comforting, but it is much harder to stand up in the public square with a paltry few once you get home. We still must do that regardless of the numbers.
        The March does one really good service for those of us who are raising a Catholic brood. It shows them that there are thousands of people who are enthusiastic about the prolife cause…..not just Mom and Dad and some priests we know who support true Catholic teachings.

        • Ford

          Slay the beast! I got royally shot down by one and almost all at an annual party next door for standing up against the gay rights movement (which is really just a squeaky wheel trying to get more than its fair share of grease). But I held my ground, and lo and behold, was invited back the next year. People have been cowed. Sometimes they need some yahoo with a cattle prod to wake them up. Go for it!

    • 4kidsandacat

      My MIL is one of those. I think people do not like to look back on their lives and think that they have made errors, plus I really do think they convinced themselves that they had actually benefited society by eliminating what they saw as an evil. Yes I do think there was a lack of charitable behavior towards young girls who got pregnant back then, and of course women were not always treated with dignity but as we know the fix for that was even worse. They seem to focus more on the problem that was “solved” than the problems with the “solution”. Fortunately for us, I believe we have a growing generation of people who can see the destruction that those decisions wrought, and they are rebelling against the revolution.

  • john

    True, true–but you don’t mention that for at least one of our political parties, the sexual revolution is its raison d’etre. In other words, the core of nearly every plank in the Democratic Party platform is to make the federal government the guarantor of the so-called rights of the sexual revolution and foot the bill for the medical and social costs of keeping the revolution humming. Contraception and abortion? Must be covered by federal dollars. Speaking the truth about human sexuality? Forbidden as “hate crime.” Out of wedlock births? Not condemned, encouraged (read: more voters in case the abortion option doesn’t take). Teaching our children to abuse themselves and one another? Call that “sex ed” and require it in public schools. The kicker: when anybody tries to call them on it (say, defund PP), the Dem Party claims to be defending “women’s health”–and more votes roll in…

  • Why is it the human gods of the sexual revolution are so suspect? Freud was a drug abusing madman whose entire body of scientific work should be suspect due to how screwed up his brain permanently was. Reich was a child abuser. These are the men sexual revolution it’s admite?

    • Steve Frank

      Let’s not forget about Kinsey the pedophile whose life story Hollywood whitewashed in a film a few years ago. It says a lot about a culture who it’s heroes are. In times past our heroes were those who bled and died to save the lives of others. Today they are sports figures who are “brave” enough to publicly declare their predilection for sodomy. I was reading an article recently that was singing the praises of the pop star Madonna. The author was hailing her as some type of hero in the same category as MLK. Her accomplishments? Freeing women from “sexual repression”. What was most sad about reading the article was the comment section where people expressed gratitude that Madonna had helped bring “freedom” to our culture and how great it was that the oppressive “Ozzie and Harriet” days of yesteryear were long gone. I don’t hold out much hope for this culture. It’s going to take something very cataclysmic like a nuclear war or complete economic collapse to change the current trajectory toward complete sexual anarchy.

      • I had the wrong Riech. This one was even nuttier. He claimed to have discovered a new element, Orgone, which came from orgasms, which he worshiped. He built Orgone Accumulators which he filled by massaging naked patients, and sold them, eventually being put in jail for fraud. Just before the fraud allegations, he claimed UFOs were flying over his insane asylum and releasing DOR- Deadly Orgone Radiation- which he attempted to dissipate with a snake-oil style rainmaking device that looked remarkably like a firework launcher.

      • fredx2

        Madonna was just a pig. I never understood why people did not see her piggishness.

        • Steve Frank

          The article I read talked about Madonna’s new album which includes some hard core Catholic baiting on some of the songs. One song on it is called “Holy Water” and it’s about Madonna receiving oral sex. The water is a reference to her “secretions” and she keeps telling her lover to genuflect and bless himself as he drinks her “holy water”. Then the song echoes a few times how the Son Of God would enjoy it too. The fact that a mainstream artist could release a vulgar and blasphemous song like that with little fanfare shows how completely toxic our pop culture has become.

          • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

            Just read the lyrics…Wow! That’s quite the offensive song. I have to laugh at how she wears a cross. It must be some sort of fashion symbol for her.

    • Nemo

      I took an Introduction to Psychology course in college. That Freud’s work contained many unfalsifiable claims and was thus unscientific isn’t some dark secret. Every psychology expert that I’ve ever encountered has been open to admit this. Freud laid the groundwork for some of the methods of inquiry into the human mind, but nobody uses his ideas as their basis. When writing any psychological paper, it is rarely advisable to use citations over ten years old. “human god”? Hardly. Freud is regarded by psychologists today as a man with some interesting ideas, but not as an unquestionable authority.

      • Just about everything they have come up with about the human brain so far is similar. None of it is hard science, it is full of prejudice and bias.

        • Nemo

          That’s why scientists subject their work to ruthless peer review, to reduce the effects of bias. Ideas which cannot stand up to scrutiny are rejected, and those which can are accepted tentatively. May I ask what about the current understanding of the human brain you object to?

          • The idea of ruthless peer review is as nonsensical as scientific consensus, it merely substitutes the bias of the individual for the bigotry of the mob. It is not a reliable way to sort truth from falsehood when it comes to subjective, non-repeatible complexity.

            • Nemo

              Like I said earlier, do you have any specific examples of bad ideas being affirmed repeatedly through peer review, and good ideas being silenced via peer review?

              • The classic example is continental drift. Modern examples are GMO and Climate Change, both of which are political enough to suffer from mass confirmation bias.

                • Nemo

                  Continental drift is a proven fact, and has been directly observed. We have observed the continents moving, and we’ve observed the destruction of old and creation of new crust at the faults.

                  As for GMOs, I’m genuinely unsure as to what your position on them is, as I’ve heard crackpots on both the left and right with this issue.

                  • It is now, but for over 250 years during the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries anybody trying to get a paper published on Continental Drift was ridiculed.
                    My position on GMO research is irrelevant to the point that like climate “science” and any of the soft sciences, politics has currently poisoned the debate so far as to make so-called peer review just the bigotry of the mob.

  • Tim Danaher

    Austin, great article along with the others that Crisis has published in support of the marriage debate. I’m of the opinion that the American people will not acknowledge the ills effects of the Sexual Revolution until it hits rock bottom. Unfortunately we cannot place our hope and confidence in the societal elites – judges, educators, nor politians – to lead is out of this cultural rot. Our hope rest in Christ, prayer, and fasting. Buckle-up it is going to be a bumpy ride to the bottom.

    • Ford

      I’m afraid the mystery of iniquity always affords opportunity to further sound the abyss. And this in turn affords further opportunity for heroic virtue. The heroes I know are Christian folk of all stripes who do not cave to artificial contraception and two household incomes. The super heroes do their best to add the Family Rosary to their busy day.

  • Michel Lhombreaud

    History will look back on all these present day deniers, not as liberals, but as anti religious bigots, as unscientific (e.g. illogical) fanatics, so blinded by their predjudiced narratives that they actually believed they were the rational ones !

  • russell snow

    Very well said. Sad, but true. Most of the partisans and promoters of the sexual revolution like Marx and Freud were essentially Gnostics and frauds, knowing that there privileged insight into reality were essential untrue. Like the radical secularists, the one thing these frauds will not tolerate is a questioning of their fundamental assumptions. The are no open to true scientific inquiry. Like the partisans of abortion, they are simply no open to reason, like the Soviets, who put people in mental institutions for questioning the premises of Marxism-Leninism. We send them to the universities.

  • russell snow

    sorry for my bad grammar and spelling.

    • publiusnj

      I post without worrying too much about errors (because the comment box is too small to edit before posting) and then I review my post for typos. When I see my mistakes, I use the edit button that appears below your own posts and cure my errors.

  • publiusnj

    Both Corporate America (or better “the Market” since so much of the Sex Revolution is presented by smaller time entrepreneutrs) and the Government support the Sexual Revolution because it tends to cut their addressable market’s (i.e., the people’s) connection to their chief competitor, the Family. And it is increasingly make that competition atrophy. Now a “Family” is not a deep blood relationship but a temporary arrangement that will go away as soon as teh person believes he or she would be better off “free.”

    If sex is disconnected from Marriage, actors are therefore disconnected from Family. The Family can do many things on a non-commercial basis that the Government and the Market would rather provide themselves, in exchange either for money or votes. For example, the Government can address the economic security needs of single woman parents (SWPs) that a husband might otherwise address, so the Government needs to undermine husbands in the eyes of SWPs by any means possible, including the propagation of propaganda such as “women need men like fish need bicycles.” Of course, once the Sexual Revolution takes over, men likewise have little actual need for a wife, given the availability of other alternatives.

    The best proof that Family is competing against Governement for the loyalties of SWPs is afforded by the voting records of MWPs versus SWPs. The SWPs have their security needs taken care of by their daddy, the Democrat party and vote accordingly. Married women don’t succumb to the siren song of Welfare in the same way because they have a support system in their families.

    I imagine that most Government and Market players don’t consciously think about the Family as competition, but most probably have been trained to think of the “consumer” (or “constituent”) as a radically free actor who should be encouraged to think of his/her needs first, last and always (except for a short while after riots). By making people think of themselves in that way, residual family loyalties and “duties” fall away and the Competition is eliminated. No wonder, Democrats love the Sexual revolution!

  • Seamrog

    I appreciate the author’s clear line of thought about all this, and I appreciate Crisis for continuing to publish these important essays.

    My first thought on reading this was “wouldn’t this make for a useful Sunday homily?”

    • Tim Danaher

      For the weeks leading up to the Supreme Court arguments on SS”M”, our homilies have been silent on this issue. Not only SS”M” but Christian persecution in the Islamic lands. We do get a steady diet of “luv”.

  • “Your revolution is killing us”?

    There is a prior problem, isn’t there? The ‘us’ is those of us who are living, but the sexual revolution is grounded on permission to kill a ‘them’, where ‘they’ are people living in the womb. The revolution kills Us because it is fuelled by legal permission to kill Them.

    I would suggest that the phrase ‘sexual revolution’ is inadequate because inaccurate. The late ’60’s brought into being a personal revolution, in that law and God have essentially different understandings of what it means to be a person. God says we have a fixed sex; law says we have a changeable Gender.

    • Not just people living in the womb. Over the last 45 years, four separate supreme court cases slowly removed the right to life from everybody. The abortion one was only the beginning, it was followed by one on police brutality (legalizing the killing of suspects of violent crime who were running), one on Euthanasia, and one on the right of the police to kill the mentally ill in cases where they are a threat to public safety.

      • Yes, but there is a connection between the first/Abortion and the next three. You said the right to live has been slowly removed. That’s true: it’s disappearance from law has required time. But in legally declaring some people to be non-persons, abortion law removes the right to life from everybody, instantly. We cannot have ‘half a principle’ in law. It’s either ‘everybody has the right’ or ‘nobody has the right, but somebody has permission’.

        • I like that and will use it in the future. I bet if I search, I can find a lot more cases systematically removing the right to life from individual groups of people (though anybody can be suspected of a crime they did not commit and sacred, run; or develop a temporary mental illness that renders them unable to follow simple instructions).

      • CadaveraVeroInnumero

        This doesn’t make sense! You are certainly pulling in recent incidents, but what Supreme Court rulings lie behind the “bad cop” cases. (Hopefully this Court never has the opportunity) but the Court has not make a “Roe vs Wide” type of case about euthanasia (as the national courts have in Belgium and The Netherlands).

        Now, since the article was focusing on the Sexual Revolution, how the “bad cop” stories relate? How would they (these recent incidents) never had occured if the S.R. never was? Doesn’t jive.

        I am well acquainted – from way back – with the culture (that is, the pathologies) of the inner city, housing projects (the whole bit). The Sexual Revolution surely did went rolling by, smashing and slaughtering as its passed through. It’s most obvious trophies (body count) was the near extermination of fatherhood. Cops kill aggressive young black men because aggressive young black men never had fathers who gave a damn. In that sense the Sexual Revolution has experimented (its tactics and techniques) with the lives of black men “running away from cops”. But remember, it was the Sexual Revolution (and its agent, the State0 which pinned the bulls-eye on their backs.

        Seen it, man. Been there. The hood knows.

        • All of the rulings seemed to, at first, limit. But they limited in such a way to specifically *enable* certain types of bad cop murders and pave the way for state euthanasia laws.

          Tennesse V Garner, made it legal for cops to use “reasonable force” on people who resist arrest, up to and including death.

          Graham v. Conner, which made police killings of the mentally ill legal, even those who can’t talk coherently (it was about a low functioning autistic).

          Washington v Glucksberg seemed to uphold the state law *against* euthanasia, but in 2008, Washington State voters reversed the state law, and the exact same argument used to uphold State’s rights to prevent euthanasia, was used to uphold State’s rights to enact euthanasia.

          Unintended consequences will bite you *every* time. There is no right to life left in America.

          How are these related? The elites have decided that the products of the sexual revolution have no right to life, thus severing the last connection between sex and procreation.

    • Ford

      The “selfish revolution”.

      • Veritas

        Thanks, Ford, that is the correct word.

        I have a student who was wrecked by his parents separation back in September. The kid was a wreck and hasn’t been able to focus and learn the entire year. He’s almost 15 years old. Then again, who can blame him. I asked him the other day how he is doing psychologically since last September and he said “better.” He also added that both parents are already dating other people. Selfish, yes; but people who don’t really “know” will do these things. If we don’t know but our instincts are good, then kids have a chance to survive the trauma.

        • Ford

          He is carrying a huge burden and I wish him a greater good than the evil that has been visited upon him. Having come from divorce myself, I can offer that the quickest way to lighten the burden is to forgive and love one’s parents, but vow not to repeat their mistakes.

    • 4kidsandacat

      This is actually very relevant! I was listening to Catholic radio where there was a discussion of the term “gender”. Contrary to what we have traditionally understood it to mean (male or female) gender evidently has multiple definitions in modern society! Facebook has many options for gender. There was never a discussion of what these gender options were but I would like to know.

      And I absolutely agree, that this sexual revolution was more about a juvenile desire to let people be selfish and do what they want to do, rather than conforming to an ideal of what is right for mankind. Everything that is destructive in our world today has its basis in pride and selfishness.

    • Nemo

      I am not a transgender, but I have never encountered one who described themselves as “changeable”. Rather, their brain is wired to the attributes of one gender and their body is built for the other.

  • FrankW

    The sexual revolution was the biggest one-liner any man over put over on a woman, and it is unfortunate that so many women have bought into the lie.

    The laws of nature require that sexual intercourse bears with it implicit responsibilities, and that those responsibilities are best handled when the couple is committed to each other and to the children that are produced from their act of intercourse. Once those implicit responsibilities were removed by man, it didn’t take very long for the concept of commitment, and then, love itself, to fall by the wayside.

    We are seeing the results of this mess, and what’s worse, the so-called answers to it. Our own government has been promoting the concept of “safe sex” to our teenagers for the last three decades – as if sexual intercourse is a recreational activity that our teens should be expected to participate in, regardless of whether their parents object. The government (and now many parents unfortunately) sees as acceptable the concept that teenagers have no more self-control than a neighborhood dog roaming the streets in heat.

  • BillinJax

    The truthful answer to THE question which could resolve a lot of this corruption of conscience and help get us back on track is not allowed to even be asked let alone answered. It’s because it shakes the hollowed ground Nancy Pelosi and so many other catholic politicians stand on and which Obama says he ain’t rich enough yet to answer it but we all know it. Life begins at conception!!! And a close second one is that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. The liberal loaded SC is sure to rule against both of these TRUTHS. Since the 1950’s it’s been all down hill for the America God blessed and the world loved and respected.

  • s;vbkr0boc,klos;

    “You see, dear reader, have been sold a lie. You have been told from every television show and comedy routine and political cartoon since you were a child that tolerant and easy-going do-your-own thing vices are willing to live and let live, and that blue-nosed intolerant angry and judgmental virtues, motivated only by hate, are seeking out vice in order to destroy harmless pleasures, and will not leave well enough alone. The opposite is true. Vice is intolerant of virtue and cannot stand to share the same world with it. Saints know all men are sinners and forgive all. Sinners go mad trying to pretend sin is good and goodness is sin, and condemn all.”
    -John C. Wright

    • Chris Cloutier

      “Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying society.”
      Aristotle

      • We dont’ even have tolerance anymore.

        • s;vbkr0boc,klos;

          Not tolerance in the sense of a virtue but rather the medical sense of the word. We are being taught to tolerate ever higher doses of poison.

          • The problem being that the poison can no longer tolerate us.

    • Gail Finke

      He wrote that in 2011! Is that show about the surrogate mother still on network TV? I don’t know the name, I only saw commercials. The woman was having a baby for two gay men because, even though she was gorgeous and smart and her mother was wealthy, she couldn’t find another way to to support herself and her daughter, the cutest cherub who ever lived. During the surrogacy she was living with her stupid, but rich, mother, who “loves the gays… they’re great hairdressers” (or some such line). After she opines this, the cherub girl looks at her and pronounces “Grandma! You’re a bigot!” That was on the commercial for the premier. I remember it because it so summed up the weirdness of “tolerance.” You tolerate your rich mother because, well, she’s RICH and is willing to financially and emotionally support you and your dependent child no matter what stupid thing you do, but you still get to roll your eyes at her and correct her errant opinions — and YOU’RE the big-hearted, virtuous one because you grace her with your dependent presence.

  • Veritas

    I’m still not sure what “attacking the Sexual Revolution looks like, and this piece does not say it; it just says “we must rely on its victims to assist us.”

    Certainly, attacking the symptoms is logical because the symptoms are the visible enemy. So, how does one attack a Revolution, or what does the counter-revolution propose as a strategy? Can we turn back the clock? Can we ban or reduce the media’s role in selling sex and sin?

    • We can encourage the victims to tell their stories publicly. In fact, I think one potential useful penance for a Rachel’s Vineyard confession should be to write out an autobiography and give it as a talk to whomever will listen. I met a woman who did this for her penance after an RV retreat, and her pain of missing her only chance to be a mother due to an abortion had the whole room in tears. Likewise, children of gay parents often have particularly sad stories to tell, and we all know children of divorce that have to deal with feelings of neglect and love/hate problems.

      The more people see the wounds, see the casualties, the less of a hold the sexual revolution will have on our society.

      We may not be able to ban the media’s role in selling sex and sin, but we can have an equal or greater competition to their market share in selling morality.

      • Veritas

        Yes, telling the stories of the shipwrecks. I’ve often counseled the kids I teach, and my own, that when talking about religion or morality, there are visible reasons for the “Thou shalt not’s.” When God said, “Thou shalt not…” it wasn’t “just because you’ll piss Me off,” it was “Because I love you and don’t want you or the other party to get hurt…I don’t want you to suffer from needless pain.” Or as Fulton J. Sheen said, we will always be subject to suffering in the form of certain uncontrollable events, but we get a double dose of pain and suffering when we freely choose sin.

        Discussing the consequences of sin is much more effective than what we used to do when we said, “But that is a sin.” Of course, back then, when someone said those words, people may have taken heed. There’s nothing wrong with teaching morality within the context of Catholicism, but people need to understand the connection between Catholicism as a way of life and Catholicism as a dogmatic system of rules without meaning. Some people will have learned the truth about Catholicism the hard way.

  • Veritas

    The Sexual Revolution will not be dead until its last victim is dead. 1980?

    Add to the list of Sexual Revolution casualties:

    Greater numbers of unhappy women.
    Progressives demand more money for education. Why? Kids can learn, but this becomes much more difficult when they come from broken homes: “Where’s your homework, your supplies?,” I ask. “At my father’s house.” And so on.

    Yes, by fracturing the family, the Sexual Revolution adversely affects the innocent souls who don’t do well in school and who won’t know what hit them when they become adults.

  • Siwash

    I’ll check out Roback Morse’s work. This is an amazingly important topic: the Democratic Party really has now taken the whole “everybody have an orgasm” idea as its chief political impetus. Or so it seems.

    Austin: I’d suggest you write a book on the leaders of the sexual revolution. . . those persons advancing these ideas. . . and note particularly their questionable and sometimes disturbed personalities and sexual practices. These people who have publicly advanced odd sexual notions often come from curious backgrounds—and have personal histories that might bear more scrutiny.

  • Big D

    This is so true and I think the broader theme is one of the greatest arguments for Christianity – we now live in a time with a generation or two of abortion on demand, no fault divorce, abandoning of “old fashioned” ideas around cohabitation, and can anyone out there say the world seems like a better place? Hell no.

  • St JD George

    Perversion will run it’s course after enough bodies are consumed and the soul slayer has had his fill, satisfied after gorging on enough carcasses to go hibernate for awhile. When the dust settles and people open their eyes to the carnage and defiled nature around them, there will be Jesus with his arms opened, standing where he has always stood, beside us.

  • St JD George

    Ain’t ever going to happen they say …

    by NICK HALLETT1 May 201550

    Green Party leader Natalie Bennett has said her party would consider allowing polygamous marriages and civil partnerships in the UK.

    Speaking in a Q&A session with PinkNews readers, the Green leader responded to a question from Redfern Jon Barrett, who asked: “As someone living with his two boyfriends in a stable long-term relationship, I would like to know what your stance is on polyamory rights. Is there room for Green support on group civil partnerships or marriages?”

    Bennett responded: “We have led the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation.”

    One of the leading criticisms levelled by opponents of gay marriage was that it could create a ‘slippery slope’ that would lead to marriage being redefined in other ways, including allowing more than two people to enter into a union.

    At the time the bill creating gay marriage was going through the House of Commons, Conservative MP Matthew Offord asked: “Why is the government saying there should be same sex marriages? Why should it not also be blood relatives? Why should it not also be polygamists? It seems they are rushing this forward and they have not thought out what the consequences are going to be.”

    His colleague Craig Whittaker also said: “What will our successors be discussing and have to legislate for in the future? Polygamy? Three-way relationships? Who knows what else?”

    Earlier this week, the Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology Congress heard that polygamy quadruples the risk of heart disease. Dr Amin Daoulah, with the King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, said: “We found an association between an increasing number of wives and the severity and number of coronary blockages.

    “This could be because the need to provide and maintain separate households multiplies the financial burden and emotional expense. Each household must be treated fairly and equally, and it seems likely that the stress of doing that for several spouses and possibly several families of children is considerable.”

  • Objectivetruth

    Excellent article from Lifesite news on how legalized gay” marriage in Canada has led to an absolute disaster for many areas including free speech and religous freedom:

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/gay-activists-claim-redefining-marriage-wont-hurt-anyone-but-thats-a-lie.-j

    • 4kidsandacat

      I’ve long said that this has less to do with gay marriage than it has to do with destroying institutions that provide moral structure in society. Justice Kennedy suggested this obliquely in the arguments presented before the Supreme Court this week. If gay marriage is pronounced a right, then churches will attempt to resist by not performing them. If they refuse to perform them, they will lose their tax exempt status. Some churches will close, others will cave. What’s happened in Canada is not the end game, but it is the progression of the expected outcome here.

  • CadaveraVeroInnumero

    Theodore Seder, below, made (attempted) a point about the Sexual Revolution and the cops shooting black men in the back – I think.

    Anyway, a response:

    Still, Theodore, your point doesn’t make sense.

    You attempted to pull in recent incidents, about cops shooting black men “in the back as they are running away”, as incidents of the Sexual Revolution; suggesting that the Supreme Court, as it did in Rose vs Wade regarding abortion, had made rulings permitting such wanton murder of defenseless black men. Do cite those rulings. You also included euthanasia (which is closer to the topic of the article). Even there which session, case ruling, judgment, has the Supreme Court made about euthanasia? Not that I would ever wish this sitting panel of Justices to ever review such a case? As of yet, the Supreme Court has not slid into moral chaos on an industrial scale – regarding this issue – as has Belgium and The Netherlands.

    Pray not. But back to the subject of dead black men.

    You tell me, since the article was focusing on the Sexual Revolution, how do your “bad cop-shooting-running-away-black-men” stories relate? You dragged them in so you must demonstrate the relationship – maybe through a negative. So, pray tell, how could these recent incidents never had occurred if the Sexual Revolution never was? If the Sexual Revolution never was these black men would never have died.

    In one sense you’re correct. But the causal target (so to speak) is not “bad cops”. Far from it.

    I am well acquainted – from way back – with the culture (that is, the pathologies) of the inner city, housing projects (the whole bit). The know the hood far too well. The Sexual Revolution certainly did roll by, smashing and slaughtering as its passed through, feasting upon the dead, the not so dead, and the never been. Black bodies all.

    To my mind (and experience) the Sexual Revolution’s greatest sought for war trophy was the near extermination of fatherhood in the black community (nuclear extinction in the inner city).

    Cops kill aggressive young black men because aggressive young black men never had fathers who gave a damn. There!

    The Sexual Revolution has experimented (fine-tuned its tactics and techniques) upon the lives of black men. How? By engineering the black culture so that black men never know(are never taught) how to be black boys. The Sexual Revolution went into the hood, fine-tuning its tactics and battle plans, by recruiting black boys to get down with sex at a young age (far younger than it would have, at the time, been allowed to do in suburbia); further, the Sexual Revolution primed black boys to glorify violence (early) as a scent marker of “independence” and supposed “manhood” they had no business seeking. As war booty, the Sexual Revolution destroyed a once well-entrenched cultural of courting in the black community. Black boys no longer know how to court (partially because black girls no longer know how be courted).

    The Sexual Revolution won because, in frightful numbers, black boys do not know how to properly separate themselves from their mothers/grandmothers/aunties. They do not know the how-to for they are (again, in frightful numbers) fatherless. Within that great empty vacancy black boys – entering into a manhood that is never quite there – are not introduced into a discipline which prepares him for a life of work (and the satisfaction that is attached to it). This is how the Sexual Revolution (and its enabling agent, the State) pinned the bulls-eye on the back of black men “running away from cops” (if that’s even the case).

    Seen it, man. Been there. Maybe I should stall and tell a story or two about what was once called the Pink Palace in San Francisco (the tales I could tell); or how a certain vile stream from the Castro District flowed down into the Filmore, Hunters Point, Bernal Heights, or the projects off the 101 & 280, swooping up fatherless flesh.

    The hood knows.

    [To you from the Mother Lode]

    • Veritas

      Have you written a book?

      • CadaveraVeroInnumero

        No.

  • Johnny Rango

    We heard all this before, and we believed that our priests were exemplars of the satisfactions of living a celibate life. Then it came out that many of our priests were so sexually frustrated that they turned to the weakest members of their congregation to satisfy their desires.

    We heard it all before, and Catholic couples were enjoined to have as many children as possible. Now we learn that extremely large families (which are the result of a marriage that forbids contraception) tend to be a huge burden on all members of that family.

    And lately we’re hearing that gays, and those who experience transgender desires, should be bold enough to face these desires in the light of Catholic truth. The Catholic truth, we are told over and over again, is that there is nothing inherently shameful about such desires as long as they are not acted upon. And yet, I just looked into that Catholic gay outreach site known as “Courage,” and despite the fact that studies indicate that at the very least, 15% of our clergy are less than hetero, can find not a single Catholic priest giving his testimony about living with and overcoming same-sex desires. All that’s there is a Fr. Check, giving a lecture in the grand tradition of the Priest Who Surely Must Be Heterosexual (though he declines to ever speak about himself), And Is Trying to Help the Gays and Transgendered Out of the Goodness of His Unimpeachably Purified Heart.

    • Seamrog

      Yawn.

      • Johnny Rango

        Feel free to tell me why what I wrote bores you, if you can.

        • GG

          It is standard gay propaganda.

          • Johnny Rango

            If you’re implying I’m gay, you’re wrong. I’m not.

            However, according to the John Jay report, upwards of 15% of Catholic clergy are gay. I didn’t make this up, you can read it for yourself. It’s reality — despite all the training, all the sacraments, all the prayers, all the counselling, thousands of priests have been and are gay. Nature will out (no pun intended).

            If there is propaganda here, it might be the unrealistic boilerplate of this essay, which speaks of human sexuality in rather unrealistic terms.

            • GG

              I am stating you assert gay propaganda. Your personal status does not matter.

    • cestusdei

      I see one of the revolutionaries is with us and peddling the same wares.

      • Johnny Rango

        The idea that celibacy isn’t normal human behavior isn’t a revolutionary idea. It’s common sense, and Biblical.

        • Ford

          Catholics realize we are no longer in the Garden of Eden and try not play too much “make believe”. Catholics have identified these things called temptations which we pray to God for help to resist. (As an aside, Catholics believe the existence of God is a truth obtainable through reason alone.) Temptations come from three sources: yourself (bodily desires, attachment to impure thoughts, etc.), the world (excesses of all sorts, false idols, etc.), and Satan and his minions (intelligence well beyond our own, but a dissipated will due to their vice). Catholics believe the practice of virtue leads to happiness in this life and the next, and that vice leads to unhappiness.

          • Johnny Rango

            Yes, but the point is that even with all of that, even many priests fall to temptation, to say nothing of most Catholics, who are not trying to live a scrupulously chaste life and manage their families with NFP.

            It’s fine to be idealistic, reality always has the last word.

            • Ford

              Catholics would say it is necessary to put the higher reality of the spirit over the lower reality of the flesh. Not that the flesh is bad, but that since the fall, things are upside-down, and the flesh is being a bit of a bully (you realize this reality when you raise children). That you can site failures in this regard does not alter God’s law, written on our hearts, or that heroes do not exist. The heroes make many sacrifices for others in peace — oftentimes, you would never know they are there. Interestingly, there is a sin in Catholicism known as being “scrupulous”, which is a sin against the theological virtue of hope. The key here is to ask for grace, make an effort, persevere, and ultimately divide and conquer vice as in weeding a garden.

        • GG

          Celibacy is not contrary to man’s nature.

          • Johnny Rango

            Issac Newton was asked what was his greatest accomplishment. IT was thought he’d say of of his many scientific discoveries, but he said it was his lifelong celibacy, because of how difficult it was to go a lifetime celibate.

            • redfish

              I’m a lifelong celibate, so far. Its not difficult at all. And I haven’t had the desire to molest any children yet.

            • GG

              How is that relevant?

        • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

          Celibacy is also Biblical, as well noted by Paul.

          • Johnny Rango

            Slavery is also Biblical, according to Paul.

            In any case, Paul said 1 Corinthians 9:5, “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?”

            • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

              And so is stoning somebody caught in adultery, yet our virtues of mercy and charity prevail.

              Since we’re picking Bible passages to prove our points:

              1 Corinthians 7:8-9
              To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

              (Those who are able to practice celibacy are called to a higher standard of living and control)

              1 Corinthians 7:26-28
              I think that in view of the present[d]distress it is well for a person to remain as he is. Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a girl[e] marries she does not sin. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that.

              32-35
              I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord.

              You can clearly see from 32-35 that those who are called to celibacy are called to a higher standard in service of the Lord, being able to give their full attention to serving Him and not a family. Not everybody is called to do it, and those who misread a call may be failing.

              • Johnny Rango

                Thanks for the citations. I read something a bit different in them: Even in that era when the Son of Man’s return was immanently expected, sexuality was still an issue with the early Christians. One might expect that in those simpler times, many hundreds of years before the sexual revolution, that sexuality wouldn’t be a problem, that things were more of less perfect back then. But as history shows us, sexuality is always something of a problem.

            • GG

              Not all slavery is chattel slavery.

              • Johnny Rango

                Oh brother…

        • cestusdei

          It is normal. Homosexual acts are abnormal. Contraception is abnormal. You have just bought into the idea that abnormal is fine and dandy. Look around, it isn’t.

          • Johnny Rango

            Life long celibacy is normal?

            • cestusdei

              For those called to it, yes.

              • Johnny Rango

                If being “called to” a particular form of sexuality is what makes it normal, then the argument for celibacy is awfully close to the argument for the legitimacy of ss attraction.

                In any case, we need to take history seriously and not try to explain it away: a good number of people felt obliged to be “called to” celibacy, and it didn’t work out so well. And instead of trying to find a rational reason for why it didn’t work out so well, the Church tried to cover the not working out so well up.

                The Church (and the author of this piece) need to question just why humanity has turned from the Church’s teachings to the “sexual revolution,” and is showing no interest whatsoever in going back to the olden days.

                • GG

                  Celibacy is not a “form of sexuality”.

            • Guest_august

              here is the thing:a naked man, Adam, and a naked woman, Eve, who were (1) in love with one another; who were (2) all alone in a beautiful garden; who went (3) everywhere together, did not realize that they were each and both naked.
              .
              This means Adam and Eve were unaware of their sexuality as expressible in the animal function of carnal copulation.
              .
              In short, naked Adam and naked Eve did not have sex, and did not engage in the sex act until they disobeyed God – by listening to the Devil, the ancient Serpent – and eating the Forbidden Fruit.
              read more: http://popeleo13.com/pope/2014/08/12/category-archive-message-board-95-st-augustine-on-sex/

    • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

      Ah yes, a few apples that might have been a bit rotten spoils the entire barrel of hundreds of thousands.

    • GG

      The desires are deviant. They are not ordered correctly. An overly benign assessment is given by those seeking to undermine the truth.

      • Johnny Rango

        “Deviant” is defined as behavior outside the norm. Experience shows us that the human norm is neither a family of 11 children. nor is it lifelong celibacy. These are extremes that are deviations from “normal” human behavior.

        • GG

          It deviates from the norm established by nature. It is unnatural.

          The other examples you cite are not contrary to nature.

          • Johnny Rango

            Homosexuality obviously exists, and can’t be wished way or prayed away. Therefore saying it’s unnatural is a personal judgement. One can just as easily say that clerical celibacy is “unnatural” because natural law and biblical teachings obviously direct us to be fruitful and multiply.

            • GG

              Homosexuality is not natural just as cancer is not natural.

    • Scott W.

      We heard it all before, and Catholic couples were enjoined to have as many children as possible.

      Citation please.

      • Johnny Rango

        Are Catholics allowed to use contraception? No.

        Are Catholics now told to use NFP? Yes.

        Does NFP work? Not really, according to NIH.

        In any case:

        “Sacred Scripture and the Church’s traditional practice see in large families a sign of God’s blessing and the parents’ generosity” (CCC 2373).

        • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

          – Saying something is a blessing and saying something is a requirement are two different things

          – Everyone will have you believe that natural family planning doesn’t work at all, yet there is clear peer-reviewed research that demonstrates it does, at high success rates.

    • 4kidsandacat

      I have no idea what you are going on about. Has anyone suggested a celibate life for all? And what’s with the suggestive intimations about Father Check? Where are you going with this? I remember getting married. I don’t remember ever having been told to “have as many children as possible”. I also remember having been an NFP instructor. Never was it mentioned that people were to have “as many children as possible”. Where are these “facts” that you are “citing”? I think it is a settled fact that the priests who were guilty of preying on the “weakest members of the congregation” were not doing it out of a sense of sexual frustration”; these were predators who disguised themselves as the shepherd, and it was rare.

      It would be far more realistic for you to replace the pronoun “we” in your above statement with “I”.

      • Johnny Rango

        I didn’t suggest anything about Fr. Check; the point is that he’s not identifying as a priest who struggles with ss attraction. The point is, there are no priests identifying as such, yet the Church is setting up sites such as “Courage” that make the facile claim that they want people with ss attraction to come forward and join their special community for ss attracted Catholics. Given that (according to the John Jay report) at least 15% of Catholic priests are gay, this is a project that doesn’t ring true.

        As for NFP, NIH says it doesn’t really work, and given that the RCC says no to any other form of contraception (and NFP is contraception), it’s a stretch to say the Church doesn’t want it’s married to not have large families.

        As for priests no longer “disguising themselves,” see again my 1st paragraph. If you really think a great number of Catholic priests aren’t gay, you’re rather naive. The whole “gay infiltration because Vatican II” excuse for the child sex abuse scandal is weaker than a cup of nickel coffee.

        • GG

          All that propaganda in one post. Might be a record.

          • Johnny Rango

            Not propaganda G. The John Jay Report reported that “homosexual men entered the seminaries in noticeable numbers from the late 1970s through the 1980s”,and available figures for homosexual priests in the United States range from 15–58%. A 2002 Los Angeles Times nationwide poll of 1,854 priests (responding) reported that 9 percent of priests identified themselves as homosexual, and 6 percent as “somewhere in between but more on the homosexual side.” Asked if a “homosexual subculture” (defined as a “definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary”) existed in their diocese or religious order, 17 percent of the priests said “definitely,” and 27 percent said “probably.” 53 percent of priests who were ordained in the last 20 years (1982-2002) affirmed such a subculture existed in the seminary when they attended.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Roman_Catholic_priests#Estimating_numbers

  • jimbo_jones

    From personal experience, I can say that pornography addiction is far more insidious that other addictions such as smoking, boozing, or gaming. Smoking mildly weakens your body but is somewhat enjoyable. It may be a secular sin, but it is no Christian sin. Boozing has a build-in warning mechanism in the hangover – eventually, after yet another vicious headache, you tone things down. Gaming & the Internet can consume a lot of hours, but they are not as psychologically damaging as pornography. That is to say, games can be good for one in moderation – surely Popes have played chess?; but pornography is no good in any doses. Pornography damages the mind and the spirit, is insatiable and horribly addictive, and is a new plague particular to our modern age of information.

  • Tom Saltsman

    “The Russian Revolution made the Romanovs look benign.”

    Just because the act of starving millions of undocumented peasants to death by systematic deprivation and theft is less dramatic than the French guillotine makes the former act no less murderous!

    Perhaps the former act of Russia’s “Christian” Romanov’s is even more depraved because it is so dishonest, deep-seated and far-reaching in its passionless, day-to-day practice. Any decent person would agree, including John the Baptist, Christ, and St. James who clearly, repeatedly, and without apology, condemned the rich for their intransigent blindness. “Man in his riches is like the beast that perishes (Psalm 49:12).” In other words, rich people are as stupid as animals. They are the pigs and dogs that Christ warned against. Try to take away the very thing which is destroying their minds and souls and they attack you.

    To any fair-minded, serious student of history, Buchanan’s hogwash has absolutely no basis in fact. Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover would have loved it. Like the homosexuals in the Nazi Party, these phonies thrived on fascist dishonesty like a babe on mother’s milk. On behalf of those who Americans who sympathized secretly if not openly with Hitler, post-war crypto-fascists turned the American people against the honest worker, FDR, his Congress, and Churchill. How often do we need to remind you that these parties saw Joseph Stalin as a worthwhile ally? They weren’t morally bankrupt or stupid. Neither was Gen. Smedley Butler who said he was asked to help Wall Street fascists stage a coup in the early thirties.

    In fact, the Russian Revolution of October 1917 was one of the LEAST bloody in history. The ruling parties had already fled Moscow and swarms of peaceful workers were walking almost dazed in the streets. Led by Lenin, the Bolsheviks (that’s Russian for majority) took the reigns of power that the working peasants had long hoped for. It was only in the anticipated lead-up to Hitler’s invasion of 1941 that Soviets (and they take credit to themselves along with Stalin) began to panic and resorted to hysterical actions that resulted in such lasting controversy. Knowing the capitalists were out to sabotage any manifestation of socialism–especially if it proved successful–Soviet society was constantly on edge and looking for bogeymen under every bed.

    It was the White Army defending centuries of injustice propagated by the over-privileged classes that made Russia’s civil war bloody. What makes Buchanan’s statement so especially odious are characters like Catherine the Great who traded serfs like they were baseball cards all the while living worse than a street prostitute. And he defends this greedy, pretentious harlot who wasn’t even Russian! Shameless!

    Oh, how I long for a Catholic Church that is neither too far to the left or too far to the right! Does anyone know where I might find one? I’m sure there are millions like me who support the honest worker against his fascist, corporate enemies while supporting the teachings of Christ about the family. I can’t be the ONLY one.

    • Austin Ruse

      I suspect Buchanan meant not the immediate revolution but the revolution that included Lenin and Stalin and killed millions.

    • Scott W.

      Oh, how I long for a Catholic Church that is neither too far to the left or too far to the right! Does anyone know where I might find one?

      I’ve never cared much for Buchanan’s thinking. I recall watching him give a tour of his workspace which had tons of books, but I noticed so many of the titles were consensus history that I thought it might as well be the history section of Barnes and Noble.

      However, I found your comments to be full of gratuitous haughty derision that no one here deserves. I’m perfectly willing to entertain the awfulness of the Romanovs. I can do that because I am not willing to give people the back of my hand over it because as saying goes, win an argument, lose a soul.

    • JP

      “In fact, the Russian Revolution of October 1917 was one of the LEAST
      bloody in history. The ruling parties had already fled Moscow and swarms
      of peaceful workers were walking almost dazed in the streets. Led by
      Lenin, the Bolsheviks (that’s Russian for majority) took the reigns of
      power that the working peasants had long hoped for.”

      Yes, the “proletariat” got exactly what they hoped for. There was Lenin’s ruthless implementation of “war socialism” (he attempted to mimic Wilson in this regard), which saw the execution of 10s of thousands in the Tambov province in 1918. Then there was his war against the Nepmen (whom he dubbed “social capitalists”) from 1918-1920. In Kronstadt he butchered Russian sailors and other revolutionaries for the crime of profiteering. All they wanted was to get paid and earn a living for their toils. But, Lenin wasn’t satisfied. In 1920 he launched a disastrous invasion of Poland, which saw his revolutionary forces crushed in a Polish counter-offensive.

      The revolutionary period also saw the the mass killings of Tartars in the Caucuses and Crimea; efforts to crush Islamic peasants in Kazakhstan, and Chechnya (efforts that continue to this day under Putin). We will never know the true number of Russians who died under Lenin’s thumb – but many historians put the number easily in the millions. And we know that Stalin continued the perpetual revolution against the Russians. Before the advent of the Second World War, the number of murdered Russian subjects went into the tens of millions.

      • 4kidsandacat

        Precisely! I don’t think anyone was saying that the Romanovs were blameless.The point being made was that the “cure” was worse than the “disease”.

  • Gregory

    “Their revolution has been murderous indeed and the body count grows ever higher. Yet still they want more, just a little bit more.” The nature of self-gratification (which we then call addiction or other innocuous terms). Are not these revolutions the collective gratifications, or “glorifications” if I may, of man by man. Gratification vs. mortification. Indulge or deny. The way of perdition or the way of the Cross. It is unimaginable how the Evil One’s hatred of men must burn as the soul of Judas is won. More, just a little bit more.

  • BXVI

    “All lies, she says, told for the purpose of establishing an easily expandable principle. And we have certainly seen these “modest reforms” expand and expand again and again.”
    The same is unquestionably true of the move to permit communion for the divorced and remarried. Anyone who can’t see this for the Trojan horse that it is can only be described as willfully ignorant.

  • St JD George

    Wednesday, students from Skutt Catholic High School in Omaha, Nebraska, marched in support of their gay English teacher who had been fired after getting “engaged” to his partner, according to local reports.

    In December of last year, English teacher and speech coach Matthew Eledge became engaged to his partner Elliot Dougherty. Thinking the school would take no objection, Eledge immediately told the administration his future plans and received a less than satisfactory response.

    According to a Change.org petition, the administration told Mr. Eledge that “he would not be invited to teach next year” and that “if he told students, he would be fired immediately” since same-sex “marriage” stands in direct opposition to Catholic teaching.

    The march Wednesday was for the annual Hawk Walk meant to raise money for the school’s financial aid program, but students used it to protest the administration by wearing shirts emblazoned with the he message “I support Mr. Eledge,” along with the Human Rights Campaign “=” sign (the organization whose co-founder Harry Bean had just recently been indicted for “sex abuse and sodomy of a 15-year-old Oregon boy”).

    Student Hannah Pachunka captured the scene in a tweet:

    The back of the shirts included a quote from Jesus, saying, “Love one another as I have loved you.” Apparently, “if you love me, then you will keep my commandments” didn’t make the cut.

    Skutt Catholic School has stood by their decision to fire Eledge, saying they have an obligation to uphold Church teachings and properly Catechize their students. In a letter to the Skutt Catholic community, school president Jon McMahon wrote the following:

    If a staff member cannot commit to Catholic church teachings and doctrines, he or she cannot continue to be on staff at Skutt Catholic.

    As a Catholic school we stand firmly with the Archdiocese of Omaha and our Catholic Church in the support and upholding of the Church’s teachings as they are defined.

    We owe it to our students to give them the best formation in the faith, to which we witness by teaching and example. At the same time that we affirm the Church’s teachings in the areas of morality, we also affirm Christ’s mandate to love. It is important that we help all who wrestle with this situation to understand the Church’s teachings and to firmly ground that seeking of understanding in truth and in love.

    The Change.org petition has since garnered over 95,000 signatures. Mr. Eledge has stated that he is “humbled” by all the support.

    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/omaha-catholic-students-march-support-fired-gay-teacher

    • Veritas

      “Gay” teachers teaching in Catholic schools? Why such a rash of gay men and women suddenly becoming Catholic school teachers?

      Next, we’ll see the banner with “Mission Accomplished” hanging from the school doors when the state shuts them down for discrimination.

      Of course, our troll friends would certainly disapprove of Christians who scheme such plots in the name of sexual freedom.

    • GG

      The Bishop should publicly state such an illicit union is contrary to the will of Jesus. Plain and simple. No wiggle room.

    • Ford

      A school or person may call themselves Catholic, but it is often laughable. The “Catholic” high school in our area is occupied by “Catholic” families with one or two kids….

  • Louise

    “All lies, she says, told for the purpose of establishing an easily expandable principle. And we have certainly seen these “modest reforms” expand and expand again and again.”

    That’s right. They introduced “no-fault” divorce with the LIE that it was to help battered wives. Yet women are more likely to be battered by their live-in boyfriend and in any case, no woman needs a divorce simply to leave her abusive husband.

    Lies, lies, lies.

  • Siwash

    This doesn’t even begin to go into all the problems associated with single parenthood.

  • tj.nelson

    To quote:

    “Roback Morse describes the modern view of sex as “a recreational activity with no moral or social significance. The freedom we have come to value is to be completely unencumbered by human relationships. Roback Morse describes the modern view of sex as “a recreational activity with no moral or social significance. The freedom we have come to value is to be completely unencumbered by human relationships. We are entitled to end or walk away from any relationship with a person who might legitimately make demands upon us that we don’t want to fulfill.

    I think that attitude is the reason there is a vocation crisis as well, why people don’t persevere:
    “We are entitled to end or walk away from any relationship with a person who might legitimately make demands upon us that we don’t want to fulfill.”

  • Jacob Hubbard

    This article is one of the dumbest articles I’ve ever read. This paragraph in particular:

    ”’She says the major tenets of the Sexual Revolution are that every person is entitled to unlimited sexual activity, contraception will cure all negative consequences including conception and disease, no one is required to give birth and therefore abortion is an absolute entitlement, any consequences not handled by contraception and abortion are not worth talking about, no one ever gets attached to an inappropriate sex partner, no one ever regrets a consensual sexual encounter, and teen depression linked to hooking up doesn’t exist.”

    Is complete nonsense that it’s an embarrassment that it even shows up in this article.

    • Nice substantive rebuttal to this article.

      Or, you could explain why the above points are “nonsense”.

      • Nemo

        “every person is entitled to unlimited sexual activity”

        I hang around a quote archive website which is decidedly left leaning. Some of the most hilarious reactions are to quotes by MRAs and incels who espouse that very idea. There are good condemnations of radfems too, but they tend to go the other way.

        “no one is required to give birth”

        Collectively, this is false, but individually, this is true. If a couple doesn’t want to have kids, and so uses contraceptives or birth control to avoid it, nobody is advocating that their doors should be kicked down and they be hauled off to court.

        “NO ONE ever gets attached to an inappropriate sex partner”

        Who says that?

        “NO ONE ever regrets a consensual sexual encounter”
        Who says that?

    • GG

      Why?

    • Austin Ruse

      Well that settles that!

      • Johnny Rango

        It rather does. “Inchon landing”?

        The question goes begging: If the the results of the sexual revolution are so much worse than the days of yore…when why isn’t humanity clamoring to renounce birth control and return to the Golden Age when happy women placidly (or not) bore 10 children and stayed married for life?

        Even the uber Catholic Filipinos are saying “no” to the Church’s teachings on sexuality.

        • Austin Ruse

          You hold that a few less orgasms deserved to be answered hundreds of millions of deaths?

          • GG

            Their god is orgasm. Period.

          • Johnny Rango

            You mean the deaths that occur when the fertilized ovum doesn’t adhere to the uterine wall?

            • GG

              He speaks of moral evil not just physical evil.

            • Austin Ruse

              50 million surgical abortions in US alone. Nice going! And how bout all those AIDS deaths. Nice work!

              • Veritas

                Austin:
                1969-70 seems to me the time period marking pre and post SR. I say this because ’70 no fault divorce took effect in California; ’70 was three years before Roe went into effect, and around this time Deep Throat becomes the film that seems to kick of Big Pornography and allows Larry Flynt and others to become household names.
                I would like to see some research showing pre and post 1970 statistics evincing the harm done after 1970–and specifically pointing to the erosion of public education due to divorce and corollary issues, i.e., pornography, that have negatively impacted marriages.

              • Veritas

                Thanks, Austin, for doing the debating here. I don’t have the patience for fencing with people who can’t see reality, or who put their trust in the creature rather than the Creator.
                Ovum wall? Right. The next thing he’s going to say, like a New Mexico priest, is “God contracepts more often than man does.”

                • Johnny Rango

                  Basic human reproductive science, Veritas:

                  http://ask.metafilter.com/203529/What-of-fertilized-human-eggs-die

                  • Veritas

                    Big deal. God has reasons for designing failure and success. I don’t get you at all–this obsession with trying to outwit Almighty God the Father and Creator.
                    Be a good boy and praise God and ask him for forgiveness.

                    • GG

                      Poor Johnny boy cannot differentiate between a natural event and one caused by the act of man.

              • Johnny Rango

                Again (and I just heard this today on Catholic radio), a fertilized ovum is “a human being.”

                According the the scientists, something like 25% of fertilized ovums don’t adhere to the uterine wall and are naturally “aborted” by the woman’s body.

                That’s a lot of “human beings” that “natural law” deigned not be born.

                Nice work, God?

                That and the bubonic plague, ebola….

                But never mind that. Transmission of AIDS can at least be prevented by contraception. But alas, that would be worse that AIDS, according to the teachings.

                • Austin Ruse

                  A fertilized ovum is a human being, no different from you except for size, state of development and dependency.

                  Evil came into the world because of man’s initial and ongoing revolt against God. Evil includes miscarriages, disease and death. None of these things existed prior to the revolt of Adam and Eve.

                  God even allows the evil of the sexual revolution. But, he did not cause it.

                • GG

                  Can you tell the difference between a physical evil and a moral evil? If a man walking falls down and hits his head and dies is that the same as if a car runs him over? Both are dead.

            • Austin Ruse

              And then, how’s about all those kids growing up without fathers? Millions upon millions of them. Nice going there, revolutionary!

              • Johnny Rango

                Everything gets blamed for “the sexual revolution.” If contraception prevents a pregnancy, that’s wrong. But if a couple uses no contraception and have a child, the Father leaving the family is also somehow the fault of “the sexual revolution,” presumably because said Father left because he needed more orgasms.

                • Austin Ruse

                  Well, you can’t blame the overthrown patriarchy! Of course, all these deaths are at the doorstep of the sexual revolutionaries. It ain’t us. It’s you.

                • GG

                  More doltish logic from you. So, if a man only stays faithful if can orgasm on demand then that is good? What a low standard.

        • Veritas

          The people, with help from apostates like you, are seeing life through the prism of the Sexual Revolution. What else would you expect?
          But you think secular wisdom is better than the Creator’s.
          Get out! You offend those who have been harmed by the Sexual Revolution.

          • Johnny Rango

            Truth, if so many have been harmed by the sexual revolution, why isn’t the counter-revolution taking hold?

            Even the “apostate” Filipinos are turning to contraception. Why? Not because they’re evil, but because your way isn’t realistic.

            • Veritas

              You base support for the Sexual Revolution on the lack of a counter revolution? You deny harm done by the Sexual Revolution?
              You come across educated and well read, armed with facts. But, have you ever attended a Twelve Step meeting for men who are addicted to porn, sex with prostitutes, and all forms of lust? HAVE YOU BEEN THERE? Have you seen the damage done? Have you seen the damage done to their wives and children? Clearly, you have not. The damage is real and it is demonic.
              You think large families are evil, but you are evil. Large families ensure the future of mankind. Before the world taught us that it was better to put old people in retirement homes, children took care of their elderly parents. Today, there are not enough younger people to take care of the elder population, and kids think that the only choice is rest homes. You have no answer for the lack of population and what will befall us. You read information and reply with glib, secular BS, and we’re tired of it.
              My mother had 8 kids; her mother had 12 with two miscarriages. Those women weren’t abused. These real women would smack you across your smug face if they were alive and met you in person.
              Go do more research. Read everything Steven Mosher at Population Research Institute has ever written.
              Leave us, You don’t belong here and you are offensive to people who have been harmed by the Sexual Revolution.

              • Johnny Rango

                Men and women get along just fine these days, Veritas. On the whole, things are no worse now than they were 100 years ago.

                If porn is such a problem as you make out, one would expect thousands of these recovery meetings you speak of, and Congress demanding action.

                If contraception was such an evil, then I’d expect even Catholic would be really vocal about demanding contraception’s end. But, many Catholics use contraception. Those that don’t use NFP, which is really just another form of contraceptive technology (and a poor one at that, both in effectiveness and ease of use, not to mention that NFP seems to be a strategy of tricking God one is “open to conception.)

                No one wants to go back to the days of 10 kids. Unless perhaps they’re Catholic radio apologists, many of whom seem to depend on listener donations to finance their gigantic families.

                • Veritas

                  I said you were smart, but you are really naïve.
                  There ARE many recovery meetings across the world, but they are anonymous. I’m sure with your Google skills, you’ll even look it up. Then again, they don’t go public so you’ll have to search psych sites to see what kind of input the shrinks provide. Your sexual revolution does not help these men and women struggling with lust addiction. Did the SR cause lust addiction? What do you think? Either way, Satan laughs at their pain and suffering. And you, too, mock these poor souls.
                  Do you weep for the poor woman who cannot forgive herself for killing the child in her womb? Do you sympathize with the women who are scarred for life because they took the life of their baby? No amount of glibness or smarts on your part will ever relate to another’s suffering. Why don’t you use your talents to find a way to leave the man-haters and come to love those who are suffering? How do you feel about the selfish and fearful boyfriend who forces his mate to get an abortion? Do you side with the pro-abort or the victim? As Austin asked, what about all of those fatherless kids? Are there more of them since the SR “began?” Say, around 1970. You see, I teach these little ones whose fathers ran off, whose parents never learned that commitment was a thing forged out of friendship, unpolluted by premarital lust. “Why didn’t you learn how to do this math, Gina, back when you were in fourth grade? My parents were divorcing and I missed the lessons.” Not once, not twice, but many times I have heard, “My parents got a divorce.”
                  What kind of glib reply will you throw at me now?
                  Congress demanding action? They, like you, don’t want to turn back the clock. Republicans get laughed at, but not by anyone intelligent, but by ignorant stooges who couldn’t spell P-L-A-T-O if you spotted them the PLA. Yes, modern man hasn’t heard the truth for too many years. I can prove it, but that isn’t the point at the moment.
                  “NFP isn’t as effective as the pill.” Children are blessings. How many of your pals really can say they have great sex when the screw like bunny’s thanks to the pill? Be honest. They get so tired of each other after days, weeks, and months of indoor sport screwing that they eventually have to toss the dick or vagina out and find a new thrill. This is true. I know. Sad, but true. The celibate Pope Paul VI knew what he was talking about. He and many celibate people who spend time in prayer have a deeper understanding of love and sex. Who wants to spend time building the cake? It’s more fun to eat the frosting. So, you have no cake. You have no basis for friendship and love. There is nothing permanent. Just raw passion.
                  Tell me. How do you secular types manage to do it? How do you manage to screw and screw, and then stay in love with your wives? How did you manage to spend so much time in premarital sex and stay so devoted for all these years in marriage? I really want to know the secret. Is it intelligence? “Say, Muffy, those days back at Dartmouth and, you know, all the rolling in the hay. After we finish reading the Wall Street Journal this morning, lets do another round together and then go off to our work at Planned Parenthood and Reproductive Rights for Asians.”
                  God Bless the Apologists and their big families. Meet a good man named Mosher. PRI. The Chinese government fear this good man. The backlash is coming, Johnny Rango. You mess with Nature, and you will feel the backlash.

                • Veritas

                  Johnny, Johnny, Johnny: “Men and women get along just fine these days.” I suppose–those who’ve survived until their hair is purple or gray.
                  Do you want to shut down the Fraternity system, Johanna?
                  Frat boys aren’t getting along too well with women these days. No, no, no. Divorced men have horror stories about selfish wives that dumped them to trade up. Nice women, Johanna. Then again, when they began to lose their femininity back in, say, ’70, what else should we expect? Thank you Gloria, Betty, and the other Gloria. Jewish women seem to really be at the forefront of the Matriarchy Movement.
                  Why do you actually believe that men and women are getting along just fine today?
                  The Japanese don’t even have sex anymore. Kinda like looking at porn too often: it dulls interest. Artificially based relationships in Japan, I hear. You Tube it. I recall girls meeting men just to talk. It’s a good thing that they don’t wind up screwing, but paying someone just to act like a friend? Oh, You Tube shows men going into brothels where the girls are dolls. Ok, no sin there I suppose. But, what are these people thinking? Artificial sex, friends, love–all just a fantasy fueled by money.
                  Ho Hum. Men and women are just fine, thanks to the Sexual Revolution.
                  Now, I’m beginning to think twice about you being smart. I’ll stick to “good at research” and “glib.”

                • GG

                  Wow, such sharp reasoning.

            • GG

              Please do not judge everyone by your low standards.

          • Johnny Rango

            That’s another thing: How were you or anyone else here personally “harmed” by the sexual revolution? It’s one thing to make a list of moral grievances, but it’s quite another thing to imply that someone else’s views on marriage or birth control somehow directly harm you.

            • Veritas

              Me? None of your business.
              Others? Inability to achieve personal intimacy due to pornography or masturbation. Psychological? Perhaps, but surely fed by the prevailing culture of sex and eroticism. Women and men are so into material and sexual delights that they no longer know how to love one another. This weak bond produces weak families. This hurts kids. I know because I see them everyday. Wonderful little souls harmed by the sheer ignorance of their parents. Please don’t tell me that there is no such thing as “a better time than today.” Not true.

              Divorce. Part of the package.
              Abortions in the millions. Harmful to me? Only insofar as it harms the world I live in. I am paying for it when I don’t want to. But, Hillary types say that I must pay for someone else’s choice.
              The building of a society that will hate men, particularly white men.
              Now, you lose when you say “someone else’s views on…” Their views on marriage are hurting people who object. If I state my opinion about gay marriage, I will lose my job. I am now being censored by the state. You know this, so why make such a ridiculous suggestion?
              As far as birth control, it doesn’t hurt me, but I think the Church must not grant approval to anyone. Why? Because Her wisdom on contraception is true. I know. I know that sex divorced from love, divorced from real giving, makes my love turn into nothing other than lust. We’ve become lust addicts. You won’t agree, but I don’t care. You are smart, but you are wrong. You love smart; you don’t love wisdom and truth. You are superficial. Your glibness does not impress me. Sophists did the same thing. Wisdom and virtue have been killed by people like you. Socrates, Jesus Christ. The list continues.

            • GG

              All of society is harmed. If you are a mere materialist who incorrectly views harm as only some physical pain then you mis- perceive reality.

  • SnowRose

    I could live a thousand lifetimes and if I never saw the words homosexual, sex, abortion, and contraception, adultery, fornication etc. etc. again, I would think I had died and gone to Heaven.
    Is it now, could it ever be possible we have become so saturated, so spineless, so detestable, so sickened by our own evil that we will turn back and stop this? Is it possible to become so evil we offend even demons who were once angels? If it is, we are here right now.

  • Timothy O’Donnell

    Thank you for the poignant article!!!

  • SnowRose

    So well said!!

  • Mark

    “No one ever regrets a consensual sexual encounter”

    This tenet is important to keep in mind with the current uproar, where “rape” all of a sudden means “any sex I don’t like.” The revolution is trivializing actual crimes this way.

  • FR. SAMUEL M. WATERS, CATHOLIC

    The same can be said about the Revolution of VC II. St. Pius X warned the Church that if it went down the path of Modernism, it would destroy the church and religion. The Church ignored him and we are on the path of destruction. Fr. S. Waters

    • Veritas

      I didn’t think the Church can be “destroyed.”

      We know that the Catholic Church will endure until the end of time: “I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world.” (Matthew, 28:20) Nevertheless, the misconception that the Church will always have a large number of faithful Catholics, is not claimed in Sacred Scripture nor anywhere else. Quite to the contrary, Scripture tells us: “… yet the Son of man, when He cometh, shall He find, think you, faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8).

  • 4kidsandacat

    So here’s where, for me, this conversation about the evils of tv breaks down. I don’t know about anyone else, but I have EWTN on my tv, and I have the Hopper. Nothing in my house gets a live viewing; we either watch on delay or on tape. There are shows like AD that my family can watch together. My kids became disgusted with the so-called “kids channels” a long time ago, and I think in part that’s due to my management of their viewing habits and actually sitting down with them to watch what they originally wanted to watch and pointing out the problems with it. They have come to the realization that, in fact, not all adults are idiots as portrayed on these shows and that no, real life is not as they (the tv programs) would have it. So they immediately object when anything appears that is inappropriate or untrue. (In case there is any misunderstanding, they do not watch any of these shows anymore). They rarely watch tv during the week. I take my children to the library; any book that they want to check out must meet my approval or they don’t borrow it. They very rarely have access to the internet and then only in our line of sight. They have MP3 players with music on it that has been uploaded by their father.

    The fact is, there has been evil, corruption and temptation in the world since the serpent. This isn’t new. I tend to view most things as neutral; they can be an evil or a good, depending on how they are used. What parent is going to send a child into the kitchen to assemble their own dinner, and then be shocked when that child walks out with cookies, candy and chips? Similarly, I would never allow my kids to manage their own entertainment choices without a proper moral foundation. Better that they understand how to properly use media than never be exposed to it and not know where to start as adults.

  • LongIslandMichael

    Great piece. Thanks for sharing. This looks like a must read book.

  • s;vbkr0boc,klos;

    I hope you have illustrated this article with poor, bewildered M.M. as a victim of the Sexual Revolution and not as symbol of ‘evil’. The devil wears $2,500 suits and rapes the minds of children without a qualm.

  • Arthur A

    We keep the TV for EWTN

  • Jacqueleen

    Men love the sex revolution….why buy the cow when the milk is free? Women, you are being used by a bunch of greedy, lust filled depraved men who sold society on the slavery of the sex revolution. ZIP UP YOU PANTS. THE FLAMES

    • Nemo

      If the only reason a man would marry a woman is because that’s the only way to have sex, women should probably avoid that man.

      • Jacqueleen

        Oh…please. Give women more credit than that. The problem as to why women jumped on the sex revolution bandwagon is to satisfy their longing for love not for sex. The fulfillment of love is taking second place to the attention they get giving away their bodies to a sex fiend. Women mistakenly think that if they give good sex, the man will love them. LOL
        Fools are born every minute both men and women. Men want a virgin to marry and women want a virgin to marry. Where are the virgins?

  • FR. SAMUEL M. WATERS, CATHOLIC

    If you spread heresy, fail to teach the faith, spread heresy, stop seeking to convert everyone to the true faith, stop teaching Catholics the importance of the moral life in relation to seeking salvation what you have done is turned the Church into something “other” than what Christ intended it for. The physical construct remains but what you have is not what Christ intended. The Christ centered institution that He created has become a man centered institution. The liturgical, moral and doctrinal elements of the church have been corrupted and this is what St. Pius X was warning about in his Encyclical against Modernism.

    • Veritas

      I appreciate your post. I once argued with a previous pastor who believed Christ did not intend an institutional church. He stated “I have issues with the Church.” Sadly, he also believed that fornication wasn’t a mortal sin. You have it correctly.

  • St JD George

    In a startling new interview, a 3-star general and former head of Communist Romania’s secret police who defected to the United States in 1978, claims that the Theology of Liberation was the creation of the KGB, who exported it to Latin America as a way of introducing Marxism into the continent.

    Ion Mihai Pacepa has been called “the Cold War’s most important defector,” and after his defection, the Romanian government under Nicolae Ceausescu placed two death sentences and a $2 million bounty on his head. During the more than ten years that Pacepa worked with the CIA, he made what the agency described as “an important and unique contribution to the United States.”

    He is reported in fact to have given the CIA “the best intelligence ever obtained on communist intelligence networks and internal security services.”

    “Liberation theology has been generally understood to be a marriage of Marxism and Christianity. What has not been understood is that it was not the product of Christians who pursued Communism, but of Communists who pursued Christians,” Pacepa said in a recent article. In his role as doctrinal watchdog, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger called liberation theology a “singular heresy” and a “fundamental threat” to the Church.

    Pacepa says that he learned details of the KGB involvement with Liberation Theology from Soviet General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, Communist Romania’s chief foreign intelligence adviser, who later became head of the Soviet espionage service, the PGU.

    In 1959, Sakharovsky went to Romania together with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, for what would become known as “Khrushchev’s six-day vacation.” According to Pacepa, Khrushchev “wanted to go down in history as the Soviet leader who had exported communism to Central and South America.” He chose Romania as his point of export, since it was the only Latin country in the Soviet bloc and provided a logical liaison to Latin America because of the similarity of language and culture.

    Pacepa claims that the Theology of Liberation was not merely infiltrated by the KGB, it was actually the brainchild of Soviet intelligence services.

    “The movement was born in the KGB, and it had a KGB-invented name: Liberation Theology,” Pacepa said.

    According to the General, during those years, the KGB had a penchant for “liberation” movements, and a Theology of Liberation fit right in.

    The National Liberation Army of Columbia (FARC), created by the KGB with help from Fidel Castro; the “National Liberation Army of Bolivia, created by the KGB with help from “Che” Guevara; and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), created by the KGB with help from Yasser Arafat are just a few additional “liberation” movements born at the Lubyanka — the headquarters of the KGB.

    Pacepa said that Liberation Theology was born of a 1960s top-secret “Party-State Dezinformatsiya Program” approved by Aleksandr Shelepin, the chairman of the KGB, and by Politburo member Aleksey Kirichenko, who coordinated the Communist Party’s international policies.

    The program mandated that “the KGB take secret control of the World Council of Churches (WCC), based in Geneva, Switzerland, and use it as cover for converting Liberation Theology into a South American revolutionary tool,” Pacepa said.

    The Soviets were aware that the WCC was the largest international ecumenical organization after the Vatican, he said, representing some 550 million Christians of various denominations throughout 120 countries.

    According to Pacepa the KGB followed a step-by-step procedure to bring Liberation Theology to Latin America, starting with the establishment of an intermediate international religious organization called the Christian Peace Conference (CPC), headquartered in Prague. Its main task “was to bring the KGB-created Liberation Theology into the real world,” he said.

    “The new Christian Peace Conference was managed by the KGB and was subordinated to the venerable World Peace Council, another KGB creation, founded in 1949 and by then also headquartered in Prague,” he said.

    In his work with the Soviet bloc intelligence community, Pacepa managed the Romanian operations of the World Peace Council (WPC).

    “Most of the WPC’s employees were undercover Soviet bloc intelligence officers. The WPC’s two publications in French, Nouvelles perspectives and Courier de la paix, were also managed by undercover KGB – and Romanian DIE – intelligence officers,” he said.

    Pacepa said that in 1968 “the KGB-created Christian Peace Conference, supported by the world-wide World Peace Council, was able to maneuver a group of leftist South American bishops into holding a Conference of Latin American Bishops at Medellin, Colombia.”

    Though the Conference’s official task was to seek solutions to poverty, its “undeclared goal” was “to recognize a new religious movement encouraging the poor to rebel against the ‘institutionalized violence of poverty,’ and to recommend the new movement to the World Council of Churches for official approval,” he said.

    “The Medellin Conference achieved both goals. It also bought the KGB-born name ‘Liberation Theology,’” he said.

    Pacepa said that although he has good reason to suspect that there was an organic connection between the KGB and some of the leading promoters of Liberation Theology, he has no evidence to prove it.

    “I recently glanced through Gutierrez’s book A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, Salvation (1971), and I had the feeling that it was written at the Lubyanka,” he said.

    “No wonder he is now credited with being the founder of Liberation Theology,” he said.

    Six years after Pacepa’s defection to the West, the Vatican issued its first of two scathing critiques of Liberation Theology, under the guidance of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

    The stated purpose of the first “instruction” was to draw attention “to the deviations, and risks of deviation, damaging to the faith and to Christian living, that are brought about by certain forms of liberation theology which use, in an insufficiently critical manner, concepts borrowed from various currents of Marxist thought.”

    The Vatican instruction also warned that the theologies of liberation generate “a disastrous confusion between the ‘poor’ of the Scripture and the ‘proletariat’ of Marx.” In so doing, it said, “they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle.”

    In Pacepa’s words, Liberation Theology was “deliberately designed to undermine the Church and destabilize the West by subordinating religion to an atheist political ideology for its geopolitical gain.”

  • Scott W.

    For the edification of the faithful, there were a few dubious and false claims below, so I thought I would put them all in one space and clear out the detritus:

    Dubious claim: the Church ejoins Catholics to have as many children as possible.

    Answer: Both the Bible and the Church call large families a blessing, but that does not equal having as many children as possible. In fact, even before Vatican II, the Church recognized the licitness of regulating the number of children and even Pope Pius XII stated that the reasonable and morally acceptable motivations for doing so were quite broad:

    “Therefore, in our late allocution on conjugal morality, We affirmed the legitimacy, and at the same time, the limits — in truth very wide — of a regulation of offspring, which, unlike so-called ‘birth control,’ is compatible with the law of God.” – Pius XII, Morality in Marriage (emphasis mine), from Papal Pronouncements on Marriage and the Family, Werth and Mihanovich, 1955

    Dubious claim: the NIH says NFP doesn’t really work.

    Answer: My net searches are not turning anything up, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. However, I am seeing several NIH abstracts that start with the proposition that any method using continence falls under NFP, which includes the calendar “rhythm” method which, with its admittedly spotty reliability is a classic object of haughty derision by scoffers of Catholic teaching. But not all NFP methods are the same. To wit: let’s see an NIH statement on a specific NFP method like Sympto-Thermal and then we’ll talk.

    False claim: Clerical celibacy is unbiblical.

    Answer: St. Paul clearly lays out celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7

    False claim: but Paul also says slavery is OK

    Answer: This is a case of trying have your cake and eat it too. To wit: you don’t get to say “x is unbiblical” and when shown that it is biblical, dive down the escape hatch of “well the Bible also teaches objectionable y”. Incidently, the Bible does not endorse the inherently immoral chattel slavery, which is an important distinction, but that’s another discussion.

    • Veritas

      Thank you for clarifying and disposing of some dubious claims below.

      Here is the point that any sincere person must begin with: THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION IS AN EVIL THAT HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE HARM OF REAL PEOPLE. Begin with this proposition and believe in it.
      As a person who has been harmed by the sexual revolution, and on behalf of all others in the same situation, and who have posted or just read these comments, I take offense to those who make false claims. They should get out. I find their presence and their words offensive.

      • Johnny Rango

        How quickly they forget the thousands of years that women were slaves to the drugery of bearing unlimited progeny, or being tied to a person who abused them, with no recourse.

        Yes, there is another side to this issue that this shrill essay neglects to mention.

        • GG

          Shouldn’t you be on a float in some parade?

          • Johnny Rango

            According to the John Jay report, at least 15% of Catholic priests should on a parade float.

            • GG

              Take them with you.

              • Objectivetruth

                Is Johnny filling in this weekend for Chuck and David Hart?

                • GG

                  Or hombre or jdonell or any other lefty agitator that views the Church as some political tool.

              • Johnny Rango

                They, like all Catholics, are part of the Christ’s body here on earth, and are priests forever in the priesthood of Melchizedek. They cannot go anywhere.

                • GG

                  Their souls may be ontologically changed, but if they persist as you do in spreading grave sin, that makes the change even more an indictment of them.

                  Be very careful.

        • Veritas

          What is your purpose for being here? How do your posts show scorn for the Sexual Revolution? They don’t. You, therefore, do not belong here, are a liar, and you need to get out.
          Leave, Sophist!
          You rub salt in the wounds of all of mankind who have been killed or harmed by this scourge from hell.
          Leave!

    • Johnny Rango

      Excuse me, but HHS says that out of 100 couples practicing NFP, 25 are likely to get pregnant. That is as much as saying that NFP does-not-work.

      http://www.hhs.gov/opa/pdfs/natural-family-planning-fact-sheet.pdf

      If there is a medical authority that you think overrides HHS, please cite it.

      If Paul “laid out” celibacy, it never the less took hundreds of years later for the Church to get the message and decree its priests must be celibate. The answer then is that the early Church recognized that sexuality is not abhorrent, even for its priests. As far as Bishops and Popes and their record on celibacy, let’s leave that alone.

      Paul did indeed say slavery is OK…Peter also said slavery is OK. Jesus, who lived in a time of slavery, never condemned it once; rather, he gave a parable that justified the institution of human ownership. Read your Bible.

      • Scott W.

        Since you are just jamming at this point, I’ll leave it to readers to decide.

        • Johnny Rango

          You’ll leave it to readers to decide, but not before a parting shot of calling me illiterate, or a liar. Thanks guy.

          The HHS link twice says that out of 100 couples who practice NFP in a given year, 25 will become pregnant. To me that says that NFP doesn’t work, but whatever.

          • GG

            That link is not a scientific study. It is like a position paper with definite ideological bias. It is for the untrained masses that, like you, are ill informed.

  • Jennifer

    We have only begun to fight.

    • Johnny Rango

      Fight how? What is your strategy for the “Inchon landing” this article proposes?

  • Anders13

    A few whys:
    Our American Declaration declares that we have the right of liberty endowed to us by our Creator. Which means that we can exercise our freewill to make choices, but then what does it mean to be free? The good book says essentially that you should know the truth and the truth will set you free. A corollary would be that the truth cannot enslave anyone. So, for a Christian, life’s struggle is to learn the truth and to live and grow according to the truth. An adult man then is one who has grown true to his nature in manhood so that he can be free as a man. And, an adult woman has grown true to her nature in womanhood so that she can be free as a woman.

    Liberals with their liberalism haven’t gotten this far. Thy are still stuck way back on rights. Liberalism rejects rights from God. Some time ago their wizards of smart proclaimed that a right is a power achieved by way of class struggle or struggle between factions. In this kind of struggle, power gained by one faction is always at the expense of other factions. The power acquired is power to be exercised over those factions that have been overcome, and liberal freedom is simply the unconstrained exercise of that power. So, liberals are constantly struggling for power and to overcome any constraints: moral, ethical, or even the constraints of reality. Liberalism is filled with self centered obsessions driven by the power of pleasure in youth and by the pleasure of power with the coming of age.

    This stone age quagmire that liberals have wrapped themselves in is clearly anti-civil, aggressive and a danger to any Christian community. The most predominant, effective obstacle to the progress of liberalism is and has been those adults who are true to their nature as adults. These Christian adults who defend their liberty, their freedom and stand for what is actually good, right and true in a civil society are the primary target of liberal attacks. Liberals don’t want another Ronald Reagan who put the breaks on decades of liberal progress ( i.e. liberal power growth), defrosted the cold war, and took down the Berlin wall. They can’t do much about Reagan, but they can corrupt or deceive those adults who elected him so that another Reagan is not elected. They can’t do much about John Paul II who shattered the iron curtain and the foundation of the Soviet Union, but they can attack and corrupt those adults who pray with him so that they won’t be able to shatter the shackles that liberalism places on the mines and souls of those that liberals subjugate and enslave.

  • St JD George

    BISHOP: PRO-ABORT HILLARY CLINTON ‘THINKS SHE IS A GOD’
    by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
    3 May 2015
    In a candid interview, Nigerian bishop Emmanuel Badejo has responded bluntly to Hillary Clinton’s recent assertion that religious beliefs “have to be changed” in order to give women access to reproductive health care.

    “If these values are not precious to Hillary Clinton, I think she has no right at all to call for a change in religious values and religious beliefs,” he said.

    “I believe there are three groups of people in this world: those who believe in God, those who do not believe in God, and those who think they are gods. Hillary Clinton I think is one of those who thinks she is a god,” said Badejo, who is Director of Communications for the African Bishops.

    Speaking at the 6th annual Women in the World Summit, Clinton said: “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” for the sake of giving women access to “reproductive health care and safe childbirth.”

    “From the way she spoke, people like herself very clearly don’t want to hear anything about God. Even if they say they believe in God, they really don’t,” said the bishop.

    “It’s evident even in her language: she talks about ‘deep seated cultural codes.’ I feel she’s gotten too wrapped up in technology and has stopped realizing that there are values, there are things that are innate to people, that are not just ‘codes’ that can be taken up and thrown out,” he said.

    “We talk about the dignity of life, the sanctity of life, etc. Is she saying they ought to be changed?” he said.

    Bishop Badejo’s remarks echoed the reaction of Gov. Bobby Jindal to Clinton’s comment.

    “Hillary Clinton said that people who are pro-life have to change our religious beliefs. That’s crazy talk. This is why the fight for religious freedom is so important. Our religious beliefs are between us and God, not us and Hillary Clinton,” he said.

    “Hillary Clinton and The Left want to socially engineer everyone to adhere to their leftwing ideology even if it’s in violation of a person’s sincerely held religious convictions,” he said.

    Bishop Badejo says he wishes only that Americans know who their candidates are and what they stand for.

    “It is my desire that the American people open their ears and their eyes and know exactly what kind of people are running to be the next President of the United States,” he said.

    • Scott W.

      I’d say we need to import more African bishops, but sadly they would be wasted on AmChurch.

    • Vinny

      It appears that Africa is the future of the Church.

      • St JD George

        There is passion nearly every where but in the west it would seem. By passion I mean the stuff that martyrs and saints are made of. When is the last time we had a contemporary we could say that of – other than Bishop Sheen that is.

  • Thomas J. Hennigan

    The left has always been deadly (literally experts at provoking mass murder), not just Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and the rest of them. Nazism was also National Socialism. They haven’t given up by any means, but they have become smarter as they no longer kill outright like Stalin & Co, but indirectly by means of the sexual revolution, misguided environmentalism which includes the global warming hoax etc. Guess how many died thanks to the banning of DDT? About 40 million. Before it was banned there were only 50,000 deaths by malaria in the world. 40 years later there were more than 1 million. Of course, the poor in Third World Countries are only a new kind of cannon fodder for the lefties, who try to impose abortion on their countries, as well as environmental madness.. At present the U:N is trying to impose abortion on countries like Peru and Equador. There is no end to the amount of people they want to eliminate either directly or indirectly. Of course, they prefer toads, whatever inscect to human babies, born or unborn. . They are also the most vociferous supporters of Islamic jihad with Obama and the rest of the political class repeating the latest BIG LIE, that Islam is a religion peace. No wonder the Bible calls Satan “the father of lies”.

  • Gail Finke

    Europe is in free fall due to the lack of new Europeans. The birth rate in most European countries is lower than any societies have ever recovered from. Same with Japan (actually, even worse) and many Russian countries. And we are getting there. All that sex but no babies… Whatever our individual reasons, the result is the suicide of our cultures. What will happen is what has always happened… the people who have babies will take over. Maybe through war, maybe over time, maybe after a disaster that kills off even more people. But no one can sustain large numbers of old, sick people with ever-declining numbers of young, well people. It’s not rocket science. The groups having babies are, generally, also declining in fertility… but not anywhere near as much. And that’s all it takes. Even a slower-growing population can outgrow populations that are shrinking. Most people don’t even seem to care, as long as they get theirs. Look at Greece! They are willing to bankrupt their country and the EU over programs that cannot ever be paid for.

    • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

      I’m finding the whole population shift problem very interesting, especially since we have environmental groups telling us we have to have less children. We already aren’t having children for goodness sakes! I find an interesting link between having less children, yet adopting a lifestyle that has a high environmental impact (buying things, huge homes, cars, food, etc).

    • Johnny Rango

      We must have more babies to defeat the Muslims!

      • Veritas

        A good strategy, even if you don’t think so.

      • Gail Finke

        Enjoy your retirement when there is no one left to look after you or pay for your healthcare or housing. Then you can recall all your hilarious rejoinders as you put on an extra sweater and make yourself some Ramen noodles.

  • Fred the Barbarian

    It’s too bad a certain clumsy jewslut didn’t get an abortion ~2000 years ago. It would be a better world.

    • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

      Your heavenly Mother loves you anyway, even if you speak about her like this.

      • Fred the Barbarian

        The dead skank is probably too busy blowing her son to think about anybody else.

        • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

          I’ll make sure I pray for you and your soul again today.

          • Fred the Barbarian

            Please don’t do anything that might result in me having to spend eternity surrounded by disgusting christian filth. It’s bad enough having to share one lifetime with you scumbags.

            • GG

              Find a Catholic Church with the Blessed Sacrament exposed and sit there for 15 minutes. Ask God to prove to you He exists. What do you have to lose?

              • Fred the Barbarian

                Been there, done that.

                • Guest

                  Not enough. Return. It is not too late.

                  • Fred the Barbarian

                    I’d much rather spend eternity in hell than 5 more minutes around disgusting christian filth.

            • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

              You’re boring

              • Fred the Barbarian

                It’s so cute when you people think you’re the only ones who’ve read the bible. I bet I’ve read it more than you have.

                • disqus_qkOcYNTXOW

                  Clearly you read it while you were blind. Have a nice day 🙂 Praying for you!

                  • Fred the Barbarian

                    Clearly I was blind until I stopped reading it. Hope you’re in heaven really soon! Remember, the Lord hates a spitter!

      • Guest

        True, and Fred is proof sodomy eventually produces liquefaction necrosis of the brain.

MENU