This is a nice thing to think, but it’s not even close to reality.
Quick question: How many atheists are in Congress?
It was a trick question. There are none. Zero in 535. 0 in 544 if you count the Supreme Court. Atheism is still political suicide in the US. This is what mainstream looks like. If anything, fundamentalists have been increasing their power over the years and have been working hard to infuse their beliefs into every corner of society from textbooks to sex and language rulings from the FCC to prayer before government meetings.
ANY authoritarian system can’t be challenged even in the slightest by anything bigger than itself. Religious or political extremists especially can’t thrive if there are major social factors that they can’t control and sex is a biggie.
To quote SAGA Volume 3: “The opposite of war is not peace. The opposite of war is fucking.”
There are nuances/grey areas between radical fundamentalism and atheism. But you’re right, for the small numbers of radicals, they do tend to wield an enormous amount of power and political persuasion.
I was startled by the implication that only atheists enjoy sex.
I’ve said before that a whole lot of Americans seem to think Christians come in two flavors: Catholic and Pentecostal. There’s also a mainstream Protestant tradition that tends to have a much healthier view of these things. Not like… we’re all Dr Ruth. But healthier.
If this was 1988, I might possibly agree with you. No atheists in congress doesn’t equal increased religious fundamentalism in society.
Fundamentalists will always attempt to infuse their beliefs into every corner of society. But there is no evidence, whatsoever, that the influence of religious fundamentalism is increasing in most Western nations. The opposite is happening.
While I can’t speak for other religions* let me say this about Christian bible-belt church teaching on whether sex is enjoyable: If you actually believed that Fundamentalist churches are preaching that you should not give in to the TEMPTATION of the Earthly Pleasures of The Flesh! because, well, it’s not really that fun anyways and people only do it to procreate… then you REALLY need to get out more and meet people outside the coffee shop.
*though strictly speaking Fundamentalism is a purely Christian belief
So your idea is that (1) don’t talk to kids about sexual pleasure pre-puberty, 'cause they haven’t hit puberty, and (2) don’t talk with pubescent kids about sexual pleasure because they’d die of embarrassment?
So basically don;t talk to kids about sexual pleasure. Am I reading that right?
I agree. I’ve seen many sermons by fundamentalists who are attempting to sound modern (and perhaps an alternative to strict Catholicism) by extolling the pleasures of sex within marriage.
I’ve seen the term “fundamentalism” applied to Islam, as well. Did it originate with Christianity?
I grew up in a household with Cinemax and Showtime so it wasn’t like I didn’t see sex scenes in movies from an early age. I mean when people are having sexy time in an elevator or on a desk I kind of picked up it wasn’t just for making babies. I’m from suburban NC and I don’t think my parents ever explicitly said - “Sex is for pleasure.” Maybe they said it feels good, but really the emphasis was on the biology and the seriousness of the act. And I mean that in a way where sex wasn’t just something casually done, but something done between two people who cared about each other (and the obvious repercussions of having a baby).
Perhaps that’s why I never cared for one night stands, FWB, or casual sex - could also just be the way I’m wired. But don’t take that as I’m some kind of prude, sex was never a taboo subject growing up, it just wasn’t something that was constantly shoved in my face (by my parents or in an academic way). My parents placed no more emphasis on it than any other aspect of my life and from what I remember we only had one sex ed class in tenth grade. (Where seeing an up close shot of a baby being delivered (or exiting) pretty much scared the class.)
Woh! You’re a feisty one aren’t you. I’m not raising your kids and your not raising mine so let’s not take it too personally ok? I quite enjoyed my childhood playing with toys and not once thinking about sex. I turned out ok too - believe it or not.
Oh for shit’s sake. Fucking is NOT the same as rape, sorry if you conflate the two. Call the reading comprehension police. I’m sorry if any language stronger than what would be held outside of a nun’s tea party instantly means ZOMG RAPEY BAD, but I was quoting an item that is very much in context if you ever read the original.
Love shouldn’t be treated as a graded scale but rather a singular condition. i.e. you love someone or you don’t.
However, if that’s not your bag, you can simply refuse to answer directly or you can redirect the question to ‘why do you think I would love one of my children more than the other’. As a parent, you should be able to outwit your child. Or, you can actually tell them and help them develop a sense of self worth not based on the opinions of others.
Talking to your children about sex is great, but I think the first time your kid masturbates, the orgasm will clue them in to the fact that sex feels good.
The last “really” religious ceremony was very open about sex, the pastor was extremely excited and happy about it extolling its virtues - now that the couple was married. It was some branch of strongly evangelical protestantism.
aa[quote=“mgphotoworks, post:6, topic:31853, full:true”]
Seems like a lot of religions (most?) talk a great deal about sex for pleasure, but in a negative manner, like it’s wrong somehow. I think this makes it difficult for schools to even hint at the topic, without raising a huge controversy.
[/quote]
